# Where's the cut off for you?



## Campag12 (Jul 31, 2008)

I mean bike weight at which point you CAN detect a significant performance advantage. Currently, I'm riding a bike that's around 15.8 lbs for training daily and my weenie bike (at least 3 years ago) at 13.8 lbs for special occasions/races although more of the former these days. To be honest, I can't feel the difference between the two. The 13.8lbs costs almost $1200 more to build.


----------



## AlexCad5 (Jan 2, 2005)

It's genetic. Some people have special abilities to sense a light weight bike although most can't. I guess you weren't one of the lucky ones;-)

More seriously, you have answered your own question. There isn't a discernible performance advantage, as much as we want to justify it. It's just a cool (to us) and expensive challenge. Moreover, almost no-one else cares.

Ask yourself this. Are you slower because you ride up a hill without water bottles? And Would you ride a significant distance with out water?

Some bikes ride "lighter" than they weigh. They feel ultra efficient, thus light.

15.3 is almost light enough. Because you are so close to sub-fifteen, you have to go there. But realistically you have a very light bike already.


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

I lost almost 3 lbs off my bike (>20lbs to <18) and about 7-8 pounds off myself (now weigh 158-160 lbs). I "think" I can feel the difference, but think the body weight is as important as that bike. The bike does feel quicker and definitely lighter to lift and move.


----------



## android (Nov 20, 2007)

Camilo said:


> I lost almost 3 lbs off my bike (>20lbs to <18) and about 7-8 pounds off myself (now weigh 158-160 lbs). I "think" I can feel the difference, but think the body weight is as important as that bike. The bike does feel quicker and definitely lighter to lift and move.


If you lost weight, you probably did it while training. That means you gained fitness at the same time. So you got a double bonus loosing 8lbs. Personally, I think you have to loose about 10lbs to start to see a big difference on hard climbs. Otherwise, I can't tell a difference.


----------



## android (Nov 20, 2007)

AlexCad5 said:


> It's genetic. Some people have special abilities to sense a light weight bike although most can't. I guess you weren't one of the lucky ones;-)


I'd call BS on this. I'd love to test some of these people with some special water bottles and wheels. Some lighter, some heavier, But the rule would be they could only get on the bike and ride it, not pick it up.

I'd bet the success rate of picking when they had the "heavy stuff" vs the "light stuff" would be around 50%. Basically the same as guessing.


----------



## CurbDestroyer (Mar 6, 2008)

When does Lightweight stop being functional or practical? If your switching from STI/Ergo shifters to downtube friction levers then your sacrificing function, to be light weight. I use Friction downtube levers on my commuter bicycle because I want to integrate the friction shifting experience to my riding experience. However on my race bike It's got STI because it's better for racing. If your racing you want positive precision shifting.


----------



## AlexCad5 (Jan 2, 2005)

android said:


> I'd call BS on this. I'd love to test some of these people with some special water bottles and wheels. Some lighter, some heavier, But the rule would be they could only get on the bike and ride it, not pick it up.
> 
> I'd bet the success rate of picking when they had the "heavy stuff" vs the "light stuff" would be around 50%. Basically the same as guessing.


Android, you need to fine tune your humor meter. I was kidding.


----------



## android (Nov 20, 2007)

AlexCad5 said:


> Android, you need to fine tune your humor meter. I was kidding.


I realized you were kidding around, but there are a bunch of people that swear they can feel a difference of a few grams when riding their bikes. I think it's psychosomatic.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

android said:


> I'd call BS on this. I'd love to test some of these people with some special water bottles and wheels. Some lighter, some heavier, But the rule would be they could only get on the bike and ride it, not pick it up.
> 
> I'd bet the success rate of picking when they had the "heavy stuff" vs the "light stuff" would be around 50%. Basically the same as guessing.


I agree to a certain point. But my 13.5lb bike felt lighter to anyone who has been riding awhile than my 21lb SCOTT.

I think on the MTB side, I fell a differnce much more. With the stop and go, wheels accelerate faster. A lighter bike is easier to manuver and handle in the air.

Now between 13.5 and 15.5? not really except maybe like a here and there, but stiull very, very hard.


----------



## spastook (Nov 30, 2007)

CurbDestroyer said:


> When does Lightweight stop being functional or practical? If your switching from STI/Ergo shifters to downtube friction levers then your sacrificing function, to be light weight. I use Friction downtube levers on my commuter bicycle because I want to integrate the friction shifting experience to my riding experience. However on my race bike It's got STI because it's better for racing. If your racing you want positive precision shifting.



My oldest ride still has downtube friction shifters and I can grab a gear just as fast with those as I can with 
my STI's. I don't consider friction downtube shifters a sacrifice. A sacrifice for me would be sitting on a 75 gram saddle so I can no longer feel my "nads" after 15 minutes


----------



## refund!? (Oct 16, 2006)

I switch between the 20.5 lb lugged steel/Super Record bike I raced in the 70's-80's and a 15.2 lb ti/Record bike I've owned for the past 10 years, and I've put a bunch of miles on each. The two bikes have similar geometries and dimensions and are high quality builds (The best of traditional vs contemporary stuff - the all Italian steel bike cost $1,400 thirty years ago and the ti bike has been an on-going "how light can I afford to go" project and I've probably got $5,000 to $6,000 in it). 

From my experience I can say that the only place where the light bike is better is on a long, steep climb with lots of switchbacks. Otherwise the two bikes are pretty equal in performance and both are fun to ride. But if I had to choose between the two, I'd likely keep the steel bike, get it under 20 lbs (Just because that used to be the standard in the old days and it's likely just switching to a lighter Brooks saddle would do it), and not visit this forum again.


----------



## sevencycle (Apr 23, 2006)

spastook said:


> My oldest ride still has downtube friction shifters and I can grab a gear just as fast with those as I can with
> my STI's.


Sorry but...... NO YOU CAN'T


----------



## superflychief (Mar 25, 2008)

I guess you need to think of it in terms of the total package of bike plus rider. Lets say you have a 180lb rider and a 20lb bike. Losing 2 lbs off of the bike would only be 1% weight difference. That's nothing. You'd notice more if you lost 5lbs of fat. Anybody who says they noticed losing 50 grams is full of crap. If you're worried about 50 grams, take a dump before you ride and you might lose 1lb. Easiest and cheapest way to lose weight.


----------



## refund!? (Oct 16, 2006)

superflychief said:


> ...dumb...


Yours is an irrelevant argument for this forum, and, in fact, is an oft repeated one that has little to do with bike weight or the real or perceived advantages of lighter equipment. The reality is weight weanies don't care about the pro's & con's, or the cost, or etc. They care about others' comments, like when your buddy picks up your bike to help load in on the roof rack and exclaims, "Holy crap, this thing is really light!"

So enough of this trying to justify or rationalize or demonize or make sense of any of this stuff...


----------



## austincrx (Oct 22, 2008)

I recently decided to build a 'better' bike than the 20+ year old Schwinn I was using for daily rides. The Schwinn weighed 28-30 lbs. and my new bike weighs right at 20 lbs. I CAN feel the difference when I am powering up short hills and sprinting, it is just easier to accelerate and maintain speed. _BUT_ this is probably more closely related to the bike having cleaner bearings/bushings and therefore less rolling resistance.


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

Im in the same boat as dirt boy here, my training bike is roughly 22 pounds (Felt FC with a power meter, lots and lots of heavy components, frame pump etc.) and my race bike is a 13 pound R3-SL. I raced my first hill climb on the R3 this past weekend and and I could definitely feel the difference, but its almost 5 kilos, not 100 grams. I regularly beat the people i raced with on my Felt in training so riding the Cervelo felt like floating  . 

My rule on buying light weight components: If i can piss out more weight than i save buying something, its not worth buying


----------



## CurbDestroyer (Mar 6, 2008)

spastook said:


> My oldest ride still has downtube friction shifters and I can grab a gear just as fast with those as I can with
> my STI's. I don't consider friction downtube shifters a sacrifice. A sacrifice for me would be sitting on a 75 gram saddle so I can no longer feel my "nads" after 15 minutes


The saddle is a very good example. Unless your comfortable, what's the point?

Well on the STI part. I feel a lot better shifting STI/ergo in the last 600 meters of field sprint, rather than reaching for downtube levers . . . That just me though.


----------

