Fly Ti Weight

Printable View

  • 01-20-2009
    Kenrow
    Fly Ti Weight
    Has anyone weighed their Fly Ti. I don't have an accurate hanging scale but did jump on a fairly accurate floor scale. Mine came in at 20.3lb which seems light since I'm running heaver tires (biggest improvement to the bike), crank bro pedals, and a cushier seat (assume its heavier). Everything else stock for now...
  • 01-22-2009
    guapo1
    My son's 16" Fly Ti weighs 21lbs 11oz. My digital scale reads exactly the same as the one in my LBS.

    -short cage XTR rapid rise derailleur (the bike comes with a long cage normal rise)
    -SL eggbeater pedals
    -1.9 small block 8 front tire
    -2.1 small block 8 rear tire
    Both tires have the stock tubes. We will be going tubeless and 1.9's F&R. That will shave a few more ounces.
  • 01-22-2009
    Kenrow
    Thanks for the info, I though my recorded weight was a little low. I did see that a separate thread was done back in Oct 07. Weight for a 18" bike was in the low 21 # range and a 20" was in the mid 22#. Both included XTR Pedals in the recorded weight.

    I am surprised that your son's bike is the high 21 # range considering it looks like you only added a little over a pound with the tire change and SL pedals. Motobecane's claimed weigh is 19.8 pounds (no pedals or reflectors).

    Not a big deal, the bike is still light and nimble and climbs like a jet.
  • 01-23-2009
    Broccoli
    I did not weight it out of the box, but I have computed that a shipped bike was 20.17lb in 18", without pedals and without reflectors.

    After multiple changes it now weights about that but with XTR pedals included. My current changes had been XTR 172.5 crankset (heavier actually), Thomson Masterpiece seatpost, KCNC collar, Dura-Ace 12-27 cassette, rear 140mm G3 rotor, iLink shifter housing, Crank Brothers Opium headset, aluminum waterbottle bolts, etc. Can not settle on the saddle to use... Can not decide on tires to use. I initially thought I will junk the Vuelta wheels, but they seem to run pretty good and it is a decent enough weight to make possible upgrade very cost ineffective. I will probably convert them to Stan's and run something like Nobby Nics, or Raven, or the Kenda's it came with. It currently runs road slicks...
  • 01-26-2009
    Kenrow
    Thanks for the info! 20.1 pounds is in the ballpark of what is listed on their website taking into account you have the 18” model. Just wondering did you weight the parts when you replaced them or just use the manufacturer’s listed weights. I am in agreement with the wheels, quite surprised over how they roll, would be tough to spend the $ up front to replace them.

    I also have the 18” frame, early model with the 80mm SID forks and no lockout. I also have the yellow graphics which I have gotten use to after about a year with the bike. I’m currently running Kendra Karmas with Stan’s, not much heavier than the klimaxs that came on the bike. They do roll a little slower, particularly on the road, but make up for it with their surefootedness in the dirt. Rest is stock except for the Terry race saddle and the eggbeater pedals.
  • 01-26-2009
    Broccoli
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Kenrow
    Just wondering did you weight the parts when you replaced them or just use the manufacturer’s listed weights. I am in agreement with the wheels, quite surprised over how they roll, would be tough to spend the $ up front to replace them.

    Yes, I have weighted everything. I just bought calibration weights for my postal scale I used and it was right on - 50, 200 and 300g show as such. I also got a new scale with 0.1g accuracy now, maybe will check some weight again - it is fun. :)

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Kenrow
    I also have the 18” frame, early model with the 80mm SID forks and no lockout. I also have the yellow graphics which I have gotten use to after about a year with the bike. I’m currently running Kendra Karmas with Stan’s, not much heavier than the klimaxs that came on the bike.

    I have removed most of the graphics except for the top tube and the head badge. Came right off with that pink jelly paint remover. I have also removed Ritchie WCS graphics from stem and handlebars with acetone. Nothing against those companies, but they do not pay me to advertise them and it looks much nicer this way.
  • 01-27-2009
    aph72
    Curmy, I'd like to see a pic of your bike sans graphics.
  • 01-27-2009
    Blake G
    I second that. Getting ready to build up a fly ti frame, so I'd like to see it sans graphics. I've noticed this is pretty common on ti frames. I guess because they last so long, or because once you see ti it doesn't really matter who made it...
  • 01-27-2009
    Broccoli
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Blake G
    I second that. Getting ready to build up a fly ti frame, so I'd like to see it sans graphics. I've noticed this is pretty common on ti frames. I guess because they last so long, or because once you see ti it doesn't really matter who made it...

    I will take a photo in the evening.
  • 01-27-2009
    Broccoli
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by aph72
    Curmy, I'd like to see a pic of your bike sans graphics.

    So after about 5 minutes of using this:



    Frame, now in its office commuter build before it will be used for its original purpose, looks like:



    At least remove the cryptic labels from the seatstays and seat tube. I have no idea what they meant and it looked ugly. There was also an incredible amount of stickers on the rims.
  • 01-28-2009
    Broccoli
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Blake G
    I second that. Getting ready to build up a fly ti frame, so I'd like to see it sans graphics.

    Did you buy frame only? Where?
  • 01-28-2009
    Blake G
    I bought the frame only on ebay. Some guy bought the whole bike from BD, but decided the frame was too big. He kept the components and sold the frame to me.
  • 01-28-2009
    Broccoli
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Blake G
    I bought the frame only on ebay. Some guy bought the whole bike from BD, but decided the frame was too big. He kept the components and sold the frame to me.

    What is the bare frame weight? I have never stripped it down completely.

    Enjoy your Fly. Quite a nicely done titanium.
  • 01-29-2009
    Kenrow
    How does the bike handle as a commuter? I've thought about putting some road tires on but the weather has been so nice here in the bay area makes the trails too tempting....
  • 01-29-2009
    Broccoli
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Kenrow
    How does the bike handle as a commuter? I've thought about putting some road tires on but the weather has been so nice here in the bay area makes the trails too tempting....

    Its an excellent commuter, much more comfortable then a road bike when carrying a messenger bag and just as fast. 44/12 gear is too low on flat ground, I need to put an 11t cog on the cassette.

    Wheather is quite nice indeed, I was riding my Coiler in Waterdog and Skeggs during last dry spell, but it is still a bit damp right now. Should be great on weekend.
  • 01-30-2009
    xc2006
    The frame is listed at 2.9 lbs on the Mountain Bike action website when they reviewed the bike on 4/7/2008
  • 01-30-2009
    xc2006
  • 01-30-2009
    xc2006
    I just noticed these pictures of them taking a fly ti off of some dirt jumps and if you look closely at the fork its the old style sid too http://www.mbaction.com/ME2/dirmod.a...1542C3BFD125F1
  • 01-30-2009
    Broccoli
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by xc2006
    I just noticed these pictures of them taking a fly ti off of some dirt jumps and if you look closely at the fork its the old style sid too

    That's nuts. But frame does feel quite robust - even if flexible.
  • 01-30-2009
    Kenrow
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by xc2006
    I just noticed these pictures of them taking a fly ti off of some dirt jumps and if you look closely at the fork its the old style sid too http://www.mbaction.com/ME2/dirmod.a...1542C3BFD125F1

    I would proably want a better purpose fork if I was going to ride my Fly Ti like that on a consistnat bases...
  • 02-04-2009
    Kenrow
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Curmy
    I
    My current changes had been XTR 172.5 crankset (heavier actually), Thomson Masterpiece seatpost, KCNC collar, Dura-Ace 12-27 cassette, rear 140mm G3 rotor, iLink shifter housing, Crank Brothers Opium headset, aluminum waterbottle bolts, etc. ..

    understand the crankset was changed due to preference in the 172.5 size, but what about the other parts. Were you trying to save weight or were there performance issues with the parts changed out? I'm particularly interested in the seatpost and headset. It looks like you went with a straight seatpost without any offset, any problems with the geometry of the bike (the top tube is fairly compact for a 18" bike).
  • 02-04-2009
    Broccoli
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Kenrow
    understand the crankset was changed due to preference in the 172.5 size, but what about the other parts. Were you trying to save weight or were there performance issues with the parts changed out? I'm particularly interested in the seatpost and headset. It looks like you went with a straight seatpost without any offset, any problems with the geometry of the bike (the top tube is fairly compact for a 18" bike).

    Seatpost is both lighter and better looking, and its geometry is fine with me. I have reused the Ritchie post on another bike. Headset has a slightly smaller stack height, lowering the front about 5mm, and it is 30g lighter, and it looks better. Rotor is to save weight and to alleviate Avid's howling, (reportedly improved with G3) and to balance braking, as I prefer smaller rotors in the rear. Cranks had been changed both to pick the length that I prefer, and from my general mild dislike for carbon components near sharp rocks. Rest is to save weight and for bling, and I trickled down the parts I have removed to my other bikes.
  • 02-05-2009
    Kenrow
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Curmy
    Seatpost is both lighter and better looking, and its geometry is fine with me. I have reused the Ritchie post on another bike. Headset has a slightly smaller stack height, lowering the front about 5mm, and it is 30g lighter, and it looks better. .

    1) Did you have the weight of the seatpost, Thompson only claims it is 40 g lighter than the elite but does not give its actual weight.

    2) Did you switch over the headset mainly to lower the front or for performance reasons (beside the weight benefit). I have the 80mm fork and would like to raise the front if anything.
  • 02-05-2009
    Broccoli
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Kenrow
    1) Did you have the weight of the seatpost, Thompson only claims it is 40 g lighter than the elite but does not give its actual weight.

    They do give actual weight on their web site. It is 193g for 31.6x350. If I remember correctly it was 195g. It is not quite 40g compared to Elite cut to 350mm, more like 30g. Ritchie was around 240 if I remember correctly. I will check later if you are interested. Thomson was $105 on Ebay. I plan on cutting off about an inch from it.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Kenrow
    2) Did you switch over the headset mainly to lower the front or for performance reasons (beside the weight benefit). I have the 80mm fork and would like to raise the front if anything.

    Mostly for weight and appearance benefits (it looks integrated with the SL version), lower stack height was an added bonus, and because I had one lying around (Opium is their "downhill" model. I would not put it on a DH bike).
  • 02-15-2009
    Kenrow
    iLink cables
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Curmy
    I did not weight it out of the box, but I have computed that a shipped bike was 20.17lb in 18", without pedals and without reflectors.

    After multiple changes it now weights about that but with XTR pedals included. My current changes had been XTR 172.5 crankset (heavier actually), Thomson Masterpiece seatpost, KCNC collar, Dura-Ace 12-27 cassette, rear 140mm G3 rotor, iLink shifter housing,...

    Hi Curmy, are you running the iLink housing with their cable, and if so how do you like it? Also, if you are using the iLink cable did you have to modify any of the cable stanchions?

    Finally- some rain in the Bay Area:thumbsup:
  • 02-15-2009
    Broccoli
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Kenrow
    Hi Curmy, are you running the iLink housing with their cable, and if so how do you like it? Also, if you are using the iLink cable did you have to modify any of the cable stanchions?

    No, I kept the existing XTR cables (pulled out and threaded them back). Frankly, iLink does not seem like much of an improvement - I bought them just to try out. They look nice, and I did like the full length plastic liner - I noticed it prevents kinking of cable under the top tube when I hang the bike on a rack. It is sure easier to install and reuse them then screwing around with cable cutters (or rotozip with thin cutoff wheels that I often use).

    I did not modify anything, works just fine. Single set was enough for the bike with enough left for a remote travel control lever on another bike.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Kenrow
    Finally- some rain in the Bay Area:thumbsup:

    Yeah, I am planning on skipping a day of work, alienating my wife a bit :rolleyes: , and making a run to Tahoe after the storm..
  • 06-01-2009
    airframepapi
    Thanks CURMY !
    Im SO GLAD I stumbled across your threads regarding removing stickers from a Ti frame. I had just posted a thread of my own asking the question of "how to?" I was wondering I couldnt REALLY tell but is there any blotchy marks or discoloration after removal because from what I saw it looked great. Thanks again for the post
  • 06-01-2009
    Kenrow
    I had a little bit of "ghosting" of the letters when I removed mine. A quick dose of metal polish took care of the rest:thumbsup:
  • 06-01-2009
    Broccoli
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Kenrow
    I had a little bit of "ghosting" of the letters when I removed mine. A quick dose of metal polish took care of the rest:thumbsup:

    Yeah, I had that too - if you take a really close look. After a few races and a healthy doze of trails - where I mostly see some burly trailbikes around - mud and dust took care of the appearance.

    I should say that Fly is holding up great. Does not flinch on some quite rocky descends and climbs like it supposed to. I have hard picking up whether I want to ride it - or my Kona Coiler (with an adjustable seatpost, 2.4" tires, 160mm through axle fork) - different kind of fun.

    I did put a 23t ellliptical granny on it this weekend. It climbs so well I do not need anything lower then 23/27 even for steepest and longest climb that I can clear.
  • 06-02-2009
    Gringo
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Curmy

    I did put a 23t ellliptical granny on it this weekend. It climbs so well I do not need anything lower then 23/27 even for steepest and longest climb that I can clear.

    Thanks for the head's up. I'm going to try this too. The first thing that came to my mind was Biopace of my earlier days (no comment), but granny-only makes great sense.

    G.
  • 06-02-2009
    Broccoli
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gringo
    The first thing that came to my mind was Biopace of my earlier days (no comment), but granny-only makes great sense.

    That is not Biopace - exactly the opposite effect.

    As I have mentioned - I would not want it on middle ring. No need to mess with pedal stroke.