How much are you willing to spend to save a gram?
Comments
-
I was just browsing back through some old posts and came across this thread again
It's interesting to see that the final poll results (as of now) are almost an all-or-nothing affair; people are generally happy to spend lots of money on saving weight or don't consider it an important factor at all. I find that interesting given the number of people I see riding around on carbon bikes with Ultegra groupsets, where, I would argue, the primary reason for choosing that bike over a base-level alloy-framed 105-equipped bike would seem to be weight-saving.
I appreciate that weight might not be people's primary concern, but I find it difficult to believe that 46% of people on this forum don't consider weight at all when purchasing new bikes and components. :?
0 -
Not read through the thread (yet) - I think I'd spend up to £200 to save 1 KG - so on that basis, I'd spend 20p to save a gram0
-
Spent £150 on a £250 stem that saved 2g, so £75 per gram.
I did not buy it to save weight, but was funny when I weighed them both.0 -
What made this particular stem worth spending £150 on then, if you don't mind me asking? Not being judgemental at all, just curious...0
-
Have a shit before you ride.
Don't take a bottle.
Weight doesn't matter.
=
I've got a heavy bike, I don't want to spend money and I'm trying to rationalise it.
Lighter bikes are more fun, easier to hop, accelerate faster, decelerate faster and can manoeuvrer quicker than heavier bikes. Oh yeah, they can climb a tad faster too. 0 -
BuckMulligan wrote:What made this particular stem worth spending £150 on then, if you don't mind me asking? Not being judgemental at all, just curious...
I needed a slightly longer stem.
Chunkier Carbon matt black one looked much better on the bike in question.
Bit blingy.
Pi55es haters off.
Guess it may feel different too?
Not generally a fan of carbon stems though.0 -
ZMC888 wrote:Have a shoot before you ride.
Don't take a bottle.
Weight doesn't matter.
=
I've got a heavy bike, I don't want to spend money and I'm trying to rationalise it.
Lighter bikes are more fun, easier to hop, accelerate faster, decelerate faster and can manoeuvrer quicker than heavier bikes. Oh yeah, they can climb a tad faster too.
Very well put
A lot of the haters have probably never ridden a v light bike........
....... but would be straight down the shops for one if they won some cash.0 -
BuckMulligan wrote:What made this particular stem worth spending £150 on then, if you don't mind me asking? Not being judgemental at all, just curious...
Can you explain how the 'judgementlism' works, if you had been so inclined to be so?
You have to take these things into context imo.
We have a couple of very nice bikes, with very nice kit on.
The fact one stem (I won't mention the saddle) cost a lot is soaked up by the fact the bikes did not.
Even at full retail cost, a 4/5k bike is still better value than two weeks at Diseneyland.
Like ZMC888 said though.
People that cannot afford both, will go to Disneyland and then sl4g off people with the nice bikes they want 0 -
Carbonator wrote:BuckMulligan wrote:What made this particular stem worth spending £150 on then, if you don't mind me asking? Not being judgemental at all, just curious...
Can you explain how the 'judgementlism' works, if you had been so inclined to be so?
You have to take these things into context imo.
We have a couple of very nice bikes, with very nice kit on.
The fact one stem (I won't mention the saddle) cost a lot is soaked up by the fact the bikes did not.
Even at full retail cost, a 4/5k bike is still better value than two weeks at Diseneyland.
Like ZMC888 said though.
People that cannot afford both, will go to Disneyland and then sl4g off people with the nice bikes they want
I'm not sure what 'judgementlism' is, but it sounds like you're angling for an argument there.
We're all adults here and don't need to justify our decisions to random people on the internet! 0 -
Seems like there's some fragile egos here who are desperate to justify spending tons of cash on weight saving with some pretty spurious reasoning. Notice how anyone who engages them in reasoned debate becomes a "hater"? Here's my take. If you're a weight weenie then bully for you, I guess we all are to a greater or lesser degree cos after all who wants their road bike to weigh as much as a cow? However for some of us weight isnt as far up the list of priorities as say ride quality, reliability, aesthetics or any number of factors For instance my titanium bike cost me a lot of money and weighs a smidge over 8kg. I could have spent quite a bit less and got myself something generic like a Giant that was lighter but then they're not my thing. My dream bike is a steel Pegoretti that would cost north of 5 or 6 grand and weigh closer to 10kg if it was in a size that fit me and I'd almost sell a kidney to get my hands one one. Now I'm certainly no hater of light bikes or the people who own them, but it does amuse me sometimes when people who could likely shed a few pounds of fat quite easily and who don't even race their bikes will spend 100s or 1000s of pounds to shed a few ounces off their bike. Most of us spend too much money on stuff we don't need be it holidays, bikes or houses. The only person you have to justify it to is yourself. One man's meat and all that.0
-
BuckMulligan wrote:Carbonator wrote:BuckMulligan wrote:What made this particular stem worth spending £150 on then, if you don't mind me asking? Not being judgemental at all, just curious...
Can you explain how the 'judgementlism' works, if you had been so inclined to be so?
You have to take these things into context imo.
We have a couple of very nice bikes, with very nice kit on.
The fact one stem (I won't mention the saddle) cost a lot is soaked up by the fact the bikes did not.
Even at full retail cost, a 4/5k bike is still better value than two weeks at Diseneyland.
Like ZMC888 said though.
People that cannot afford both, will go to Disneyland and then sl4g off people with the nice bikes they want
I'm not sure what 'judgementlism' is, but it sounds like you're angling for an argument there.
We're all adults here and don't need to justify our decisions to random people on the internet!
Er, no. You mentioned the concept of being judgmental.
I was just asking how that would work.
I don't need to justify anything. I was just answering your question!!
Not going to let haters make little snide remarks (not pointing finger at you) and get away with it though lol.
£1 per gram (the max option in the poll) is about standard isn't it?
A stock 10kg bike is roughly £1000, and a 7kg one roughly £4000.
I could not get £200 (20p per g) out of my pocket quick enough if it saved me a whole kg in bike weight!
That would turn a £1000 10kg bike into a £2000 5kg bike!0 -
Few quid per gram I expect, if I was trying to build a light bike.
Although I ride a steel bike which wasn't that expensive as far as road bikes go, couple grand, I could have got a carbon bike for the same price that was 1 - 1.5kg lighter but I like the way the steel one rides. And it's a bit more versatile. I've never found a few grams in weight to make all that much difference.0 -
It's complicated, isn't it? There are a finite number of components to save weight on. It makes sense to start with those that give the biggest savings for the money (quid per gram). But as the bike gets lighter, further possible savings become more expensive in terms of quid per gram. There comes a point as the asymptote approaches where it becomes silly and you end up spending vast amounts of money to save very small amounts of weight that will be undetectable in practice. Also, when you get to the point where you need to spend £200 to save 5g on a pair of jockey wheels you could probably have saved that weight much more cheaply earlier on by spending £200 rather than £170 on bars that saved you 50g rather than 45g..
So ideally you need a graph of cost against lightest-bike-possible, where the calculations at each point represent the unique optimal solution at that point in terms of component choices. And then pick your point on the line according to your budget and priorities. And of course you would also want to have controllable parameters for trade-offs between lightest-possible and durability / functionality...
From such a graph you could then extract an abstracted quid per gram figure.0 -
Carbonator wrote:
A lot of the haters have probably never ridden a v light bike........
....... but would be straight down the shops for one if they won some cash.
So it's a wealth/envy thing. You are Vtech and I claim my £5....0 -
Haha, whatever happened to Vtech?
No sorry Imposter, not Vtech, and not a wealth thing.
A nice bike really is not expensive if its something you want.
3 years 0% was how I got my first one. You just spend your money on that rather than other things.
If people don't want to, then fine, but don't knock people that do.
I think my point about knockers not having ridden a very light bike is a valid one.
Same as people knocking SPD SL's that have never used them.0 -
Carbonator wrote:Haha, whatever happened to Vtech?
No sorry Imposter, not Vtech, and not a wealth thing.
A nice bike really is not expensive if its something you want.
3 years 0% was how I got my first one. You just spend your money on that rather than other things.
If people don't want to, then fine, but don't knock people that do.
I think my point about knockers not having ridden a very light bike is a valid one.
Same as people knocking SPD SL's that have never used them.
Of course some people who criticise light bikes will be motivated out of jealousy but I don't detect any of them in this thread. All I have seen is sensible discussion on the merits of otherwise of spending big bucks to save a few grammes and whether there may be more pragmatic and cheaper approaches such as losing body fat. Indeed it could be argued that the 150 quid you spent on your carbon stem to ( pi55 of the haters as you would have it) might have been better spent on a bike fit. If the fitter discovered that your stem was too short for instance, then fitting a slightly heavier 10 quid alloy version from Planet X
might put you in a more aero position or one where you could sustain more power for longer. You'd end up with a fractionally heavier but ultimately faster bike. I suppose you could buy the longer stem in carbon as well but you take my point?
I get the obsessive weight saving thing if you're racing and you're looking for every possible advantage having covered all the other variables such as correct training, nutrition and recovery, and you're at your optimum weight and body fat percentage. I don't quite get it for someone who isn't competing however, particularly when any theoretical gains there are to be had are marginal at best. It's a marketing man's dream however that people want to own super light bikes and components regardless of whether they yield much in the way of real world advantages. Hence Trek et al charging five figure sums for their flagship sub 6kg bikes. Now I understand that Trek's Emonda SLR 10 is going to be faster than a Raleigh Grifter, and it's going to be faster than a lot of cheap road bikes, but it's arguable that it's going to to be much faster if at all than say a CAAD 12 costing 8 grand less. The only way to tell of course is in a race but who's going to race with an Emonda SLR 10? If owning the lightest bike in the world or the lightest bike you can afford is your thing then knock yourself out I sort of understand where you're coming from, but we part company when you justify your purchases on the grounds that you want to annoy "haters" on the internet who are basically people you have never met and have a different opinion to you.0 -
So funny you keep mentioning the last thing on my list of reasons for buying the stem, and completely ignore all the other ones.
You also assume a lot about me, maybe I have had all the things you so kindly recommend I spend my money on rather than a stem. Maybe I don't need to not by the stem if I have not already done them but do want to.
Why does your generic bike fit guy seem to have God like status as the perfect way to spend £150?
Where did I mention anything about wanting a faster bike?
Not to mention the fact I said the stem purchase had bugger all to do with weight.
Would you recommend those things to people over other purchases? How about someone who was going to buy a cheap set of wheels?
How about if it was not even cycle related? "Hey mate, don't buy that TV, get a bike fit"
The whole annoying haters thing is never actually a reason for buying anything, its just a nice bonus 0 -
Carbonator wrote:So funny you keep mentioning the last thing on my list of reasons for buying the stem, and completely ignore all the other ones.
You also assume a lot about me, maybe I have had all the things you so kindly recommend I spend my money on rather than a stem. Maybe I don't need to not by the stem if I have not already done them but do want to.
Why does your generic bike fit guy seem to have God like status as the perfect way to spend £150?
Where did I mention anything about wanting a faster bike?
Not to mention the fact I said the stem purchase had bugger all to do with weight.
Would you recommend those things to people over other purchases? How about someone who was going to buy a cheap set of wheels?
How about if it was not even cycle related? "Hey mate, don't buy that TV, get a bike fit"
The whole annoying haters thing is never actually a reason for buying anything, its just a nice bonus
There are lots of reasons not to buy cheap wheels, regardless of any of the other things I mentioned. However if you were buying expensive wheels then looking at your nutrition, training, weight and body fat might be advisable. If you have the cash and you can afford a bit of bling then that's a good enough reason I suppose but don't expect them to make any appreciable difference if you neglect the other things. Any assumptions I have made about you are based on your contribution to this thread but if I've misinterpreted you then I apologise. From what you have written you appear to spend large sums of money on lightweight bikes and components which is your absolute right as you say, but equally we're allowed to question your rationale on a thread about how much you can justify spending on a £ per gramme basis, particularly when you throw out lines about haters not being able to afford lightweight bikes or never having ridden one. So do you race? What are your reasons for spending a lot of cash on weight saving? Just curious.
Edit. My reason for mentioning a bike fit was to illustrate a point that you can actually add weight to a bike and make gains. It wasn't aimed specifically at you. I could have given the example that buying the lightest possible wheels might actually make you slower if they were more flexible/less aero or whatever than a heavier set. Not sure where you're going with the thing about advising someone wanting a TV set to get a bike fit. What I would say though is that if you want the best picture quality and sound then don't bother asking the salesman how much it weighs 0 -
Please can people stop using words like 'haters' - unless you are a south London teenage rapper, in which case carry on.0
-
My chainring teeth are starting to wear out. I had a quick look and the Dura-Ace chainset is more than double the price of the Ultegra chainset but only 176g lighter. The new Dura Ace 9100 doesnt even look much different to the Ultegra 6750 (an extra arm)It's interesting to see that the final poll results (as of now) are almost an all-or-nothing affair; people are generally happy to spend lots of money on saving weight or don't consider it an important factor at all.
In my own opinion it wasn't worth going for a weight-weenie frame when I don't have the lightest wheels or groupset. If you look at the cheaper specs of "climbing bikes", they're not that lightweight. And I would just add weight by putting on a puncture repair saddle bag, bike lock, water bottles, lights, jersey pockets full of energy bars, keys, phone, wallet (not that heavy) and stuff. To go weight-weenie, I would need to be all out and blank cheque ...or... nothing, as theres no point doing it half heatedly. As long as my road bike is reasonably light within reason, then Im happy. At least its not as heavy as my full sus 29er mountain bike.
Interestingly I read a review on the Meridia Scultura 9000 LTD, which weighs 4.56Kg
http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/cate ... 000-50409/
and the reviewer said he could feel it flexing horribly. I think he wrote even the Lampre race team (who use Meridia bikes) didn't want to use such a delicate frame. Something I never considered was that extreme weight saving could result in a bad ride or a top tube you could push in by sitting on it or clamping it into the cars bike rack. But Im guessing a 4.5Kg bike was never meant to be ridden seriously but is just a technology demonstrator or concept bike for the manufacturers bragging rights."The Prince of Wales is now the King of France" - Calton Kirby0 -
Shortfall wrote:Carbonator wrote:So funny you keep mentioning the last thing on my list of reasons for buying the stem, and completely ignore all the other ones.
You also assume a lot about me, maybe I have had all the things you so kindly recommend I spend my money on rather than a stem. Maybe I don't need to not by the stem if I have not already done them but do want to.
Why does your generic bike fit guy seem to have God like status as the perfect way to spend £150?
Where did I mention anything about wanting a faster bike?
Not to mention the fact I said the stem purchase had bugger all to do with weight.
Would you recommend those things to people over other purchases? How about someone who was going to buy a cheap set of wheels?
How about if it was not even cycle related? "Hey mate, don't buy that TV, get a bike fit"
The whole annoying haters thing is never actually a reason for buying anything, its just a nice bonus
There are lots of reasons not to buy cheap wheels, regardless of any of the other things I mentioned. However if you were buying expensive wheels then looking at your nutrition, training, weight and body fat might be advisable. If you have the cash and you can afford a bit of bling then that's a good enough reason I suppose but don't expect them to make any appreciable difference if you neglect the other things. Any assumptions I have made about you are based on your contribution to this thread but if I've misinterpreted you then I apologise. From what you have written you appear to spend large sums of money on lightweight bikes and components which is your absolute right as you say, but equally we're allowed to question your rationale on a thread about how much you can justify spending on a £ per gramme basis, particularly when you throw out lines about haters not being able to afford lightweight bikes or never having ridden one. So do you race? What are your reasons for spending a lot of cash on weight saving? Just curious.
Edit. My reason for mentioning a bike fit was to illustrate a point that you can actually add weight to a bike and make gains. It wasn't aimed specifically at you. I could have given the example that buying the lightest possible wheels might actually make you slower if they were more flexible/less aero or whatever than a heavier set. Not sure where you're going with the thing about advising someone wanting a TV set to get a bike fit. What I would say though is that if you want the best picture quality and sound then don't bother asking the salesman how much it weighs
Well done on the paragraph.
I don't consider 2-3.5k large sums of money for a bike.
Nope, you are not allowed to question what I, or anyone spends my/their money on.
The £ per gram poll of this thread is a joke (as I pointed out above).
The 'are you racing' question' is so so sad. You have a road (racing in old money) bike to ride fast, it does not matter who is around you!
Heard of time trials?
Why do you keep saying I have spent 'lots of cash'?
How much is lots of cash on a bike?
How many times do I have to say I did not buy the stem to save weight?
I never buy anything purely to save weight.
I do want a light bike though (as do a lot of people if they are honest), but the fact its faster (which it is) is just a bonus imo.
Ride quality is obviously important, but not at too much weight expense.
I am not weight obsessed but you can have both so why wouldn't you?).
Like most things in cycling and life, its not either/or
Which leads nicely onto questioning why you bang on about nutrition and bike fits and position etc.etc. as somehow being an option to nice kit.
Why would you not just do both?0 -
You can do both which is exactly what I have been saying. I don't know why you're getting so uptight about it all, but then I remembered you're the guy from the thread about carbon bottle cages and you got a bit pi55ed when questioned about buying them because plastic ones were "sluggish" or something. You went on about haters then too. Honest, I'm not a hater, I just take a different view, take it easy.0
-
Only 176g lighter? That's a pretty massive saving for one component for a weight weenie..ben@31 wrote:My chainring teeth are starting to wear out. I had a quick look and the Dura-Ace chainset is more than double the price of the Ultegra chainset but only 176g lighter. The new Dura Ace 9100 doesnt even look much different to the Ultegra 6750 (an extra arm) It dwarfs the 40g saving Campagnolo fans get for paying through the nose for the Super Record crankset with the titanium spindle over the Record one with the steel spindle.. 0 -
I am a fat bloke so I am in a position to save grams ( or quite a few kilos to be honest ) and save money while doing it too..( by eating less). Fun aside, when pro team or sponsor or someone else paying, put on your bike whatever you fancy , in real life and riding for fun ( and I do mean for fun as for the love of riding and fresh air freedom and all that cycling gives... ) only proper answer has to be Nothing - I don't care about weight- we are not pro's here and unless someone is riding just to show off his/her bike saving few grams of weight is irrelevant as it makes no difference whatsoever to the actual riding . Saving few grams is aimed at gaining tiny advantage against your opponents, we ride for fun hence have no opponents. Some in here might disagree but that's how real life and real world works.0
-
Respectfully disagree.. the best thing about a light bike is that it's much more fun to ride. It accelerates faster and rewards aggressive riding. It basically accentuates the feeling of freedom and augmented physical ability that a bike gives you by disappearing under you. A few grams won't make a difference, but a a couple of kilos definitely will, and the only way you make a bike 2kg lighter is by saving 100g or so many times over by sensible component choices.grumpy cabbie wrote:I am a fat bloke so I am in a position to save grams ( or quite a few kilos to be honest ) and save money while doing it too..( by eating less). Fun aside, when pro team or sponsor or someone else paying, put on your bike whatever you fancy , in real life and riding for fun ( and I do mean for fun as for the love of riding and fresh air freedom and all that cycling gives... ) only proper answer has to be Nothing - I don't care about weight- we are not pro's here and unless someone is riding just to show off his/her bike saving few grams of weight is irrelevant as it makes no difference whatsoever to the actual riding . Saving few grams is aimed at gaining tiny advantage against your opponents, we ride for fun hence have no opponents. Some in here might disagree but that's how real life and real world works.0 -
grumpy cabbie wrote:I am a fat bloke so I am in a position to save grams ( or quite a few kilos to be honest ) and save money while doing it too..( by eating less). Fun aside, when pro team or sponsor or someone else paying, put on your bike whatever you fancy , in real life and riding for fun ( and I do mean for fun as for the love of riding and fresh air freedom and all that cycling gives... ) only proper answer has to be Nothing - I don't care about weight- we are not pro's here and unless someone is riding just to show off his/her bike saving few grams of weight is irrelevant as it makes no difference whatsoever to the actual riding . Saving few grams is aimed at gaining tiny advantage against your opponents, we ride for fun hence have no opponents. Some in here might disagree but that's how real life and real world works.
I am not going to be quite so respectful.
If (first post so more likely a troll) your a fat bloke with a cheap heavy bike, then I'm sorry, but you have no idea what a light bike is all about, and really should not be commenting (the concept of the thread is a cr4p one in the first place).
No problem if you are happy with what you are doing though.
Please don't mention losing weight unless you are actually going to get off your fat ar5e and do it though,
Sorry if that seems harsh, but its, as you put it, 'real life and how the real world works'.
I got off my fat ar5s and lost weight.
It was not easy, but well worth it, as was the light bike
My advice to you would be to lose weight and buy a light bike.
Your life will be much better and trust me, you will have a lot more fun.0
