Results 1 to 20 of 20
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    101

    Advice for weight saving...Sorry :)

    Hi

    Here's the build list, any suggestions? Finally bit the bullit and went for brakes that work over here in the UK, my fingers no longer get cramp on those looong muddy decents! Anyway, any ideas for lightening? No stupid parts please, and I'm not going goooey tubeless, been there, done that, didnt get on. Any help gratefully appreciated.

    Ta
    G

    frame 1550 Titus HCR
    fork 1345 Sid WC 2003
    headset 125 King (inc top cap & plug)
    cranks 601 Tune Bigfoot, TA rings 24/34/46
    brakes 700 Magura Marta SL
    shifters 199 Sram XO
    rmech 204 Sram XO
    fmech 151 XTR M952
    chain 280 Sram PC-89R
    cassette 254 XTR M960 11/32
    qrs 53 Tune
    hub f 148 DT Hugi 240
    hub r 266 DT Hugi 241
    tyres 900 Explorer Supersonic
    tubes 300 Wrench Force Standard
    spokes 266 DT Revolution
    nipps 64 DT Alloy
    pedals 207 Xpedo Ti/Ti
    bb bolts 29 Tune
    bb 145 Tune JU
    hset spacer 20 Seven Ti
    stem 146 Ibis Ti
    bars 105 Maxm 23"
    bar ends 58 Post Moderne
    grips 20 Foam
    seat 178 Fisik Aliante Ti
    post 207 Syncros Ti
    rims 800 Mavic XC717 Disc

    Total 9321g
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    Get your freak on!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,698
    Awesome bike!

    The only thing that stands out is maybe some slightly lighter or smaller tubes. Maybe just for the front only?

    I'm guessing you have already bolt tuned it?

    Oh ye... if you want to get rid of some of the bling Ti(I don't think you should ), you could replace the stem with a Syntace F99, and the spacers with carbon(not sure how much this will actually save).

  3. #3
    Whatever
    Reputation: MINImtnbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    501

    Stan's Rims?

    You could save ~400 grams by building wheels with Stan's Olympic Disc rims - 347g each. I have one in rear that weighed 348g. It uses no rim strip, and the only weight is some Stan's goo in the tires, about 50g max each. Take the weight of the tubes off, reduce the chance of pinch flats, and get a faster ride w/ more traction.

    Also you could do a USE aluminum post which will save some weight, or a ti to save a bit more and have a little bit of plush built in...and be patriotic. You could do an SLR saddle but it's not as comfy as the Aliante. However, a word of caution: I broke one SLR's nose from climbing steep stuff -- just sitting on the front mind you -- and the USA importer wouldn't warranty it. It was 9 months old. So it's the last Selle Italia product I'll ever use.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    104
    You can save 178 grams by taking off the seat.

  5. #5
    Trail rider and racer
    Reputation: Trevor!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,693
    Use Seatpost would be lighter as would some other carbon ones
    Selle Italia SLR 140gr
    Syntace F99 stem
    Road cassette if you really want.

    I honestly couldn't suggest anything else. Keep everything else, the bikes basically perfect (Except the fork - Sorry couldn't resist )
    Trev!

  6. #6
    Whatever
    Reputation: MINImtnbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    501

    Sorry, didn't ready carefully enough before suggesting tubeless!

    Sorry, didn't ready carefully enough before suggesting tubeless! Still, the Stan's rims w/tubes would save you about 100g. And there is no way I would go tubeless with those light tires -- the sidewalls are just too thin. You would need heavier tires which would negate the weight savings.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    51
    Is anyone else concerned about the single bolt stem with the carbon handlebar? I would think that is a no-no with that type of clamp's propensity to crimp bars. The stem also appears to have a single bolt steerer tube clamp on that sid carbon.

    You could replace it with a syntace f99 and save roughly 40 grams.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    104
    nipps 64 DT Alloy
    Can someone please explain to me how do nips add up to 64 grams if "weight weenies" lists them as roughly 30 grams per 100 nipps? Even brass should not be that heavy! Are "weight weenies" giving the right weight though?

  9. #9
    Trail rider and racer
    Reputation: Trevor!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,693
    Quote Originally Posted by novice
    Is anyone else concerned about the single bolt stem with the carbon handlebar? I would think that is a no-no with that type of clamp's propensity to crimp bars. The stem also appears to have a single bolt steerer tube clamp on that sid carbon.

    You could replace it with a syntace f99 and save roughly 40 grams.
    I would be. I would want to evenly torque my stem to my carbon bar and I am not too sure that a single bolt will make each side evenly torqued.
    Trev!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: carlos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    563
    Quote Originally Posted by novice
    Is anyone else concerned about the single bolt stem with the carbon handlebar? I would think that is a no-no with that type of clamp's propensity to crimp bars. The stem also appears to have a single bolt steerer tube clamp on that sid carbon.

    You could replace it with a syntace f99 and save roughly 40 grams.

    if your concern is your only concern, the syntace f99 and all 4 bolt stems will have a very high risk of damage your carbon bar. syntace says only their bars are made to work with 4 bolt stems without problems

    i personally wouldnt trade a ibis titanium stem for a syntace just to save 40grams, i will change the bar for titanium like moots or seven and be happy for the rest of my life.
    hey
    ho
    lets go!

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by carlos
    if your concern is your only concern, the syntace f99 and all 4 bolt stems will have a very high risk of damage your carbon bar. syntace says only their bars are made to work with 4 bolt stems without problems

    i personally wouldnt trade a ibis titanium stem for a syntace just to save 40grams, i will change the bar for titanium like moots or seven and be happy for the rest of my life.
    How do four bolt stems pose a high risk of damage to a bar? The mechanism of closure is not different from that of a common two bolt stem.

    Single bolt stems can easily crimp an aluminum bar; I had a titanium single bolt stem (titec) on a previous road bike where the only way to keep the bars from slipping in the stem was to tigthen the stem so much that it crimped the bars. This a result of the elongation of the titanium 'tube' that holds the bar, causing the single bolt to bend and apply a localized force into the bar.

  12. #12
    Trail rider and racer
    Reputation: Trevor!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,693
    Quote Originally Posted by novice
    How do four bolt stems pose a high risk of damage to a bar? The mechanism of closure is not different from that of a common two bolt stem.
    I'm no engineer so forgive me if I am wrong, but I thought with a single bolt on the stress of the torquing goes to one point, rather then being spread over a greater area???
    Trev!

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by Trevor!
    I'm no engineer so forgive me if I am wrong, but I thought with a single bolt on the stress of the torquing goes to one point, rather then being spread over a greater area???
    This is correct, all of the clamping force must 'flow' through the bolt. Therefore, any material beside the bolt, or bolt anchor, will have little to no force acting upon it. This does cause an imbalance in stress, pressure, on the bar. But since the bolt is bending a more direct force directly into the bar is generated; I think this will more likely cause damage than the imbalance in stress, neither of which are good.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    101
    Hi again...

    Will look into those stans rims, like I said I tried eclipse and didnt get on, I change tyres too much. Otherwise it's a great system. Had that stem for years, no stress marks on forks or bars after 2 years running the stem with that combo. Have zero faith in USE seatposts, its the only thing I've ever broken (other than in a crash) and dont really want another one.

    One word of caution - those Post Moderne bar ends have crimped the ends of my bars. So dont use them with Maxms!!! For some reason I had to torque them quite tight to stop them moving when I pulled on them, guessing Maxm and Post Moderne disagree on the diameter of a handlebar, which is what I imagine created the problem.

    I weighed the bike pre-disc upgrade and it was 21lbs and a smidge, to be honest doing the maths I cant see it changing much with those wheels replacing kings and discs replacing Arch supremes (heavy heavy...) The weights in my list are the real ones according to ww, apologies if I have made some errors. Will be weighing the bike this weekend on digi scale, will post. Oh, and you're right about those forks, they are crap. Flexy, dont go up and down no matter how much I grease / clean / etc... Got some Rebas on the other bike and wow! What a difference suspension that works makes.

    ta ta

  15. #15
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    3,088

    Separate question....

    You've alluded to going to discs because of muddy descents.

    How do you expect those Supersonics to perform in the mud?

    Otherwise the bike is very nice.

    Mike

  16. #16
    Whatever
    Reputation: MINImtnbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    501
    Quote Originally Posted by Gee2
    Hi again...

    Will look into those stans rims, like I said I tried eclipse and didnt get on, I change tyres too much. Otherwise it's a great system.
    I hear you there. I resisted going tubeless for a long time, because I used to change tires sometimes for a specific trail. I finally bit the bullet and went tubeless when Stans rims came out. Now I have two sets of wheels both with King hubs: the Stan's rims wheelset which runs 2.0/2.1 tires, and a separate set with 317's and Stan's rimstips and heavier 2.3 tires. I have had only one flat in a 15 months, that was when I did a 3 foot drop and landed on a rock which ripped the sidewall on a Hutchinson Python. Otherwise they have been great -- the improved traction even with worn out tires is amazing.

  17. #17
    Upgrade-itis
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    124

    I think that is wrong

    Quote Originally Posted by novice
    This is correct, all of the clamping force must 'flow' through the bolt. Therefore, any material beside the bolt, or bolt anchor, will have little to no force acting upon it. This does cause an imbalance in stress, pressure, on the bar. But since the bolt is bending a more direct force directly into the bar is generated; I think this will more likely cause damage than the imbalance in stress, neither of which are good.
    You guys are wrong about the clamping force "flowing" through the bolt, what does that mean anyways? This is a clip from a correspondence I had with a Syntace guy off mtbr.

    "In a recent post I mentioned that the F-99 can be "unfriendly" to most
    conventional handlebars. I want to explain what that means. The "unfriendly"
    term is NOT just for the Syntace F-99 stem but also for any 4-bolt design
    stem, just other manufactures will not tell you or they have not done the
    testing and do not know.
    Any bar can be used with the F-99; however using a non-Syntace bar will cut
    the life expectancy of the bar by 50%. This has been tested and proven.
    Again this is not only with the F-99 but any and all 4 bolt stem designs.
    The reason this happens is because the 4 bolt design puts the force of the
    clamp in 2 sections of the bar pinching the bar. So there is less material
    holding the bar in place. The edges of the stem is where the majority of
    force is put on the bar from riding actions and this just happens to be
    where the clamps are holding the handlebar. It does not matter if the clamp
    strips are smooth or have a sharp edge, the fact that the clamp is
    "pinching/strangling" the bar results in an area that has a lot of pressure
    on it.
    The benefits of the 4 bolt designed stem are as follows: A 2 bolt stem with
    a face plate needs to have extra material added to the stem to allow for the
    bolt threads in the center of the stem. Since the 4-bolt design can use the
    edge of the clamping area no added weight is needed for the bolt threads.
    Also there is no faceplate instead 2 smaller strips of material are used.
    Also, since the clamp area is being secured on the edges it offers a stiffer
    clamp. Resulting in a lighter, stiffer stem."

    also, read this from easton

    http://www.velonews.com/media/easton_bolt.pdf

    I know that these companies have stuff to gain from telling you this (Easton wants to sell it's 2 bolt stems and Syntace wants you to buy it's reinforced handlbars) but these are valid arguments nonetheless.

  18. #18
    Whatever
    Reputation: MINImtnbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    501
    Quote Originally Posted by kukusz
    You guys are wrong about the clamping force "flowing" through the bolt, what does that mean anyways? This is a clip from a correspondence I had with a Syntace guy off mtbr.

    "In a recent post I mentioned that the F-99 can be "unfriendly" to most
    conventional handlebars. I want to explain what that means. The "unfriendly"
    term is NOT just for the Syntace F-99 stem but also for any 4-bolt design
    stem, just other manufactures will not tell you or they have not done the
    testing and do not know.
    Any bar can be used with the F-99; however using a non-Syntace bar will cut
    the life expectancy of the bar by 50%. This has been tested and proven.
    Again this is not only with the F-99 but any and all 4 bolt stem designs.
    The reason this happens is because the 4 bolt design puts the force of the
    clamp in 2 sections of the bar pinching the bar. So there is less material
    holding the bar in place. The edges of the stem is where the majority of
    force is put on the bar from riding actions and this just happens to be
    where the clamps are holding the handlebar. It does not matter if the clamp
    strips are smooth or have a sharp edge, the fact that the clamp is
    "pinching/strangling" the bar results in an area that has a lot of pressure
    on it.
    The benefits of the 4 bolt designed stem are as follows: A 2 bolt stem with
    a face plate needs to have extra material added to the stem to allow for the
    bolt threads in the center of the stem. Since the 4-bolt design can use the
    edge of the clamping area no added weight is needed for the bolt threads.
    Also there is no faceplate instead 2 smaller strips of material are used.
    Also, since the clamp area is being secured on the edges it offers a stiffer
    clamp. Resulting in a lighter, stiffer stem."

    also, read this from easton

    http://www.velonews.com/media/easton_bolt.pdf

    I know that these companies have stuff to gain from telling you this (Easton wants to sell it's 2 bolt stems and Syntace wants you to buy it's reinforced handlbars) but these are valid arguments nonetheless.
    The other thing to be concerned with is whether the clamp area is central (goes through the center of the bar) or offset. Offset clamps are the #1 reason many bar-ends crimp lightweight aluminum or carbon handlebars. Most new carbon bars have warnings about "good" bar ends and older styles you shouldn't use.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    101
    Er...

    I use different tyres in the mud. Duh.

    ;-)

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by kukusz
    You guys are wrong about the clamping force "flowing" through the bolt, what does that mean anyways? This is a clip from a correspondence I had with a Syntace guy off mtbr.

    "In a recent post I mentioned that the F-99 can be "unfriendly" to most
    conventional handlebars. I want to explain what that means. The "unfriendly"
    term is NOT just for the Syntace F-99 stem but also for any 4-bolt design
    stem, just other manufactures will not tell you or they have not done the
    testing and do not know.
    Any bar can be used with the F-99; however using a non-Syntace bar will cut
    the life expectancy of the bar by 50%. This has been tested and proven.
    Again this is not only with the F-99 but any and all 4 bolt stem designs.
    The reason this happens is because the 4 bolt design puts the force of the
    clamp in 2 sections of the bar pinching the bar. So there is less material
    holding the bar in place. The edges of the stem is where the majority of
    force is put on the bar from riding actions and this just happens to be
    where the clamps are holding the handlebar. It does not matter if the clamp
    strips are smooth or have a sharp edge, the fact that the clamp is
    "pinching/strangling" the bar results in an area that has a lot of pressure
    on it.
    The benefits of the 4 bolt designed stem are as follows: A 2 bolt stem with
    a face plate needs to have extra material added to the stem to allow for the
    bolt threads in the center of the stem. Since the 4-bolt design can use the
    edge of the clamping area no added weight is needed for the bolt threads.
    Also there is no faceplate instead 2 smaller strips of material are used.
    Also, since the clamp area is being secured on the edges it offers a stiffer
    clamp. Resulting in a lighter, stiffer stem."

    also, read this from easton

    http://www.velonews.com/media/easton_bolt.pdf

    I know that these companies have stuff to gain from telling you this (Easton wants to sell it's 2 bolt stems and Syntace wants you to buy it's reinforced handlbars) but these are valid arguments nonetheless.
    I am not wrong about the clamping force flowing through the bolt. All single and multi-bolt stems rely on the tension of bolt, which are actually screws, to provide the compression force to the handlebar to hold it in place. This tensile stress is a result of the force flowing through the bolt (screw).

    The next part, is this person from syntace implying that the life expectance of a bar in use with the F99 is cut in half because the stem pinches the bar in two locations? I'll assume that the stem does not actually pinch the bar, but applies a compressive force in two locations. I don't understand how spreading the force out, reducing localized stresses, would damage a bar. This assumes all the bolts are evenly tightened, toqured.

Similar Threads

  1. My First Race-Thanks for the advice!
    By HelenFern40 in forum Women's Lounge
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-10-2004, 12:49 PM
  2. wheel advice?
    By grundy in forum Singlespeed
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-01-2004, 03:09 PM
  3. High end wheels advice please
    By ride red in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-21-2004, 10:08 AM
  4. Blur advice (long)
    By Tsunami in forum Bike and Frame discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-26-2004, 08:44 AM
  5. Blur advice (long)
    By Tsunami in forum Santa Cruz
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-25-2004, 08:21 PM

Posting Permissions

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