# Dollar per gram



## DeLuz

Is there some generally accepted $ per gram figure that would be used to determine if buying something purely for weight savings is worth doing?


----------



## lucer0

"worth doing"? Wrong forum  As long as something can safely be made lighter, there are people that will pay for it


----------



## DeLuz

Right, some people will pay anything to save a few grams or for the right bottle of wine. 
But there must be some parts that can save weight without being a super rich guy.


----------



## Svooterz

lucer0 said:


> "worth doing"? Wrong forum  As long as something can safely be made lighter, there are people that will pay for it


I think parts don't even need to be _safely_ made lighter. If a bicycle part (and really, any part) is made light enough, there will be a niche market, even if the part in question is flimsy, flexes under load, loses part of its functionnality or is not durable at all.

Yes, some people will forgo safety for lightweight, at some extent. And it still requires a big money imput to shed those safety-grams!

To answer the OP : there's no accepted "standard" concerning how much $ per gram is reasonnable to pay for weight loss. Go with what you are comfortable with. I've recently spent 130$ CAN to lose 180 grams and to gain adjustability (seatpost). The weight loss, I can't notice while riding, but still, 130$ is not HUGE money and I could afford it. On the other hand, even though it's not weight-related, the new-found adjustability was more than worth it!

I think this would be the "golden rule" of weight saving : can you afford to do it without doing too many compromises on other things? As a graduate student, the question I had to face was even more precise : can I afford this upgrade AND food? The answer was yes, and the choice was made easy


----------



## lalahsghost

Overall, on my most current build, I spent $0.34 per gram. 

6852g for $2,359.88








Note, some of the individual weights may be moot because I weighed things like the crankset with the pedals on it/wheels with everything, and just distributed the weight according to manuf spec, and kept the total & sums the same.


----------



## Camilo

I have "upgraded" parts over the past couple of years, almost always for fit and comfort. But when I do, I usually spend some extra bucks to lose some weight. If I can get a 170 gram stem for $40, I'll probably go ahead and spend $75 for a 110 gram stem.

My personal rules: (a) usually don't make any effort to lose less than 30 grams (an ounce) on any particular component and (b) if it's 50 cents a gram, it's a great deal, and I try to stick less than a dollar a gram (US) when comparing the price of the "heavy" component vs. the "light" component. So the above stem example I'd consider my cost to be $35 to lose 60 grams.

I could have bought ~1800 gram wheels for about $200. I bought 1600 gram wheels for ~$350. $150 to lose 200 grams.

All arbitrary of course, and just a game I play because I really don't think weight-weenism is meaningful for a recreational rider. Maybe it makes it a little more fun to ride a lighter bike, but mostly It's just a hobby I have to make my bike a little lighter as long as costs aren't ridiculous.


----------



## muscleendurance

*oH great another opportunity to use my sig line.*

_"your trying to impose logic on a sitaution which has nothing to do with it"_


----------



## kjmunc

Most people use the "but it's lighter" excuse just as a justification to buy more stuff. 

The odds are non-existent that you'll ever notice the incremental weight savings of upgrading parts to save 20gr at a time, but if that's your thing then go for it. 

Since I ride 62cm frames it's no fun to play the weight weenie game. I tend to play the "how cheap can I buy top-end stuff" game, and the weight savings comes along with it.


----------



## DeLuz

Camilo said:


> I have "upgraded" parts over the past couple of years, almost always for fit and comfort. But when I do, I usually spend some extra bucks to lose some weight. If I can get a 170 gram stem for $40, I'll probably go ahead and spend $75 for a 110 gram stem.
> 
> My personal rules: (a) usually don't make any effort to lose less than 30 grams (an ounce) on any particular component and (b) if it's 50 cents a gram, it's a great deal, and I try to stick less than a dollar a gram (US) when comparing the price of the "heavy" component vs. the "light" component. So the above stem example I'd consider my cost to be $35 to lose 60 grams.
> 
> I could have bought ~1800 gram wheels for about $200. I bought 1600 gram wheels for ~$350. $150 to lose 200 grams.
> 
> All arbitrary of course, and just a game I play because I really don't think weight-weenism is meaningful for a recreational rider. Maybe it makes it a little more fun to ride a lighter bike, but mostly It's just a hobby I have to make my bike a little lighter as long as costs aren't ridiculous.


I think those are some good ideas. For example I have to choose between a FSA Gossamer tandem crankset and a FSA SLK carbon crankset. The price difference is $300 and the weight difference is 200g so I will probably go with the Gossamers.


----------



## Svooterz

kjmunc said:


> Most people use the "but it's lighter" excuse just as a justification to buy more stuff.
> 
> The odds are non-existent that you'll ever notice the incremental weight savings of upgrading parts to save 20gr at a time, but if that's your thing then go for it.
> 
> Since I ride 62cm frames it's no fun to play the weight weenie game. I tend to play the "how cheap can I buy top-end stuff" game, and the weight savings comes along with it.


I would even say that chances are that most people wouldn't notice a sudden weight loss of half a pound. I didn't notice the difference in my bike's behavior when I dropped the aforementionned 180 grams (more than 1/3 of a pound). I have not become a mountain goat all of a sudden and I truly think that anyone who claims that half a pound has made a HUGE difference is lying to himself.

This doesn't mean we shouldn't try to save weight, but it's just something to keep in mind. And I knew this well before doing my upgrades  

Oh and to the OP : you should really go with the Gossamer cranks! The claimed weight difference may be 200 grams, but the actual weight difference is in fact much less. Weightweenies lists the Gossamer at 908 grams for the whole crankset (including BB), and the the SL-K Carbon at 809 grams (including BB and w/ identical crank arms length & chainrings). It turns out you'd pay 300$ to save 100 grams rather than the 200 grams you could have been hoping for. Not quite the deal, is it?


----------



## AlexCad5

DeLuz said:


> I think those are some good ideas. For example I have to choose between a FSA Gossamer tandem crankset and a FSA SLK carbon crankset. The price difference is $300 and the weight difference is 200g so I will probably go with the Gossamers.


 You'll never get a light bike if you put tandem parts on a road bike. You can always find cheap parts. The question is do you want them?


----------



## natedg200202

For me, less than $2 a gram is OK. Less than $1 a gram is a good deal and might be worth it. 50 cents a gram or less is excellent and can make a difference on a heavier part. 

I will agree with the other post that the weight savings are very hard to feel. I just had a major rebuild to swap the frame (Cervelo RS), fork, cranks, and stem for lighter. Saved around 900 grams and honestly, it didn't make that huge of a difference, even going uphill. Make sure if you swap parts for lighter that it does something else well, like improves shifting or smooths the ride. Then it might be more worth your effort and cash.


----------



## andy87t2

The only really place i notice weight savings is in wheels. the power tap wheels i train on are around 1900 grams. and the American classics that i race on weigh 1240grams. My bike accelerates muchhhhhh faster with the race wheels.
But every other part of the bike doesnt make a huge diference. Light weight seems to be more for a confidence boost.  which is why i want a 13 lb bike.....


----------



## albert owen

Saving weight (wheels aside) has almost no effect on bike performance IMO. But it is fun to do. I reckon that any weight savings I have made cost @£1.00(sterling) per gram.


----------



## Juanmoretime

Is there a limit? Whatever you can personally accept and afford. That's my limit dollars to grams.


----------



## dadoflam

After I built my bike with a basic setup (Ultegra, Ksyrium Equipes etc) I found that I used AUD$4/gram as a sort of mental benchmark for upgrades for weight reduction - it didn't necesarrily limit my buying but it became a fairly consistent rule of thumb.
In most cases I pursued weight reduction where it was practical but did not limit myself to only big chunks - getting down to 6kg is relatively easy in 100g+ chunks - below that you need to start looking at the smaller gains but they do add up quickly.
I think my 'worst' return on cost/gram was probably upgrading my bars and stem but that had other advantages in terms of comfort.
In terms of 'where is the limit' - I found it came at the point where the bike functionality became compromised - things like the Parlee FD clamp are beautiful but flex like crazy and made shifting sloppy. I got the bike down to about 5.5kg but with some changes for comfort (saddle) and improved performance (stiffer wheels and stem etc) I have ended up at around 5.8kg.
For me (and I'm no featherweight) I really noticed a difference in the bike when it went below 6kg - really lively and responsive. I have found that my focus has shifted from _'reduce weight' _as the sole objective to _'achieving the best performing bike below 6kg' _- still gives me hours of pleasure assessing the relative value of new 'bits'


----------

