Why the obsession with weight?
Comments
-
A nice article here that puts the weight thing in financial perspective.
http://intheknowcycling.com/2015/10/08/5-beliefs-about-choosing-cycling-gear-dropped/
And a really good calculator to see just how much difference it makes.
http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesLessWeight_Page.html0 -
And a really good calculator to see just how much difference it makes.
http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesLessWeight_Page.html
A 2kg saving would buy me 3.13 seconds up Box Hill.
Pass the credit card..
0 -
65 seconds or 200m up Sa Colabra for me.And a really good calculator to see just how much difference it makes.
http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesLessWeight_Page.html
A 2kg saving would buy me 3.13 seconds up Box Hill.
Pass the credit card..
I won't bother with the credit card, that's 65 seconds extra to take in the scenery.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Nevermind all that, 10 seconds over 40km, how do I get my drag coefficient from 0.5 to 0.4?0
-
And a really good calculator to see just how much difference it makes.
http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesLessWeight_Page.html
A 2kg saving would buy me 3.13 seconds up Box Hill.
Pass the credit card..
a nice tailwind up the 3rd part would save you more...0 -
The thing about those analytical websites is they don't take into account real world cycling.
I have a 7.3kg bike, wheels for this weigh about 1400grams, I have good light tyres but not sure of the exact weight. I also have a Genesis CDF with a total weight of 12.5kgs. This has heavy wheels and tyres, semi slick cross tyres.
I have a regular loop I do at this time of year, only a short loop as its all the time I have. 21 miles with approx 1100 foot of elevation. I do this loop on both bikes very regularly so have a pretty good idea on speeds / pacing myself. I also appreciate every ride is different, weather conditions, road conditions etc.
Last nights ride was on the Genesis, I averaged 18.2 mph. This was a hard pace to maintain. Whilst on the flats I can easily maintain a similar speed to the lighter bike, most of the rides I do are rolling countryside, effectively I am either going up small hills or having to accelerate to get back to speed. From a standing start (road junctions etc) the heavier bike takes a lot more effort to get up to speed. Even small hills the effort levels on the heavier bike is noticeable. So last nights ride, I honestly felt that I worked my socks off to keep my average speed above 18 mph, whereas that ride on my lighter bike would have been a below average ride.
I'm also currently using my heavy bike for club runs, approx 60 mile rides. These tend to incorporate some of the hillier areas in Bucks / Herts area (Dunstable Downs and around that region). On my light bike I'm happy to sit on the front, whereas on my heavy bike I know the effort needed is considerably more so I hide in the pack. I also know that I have to save myself so I take it easy up the hills.
So on a single climb I think those analytical figures show very little reward for a lighter bike, but if you look at the accumulation of effort needed throughout a ride, including riding a 5kg heavier bike into a headwind, stopping and starting and then getting back up to speed, constant rolling hills etc, then if you are looking at riding at a certain speed, obviously it makes sense to ride a lighter bike.
All that being said, I absolutely love my CDF. Weighs a tonne, only has Shimano Sora and the rolling resistance from the cross tyres makes things harder, but I still really enjoy riding it. Using the heavier bike I should also see myself lose a couple of kgs as well!!0 -
/\ 5 kg is a big difference though. I've seen people argue on here that as little as 0.5kg will make a noticeable difference on the hills, and I just don't think that's the case.
I've two bikes, they both have the same groupset and I switch the wheels between the two (Zondas). One's about 8.9kg (alu Defy) and the other is about 10kg (steel Condor) - in practice I ride the heavier one almost exclusively now, because it fits me better and is just a nicer bike to ride. I am actually faster over long distances on the Condor, which I put down to it being more comfortable.
Basically getting a bike that's nearly 50% lighter is fair enough but quibbling over 0.5-1kg seems a bit pointless when you're buying a bike at a given budget, there's other factors which I would put far higher up my list of priorities. Obviously if I had unlimited money I would still have a really light bike, I'm just saying that for a fixed budget a fairly trivial weight saving is not very important compared to other things (such as fit, groupset, value for money etc. etc.).0 -
Yes, but you say 5kg is a big difference, and 0.5kg is no difference. Then at what point is there a difference? 1, 2 , 2.5, 3 or 4kg?/\ 5 kg is a big difference though. I've seen people argue on here that as little as 0.5kg will make a noticeable difference on the hills, and I just don't think that's the case.
I've two bikes, they both have the same groupset and I switch the wheels between the two (Zondas). One's about 8.9kg (alu Defy) and the other is about 10kg (steel Condor) - in practice I ride the heavier one almost exclusively now, because it fits me better and is just a nicer bike to ride. I am actually faster over long distances on the Condor, which I put down to it being more comfortable.
Basically getting a bike that's nearly 50% lighter is fair enough but quibbling over 0.5-1kg seems a bit pointless when you're buying a bike at a given budget, there's other factors which I would put far higher up my list of priorities. Obviously if I had unlimited money I would still have a really light bike, I'm just saying that for a fixed budget a fairly trivial weight saving is not very important compared to other things (such as fit, groupset, value for money etc. etc.).
And that sir is the whole idea of weight weenies and why weight weenies exist.0 -
/\ 5 kg is a big difference though. I've seen people argue on here that as little as 0.5kg will make a noticeable difference on the hills, and I just don't think that's the case.
It probably makes no difference in time but it certainly can make a difference in feel - that's not just on the hills.Faster than a tent.......0 -
/\ 5 kg is a big difference though. I've seen people argue on here that as little as 0.5kg will make a noticeable difference on the hills, and I just don't think that's the case.
It probably makes no difference in time but it certainly can make a difference in feel - that's not just on the hills.
Personally, I know it's subjective but I think that depends a bit on where the weight is - changing the stock wheels on the Giant to Zondas saved about 0.5kg and made the bike feel a lot better (the Giant wheels were flexy and rubbish as well as heavy though), but moving between the Defy and the Condor (both with the Zondas) I really don't notice the extra 1kg.
Like I say I find the heavier bike to be the better ride - which you'd hope would be the case because the Condor is a £700rrp frame compared with an £800rrp complete bike for the Giant, plus it fits me better.0 -
Yes, but you say 5kg is a big difference, and 0.5kg is no difference. Then at what point is there a difference? 1, 2 , 2.5, 3 or 4kg?/\ 5 kg is a big difference though. I've seen people argue on here that as little as 0.5kg will make a noticeable difference on the hills, and I just don't think that's the case.
I've two bikes, they both have the same groupset and I switch the wheels between the two (Zondas). One's about 8.9kg (alu Defy) and the other is about 10kg (steel Condor) - in practice I ride the heavier one almost exclusively now, because it fits me better and is just a nicer bike to ride. I am actually faster over long distances on the Condor, which I put down to it being more comfortable.
Basically getting a bike that's nearly 50% lighter is fair enough but quibbling over 0.5-1kg seems a bit pointless when you're buying a bike at a given budget, there's other factors which I would put far higher up my list of priorities. Obviously if I had unlimited money I would still have a really light bike, I'm just saying that for a fixed budget a fairly trivial weight saving is not very important compared to other things (such as fit, groupset, value for money etc. etc.).
And that sir is the whole idea of weight weenies and why weight weenies exist.
For me? If I was choosing a new bike, 1kg or more would probably be enough to affect my decision making (assuming I was comparing 2 normal road bikes for the same purpose...). I am aware that this is massively subjective!! And that it might only have a small impact on the feel of the bike.0 -
/\ 5 kg is a big difference though. I've seen people argue on here that as little as 0.5kg will make a noticeable difference on the hills, and I just don't think that's the case.
I've two bikes, they both have the same groupset and I switch the wheels between the two (Zondas). One's about 8.9kg (alu Defy) and the other is about 10kg (steel Condor) - in practice I ride the heavier one almost exclusively now, because it fits me better and is just a nicer bike to ride. I am actually faster over long distances on the Condor, which I put down to it being more comfortable.
Basically getting a bike that's nearly 50% lighter is fair enough but quibbling over 0.5-1kg seems a bit pointless when you're buying a bike at a given budget, there's other factors which I would put far higher up my list of priorities. Obviously if I had unlimited money I would still have a really light bike, I'm just saying that for a fixed budget a fairly trivial weight saving is not very important compared to other things (such as fit, groupset, value for money etc. etc.).
I have a quite a budget CX bike and the carbon road bike I hired to ride to MT Teide was getting on for 5KG lighter.
But this is not every thing is equal case since the CX has much lower gearing, 28-28 vs 36-28 Not sure there would be much difference in time, but on a 23 mile climb having cogs to spin on the last hotter and steeper few miles would of been great.
But all things being equal lighter does feel nicer, and since it's mostly about having fun?0 -
{edit} Whoops, new to the forum and I didn't see the extra pages under the ads. Now I see that everyone has already covered everything I said here.
Carry on. Nothing to see here.
I see it differently.
Lighter is better for both bike and rider (until one is actually lean and fit, when lighter is impossible.) However, it is the cost per kg lost that really raises questions.
If I were a WorldTour-type athlete, 50 grams could mean a huge amount on a long climb--maybe the difference between a podium and not.
With me being built like a jellyfish, 50 grams probably saves me one second on an a hour’s ride.
For the racer, 50 grams might be worth a Lot of money (pride, prestige, ego—Value, to the racer.)
For me, one second is nothing. Paying a lot of money to ride one second quicker—paying Any money to ride one second quicker—seems insane to me.
But my Value is in more than time over distance. To me, the lighter bike is still a lighter bike, even if I cannot tell the difference except in the first three minutes of a back-to-back bike swap. I Like knowing I took some weight off my bike (I like better taking it off my waistline, but I cannot buy that.)
For me, spending a little money to save a little weight is its own reward, even if practically it means nothing.
I won’t go out and spend a lot of money on the lightest (or the latest) Anything, but if I have to upgrade (or just can and want to) I will always look at weight. Saddle is worn? What does a light saddle cost? Leftover discontinued carbon seatpost on closeout for 1/4 the original sales price? Sure. That’s good Value to me.
It is impossible to rationalize personal value.
I think some people take the weight-savings thing to an extreme (the aero thing as well—unless you are riding 30 mph it doesn’t much matter) but it is not for me to decide what works for them. If they can afford the latest CF frame, the parts group which is 200 grams lighter for the whole group but also $200 more ... good for them.0 -
Very true, and this is the question I often ask of sceptics when they poo-poo (!) a light bike.
"OK so if I ask you carry my 1kg water bottle you won't mind?" Needless to say, they do! (mind!)
Nice way of turning the tables and proving your point lol.
Light bikes also come with nicer kit, but they have that covered too as they think 2 or 3 groupsets up the range makes no difference either :roll:
It boils down to money and effort seeking 'marginal gains' and 'enthusiasts kit' unfortunately.
Slagging stuff off to convince themselves (and trying to convince others) that it is pointless, makes them feel a bigger fish in a smaller pond, which a lot of people love.
Sure some people are obsessed, but most just want it because its better.0 -
Very true, and this is the question I often ask of sceptics when they poo-poo (!) a light bike.
"OK so if I ask you carry my 1kg water bottle you won't mind?" Needless to say, they do! (mind!)
Nice way of turning the tables and proving your point lol.
Light bikes also come with nicer kit, but they have that covered too as they think 2 or 3 groupsets up the range makes no difference either :roll:
It boils down to money and effort seeking 'marginal gains' and 'enthusiasts kit' unfortunately.
Slagging stuff off to convince themselves (and trying to convince others) that it is pointless, makes them feel a bigger fish in a smaller pond, which a lot of people love.
Sure some people are obsessed, but most just want it because its better.
the rest of us buy it just because we like nice stuff0 -
I have a 4KG weight difference between my two bikes. The lighter bike is far better to ride.0
-
Possibly more accurately, "I vastly prefer riding the lighter bike." Chacun a son gout.I have a 4KG weight difference between my two bikes. The lighter bike is far better to ride.0 -
Nothing wrong with the Maxis Advantage tyres I run on the heavy bike.Advocate of disc brakes.0
-
Just to be clear, buying expensive toys and genuine interest in performance aren't the same thing. You don't have to spend a lot to have a good bike, buying all the latest kit won't give you performance increases proportional to additional cost, the equipment you have doesn't have anything to do with how 'serious' you are, people that don't buy the most expensive aren't 'jealous', and the things that make you faster aren't always shiny. If you like spending your money then good for you, but appreciate your consumerism for what it is.0
-
I have a ~11.5 kg aluminum-framed cheapo which is my daily ride and an ancient tourer which probably weighs 14 kg. Both have good rubber, because when I can I ride each of them, and darn it, I am worth it!
0 -
There’s a difference between “good rubber” and “fast rubber”. In fact, let’s just call them tyres from now on. Slow tyres may be good in other ways – they may have high puncture resistance or good winter grip or a low price – but they remain slow.
If you run Grand Prix 4000 S IIs on your light bicycle and Gator Hardshells on your heavy one, I am not too interested in your views on weight. They’re likely imagined.
P.S. I agree with Simon above. I even agree with his gearing (8-speed forever!).
Perhaps we should start a club. For me, I can't see what's not to like - 12-19 gives me the gears that I want and I can get these cassettes NOS for good prices, and current production Record cassettes are available in a few different ranges and cost just over £30. 8 speed Campag components are such high quality as well; not to mention looking pretty.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19727405#p19727405]Simon Masterson[/url] wrote:Just to be clear, buying expensive toys and genuine interest in performance aren't the same thing. You don't have to spend a lot to have a good bike, buying all the latest kit won't give you performance increases proportional to additional cost, the equipment you have doesn't have anything to do with how 'serious' you are, people that don't buy the most expensive aren't 'jealous', and the things that make you faster aren't always shiny. If you like spending your money then good for you, but appreciate your consumerism for what it is.
Just to be clear, decent bikes are not 'toys' to most people that have them, and you can have a genuine interest that is not performance related.
You have to spend a fair amount to have a good bike IMO, and I never said anything about the most expensive.
People will spend their money, its more or less the only thing you can do with it ultimately.
You don't have to like spending it, you just need to like the things you spend it on.
To hint that spending it on a nice light bike makes you some kind of gullible consumer is laughable lol0 -
Decent bikes are definitely toys (unless you're a pro or a cycle courier or something). What else are they?
Expensive and shiny toys, mind.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19727405#p19727405]Simon Masterson[/url] wrote:Just to be clear, buying expensive toys and genuine interest in performance aren't the same thing. You don't have to spend a lot to have a good bike, buying all the latest kit won't give you performance increases proportional to additional cost, the equipment you have doesn't have anything to do with how 'serious' you are, people that don't buy the most expensive aren't 'jealous', and the things that make you faster aren't always shiny. If you like spending your money then good for you, but appreciate your consumerism for what it is.
Just to be clear, decent bikes are not 'toys' to most people that have them, and you can have a genuine interest that is not performance related.
You have to spend a fair amount to have a good bike IMO, and I never said anything about the most expensive.
That depends on what you term a 'good' bike, but no. You can spend a fair amount to have a good bike.To hint that spending it on a nice light bike makes you some kind of gullible consumer is laughable lol
It's a good thing no-one's hinting that then!0 -
I have a 4KG weight difference between my two bikes. The lighter bike is far better to ride.
Are both frames made from the same material?0 -
Decent bikes are definitely toys (unless you're a pro or a cycle courier or something). What else are they?
Expensive and shiny toys, mind.
What a load of bollox!
Decent bikes are no more 'toys' than mediocre ones.
Why would you want to ride a mediocre bike?
When is a bike not a toy then?
The use of the word toy is usually either a jealous insult or a rich person showing off.
In reality a decent bike is just quality rather than mediocre or complete toot!
What else is a toy? A decent watch? A decent TV? A decent Hi-Fi? A decent car?0 -
I'm under no illusions that the marginal gains created by the lightness of my "best bike" are wasted on me, but that's not really the point. It's just a great feeling to ride a really hilly route on a lovely lightweight bike and it's certainly noticeable compared to riding a heavier bike.
I know all about the physics of hilly riding (ie that it's the weight of bike + rider that's the critical factor) but you just cannot recreate the feeling of riding a taut, lightweight bike up and down hills. I just love the feeling of its lightness from the moment I unhook it from its high hanging place.
However, even a weight weenie like me can appreciate the joys of riding a heavier bike and I love both. A case in point is that I'm back on my winter n+1, my old 531 steel bike, and I've been thoroughly enjoying it. Even climbing is enjoyable in a comfy sort of way and its weight means I don't get so wrapped up in chasing an average speed. I took it on a 100ft/mile hilly route home today and I was a fair bit slower than on my lighter bikes.0 -
Marginal gains lol, Its just a sh1t phrase haters use.
Its funny the things haters get away with when hating nice bikes/kit that would not transfer to other things in life.
What exactly are the 'gain's'? Speed? I don't ride a nice bike just to go faster!! I would train harder to do that .....
..... but I would not be on the sh1t heavy bike after I had trained
Of course the 'gains' get less value for money, and I have nothing against 'sweet spots' for value (quite the opposite actually), but there is nothing wrong with going beyond that too.
You do get to a point where it becomes silly, but talk of 'marginal gains' happens way before it should IMO.
Its subjective anyway.
A bike is an extension of your body in a way other things are not.
Bikes feel different to a point that marginal is far from marginal IMO/IME.0 -
Simplistic ideas with numerous flaws and everyone else is a 'hater' - it's like Britain First on cycling.
But marginal gains is a performance philosophy far removed from any amateur that just wants a nice bike. Who is suggesting you shouldn't have one anyway?0 -
Why apply it to 'amateurs' then?
WTF are amateurs anyway? Guessing not pro's lol?
Why are Pro cyclists even mentioned so much?
So many haters, so many chips, so many nay sayers, so many hang ups.
Cycling deserves better IMO.
Door closing. Enjoy your heavy bikes. Happy cycling 0
