# Whos lying about bike weights?



## tedgrant (Jun 13, 2006)

I read this forum and wondered, "manufacturers and individuals MUST be lying about bike weights". I run a scott cr-1 (the lighter one, team or pro, cant remember, I weighed it and it was 900 grams nude), whatever isnt dura ace is made of carbon or titanium or magnesium or unobtanium, with NO front derailleur/shifter/ring (i.e. 1 x 9), size 58cm, and it still weighs 15.2 pounds, (really),....how the hell can scott claim "UCI ILLEGAL" when its OVERWEIGHT while missing several parts and BEYOND stock????????? Ive given up... it rides stiff, fast and great, but it does seem fragile (Im 175 lbs), Im thinking of going back to the lightest artisan produced steel frame I can get and just live with it... I AM BURNED OUT!!!!!!!! :blush2:


----------



## Forrest Root (Dec 22, 2006)

tedgrant said:


> I read this forum and wondered, "manufacturers and individuals MUST be lying about bike weights". I run a scott cr-1 (the lighter one, team or pro, cant remember, I weighed it and it was 900 grams nude), whatever isnt dura ace is made of carbon or titanium or magnesium or unobtanium, with NO front derailleur/shifter/ring (i.e. 1 x 9), size 58cm, and it still weighs 15.2 pounds, (really),....how the hell can scott claim "UCI ILLEGAL" when its OVERWEIGHT while missing several parts and BEYOND stock????????? Ive given up... it rides stiff, fast and great, but it does seem fragile (Im 175 lbs), Im thinking of going back to the lightest artisan produced steel frame I can get and just live with it... I AM BURNED OUT!!!!!!!! :blush2:



Bye bye. Have a nice day.


----------



## ewitz (Sep 11, 2002)

Agreed. I think anyone claiming a bike weight under 16 lbs on this forum should automatically back it up with a photo of the bike hanging from a digital scale.


----------



## dmar836 (Nov 17, 2007)

Even so, I'd look for a hidden finger at the bottom of the pic.


----------



## Forrest Root (Dec 22, 2006)

You guys should try to keep up with the times. A 16lb bike is easy to build now. Hell, you can buy 'em off the showroom floor. Even accounting for production variances and the resulting weight variances, using numbers available anywhere, it's possible for a doubting Thomas to take said numbers, put them in an electronic math calculating device, sum them, and arrive at a value for weight.


----------



## Flat Out (Aug 9, 2007)

ewitz said:


> Agreed. I think anyone claiming a bike weight under 16 lbs on this forum should automatically back it up with a photo of the bike hanging from a digital scale.


Including pedals, cages, and computer.


----------



## Juanmoretime (Nov 24, 2001)

dmar836 said:


> Even so, I'd look for a hidden finger at the bottom of the pic.





















Sorry you can't see the whole bike in the scale shot so you can't see my finger and its a very good trick holding a DSLR with one hand and lifting the bike. Please notice pedals, cages and computer. :thumbsup:


----------



## cpark (Oct 13, 2004)

tedgrant said:


> I read this forum and wondered, "manufacturers and individuals MUST be lying about bike weights". I run a scott cr-1 (the lighter one, team or pro, cant remember, I weighed it and it was 900 grams nude), whatever isnt dura ace is made of carbon or titanium or magnesium or unobtanium, with NO front derailleur/shifter/ring (i.e. 1 x 9), size 58cm, and it still weighs 15.2 pounds, (really),....how the hell can scott claim "UCI ILLEGAL" when its OVERWEIGHT while missing several parts and BEYOND stock????????? Ive given up... it rides stiff, fast and great, but it does seem fragile (Im 175 lbs), Im thinking of going back to the lightest artisan produced steel frame I can get and just live with it... I AM BURNED OUT!!!!!!!! :blush2:


Building a sub 16lb bike with CF bike is very doable.
You said that the most of the parts you used is made out of Carbon?
That maybe be one of your problems.
For instance, a typical Carbon Stem is heavier than the Al one.
That's the case with the handlebar as well (unless you choose Zipp SL).
I used a postage meter when I built my Time VXR Proteam and it came in at about 15.7lbs with a set of Fulcrum Zero Clinchers (14.9lbs with a set of Reynolds DV 46UL). That's built with DA with a set of clinchers. I also used an ITM K-Sword that actual measured 268 grams not a claimed weight of 220. I could've save about 100 grams (almost 1/4 lbs) by using Zipp SL handlebar instead. I could've saved additional 100 grams by switching out the Time Stem/Seatpost with Ritchey WCS/Thomson Masterpiece.
A set of ZG Ti brakeset would drop another 1/3 lbs.

I used the standard parts it came with because I wasn't out to build a lightest bike out there. But if you want it can be done......

Btw, I didn't add the grease and lubrication. I'm guessing about 15 grams.

Go to http://www.light-bikes.com/BikeGallery/BikeSelect.asp?choice=1&catid=3 to view some very light bikes....


----------



## schimanski (Jan 11, 2002)

Juanmoretime said:


> Sorry you can't see the whole bike in the scale shot so you can't see my finger and its a very good trick holding a DSLR with one hand and lifting the bike. Please notice pedals, cages and computer. :thumbsup:


That is one nice build indeed. Which fork is that? Matt black carbon? Also no stickers on wheels - pure class.


----------



## terzo rene (Mar 23, 2002)

Forrest Root said:


> You guys should try to keep up with the times. A 16lb bike is easy to build now. Hell, you can buy 'em off the showroom floor. Even accounting for production variances and the resulting weight variances, using numbers available anywhere, it's possible for a doubting Thomas to take said numbers, put them in an electronic math calculating device, sum them, and arrive at a value for weight.


So true, my clincher wheeled steel bike is significantly under 16lbs. If you can't get under 15 with carbon you're just not trying. It's gotten so easy I had to challenge myself by doing a UCI illegal steel bike with a steel fork a couple years ago.

Doesn't mean all the posts on the web are accurate. Some on lightbikes strike me as fudged based on what some of the same parts have weighed for me.


----------



## laffeaux (Dec 12, 2001)

terzo rene said:


> So true, my clincher wheeled steel bike is significantly under 16lbs. If you can't get under 15 with carbon you're just not trying.


Agreed. My 58cm steel-framed road bike is 16.8 lbs with clinchers and mountian bike pedals. I tried to build it light, but did not go over board on buying the lightest components available. Dropping two pound off the frame (by coing to carbon) would put it well under 15 pounds.


----------



## ewitz (Sep 11, 2002)

cpark said:


> Building a sub 16lb bike with CF bike is very doable.
> You said that the most of the parts you used is made out of Carbon?
> That maybe be one of your problems.
> For instance, a typical Carbon Stem is heavier than the Al one.
> ...


Now put it on a scale so we can see the weight.

My size medium LOOK 585 with DV46C's full Dura Ace (incl. pedals)
USE Alien Carbon post and SLR
Spec. S-Works carbon stem and FSA K-Wing Bars
Cateye Strada and Tine carbon cage (1)

Should come in under 16 lbs but weighed 16.25 when built.


----------



## cotocalicyclist (Feb 18, 2006)

I would not doubt most people when they claim to have a light bike (i.e. sub 15-16 lbs); however, I do think it is a little harder to do than most people think. Additionally, I think it is very tricky to come up with an accurate bike weight by adding up all of the parts individually. People frequently forget to add cable-chain-computer-bottle cage-etc. weights or use the listed weights of components which are often lower than the real values. 

I do not have a super-light frame (Colnago C50--best guess is 1150 g in size 53cm), yet I have tried pretty hard to make light (but not ridiculously light) component choices and my bike is only 7kg or about 15.5 lbs....yes this was weighed on a scale at a LBS.

Here is a partial build list:
Full Dura Ace----definitely the heaviest of the major groups
Reynolds 195 g carbon bars, Colnago seatpost (heavy) and a 135 gram reynolds stem
Zipp 303 tubulars---one of the lighter wheelsets out there.
Specialized Toupe saddle
Nokon Brake cables
Tacx Tao cages
Garmin Edge 305 GPS

If you use Record or Red, and have a sub 1000g frame (there are many these days) Your bike could easily be below the UCI limit. 

However, with full Dura Ace and an average set of clinchers (the most common setup out there), it becomes very hard to get below 6.8 (15 lbs) without resorting to some extremely expensive/light components and a super-light frame.


----------



## Juanmoretime (Nov 24, 2001)

schimanski said:


> That is one nice build indeed. Which fork is that? Matt black carbon? Also no stickers on wheels - pure class.


The fork is an Alpha Q GS30.

Here is a link yo the build:


http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38728


----------



## homebrew (Oct 28, 2004)

Wheels can reduce weight alot. !800 gram wheel with steel cassette.vs 1100grams or less and save 100 grams on a ti or even lighter aluminium cassette. That and watching all the details like steerer plugs, ti bolts, powercords, light saddle and post (can be had under 120 grams for both if your backside and wallet can take it). Carbon parts are not however always lighter, I think most carbon stems weigh more then the lightest aluminium ones. FSA parts tend to be heavy. 
You can build up a modern steel frame to 6.8 kilos (14.9 lbs) if your willing (I have done so but it goes up to 15.5 lbs with training wheels, powertap, computer. Just do the research, after looking at these builds for awhile you can see who is lying and whos not. Most that are way off are guessing weights or using manufacturers listings and adding it up. They are mistaken but I would not say they are lying. Post the compete listing of your build and I bet we can find some weight to loose


----------



## cpark (Oct 13, 2004)

homebrew said:


> Wheels can reduce weight alot. !800 gram wheel with steel cassette.vs 1100grams or less and save 100 grams on a ti or even lighter aluminium cassette. That and watching all the details like steerer plugs, ti bolts, powercords, light saddle and post (can be had under 120 grams for both if your backside and wallet can take it). Carbon parts are not however always lighter, I think most carbon stems weigh more then the lightest aluminium ones. FSA parts tend to be heavy.
> You can build up a modern steel frame to 6.8 kilos (14.9 lbs) if your willing (I have done so but it goes up to 15.5 lbs with training wheels, powertap, computer. Just do the research, after looking at these builds for awhile you can see who is lying and whos not. Most that are way off are guessing weights or using manufacturers listings and adding it up. They are mistaken but I would not say they are lying. Post the compete listing of your build and I bet we can find some weight to loose


I agree with you. Most people assume that the claim weight is correct.

For example my Fulcrum Zero wheels claim to be 1425 grams. I actually measured 1518gram! That's almost 1/4 lbs heavier.
Most of the Dura Ace parts were very little off by a few grams.
My SLR saddle claims to be 135 but came in at 139.
The other big discrepancies came from the stem, seatpost and handlebar.
ITM K-Sword (220 claimed - actual 268), Time Stem (125 Claimed - actual 148) and Time Seatpost (claimed 175 - actual 201).
This could be due to the weight varience in different sizes...


----------



## Mdeth1313 (Nov 1, 2001)

Juanmoretime said:


> Sorry you can't see the whole bike in the scale shot so you can't see my finger and its a very good trick holding a DSLR with one hand and lifting the bike. Please notice pedals, cages and computer. :thumbsup:



Oh Juan, we all know its not your finger, its that third leg. They dont call you tripod for nothing :blush2: 

BTW- nice bike! What happened to the tits (oops, titus)?


----------



## Juanmoretime (Nov 24, 2001)

Mdeth1313 said:


> Oh Juan, we all know its not your finger, its that third leg. They dont call you tripod for nothing :blush2:
> 
> BTW- nice bike! What happened to the tits (oops, titus)?


The Titus frame is currently residing in the Lynskey box. I need a few more rides on the Lynskey before I decide its fate. I may keep it but the Lynskey is just has been great and it has several things I like about it that makes it the numero uno bike. The handling is just much better and the cage mounts are higher. The low cage mounts on the Titus gives you a lower center of gravity but reaching for the bottles was not great. The probelm didn't really come up until I built the Lynskey.


----------



## tedgrant (Jun 13, 2006)

I would be very interested in knowing what sort of build kit the steel guys are using to get under 17 lbs. I am leaning toward dumping my scott cr1 and going steel... i rode the same loop as always on an old steel cross bike with the same wheels off my light bike, and my body felt much better, less soreness and stiffness. I used to the the "steel ride" thing was BS, but I have changed my mind, thanks


----------



## MIN in PDX (Nov 29, 2007)

tedgrant said:


> I would be very interested in knowing what sort of build kit the steel guys are using to get under 17 lbs. I am leaning toward dumping my scott cr1 and going steel... i rode the same loop as always on an old steel cross bike with the same wheels off my light bike, and my body felt much better, less soreness and stiffness. I used to the the "steel ride" thing was BS, but I have changed my mind, thanks


you should post your build list and we can tell you where your weight is.


----------



## MaestroXC (Sep 15, 2005)

Indeed, if you've got Ksyriums with heavy tires or something it may be hard to get under 15, which is still a very respectable weight.


----------



## homebrew (Oct 28, 2004)

tedgrant said:


> I would be very interested in knowing what sort of build kit the steel guys are using to get under 17 lbs. I am leaning toward dumping my scott cr1 and going steel... i rode the same loop as always on an old steel cross bike with the same wheels off my light bike, and my body felt much better, less soreness and stiffness. I used to the the "steel ride" thing was BS, but I have changed my mind, thanks


This bike was built for me to be stiff and support my 95 kilo's and 953 is not the absolute lightest steel but being stainless you don't have to paint it (no rust!). That could result in saving a few hundred grams. They do make a Feather weight steel frame that is a bit lighter 
My build is subject to a few changes but here goes:

Frame Inedpendent Fabracation 953 SSR Crown Jewel approx size 58
Reynolds UL fork
King headset with Ti base plate
Ritchy Axis 4 carbon stem w/ ti bolts
Syntace Racelite carbon bars
Expansion plug Ritchy with aluminium bolt and custom carbon cap
Campy UT compact crank 34 shown, replaced with 36/ 50 
Campy shifter/ brakes Left shifter has had the shifting parts removed. Carbon downtube front drerailuar shifter 
M5 brakes, M5 brake pad holders, Campy carbon pads
Campy Front derailuar with ti springs and bolts / clamp sloted
Campy rear derailuar tuned 
Record full ti cassette with aluminium lockring
Thompson masterpiece seatpost shown but using a lighter Forte carbon with ti bolt
Tune speedneedle saddle with custom leather
Campy Bora wheels / Zipp 303 powertap wheels for training (shown)
tires veloflex carbon
Shifting cables Powercords, brake cables campy
Emporelli botle cages
Brookes bar tape
M2 skewers
KMC chain
Look Keo ti pedels

Sorry for the poor pic www.msnusers.com/bikephotos
I rode a Scott prior to having this built. For me the ride is far better but I think alot of this has to do with having a perfect fit and choosing how I wanted my bike to behave ( fast handling and stiff is what I asked for and what I got). I use this bike for crits/training I have owned Ti, Carbon, aluminium, steel. For all but a hillclimb bike for non sanctioned races (Mt Washington) I think steel gives away nothing to any others. I have gone from being a pure Weight Weenie to having the opinion that a frame built for you and your needs will give the ultimite satifaction regardless of material choice
BTW Juanmoretime, your bike rocks!


----------



## cpark (Oct 13, 2004)

homebrew said:


> This bike was built for me to be stiff and support my 95 kilo's and 953 is not the absolute lightest steel but being stainless you don't have to paint it (no rust!). That could result in saving a few hundred grams. They do make a Feather weight steel frame that is a bit lighter
> My build is subject to a few changes but here goes:
> 
> Frame Inedpendent Fabracation 953 SSR Crown Jewel approx size 58
> ...


That is one sweet looking ride!!!!!!!!!!
How much does it weigh?


----------



## homebrew (Oct 28, 2004)

6971 grams on my scale with the Boras, add approx 1/2 lb for the Powertap/Zipp with ti/steel cassette Not a weight weenie build but still a high performence roadbike. You can build a UCI legal limit bike out of steel, ti, carbon or aluminium IMO weight become less an issue in frame choice for those that wish to race. Yes you will seldom get checked at your local crit but its in the rule book, 6.8 kilos. So perhaps some would do well to look at other attributes in fame material choice other then just weight


----------



## sevencycle (Apr 23, 2006)

ewitz said:


> Agreed. I think anyone claiming a bike weight under 16 lbs on this forum should automatically back it up with a photo of the bike hanging from a digital scale.


Come on step up to the year 2000.My Cannondale weight was 16 lbs. in 1985.Now my Scott has got Fat at 13.22 lbs. (CR-1 not Addict) as It was 10.91 lbs. before I changed a few things for personal ride quality. Scale pics could be riged as Tyler would say *"Just Believe"*


----------



## sevencycle (Apr 23, 2006)

Juanmoretime said:


> Sorry you can't see the whole bike in the scale shot so you can't see my finger and its a very good trick holding a DSLR with one hand and lifting the bike. Please notice pedals, cages and computer. :thumbsup:


Its a trick photo weight THERE IS NO AIR IN THE TIRES.... YOUR BUSTED!!!!


----------



## Cruzer2424 (Feb 8, 2005)

tedgrant said:


> I read this forum and wondered, "manufacturers and individuals MUST be lying about bike weights". I run a scott cr-1 (the lighter one, team or pro, cant remember, I weighed it and it was 900 grams nude), whatever isnt dura ace is made of carbon or titanium or magnesium or unobtanium, with NO front derailleur/shifter/ring (i.e. 1 x 9), size 58cm, and it still weighs 15.2 pounds, (really),....how the hell can scott claim "UCI ILLEGAL" when its OVERWEIGHT while missing several parts and BEYOND stock????????? Ive given up... it rides stiff, fast and great, but it does seem fragile (Im 175 lbs), Im thinking of going back to the lightest artisan produced steel frame I can get and just live with it... I AM BURNED OUT!!!!!!!! :blush2:


Post a detailed build. I PROMISE we can EASILY get it below the UCI limit. 

It's just a question of how much you're willing to spend.


----------



## SEK82089 (Dec 19, 2004)

I broke the frame but this was one that I had a while ago.
http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?p=594709#poststop

But now I have a Waterford R33 with Reyolds wheels that weighs 16lbs even.


----------



## TelemarkTumalo (Jan 31, 2007)

*15 1/2 Ibis Silk*

I had no illusions about building a super light bike but really demand reliability and low maintenance. I was pleasantly surprised though when my Ibis Carbon Silk Road came in at 15 1/2 lbs with clincher wheels. There are really no weight weenie parts on here. I put my buddie's 303 tubulars on for a couple of weeks last summer and although I didn't weigh the bike, that set up was noticeably lighter with climbing.

2007 Ibis Silk Carbon Frame 55.5 cm
Easton EC90 SLX carbon Fork
Dura Ace Groupo complete including DA cassette
FSA OS140 stem and FSA K Force carbon bar
Dura Ace Clincher wheels and Conti Attack/Force tires
Speeplay X2 stainless pedals
Arundel Dave-O cages
Easton EC70 post
Fizik Arione ti saddle

Computers, like mirrors, do not belong on bicycles!


----------



## b24fsb (Dec 21, 2006)

i have a CR1 as well and you just have to be smart about your parts that you put on the bike, for instance i needed a zero offset seatpost. I chose to get a easton ec90 because its 100% carbon, the only metal in it are 2 bolts. it is only 190g and then i cut it down so its a little less. thats really light for a 31.6 seatpost, even a thompson would be 190g :blush2: . i ditched the ritchey comp. stem (165g) for a ritchey WCS (125g). go and trim the factory cables down a little will save some grams. 

07 CR1 Team (105)
easton ec90 zero-seatpost
ritchey WCS stem 100mm
selle italia SLR XP
look keo carbon-chrom. spindle
profile carbon cages

everything else is how it came from scott, it weighs in at 17.75lbs according to my shops scale but call it 18lbs it you want to. now i have sram red on its way and i have easton ec90 aero tubular wheels on the way as well. that will be at least 3lbs coming off the bikes weight, so thats a sub 15lbs if not a solid 15.5lbs for sure. so no its not hard to get a 15lbs bike, with a CR1 it should be easy. :thumbsup:


----------



## Forrest Root (Dec 22, 2006)

Juanmoretime is lying about his bike weights. I know this because of his personal history as compared to his claims about his personal history:
Unlike what he told the investigators, the babysitter was *NOT* 18 at the time. FWIW, I was 15 but was afraid of what JMT would do if I told the truth.
He cannot still fit in a size 8 like he brags.
He did, in fact, vote for Bo Gritz in '04.
That's not his Lynskey. JMT rides a Mongoose.
His claimed boy weight is the result of rigorous enemas before he weighs himself.
How can you trust a guy named Juan?


----------



## DannyBoy (Feb 19, 2004)

*What build did you use for the steel bike?*



terzo rene said:


> So true, my clincher wheeled steel bike is significantly under 16lbs. If you can't get under 15 with carbon you're just not trying. It's gotten so easy I had to challenge myself by doing a UCI illegal steel bike with a steel fork a couple years ago.
> 
> Doesn't mean all the posts on the web are accurate. Some on lightbikes strike me as fudged based on what some of the same parts have weighed for me.


I'd be interested to know a little more and perhaps you could post some pics if you've got 'em.


----------

