why save weight?- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 63 of 63
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    306

    why save weight?

    many of us know that save that bit of weight does not really make you faster.
    but why still save weight?
    personally i save weight because i want the bike to feel light when i carry it with hand.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    350
    becouse itīs fun itīs as a little sport the person that have most things when they die, wins

  3. #3
    PurpleIsFasterThanRed!
    Reputation: vi3dr0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    81
    Because it IS faster. 200g won't make you(r bike) faster, but 3kg surely would. It accelerates, brakes and handles in air and sharp turns better. And why speed means?

    Because faster is funnier

    Greetz
    vi3dr0
    Aluminium Carbon / Damping Composite

  4. #4
    1 bike per day + 1 or 2
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    264
    If you have to ask you do not get it.

  5. #5
    More than somewhat.
    Reputation: Cypress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    660
    Quote Originally Posted by ivantcs
    many of us know that save that bit of weight does not really make you faster.
    .

    True if you live in Kansas. If you live anywhere with hills or mountains, you are incorrect.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,465
    I see there is nobody here talking about how weight saving can make you slower. Oh yeah. It happens. Been there, done that.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Some Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,482
    Because we can. .

    Petercarm: a lighter bike in and of itself can't make you slow, but the common side-effects of lower weight (reduced performance, stiffness and reliability) of course can.
    www.yourtrails.net/weights/ - Kick ass weights listing
    racing.thylacinecycles.com - Racing silliness

  8. #8
    pedal pusher
    Reputation: f3rg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,712
    Anyone can own and ride a bike, but it takes a special type of obsessive geek to get every bit of performance (in this case, efficiency) out of their bike.

    Do I need to overclock my CPU so Firefox opens a millisecond faster? Nope, but I do that, too. It makes life fun.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Some Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,482
    Do I need to overclock my CPU so Firefox opens a millisecond faster? Nope, but I do that, too. It makes life fun.
    Interesting, I was into overclocking too, before I started taking racing seriously. I wonder if the type of person who does one is likely to do the other.
    www.yourtrails.net/weights/ - Kick ass weights listing
    racing.thylacinecycles.com - Racing silliness

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CactusJackSlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,536
    Wheels, take it off the wheels! Rotating weight, even 100 or 150 grams per tire is huge.
    Largest NorCal XC Race Series
    http://www.bicyclingevents.com
    http://www.UavTechReview.com
    Best in the West!

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SwordMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by vi3dr0
    Because faster is funnier

    Greetz
    vi3dr0
    That's what she said.

    I like lighter bikes because they can be "thrown" around easier. More nimble and crisp.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,465
    Quote Originally Posted by CactusJackSlade
    Wheels, take it off the wheels! Rotating weight, even 100 or 150 grams per tire is huge.
    But if you end up with the wrong tires for the riding you do, you go slower and it is no fun at all.

    Back in the day, I saved a bunch of weight by swapping from my regular choice of Panaracer Smoke Light Comps to Ritchey WCS 1.7s. They were completely inappropriate for the races I was entering such that I had to have them pumped to about 70 psi to prevent pinch flats and then I had to carry the bike down most of the downhills. This did not make me fast.

    I also got suckered by the Onza HO pedals (elastomers) that just plain didn't work. They were light but rubbish.

    In my previous comment, I wrote that "saving weight" can make you slow. By that I mean that if you enter into it from the point of view that lighter weight in a mountain bike is always better you end up with a 17lb bike that is only fit for an anorexic to ride on pavement, but won't be as good as a road bike.

    Another example.

    A friend of mine has a new S-Works Carbon Stumpjumper FSR with a set of Crossmax SLR wheels on it. They are astonishingly light and he got a good deal. I am busy speccing up my new bike, but I know I want to give it a good thrashing. For my purposes, the SLR is not right. Instead I have specced Crossmax ST as a great compromise level spec. I know I want to run UST tires that won't be the lightest, but for the level of aggression I put into my riding I know I can burp Stans at will as I pump through compressions. I want a proper UST rim. My current wheels are Mavic 819s on Hope Pro II. The Crossmax STs will be about 300g lighter. There is no lighter way for me to get a wheelset with a 19mm internal UST rim, so buying a wheel set that is 140g heavier than my friend's SLRs is the absolute practical limit for my intended use.

    On brakes, I have just discovered that my four year old Hope Mono M4s that directly use the IS mount are lighter than 2008 spec Special Edition Hope Mono M4s that come with Titanium bolts and a carbon lever because the new brakes are post mount and need an adaptor. I'm quite tempted to buy up another set of old spec Mono M4s for one of my other bikes.

    BTW, if anybody wants a bit of a retro look in, I have a set of original M900 XTR hubs with replacement Ti axles with internal threading and Ti cap head bolts that hold it in your dropouts - these are absolutely rubbish for running with suspension because they are so wobbly but they sure save a lot of weight.

  13. #13
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,156
    Quote Originally Posted by petercarm
    Back in the day, I saved a bunch of weight by swapping from my regular choice of Panaracer Smoke Light Comps to Ritchey WCS 1.7s. They were completely inappropriate...

    I also got suckered by the Onza HO pedals (elastomers) that just plain didn't work. They were light but rubbish...
    All you're telling us is that you made some poor choices with respect to weight saving. We've all been there. Do you really believe that many people reading this board think that saving weight at all costs (functionality + reliability) is the ultimate goal? You give yourself too much credit if you think that you're the only one who does an effective job of evaluating and building up the proper combination of weight vs. functionality vs. durability. The answer, or "magic formula" changes for every person depending on their weight, riding style, terrain, and intended use. So long as you've found a balance that works for you then that's great. Your answer isnt necessarily the right answer for everyone else though.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,465
    Quote Originally Posted by Circlip
    All you're telling us is...
    I've made my mistakes. You are absolutely right. I'm just expressing a subjective view.

    Petercarm: a lighter bike in and of itself can't make you slow, but the common side-effects of lower weight (reduced performance, stiffness and reliability) of course can.
    I've got my own very firm idea of how light is "light enough" (for me). I've got two 5" full suspension bikes under 27 lbs (well the second one isn't quite here yet) and my 6" travel bike is under 32lbs. Hell, I've got a car that weighs 1100lbs. Some of the amazing lightweight bikes I read about on this forum are fascinating to me up to the point when I realize that if I sat on one I'd squash it.
    Last edited by petercarm; 03-21-2008 at 10:33 AM.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Atmos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    163
    Because i love carbon bits

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    301
    Because in the races I do I often end up carrying my bike a lot, and it really does make a difference then.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,330
    I'm with the first poster, the only concern I have over bike weight is lifting it over tricky stuff especially after a long ride, but I'm not going to say i care that much.

    My bike weight 34lbs.

    I've also weighed it at 42lbs with mud, was that extra 8lb's noticeable while riding ??? Hell No, but does take it out of me lifting it over gates

    I'm faster down on a heavier bike as i trust it not to fail!!

  18. #18
    Recovering Weight Weenie
    Reputation: Padre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,814
    Because making your bike lighter is 5xs more exciting than fishing and 10xs more exciting than Nascar.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,330
    Good point there, but 5x's very very very little excitment still isn't alot of excitment, riding it on the other hand is where it's at, especially fast down stuff

  20. #20
    rad to the power of sick
    Reputation: superlightracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,968
    power/weight.

    0.0000000003% faster, or 5% faster. its still faster.
    Some great sets for the trainer:
    https://www.mixcloud.com/djfeelgood/

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,330
    power / weight = total weight power / (YOU + Bike) thats why even a 10lb weight difference makes so little difference unless you weight 140lbs.

    And only counts while fighting against gravity going down don't matter.

  22. #22
    fnar fnar brrraaaaap
    Reputation: ilostmypassword's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,160
    I do like light wheels... they climb well!
    Last edited by ilostmypassword; 03-21-2008 at 02:14 AM.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Some Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,482
    Quote Originally Posted by Turveyd
    power / weight = total weight power / (YOU + Bike) thats why even a 10lb weight difference makes so little difference unless you weight 140lbs.
    I had to switch to a lower spec bike part way through an enduro race, which performed just as well but weighed 3kg more. My first four laps had been around 24 minutes, the fastest lap I managed on the heavier bike was a full 60 seconds slower. It felt incredibly sluggish on the climbs, and was more difficult to whip through the narrow tech sections. Even the downhill ones.

    Anecdotal sure, but it re-affirmed my faith in weight weenie-ism.
    Last edited by Some Guy; 03-21-2008 at 04:06 AM.
    www.yourtrails.net/weights/ - Kick ass weights listing
    racing.thylacinecycles.com - Racing silliness

  24. #24
    fnar fnar brrraaaaap
    Reputation: ilostmypassword's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,160
    Edited

  25. #25
    mutaullyassuredsuffering
    Reputation: used2Bhard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    2,053

    Weight

    40g doesn't matter, but saving 40g on 10 items matters....

    I like the rule of thumb that one kg is a bit over 1.25% on a climb. Around here that equates to over 45s in an XC race That's a difference of a podium or not.I've taken 1.5kg off my bike and 2.5kg off of me. That's 3 minutes... If you aren't climbing though, only rotational wieght is really noticable for acceration and decelleration.

    It all has to be in reason. I have found a good mix of light parts that are durable and perfrom as well as anything else out there.
    Free will is an illusion, people will always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: serious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,269
    Turveyd: ... thats why even a 10lb weight difference makes so little difference unless you weight 140lbs.

    When performance is important, 10 lbs is HUGE on a bike. If you cannot feel that, you are riding well below your potential.
    My rides:
    Lynskey Ti Pro29 SS
    RM Suzi Q 90 RSL
    KHS Team 29
    S-Works Roubaix
    KHS CX 550 cyclocross

  27. #27
    Brant-C.
    Reputation: bcaronongan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,062
    because my scrawny legs can barely handle what i have now...:-)
    I just like riding my mountain bike.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    436
    My bike is a huge % of my body weight so it all depends who you are and what you ride. As for overclocking I have been into that for about 10 years. I frequently post on www.ocforums.com as Bender.

  29. #29
    rad to the power of sick
    Reputation: superlightracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,968
    Quote Originally Posted by Turveyd
    thats why even a 10lb weight difference makes so little difference unless you weight 140lbs.

    And only counts while fighting against gravity going down don't matter.
    1. A difference of 10lbs, is VERY significant.

    2. A lighter bike accelerates better. Regardless of incline. A lighter bike will also be easier to manoever.

    Like I said in my last post, even if its a tiny 'insignificant' decrease in weight, or a large 10lb decrease, the result is the same. Lighter = faster, all other variables aside.

    If you race XC you're constantly trying to improve every variable in the equation. Making your bike 0.5% faster by dropping weight may not mean much, but in conjunction with 1% increase in speed due to training, and 1% increase in speed due to using semi slicks, you're looking at your net package being 2.5% faster than it otherwise would be. Shave 2.5% off of your race time, and you'll see the results. At least thats what my obsessive weight weenism means to me.

    my 0.02
    (it adds up in conjunction with other stuff =) )
    Some great sets for the trainer:
    https://www.mixcloud.com/djfeelgood/

  30. #30
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Turveyd
    power / weight = total weight power / (YOU + Bike) thats why even a 10lb weight difference makes so little difference unless you weight 140lbs.

    And only counts while fighting against gravity going down don't matter.
    I beg to differ, and suspect that one could tell that their bike was 10 pounds lighter, and at an advantage on almost any off road trail, regardless of whether one is fighting gravity, riding on the flats, or going downhill.
    Last edited by NMSSer; 03-21-2008 at 01:59 PM. Reason: moran

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    381
    New wheelset on my stumpjumper saved 2 lbs. and made riding the bike 10 times more fun. Riding one gear up from the old heavier weight is delightful and many rides later I'm glad I spent the $600.

  32. #32
    FIRENZE rulez !!
    Reputation: eliflap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,837
    Quote Originally Posted by rakerdeal
    New wheelset on my stumpjumper saved 2 lbs. and made riding the bike 10 times more fun. Riding one gear up from the old heavier weight is delightful and many rides later I'm glad I spent the $600.
    i agree

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,330
    The 2lb saved is great for a few weeks maybe a month then you'll adapt to this, you'll lose leg muscles, become less fit and end up riding the same speed as what you did before.

    $600 wasted!!

    Then the uber light wheel set wears out quicker than a 2lb heavier set, it's not as stiff and you'll ride much slower for awhile when you got back to the previous wheelset, meaning you've just wasted alot more than $600 all in

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Turveyd
    The 2lb saved is great for a few weeks maybe a month then you'll adapt to this, you'll lose leg muscles, become less fit and end up riding the same speed as what you did before.
    Wow, this is great stuff! Spoken like someone who has no idea how to train hard.

    Any other brown colored nuggets of knowledge you would care to share?

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,330
    The Truth hurts and a fool and his money are easily parted!!

    Most of it is a Placebo effect anyway the power saving of 2lb's of weight even rotational mass your looking at @1.5% improvement for the average person. Which is @30seconds per hour factoring out flat or down bits where it makes no difference.

    Initially I'll add!!

  36. #36
    mutaullyassuredsuffering
    Reputation: used2Bhard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    2,053

    Bs

    Quote Originally Posted by Turveyd
    The 2lb saved is great for a few weeks maybe a month then you'll adapt to this, you'll lose leg muscles, become less fit and end up riding the same speed as what you did before.

    $600 wasted!!

    Then the uber light wheel set wears out quicker than a 2lb heavier set, it's not as stiff and you'll ride much slower for awhile when you got back to the previous wheelset, meaning you've just wasted alot more than $600 all in
    That's BS you still put out the same wattage, you just ride faster. Just cause the bike is lighter doesn't mean you now ride easier. If that was the case, I'd be a 50lb weakling by now.
    Free will is an illusion, people will always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Turveyd
    become less fit and end up riding the same speed as what you did before
    Do you now see how stupid this statement is? Would you actually slow down because you are going faster than you usually ride? Good way to stay slow

    Quote Originally Posted by Turveyd
    The Truth hurts and a fool and his money are easily parted!!

    Obviously you must be broke.

    Quote Originally Posted by Turveyd
    your looking at @1.5% improvement for the average person. Which is @30seconds per hour factoring out flat or down bits where it makes no difference.
    While you may be average, other people are not. While you may like to ride at the same speed forever, other do not. Some people constantly push themselves to be better, faster, stronger, you it appears, do not.

    I'll take a 1.5% improvement any day of the week. Losing a race by a second hurts, it motivates me to train harder.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by Turveyd
    The 2lb saved is great for a few weeks maybe a month then you'll adapt to this, you'll lose leg muscles, become less fit and end up riding the same speed as what you did before.

    $600 wasted!!

    Then the uber light wheel set wears out quicker than a 2lb heavier set, it's not as stiff and you'll ride much slower for awhile when you got back to the previous wheelset, meaning you've just wasted alot more than $600 all in

    Wow. Remind me to completly ignore ANYTHING you ever say, since it's clear you know squat.

  39. #39
    pedal pusher
    Reputation: f3rg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,712
    Quote Originally Posted by Turveyd
    The Truth hurts and a fool and his money are easily parted!!

    Most of it is a Placebo effect anyway the power saving of 2lb's of weight even rotational mass your looking at @1.5% improvement for the average person.
    Losing weight on the bike isn't all about climbing efficiency; it also helps in maneuverability and braking, which are pretty important to some of us.

    Quote Originally Posted by p_shep[/quote
    Wow. Remind me to completly ignore ANYTHING you ever say, since it's clear you know squat.
    That's what the ignore function is all about. If you use it, your [sic] looking at @[sic] 1.5% improvement for the average idiot who can neither master the English language, write it, nor convey a thought well.

    Tur...d, enjoy your lead bike, and I'll enjoy my Ti, AL and carbon. See you when you get to the top.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark16q's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    289
    While on a recent ride aboard a ridiculously light bike, almost everyone that lifted it up was very impressed. Lots of oohs and aahs and discussion about the pros and cons. And one nay-sayer touting that it's a waste of money and he just loses the weight by eating right.

    My response....how many people oooh and aaah while picking him up? He understood.
    '16 Scott Genius 700 Premium
    '14 Giant Anthem Advanced 1 27.5"
    Cervelo R3sl
    Seven Alta
    Curtlo h/t

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    381
    Once again, I saved 2 pounds of bike weight by switching from the 317 Mavic wheelset to the 717 wheelset which was built by the local bike shop. I'm not even sure of what the hubs are, spokes are or whatever. Actually I lost almost exactly 2 pounds and 1 ounce. Now, I'll be honest with you. Even if I don't ride any faster, and if my leg muscles shrivel up to nothing, carrying the damn bike to the car and back makes that $600 a well spend endeavor. I can do 18 pull-ups today but lifting a heavy bike knowing it could be so much lighter pisses me off. I guess it is my German blood- we have to progress and conquer!

    By the way...I just took my 2006 hardtail to the LBS for the first time in years. I've worn out all kinds of parts which I pretty much knew. I'm adding all xt level parts and when I get the bike back it will weigh a little less than it did last week and this old man will be one happy camper!

  42. #42
    I Tried Them ALL... SuperModerator
    Reputation: Cayenne_Pepa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,431
    I found that whacking 70 pounds off my own body, was much more efficient than spending thousands lightening the bike. The light bike was my "reward" for going from 230 to my current weight of 160. When your body matches your bike- YOU become the weapon!
    "This is a male-dominated forum... there will be lots of Testosterone sword-shaming here" ~ Kenfucius

  43. #43
    Don't be hasty.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    525
    Unfortunately, not everyone has the luxury of being 70lbs overweight.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    191
    Some simple math for those who don't know how to use a calculator.

    First, lets assume that there is no friction, and that on an uphill all your energy goes into moving vertically at a constant speed. I know this is not the case, however i don't know of anyone with friction forces or drag co-efficents. This is just to show a point.

    F=M*a
    W=F*d
    or W=M*a*d

    M=rider weight+bike weight
    M=68+12.3
    M=80.3kg

    a=9.8
    d=35(lets say finish is 35m higher then the start)

    therefore we have
    W=80.3*9.8*35
    W=27,542.9J

    If your bike was 1kg or 2.2lbs ligher then
    W=27,199.9

    for a difference of 343J for only 1kg

    If you were to get up such a hill 90 secs, then at 80.3kg you would have produced 306.03 watts
    at 79.3 kg you would have produced 302.2 watts

    Numbers are numbers and they don't lie. As well you will accelerate up to a constant speed faster and be able to brake later while going into a corner with a lighter bike. If you are an athlete then lighter is better in almost every way

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    308
    Just a boring 134lb old fart here. I climb the same boring fireroad every week. I've been riding it for 10 years. It starts at 2000ft and goes 5.65 miles up to 4300 ft. I'm no racer so my grossly overweight 22 lb hardtail takes a best time of 43:20 on Kenda SB8 tires, 2.35 front 25psi and 2.1 rear 30psi. Most attempts average out to 43:30. Yessir, really consistently boring! Until lately just useless trivia in a boring 139 IQ sorta way.

    Last week, to spice up my boring life a bit, I swapped those big phat inefficient SB8 tires and heavy tubes out for a Ritchey Zed WCS 1.9 front at 30 psi and a Kenda cosmic lite 395 rear at 35psi with .45mm maxxis tubes. I used the same boring gears in the same places at the same heart rate. Remember, I'm a boring old fart who knows this boring old body.

    guess what? 43:34 on tires and tubes that weigh close to a pound less.

    Maybe it was just the extra humidity rising from that pile of dog poop I swerved to avoid?

    What happened to rotating mass, acceleration, and the rest of those weenieisms?

    Wheres the love people?

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    381

    You lucky fellow

    Damn bike is already at 22 lbs and you are still saving more weight expecting better time. Damn again. I'm now at 23.2 lbs and happy....until tomorrow.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: serious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,269
    pedalitup: What happened to rotating mass, acceleration, and the rest of those weenieisms?

    You provided your own answer: "I used the same boring gears in the same places at the same heart rate.". You probably produced the same power output too. In other words, you keep riding in your comfort zone, so a bit of weight reduction will get you nothing.
    My rides:
    Lynskey Ti Pro29 SS
    RM Suzi Q 90 RSL
    KHS Team 29
    S-Works Roubaix
    KHS CX 550 cyclocross

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Robin v Berkel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    197
    1- licht it bike nice
    2- looks of carbon i love carbon
    3- to have things on your bike who know one else got
    4- to make bike who fit you 100%

  49. #49
    pedal pusher
    Reputation: f3rg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,712
    Quote Originally Posted by serious
    pedalitup: What happened to rotating mass, acceleration, and the rest of those weenieisms?

    You provided your own answer: "I used the same boring gears in the same places at the same heart rate.". You probably produced the same power output too. In other words, you keep riding in your comfort zone, so a bit of weight reduction will get you nothing.
    Seems to me like he used less power. Go up one single gear from whichever gear you'd typically be in, and I bet you then wind up using the same power as before, and cut the ride down by a few minutes.

  50. #50
    mutaullyassuredsuffering
    Reputation: used2Bhard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    2,053
    Its likely that Your weight savings were eaten up by rolling resistance.
    Free will is an illusion, people will always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: serious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,269
    f3rg: Seems to me like he used less power.

    You are probably right!
    My rides:
    Lynskey Ti Pro29 SS
    RM Suzi Q 90 RSL
    KHS Team 29
    S-Works Roubaix
    KHS CX 550 cyclocross

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    497
    In building up a bike that fit me, I ended up choosing light parts instead of heavy parts. It doesn't have to cost excessively more. I ride my bike and enjoy the benefits of a healthy lifestyle, and my excess income certainly wasn't going to go toward bar tabs.

    Getting a scale and making a spreadsheet was the most useful thing I did, and allowed me to see exactly how much excess there was in my mountain biking. It also showed me that people will lighten the hell out of their bikes and still wear a Camelbak that weighs over 1-2lbs empty....heh. I went with frame attached pump/tube/tools. My 'cambelbak' is now nothing more than kite material with just enough room for the bladder and a shirt. Handmade, weighs 1/6 what my CB Mule weighed, and the single most cost effective weight upgrade I had.

    For the question "Why save weight?" the answer is obvious. Life sucks when you're riding a whale.
    ***

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: serious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,269
    Kyle2834: I went with frame attached pump/tube/tools.

    Personally I hate taking a light bike and attaching all kinds of stuff on it, including bottles. I would rather have them on my back. At least the additional weight can be used to crank my pedals when out of saddle.
    My rides:
    Lynskey Ti Pro29 SS
    RM Suzi Q 90 RSL
    KHS Team 29
    S-Works Roubaix
    KHS CX 550 cyclocross

  54. #54
    RideSalsa
    Reputation: a_burnside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    48
    Saving 10g here and 30g there seems to give me that 'mental edge' that is needed in racing.
    I get that extra incentive to push harder knowing that my bike is lighter than the next guy's.
    PIN IT YA' FAIRY!

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by serious
    At least the additional weight can be used to crank my pedals when out of saddle.
    I assume that's a human-powered flywheel, where your body is doing the work regardless.

    I paid attention to the weight and size of the frame-attached tube/pump/tools. I like leaving them attached for my training rides. I usually need nothing more than my bladder (3L camelbak bladder with slightly trimmed hose = 195g) and lightweight phone on my back. Phone...now that's another good place to save weight too.
    ***

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    762
    Only a true idiot would think that using a wheel and tire set (significantly lighter than the previous set) would not result in increased efficiency, leading to a quicker time on a given ride. Not withstanding other factors; physical condition on a given day, trail conditions, atmospheric conditions, etc.]

    Simply put, lighter tires and wheels spin faster/quicker given the same amount of effort, be it a human on a bicycle or a motor driving them/it.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    191
    you have to consider rolling resistance as well

  58. #58
    pedal pusher
    Reputation: f3rg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,712
    Quote Originally Posted by racerick
    Only a true idiot would think that...
    That's always been my favorite way of starting a sentence when arguing with someone. Kinda hard for someone to come back with a good response to that one.

    Anyone who doesn't understand how less weight equals more efficiency should study Colin Chapman and Lotus cars.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,816
    Greg LeMond said "It doesn't get any easier. You just get faster." A light bike doesn't make it easier for me, it just lets me go faster and further.

    I appreciate a light bike because it's easier to move around. It's easier to hop it, float it, and to use my weight to make the bike do what I want. It's a very nice feeling.

    I think the people who say "just lose weight yourself" don't really understand bikes or body english. If the weight is attached to you it's much easier to work with than if it's not attached, and you're just perched on top of it. This is why all tools and water are carried in my camelbak. Try this: load up your pack with water and tools, put it on, and then bunny hop something. Now take the pack and attach it to your seat tube or down tube and try it again. More difficult, huh? Finally, not all of us can lose weight; if I drop three pounds I'm in dangerous territory.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    112
    Given decent tires appropriate for the conditions a light bike will be MUCH faster than a heavier bike. To really feel a difference there really needs to be a significant difference in weight, id say about 2lbs or more. My bike weights 26 lbs, recently I tested a similar bike that weighted about 22 lbs. There was a HUGE difference in the way the bike felt under me. It felt much more agile and quick. On the hills it felt faster and easier to pedal no question. The weight wont compensate for technique but sure helps a lot if you already are a decent rider. For a race bike id say ideal weight is around 20 lbs.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    762
    Quote Originally Posted by f3rg
    That's always been my favorite way of starting a sentence when arguing with someone. Kinda hard for someone to come back with a good response to that one.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    308
    Sounds good, Like I said before though, I used the same max heart rate which was 166???? I'll try to use a higher gear w/o going over 172bpm. At my age thats the redline kids.

    I can't afford the SRM strain gauge thingamajiggy or I would try that. Athletes told me its like using a dyno in realtime instead of a simple tachometer.

    I also wonder if the bigger tires aren't posssibly hooking up a tiny bit better? In a practical situation like an XC race I recall flatting skinny tires when I tried to run them at low enough psi to hook up on loose over. So I understand the big attraction for Stans goop and rims etc. . I also remember what its like to descend at racing speed on 1.9 tires.
    Over the years I've learned that high volume lower pressure relatively lightweight tires run on super light wheels seems to be what I enjoy most. The local riding consists of 75% up/down and 25% or less flat sections. So I see two types of rides around here, 5 or 6 inch stuff with lotsa rubber usually headed uphill piled in a pickup and a lot of hardtails with risers and longer front ends. Not as many single speeds or racer x's w 80mm and flat bars.

    I read the Schwalbe info on rolling resistance and sort of agree with some of the negative commentary posted on the article dealing with an opportunity to justify their fatter tires to increase sales????

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,816
    Quote Originally Posted by f3rg
    Anyone who doesn't understand how less weight equals more efficiency should study Colin Chapman and Lotus cars.
    I love their design philosophy: Simplify and add lightness.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.