Results 1 to 42 of 42
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    16

    How important is bike weight

    It seems people are willing to pay big bucks for shaving off pounds on a bike. I will see a 10% decrese in weight costing 2X more. What is the big benefit? I weigh 200lbs. How much difference will I feel between a 33lb bike and a 29lb bike? I assume it is not one to one, but could I possibly loose 10lbs and make up for the 4 lb loss in bike weight? Is bike weight less important for bigger people as it constitutes a smaller percentage of total weight?

    Thanks for the help.

    Wojtek

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,240
    How critical is weight? This was on page two of the AM forum

    Depends on the person, my friend took his Stinky Deelux everywhere I took my XC bike. There will be a benefit between 33lb and 29lb, especially if its located in the wheels. And loosing 10lbs won't equate to the feeling of a lighter bike, different weight distribution.

  3. #3
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,787
    From the old days when night ride light batteries were 3 pounds I could feel the difference in climbing but it smoothed bump feedback a little more with that much added weight.

    I don't notice adding half that amount of weight while riding. But I do notice even a 1/4 pound difference when lifting the bike off the ground, so there must be a difference in long ride energy used with small weight differences.

    The question is price per weight saved. Look for a frame that fits well, is relatively light and high quality. Components can be upgraded later with lighter weight versions as they wear out or you can afford to.

    Rim and tire weight difference is the most noticeable while riding. A lighter good quality wheel set should also be considered when buying a new bike. Often you can buy a lower spec component model bike and the shop will upgrade wheels for their cost when you buy. Wheels are very expensive to replace. Other components are less expensive and less weight to replace later.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    522
    It's real important to the bottom line of the companys who sell to weight weenies!
    Half our life is spent trying to find something to do with the time we have rushed through life trying to save

  5. #5
    *****************
    Reputation: Bikinfoolferlife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,378
    Bike weight isn't as important to me as I thought it was once. I don't race, though, so no need to go crazy for that advantage.... but I do use as lightweight a component as I can if it does everything I want it to do. At 200 lbs I'm sure 4 lbs on my bike mean less to me than someone weighing a buck twenty...
    "...the people get the government they deserve..."
    suum quique

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    59
    Remember, there is sprung and unsprung mass i.e. your wheels is a 6:1 ratio. So 1 lbs off the wheels will feel like 6 lbs off the bike/rider. Mathematically when you're dealing with only sprung weight it doesn't matter where the weight is performance wise - but geometrically it does. By having the weight higher or lower you drastically will change the center of gravity (CG) and moment arm (MA) of the bike - which is why those 3 LBS batteries seem to make a huge difference, they were below the CG of the bike changing the MA.

    Add in the secondary factor that the human isn't directly connected to the bike and he/she needs to control the bike, adding weight while not changing leverage will increase the force required by the rider to change directions (once again, a factor for those batteries).

  7. #7
    My Brain Hurts!
    Reputation: ProfGumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    699
    Where I see a real gain in the weight issue is when a guy (or girl) goes from a Big Box Battletank bike to a real Mountain Bike. Even my 13 year old son likes his new GT much better than the Huffy he used to ride.

    As for shaving one or two pounds here or there for a recreational rider, IMHO it really doesn't matter as much as quality of construction in the bike and it's components. I'd rather have a bike that weighed 10 pounds more than a super sleek high end, lightweight racer. That is if I knew the heavier bike would require less maintenance and last longer.

    I see this happening with bikes like it does with high performance cars...high performance = high maintenance! And high maintenance = high cost of ownership.

    And do not misunderstand, if I were on a circuit or into competing as the lions share of my riding, I'd have the best I could afford and then some!
    Remember when we were kids and our Mom's said we could not play in the mud? I'm making up for it now!!

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: woodyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,076
    I think the whole bike weight think is way overblown for everything but racing. I weigh 150 lbs. soaking wet and ride a 37 lb. Knolly Delirium as my do-it-all bike and I run with a fast crowd all on light 6" bikes. I used to ride a 26 lb. Moto-lite and a 33 lb. El Guapo. As the bikes got heavier I got faster. I think the reason for this is because the bigger slacker bike fit my aggressive riding style better. Sure I had to work a little harder on the uphills but I'm able to more than make up for it on the downhills and technical sections.

  9. #9
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    3,698
    if you can reduce weight and lose no function or durability- great! do it. Drivetrain parts are like that.
    if you're trading weight for function or durability... think really hard about how worthwhile it is.

    I'm a much faster climber on my XC bike than my AM bike, but there's only a 1lb difference between them. The XC bike has better geometry for climbing and it's rigid. The XC bike was cheap.
    affect befect cefect defect effect fect

  10. #10
    ride hard take risks
    Reputation: dogonfr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    25,418
    What type of riding are ya gonna be doing??
    Formotion Products
    http://www.formot

  11. #11
    long standing member
    Reputation: PCinSC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,093
    What dogonfr said...this conversation is irrelevant without knowing the type of riding you're talking about.

    If you've got some time to read check out this thread from way back. Pay particular attention to the posts by knollybikes.com, some good info there.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: other aardvark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    965
    Bike weight is over hyped kind-a. Light weight wheels can make a big differance to how responsive a bike is, I find its more a matter of suspension versus pedaling responsiveness that makes a bike feel heavy.

  13. #13
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,384
    Quote Originally Posted by poppew
    It seems people are willing to pay big bucks for shaving off pounds on a bike. I will see a 10% decrese in weight costing 2X more. What is the big benefit? I weigh 200lbs. How much difference will I feel between a 33lb bike and a 29lb bike? I assume it is not one to one, but could I possibly loose 10lbs and make up for the 4 lb loss in bike weight? Is bike weight less important for bigger people as it constitutes a smaller percentage of total weight?

    Thanks for the help.

    Wojtek
    I never notice a pound or two on the bike. I definitely notice a pound of tire/rim/tube weight.

  14. #14
    long standing member
    Reputation: PCinSC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,093
    Quote Originally Posted by other aardvark
    Bike weight is over hyped kind-a. Light weight wheels can make a big differance to how responsive a bike is, I find its more a matter of suspension versus pedaling responsiveness that makes a bike feel heavy.
    What about hardtails? I'm not saying you're wrong, I actually agree with your comments. But it would be interesting to do an experiment to see how weight alone affects a bike's performance.

    Take this scenario:

    Two hardtails, same model frame, same size, same wheels and tires/tubes...but Bike A is built with heavy components and Bike B with light ones so there is a five pound weight difference.

    Any guesses on how they would compare?

  15. #15
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,384
    Quote Originally Posted by PCinSC
    What about hardtails? I'm not saying you're wrong, I actually agree with your comments. But it would be interesting to do an experiment to see how weight alone affects a bike's performance.

    Take this scenario:

    Two hardtails, same model frame, same size, same wheels and tires/tubes...but Bike A is built with heavy components and Bike B with light ones so there is a five pound weight difference.

    Any guesses on how they would compare?
    It is an easy experiment. If you have to water bottle holders, ride it with them empty, and then stick a 32 oz bottle in each. OK, thats 4 pounds, but close enough.

    I've done this with a 80mm HT SS. I noticed a little difference, but more in the way the bike handled than in the effort to pedal.

    It really all depends on how much of the weight gain is in the wheels. When I got my wheels rebuilt with rims weighing 150g more a piece, I did notice that (though it was slight and well worth it). Everything else was the same on the bike, including hubs, tubes, tires, even the type of spokes. I recently switched my front tire to one with slightly less rolling resistance, but 200g heavier. I notice that as well. Not a huge difference but it is there. Throw a full 24 oz water bottle on the bike.....can't tell.

  16. #16
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    24,012
    I don't think bike weight is overhyped or the importance can be over-emphasized. People try to make up for bike weight with lots of things, like propedal, lockouts, air-shocks (to give a firmer ride) SPV, and so on. In the end, these don't really help all that much because the rider is just not capable of lugging a bike that weighs that much, and now you're lugging around the weight for an even poorer reason, because you've decreased the suspension performance with these "aids", whereas with a lesser-travel bike that is lighter you may not need them as much. If you really want to go faster, get a light 29er FS bike, a light hardtail, or light 29er hardtail. The difference on level ground and on the uphills is huge, due to the bigger wheels and lighter weight. Lots of people try to convince themselves they can pedal around a heavy bike all day long, and these bikes sell, but I don't think nearly as many people are really suited-for them as they would like to believe, that and the fact that a lot of these 6" or more trail bikes may not even perform as good as a 5" travel bike with coil springs on each end that weighs the same. In other words, there are often sacrifices to make that 6" bike "do-able" all day long or whatever. I'd rather have a good 5" travel bike with coil springs than a 6" one with air on both sides, at least excluding the DW/maestro bikes that seem to allow you have your cake and eat it too (they have a very light compression tune due to the suspension forces).

    The difference between a rider on a 34lb bike with a coil shock and a rider with an air shock on a 33lb bike is probably going to be nowhere near as big as with either compared against a 28lb bike IMO, and it really doesn't matter if that 28lb bike has propedal, lockout, or anything at all in that regard IMO, a lighter bike is easier to ride all day long, even if it does bob some.

    Bottom line IMO is don't choose the bike unless you are comfortable riding something that heavy all day long (or on the rides that you are thinking of). Don't think that propedal or lockouts are going to make a huge difference here, they simply don't make much difference off-road, not nearly as much as the weight would.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  17. #17
    Alien Surf Team
    Reputation: Razorfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,168
    It's perception. Our body is finely tuned to our current weight and will notice if we put just 2 lbs in our pockets and walk around. It will feel like it's a lot when in fact it isn't. i.e. If you lose 10 lbs over a week you won't notice. If you ride your 33 lbs bike and then your buddy's 27 lbs bike you probably will even though it's only have of your weight loss.

    For climbing, it makes no difference if the extra weight is on the bike or our gut. Most of us should lose 10+ lbs off our gut before getting nuts about bike weight. Plus it's free.

    Otherwise where the suspension is working that's a whole different story. Given 40ish lbs DH bikes I doubt that matters either.

    So my point, bike weight is not that important unless you're at the high end of conditioning or competition. 40+ lbs DH bike? Sure but the geo will be different too. 30 lbs +/- a couple pounds and most of will be fine and comfortable after a little while.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: woodyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,076
    Quote Originally Posted by Razorfish
    It's perception. Our body is finely tuned to our current weight and will notice if we put just 2 lbs in our pockets and walk around. It will feel like it's a lot when in fact it isn't. i.e. If you lose 10 lbs over a week you won't notice. If you ride your 33 lbs bike and then your buddy's 27 lbs bike you probably will even though it's only have of your weight loss.

    For climbing, it makes no difference if the extra weight is on the bike or our gut. Most of us should lose 10+ lbs off our gut before getting nuts about bike weight. Plus it's free.

    Otherwise where the suspension is working that's a whole different story. Given 40ish lbs DH bikes I doubt that matters either.

    So my point, bike weight is not that important unless you're at the high end of conditioning or competition. 40+ lbs DH bike? Sure but the geo will be different too. 30 lbs +/- a couple pounds and most of will be fine and comfortable after a little while.
    Well put. I think of a buddy of mine who has a real light bike but his Camelbak weighs close to 10lbs more than mine. He also carries about 20 extra pounds on his frame that he could stand to lose. This guy is not a fast rider...

    I remember the first time I had to upgrade my frame to something much heavier because I broke the lighter one. I was completely freaked out that I was going to have to pedal a 6" bike that was 3 lbs. heavier and that I would never be able to keep up with my buddies. I was pleasantly surprised that not only could I keep up but I was able to go faster because the beefier bike handled the gnarl better. Instead of putting energy into dealing with obstacles I was powering over them. So at the end of the day I was a faster rider and less tired. This of course is terrain specific. You put my 37 lb. bike vs. my buddies 27 lb. going uphill on a fireroad for 2 hours and there will be a difference. Thank God we don't have that type of riding around here!

  19. #19
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    24,012
    Quote Originally Posted by Razorfish
    For climbing, it makes no difference if the extra weight is on the bike or our gut. Most of us should lose 10+ lbs off our gut before getting nuts about bike weight. Plus it's free.
    I disagree, every pedal-stroke is an acceleration, the more weight you are trying to accelerate that is distant from your center of mass=harder to accelerate. The closer it is to your center of mass=better. Center of mass for this doesn't necessarily mean the middle of your body, but the idea is that a bike is constantly accelerating in all sorts of directions on a ride. That takes a pretty big tool.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  20. #20
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    24,012
    Quote Originally Posted by woodyak
    Well put. I think of a buddy of mine who has a real light bike but his Camelbak weighs close to 10lbs more than mine. He also carries about 20 extra pounds on his frame that he could stand to lose. This guy is not a fast rider...

    I remember the first time I had to upgrade my frame to something much heavier because I broke the lighter one. I was completely freaked out that I was going to have to pedal a 6" bike that was 3 lbs. heavier and that I would never be able to keep up with my buddies. I was pleasantly surprised that not only could I keep up but I was able to go faster because the beefier bike handled the gnarl better. Instead of putting energy into dealing with obstacles I was powering over them. So at the end of the day I was a faster rider and less tired. This of course is terrain specific. You put my 37 lb. bike vs. my buddies 27 lb. going uphill on a fireroad for 2 hours and there will be a difference. Thank God we don't have that type of riding around here!
    That's a good point too. You can "grow" into the bike and get used to it. You have to work hard though and not have a problem with the fact that you'll often be going slower than your buddies, at least for a while. And it's going to "hurt" for a while as you get stronger. Once again, some people aren't really prepared for this. Some people do ok, but you still gotta know what you're getting into. With time you get faster (stronger).
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  21. #21
    Alien Surf Team
    Reputation: Razorfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    I disagree, every pedal-stroke is an acceleration, the more weight you are trying to accelerate that is distant from your center of mass=harder to accelerate. The closer it is to your center of mass=better. Center of mass for this doesn't necessarily mean the middle of your body, but the idea is that a bike is constantly accelerating in all sorts of directions on a ride. That takes a pretty big tool.
    With all due respect, you're mistaken. What you're saying to not true for linear motion. You're thinking of objects on a circular path.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: woodyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,076
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    That's a good point too. You can "grow" into the bike and get used to it. You have to work hard though and not have a problem with the fact that you'll often be going slower than your buddies, at least for a while. And it's going to "hurt" for a while as you get stronger. Once again, some people aren't really prepared for this. Some people do ok, but you still gotta know what you're getting into. With time you get faster (stronger).
    I do think terrain plays a big part in this as well. My 85% consists of lots of highly technical riding with lots of large obstacles of various sizes and shapes. Our climbs and downhills are very short, steep, and techy. Drops and steep rollers abound! With my light bike I get bounced all over the place and have a hard time controlling my bike. Towards the end of the ride I adapt and pick better lines but it takes a lot of effort to maintain speed in this type of environment. With my big bike I can pick my own lines and my energy is used towards flowing the bike. The majority of the better faster riders around here have beefier 5" to 6"+ bikes.

    Now when I go pure XC riding that's a different story. The XC trails I ride have some long sustained climbs with some real steep sections. I'm sure a lighter bike would get me up the hill faster but I'm usually out front anyway so I don't need to go that much faster. I prefer my heavier bike on these trails as well because the downhills are so ridiculously fast and flowy that I get sketched out on my light bike.

    Overall I have no problem pushing my overweight bike on 30+ mile epics day after day, but I am very used to this bike and wouldn't trade it for anything. Now if I were at the back of the pack all the time I'd probably change my tune...

  23. #23
    exacerbated member
    Reputation: WorldWind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    241
    Since you have posted this in all mountain and are asking about weight lets first look at the generally accepted definition of all mountain.

    The all mountain category consists mostly of bikes with about 4 to 6 inches (100 to 160 millimeters) of travel. While they are designed to climb hills very efficiently, they are generally heavier and a bit more stout than the typical cross county mountain bike. They can handle a lot rougher terrain as well.

    So then here is my list of how important things are, starting with the most important… to achieve the maximum speed and performance.

    1. skill, yours.
    2. strength and endurance, yours.
    3. weight, yours.
    4. your bikes handling characteristics.
    5. your bikes weight.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: other aardvark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    965
    Quote Originally Posted by PCinSC
    What about hardtails? I'm not saying you're wrong, I actually agree with your comments. But it would be interesting to do an experiment to see how weight alone affects a bike's performance.

    Take this scenario:

    Two hardtails, same model frame, same size, same wheels and tires/tubes...but Bike A is built with heavy components and Bike B with light ones so there is a five pound weight difference.

    Any guesses on how they would compare?
    Definitely would feel a difference but I think if would be difficult to pick weather it was 2 pounds or 5 pounds if the wheels had the same weight.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    4

    i agree with WorldWind

    P.S. sorry for my english, i'm a french canadian

    Since a few days, I read on the forum of mtbr and I noted that the weight of the bicycles and the parts is often discussed…

    First, IMO I believe the most important point is to have fun when you ride. After that, if you want to be more performant, the first point is not only to look at the weight bike, but look at you!

    Someone with a good physical condition will be more powerful even if is bike has a higher weight of 5 lbs. The body can easily adapt itself about anything, so 5 lbs heavier... All the theories of mathematics which we can apply, IMO this is not the biggest concern... the person who is on the bike will do all the difference… even in competition, the bikes are very similar. The psychological and physical aspect which make the biggest difference between the first and the last…

    You want to be more enduring, go in a gym and do a training to improve yourself for that!
    You want to have more power "torque", go in a gym and do a training to improve yourself for that !
    You want to have fun without worried about your performance, jump on a bike no matter what years, size, weight, components, quality, etc, and just ride the ******* bike!

    FreakKit

  26. #26
    I am a pathetic rider...
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    644
    IMO weights don't matter. I ride a 40 lb steel hardtail, but it is indestructible so I don't care. I can pedal that thing anywhere I want, and technique is the only thing limiting my manuevarability with the bike. Case in point, I demoed an 08 C'dale Rize, which the rep told me was around 30 pounds. I thought, oh cool, a bike that weighs 3/4 of what mine does, should be really easy to move it around and climb and stuff. nope, the suspesnsion sucked up way more of my pedalling efficiency and body input than those extra 10 pounds ever did. IMO a good suspension design (or none at all ) is way more noticeable and important than the weight of your bike.
    Save the Earth, Ride a Cyclist

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: justonegear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    167
    If you don't race... don't sweat the weight of your sled. Weight = watts burned on the course, the less you burn on the course the more you have for the sprint at the end of the race. That's why racers pay monster money for super light wheel sets and other parts. Happy Trails

  28. #28
    ride hard take risks
    Reputation: dogonfr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    25,418
    Next time you pick up a beer think weight
    Formotion Products
    http://www.formot

  29. #29
    wuss
    Reputation: dropadrop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,364
    I just lost a pound from my fork and the difference was very noticable. I then changed my wheelset and lost a pound there too (maby even a bit more) and that was a huge difference. I proceeded to lose weight in a few other places (where possible), but that difference was not really huge.

    I would still say that losing weight can make a huge difference. Before changing the fork I felt like the bike was "front heavy". After changing the fork it felt very balanced (so your milage might vary). The wheelset was a killer though, now I just hold the new one will hold up.

  30. #30
    Alien Surf Team
    Reputation: Razorfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,168
    I've been using a Camalback Classic, which is about the smallest you can get, 2L of water and virtually no storage. My new Mule showed up yesterday and I filled it with all kinds us useless stuff. I did replace the 3L with my 2L but I have everything in there now. I even have binoculars. hahaha

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    209
    Quote Originally Posted by poppew
    It seems people are willing to pay big bucks for shaving off pounds on a bike. I will see a 10% decrese in weight costing 2X more. What is the big benefit? I weigh 200lbs. How much difference will I feel between a 33lb bike and a 29lb bike? I assume it is not one to one, but could I possibly loose 10lbs and make up for the 4 lb loss in bike weight? Is bike weight less important for bigger people as it constitutes a smaller percentage of total weight?

    Thanks for the help.

    Wojtek
    Well, the comments here IMO are one sided. Kind of reminiscent of other threads. But I'm sure you realize you're posting on the AM forum.

    Sure, if your thing is going for 5" drops, finding gnarly tough terrain, and ski area DH's, weight is less important than strength.

    If your thing, even if you're not a racer, is riding fast on single track and climbs, e.g. mostly XC/trail riding, yeah, 5+lbs makes a huge difference. Also these bikes tend to have faster more agile geometry. Besides noticing on the climb and accelerations, you can feel and use the difference else where. For instance, lifting the front wheel over some terrain or bunny hopping an obstacle, or lifting and moving the front end to help steer the bike, and at high speeds.

    Some say it's the rider. Of course it is and it works both ways. The best DH'ers will do great on HT's. They'll just be a little more beat up at the end of the day. That's no different than if you took a 30+lb machine out (and kept up) with the racers all day.

    I'm sure Lance A and Steve P can keep up with most on a whatever they choose in their repsective categories. Mario Andretti can out drive me in my sports car with him in a family sedan. That doesn't mean I don't like the agility of my Z over my Xterra.

    So it really comes down to what you want out of riding.

  32. #32
    MEDBLKANOSCBLT2RP23
    Reputation: pakdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    280
    In an "Ideal" world, you might want your bike no more than 15% of your body weight taking in count your %fat is 20 or less.

    Ok, I just made that up, but it does make sense with what you can get and build up in 2008 as a trail or AM bike without much effort. I'd go 20% for DH and 12% for xc while we are playing with the numbers.

    Max bike wt= "body wt" x .15
    RTR

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by FreakKit

    First, IMO I believe the most important point is to have fun when you ride.

    FreakKit
    I totally agree with that. I enjoyed doing all-mountain riding with my crappy 47 lb Wal-Mart mongoose. Seriously

    I now enjoy riding my 08 Giant Reign (31-32 lb). Weight is not the most important thing in choosing a bike. Primarily, I believe you need to get a bike that is built for your kind of riding. Don't get a cross-country racer unless you are in fact a cross country racer - (or a rider who mostly rides smooth trails without much of descents and you have plenty of money to burn). If you actually do all-mountain riding, get an all-mountain bike.

    All else being equal, less wieght is generally a good thing. However, there are few situations in bikes and bike parts that this is the case. In other words, don't give too much priority to weight.

    But hey, if you want to spend your money on components to lighten your ride, choose wisely and enjoy.

    I'd like to try this water bottle experiment people have been talking about in this thread, but a gotta get a bottle cage, cause my hydration pack won't have the same effect...

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,746
    i guess some people notice weight more than others, i changed out my s works captains on my 2009 SJ for maxis minions dual ply 2.35 downhill tires, theres a noticable difference when i pick the bike up but when riding it all i notice is that the bike rides a hell of a lot better especially on downhill trails

  35. #35
    I'm SUCH a square....
    Reputation: bigpedaler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,948
    For a 200# rider, the diff between a 33 & a 29 bike is small, but noticeable (bt,dt); the trick of it all is WHERE the weight is. Lighter wheels FEEL like more of a gain, as do the tires, of course. A lighter crank will only be noticed by an extremely sensitive & experienced rider. Smaller differences, like going to a carbon bar from an alu bar, can be more noticeable than the reflected weight savings. Again, same with the fork. You get a nimble-feeling front end that way, easy to loft.

    Most important, for riders OUR size (right now, I'm at 230), is durability, and there, my XLT has surpassed every expectation!
    A bike is the only drug with no bad side effects....

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tkul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    611
    If you think about it, I think we use 80% of our time in the saddle climbing and the rest DHing.

    Of course weight is important, if you don`t take to ridiculous numbers. AM bike in the 13kg can be achieved without difficulty! Even stock bikes weight that and doesn`t cost an arm and leg!

    For more agressive ridding a bike in the 15kg is normal! This bike will climb worse than the 13 kg and will do it worse if the fork can`t be shrink so that headangle and seat angle have better numbers to the job!

    For me, I`m not a weight freak! I want a bike that I can use any where, any time, without loosing my head. That has some "price"!

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    623
    Quote Originally Posted by pakdoc
    In an "Ideal" world, you might want your bike no more than 15% of your body weight taking in count your %fat is 20 or less.

    Ok, I just made that up, but it does make sense with what you can get and build up in 2008 as a trail or AM bike without much effort. I'd go 20% for DH and 12% for xc while we are playing with the numbers.

    Max bike wt= "body wt" x .15
    I'm curious if there is actually a ratio like the one suggested above. 15% seems too low for AM however.

    I weigh 160lbs, which would mean that my bike should weigh 24lbs (which is about what my SS hardtail weighs). I can't imagine getting my 34lbs Moment down to 24lbs...I'd like to get it down to 30lbs but that is difficult also.

  38. #38
    ride hard take risks
    Reputation: dogonfr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    25,418
    Quote Originally Posted by LowLow
    I'm curious if there is actually a ratio like the one suggested above. 15% seems too low for AM however.

    I weigh 160lbs, which would mean that my bike should weigh 24lbs (which is about what my SS hardtail weighs). I can't imagine getting my 34lbs Moment down to 24lbs...I'd like to get it down to 30lbs but that is difficult also.
    No problem just post over here and have your credit card in hand.

    http://forums.mtbr.com/weight-weenies/

    These guys can help with the price search to help that credit card along.

    http://www.spadout.com/c/mountain-biking/
    Formotion Products
    http://www.formot

  39. #39
    Trying a little
    Reputation: dusthuffer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,781
    bike weight doesn't matter for the first 1 hour of the ride. It matters for the last 1 hour.
    That is true no matter if you are 70lbs or 300lbs.

    I never apologize. I'm sorry, but that's just the way I am.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    151
    I also agree with worldwind.

    So then here is my list of how important things are, starting with the most important… to achieve the maximum speed and performance.

    1. skill, yours.
    2. strength and endurance, yours.
    3. weight, yours.
    4. your bikes handling characteristics.
    5. your bikes weight.
    and THEN you split out the bike weights:

    5a. rotating weight
    5b static weight

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tkul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    611
    True... last hour is really grm weenie! Even mud weight!

  42. #42
    exacerbated member
    Reputation: WorldWind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    241
    There is a parting thought for this thread that is a given, for the experienced riders out there, but may not be quite so obvious for the guy who is still testing the shallow end of this sport.

    For a pro rider or a committed enthusiast a few ounces can make a world of difference under certain circumstances. Here are two examples.

    You can pretty much count on a number of things happening as the price of a component goes up. Weight goes down and adjustability and functionality go up. So that as an added bonus to less weight for a part, you get a better shifting derailleur, or a smoother turning bottom bracket or hub.
    As you approach the stratosphere of cog sets you get less weight and hardened profiled cogs that shift faster and quieter.

    The novice rider can’t take full advantage of these nuances so all the extra cost is not fully realized, therefore not justified.

    The other example relates to the finesse a pro rider is able to achieve in his or her riding style. With ample experience a rider can take a very light bike through terrain that would destroy a heaver stronger bike in the hands of a novice.

    So with this in mind to get back to the original post, it becomes clear that for different riders, weight has a different value.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •