Results 1 to 22 of 22
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    59

    Air 9 - Air 9 Carbon weight differential?

    Does anyone know (or have an educated guess) on the weight difference between the new Air 9 hydroformed aluminum frame & the Air 9 Carbon? Just curious...

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,947
    Me too.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    497
    my small hydroformed one 9 w/out BB was 1530 grams

  4. #4
    thecentralscrutinizer
    Reputation: mopartodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,581
    My 2012 Air9, small, was 1418 grams. My guess is that the carbon frame in the same size is close to a pound lighter.
    2015 Kona JTS
    2014 Giant Anthem 27.5
    2013 DeVinci Leo SL
    2009 SE Racing SoCal Flyer
    2008 SE lil Ripper
    2003 TiSport Gman

  5. #5
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,990
    1lb is 453g, the A9C is nowhere near that much lighter. I believe around the 1200-1300g mark depending on size. Not a massive difference.

    Do a search and read here, someone will have weight published.
    Ti O'Beast
    Indy Fab
    One9
    Dirty Disco CX

  6. #6
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,990
    Just had a find of someones weights..... Here

    Looks like LARGE=1460 MED=1350

    Seems your small AIR9 is lighter than the MED A9C
    Ti O'Beast
    Indy Fab
    One9
    Dirty Disco CX

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    330
    The difference is in the ride not the weight!

  8. #8
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,990
    So if im buying a bike for the ride, why wouldnt i buy steel ?

    Its all about weight, i rode many carbon bikes, dont kid yourself.
    Ti O'Beast
    Indy Fab
    One9
    Dirty Disco CX

  9. #9
    Underskilled
    Reputation: CaveGiant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,111
    Weight is only a small part of a bike, it is easy to evaluate, so people tend to concentrate on it.

    It is like megapixels on cameras, they tend to have very little to do with the quality, but as they can be given an easy to understand figure, people flock to it.

    My WFO frame is 1lb heavier, yet I am MUCH faster on road with it, weird huh?

    Maybe it is due to the stiffness of the frame lets me put my power down without flexing like the gen 1 RIP?

    Hard to evaluate stiffness, so people concentrate on it less, WFO is heavier, must be slower.

    Marketing tries to oversimplify things for stupid consumers that buy on figures not results. Do not fall for the BS.
    Why would I care about 150g of bike weight, I just ate 400g of cookies while reading this?

  10. #10
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,268
    Quote Originally Posted by CaveGiant View Post
    Weight is only a small part of a bike, it is easy to evaluate, so people tend to concentrate on it.

    It is like megapixels on cameras, they tend to have very little to do with the quality, but as they can be given an easy to understand figure, people flock to it.

    My WFO frame is 1lb heavier, yet I am MUCH faster on road with it, weird huh?

    Maybe it is due to the stiffness of the frame lets me put my power down without flexing like the gen 1 RIP?

    Hard to evaluate stiffness, so people concentrate on it less, WFO is heavier, must be slower.

    Marketing tries to oversimplify things for stupid consumers that buy on figures not results. Do not fall for the BS.
    I Also think that people concentrate & put way to much focus on frame weight.

    How it works is more important, I always look at weight but that is only 1 part of it.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by ozzybmx View Post
    So if im buying a bike for the ride, why wouldnt i buy steel ?

    Its all about weight, i rode many carbon bikes, dont kid yourself.


    Weight and bling to be precise

    I would love a carbon Niner but I don't need one and can't justify the price

    SIR9 SS for the ride, Air 9 (scandium) for the weight for me

  12. #12
    thecentralscrutinizer
    Reputation: mopartodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,581
    Quote Originally Posted by ozzybmx View Post
    Just had a find of someones weights..... Here

    Looks like LARGE=1460 MED=1350

    Seems your small AIR9 is lighter than the MED A9C
    Med A9C = 1331/1350, my small Air9 = 1418

    I can see the small A9C coming in around your estimate though.
    2015 Kona JTS
    2014 Giant Anthem 27.5
    2013 DeVinci Leo SL
    2009 SE Racing SoCal Flyer
    2008 SE lil Ripper
    2003 TiSport Gman

  13. #13
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,990
    I was only helping the guys out using the search function

    Im the same with carbon bikes now, no interest. I love my one9 but will probably go custom steel for my next SS... though keeping an eye out on a good deal on a previous model (2011) scandium ONE same as my current one.
    Ti O'Beast
    Indy Fab
    One9
    Dirty Disco CX

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by ozzybmx View Post
    So if im buying a bike for the ride, why wouldnt i buy steel ?

    Its all about weight, i rode many carbon bikes, dont kid yourself.
    I meant between The carbon and Alum. NO its not all about weight, its actually about price. Ha, I have lots of time on a scandium Air 9 and I own a A9C, I noticed the ride differences more than the weight. I do have a Steel bike to, I love the ride of that too, but its a totally different deal all together.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    24
    I've weighed them all.

    "Da" 29er/Twentyniner Topic - Belgium Mountain Bikers - Page 23

    Medium carbon black (no seatclamp)=1312g
    Medium carbon orange (no seatclamp)= 1334g
    Medium alloy black (no seatclamp)= 1518g
    If you had the weight of the BB adapter on the carbon frame (approx 85g) then there is a little bit more than 100g difference.
    I've also tested both and even though i admit that the carbon frame is a bit smoother from the rear on roots and rocks, the price difference, the durability (belgian mud is pretty awful on carbon) and the overall design made me choose the alloy one.
    OBEY

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    24
    And here is mine waiting for the brakes and complete assembly...

    OBEY

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: xenophobe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    101
    I find the stiffness of a carbon frame as well as the vibration dampening to be overrated. I like the apparent squishiness of my Air 9 Sc compared to my carbon framed bike. I'm quicker and track better on my carbon bike, but I'm not racing, so my Air 9 has some give that's nice on a trail when I'm riding at a leisurely scenic view pace instead of trying to race my friends.

    I grab my carbon bike when I know I need to keep up. When I'm riding at my pace I like my Air 9 Sc.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by gorg View Post
    I've weighed them all.

    "Da" 29er/Twentyniner Topic - Belgium Mountain Bikers - Page 23

    Medium carbon black (no seatclamp)=1312g
    Medium carbon orange (no seatclamp)= 1334g
    Medium alloy black (no seatclamp)= 1518g
    If you had the weight of the BB adapter on the carbon frame (approx 85g) then there is a little bit more than 100g difference.
    I've also tested both and even though i admit that the carbon frame is a bit smoother from the rear on roots and rocks, the price difference, the durability (belgian mud is pretty awful on carbon) and the overall design made me choose the alloy one.
    Thanks a bunch for posting this. I'm about to upgrade from my EMD9, and if the weight difference is only that much, I'll probably put off on going carbon for a few more years, and as a bonus, that will make the wife much more happy with the cost of the frame
    who needs brakes?

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    373
    My Medium Air9 was 3.28lbs
    Carbon Large Air9Carbon I replaced it with was 2.8lbs

    Both had no EBB - both had seat post clamps installed.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: trailof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    247
    Interesting. I just weighed my stripped A9C yesterday (size medium) and it was 3 lbs flat so 1360.78 grams. No seat post clamp, no EBB, but I do have the chain guard and one of the titanium frame protector pieces on it.

    Mine is a 2010 model year frame.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    373
    Both of the ones I weighed were fairly fresh 2012's - wonder if they were changed over the past two years.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15
    $1000 for 100g? Easy choice.

Posting Permissions

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