# How light is *light enough*?



## Fixed

What is the consensus among us weight weenies as to how light is light enough for a race bike? 

10% of body weight?

UCI minimum (14.9 pounds)?

As light as you can afford?

As light as you can without questionable boutique parts?

13 pounds?

It's never light enough?

My test -- you should be able to hold the bike with a straight out extended arm. Seems to work out -- the bigger and stronger you are, the heavier your bike can be (if you are heavy and weak, it's not the bike's problem ;-)


----------



## Juanmoretime

As light as it will go without compromising durability and longevity. My Titus at 12.6 lbs is right there. I do ride it daily and put 7,500 miles last year on a sub 13 lb bike.


----------



## estone2

No such thing as "light enough"
Only "too light" (well, and "too heavy"...)
Too light is when you start making compromises for weight. If you can't comfortably ride components/frame/wheels that weigh <18lb, <18lb is too light.

If you can ride a 10 pound bike comfortably, then by all means, ride it.


----------



## Forrest Root

As light as you need it to be to meet your goals.


----------



## Mapei

Okay Fixed, I'll give you a number. 16 lbs.


----------



## roadfix

Numbers don't matter.....as long as my road bike is lighter than my lightest fixie.


----------



## SilasCL

Lighter than the average bike in the Tour de France 15 years ago...


----------



## DIRT BOY

Juanmoretime said:


> As light as it will go without compromising durability and longevity. My Titus at 12.6 lbs is right there. I do ride it daily and put 7,500 miles last year on a sub 13 lb bike.


 You nailed it Juan! Light to the point it's durable.
My ride is 13.51lbs and gettign lighter. Nothing to worry about durablity wise.

https://light-bikes.com/bikegallery/BikeListing.asp?id=946


----------



## Cruzer2424

Juanmoretime said:


> As light as it will go without compromising durability and longevity. My Titus at 12.6 lbs is right there. I do ride it daily and put 7,500 miles last year on a sub 13 lb bike.


Is there a thread with pics of this?


----------



## Cruzer2424

Cruzer2424 said:


> Is there a thread with pics of this?



nevermind. found it.

freaking nuts.

nice bike.

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?t=80504


----------



## Fixed

*another*



SilasCL said:


> Lighter than the average bike in the Tour de France 15 years ago...


...lighter than all your friends' bikes or of those you ride with.


----------



## Fixed

*16???*



Mapei said:


> Okay Fixed, I'll give you a number. 16 lbs.


16??? What are you doing on the weight weenie forum? ;-)


----------



## sevencycle

Juanmoretime said:


> As light as it will go without compromising durability and longevity. My Titus at 12.6 lbs is right there. I do ride it daily and put 7,500 miles last year on a sub 13 lb bike.


My CR-1 is 12.8lbs Durable everyday climbing, high speed downhill & comfort.Only problem commuting with it I would worry about theft.I would say the magic number is *13lbs.!!!!!*


----------



## sevencycle

SilasCL said:


> Lighter than the average bike in the Tour de France 15 years ago...


15 years ago some TDF bikes might have been lighter than todays TDF bike. Was there a weight restriction back then????


----------



## xQuickSilver

"My test -- you should be able to hold the bike with a straight out extended arm. Seems to work out -- the bigger and stronger you are, the heavier your bike can be (if you are heavy and weak, it's not the bike's problem ;-)"

Heck, im ~100 pounds and I can hold my 18 pounder with a straight arm,,,that light enough? =)

and no I dont make myself throw up! Im just younger and lithe.


----------



## Fixed

*light fixie?*



roadfix said:


> Numbers don't matter.....as long as my road bike is lighter than my lightest fixie.


Speaking of which, what's the lightest fixie someone had seen? Seems light one could be *really* light -- 900 gram frame, 1000 gram wheels, and without derailleurs, shifters, one less brake, at least, one chainring, etc., sub 10 should be fairly doable.


----------



## CoLiKe20

sevencycle said:


> 15 years ago some TDF bikes might have been lighter than todays TDF bike. Was there a weight restriction back then????


I think in the early 90's the bikes were pushing 16-17lbs. The absolute lightest frame back then was the Trek OCLV at 2.44 lbs sans paint (an amazing number for the day). No carbon wheels, bar, post, stem, cranks, etc. and those were old fashion headset/stem.


----------



## Yangpei

*Weight question*

I'm a mountain biker that occasionally rides on the road. I recently purchased a new road bike - Titus FCR. It's about 17lbs with pedals, which according to this forum, is a heavyweight. Being new to road biking, I'm not sure what is included in a road bike weight. I assume you remove the saddle bag if you use one. What about the pedals? Water bottle cages?


----------



## Fixed

I include everything attached to the bike, except bag, pump, and bottles. I do include computer, bottle cages, and pedals.


----------



## Juanmoretime

Yangpei said:


> I'm a mountain biker that occasionally rides on the road. I recently purchased a new road bike - Titus FCR. It's about 17lbs with pedals, which according to this forum, is a heavyweight. Being new to road biking, I'm not sure what is included in a road bike weight. I assume you remove the saddle bag if you use one. What about the pedals? Water bottle cages?


My Titus Solera comes in at 12.69 lb pedals, waterbottle cages and computer. I don't use a saddle bag since I prefer to carry my CO2 inflator and spare cartridges cash, spare tubes, patch kit, tire irons and Park Boots in a plastic bag that I rubber band together and carry in my jersey pocket.

I personally believe when you give a weight for a bike it should be ready to ride minus the filled waterbottles only.


----------



## uzziefly

For me, it's the UCI weight minimum. I just wanna have a bike that's legal. It's a matter of preference but yeah. FWIW my bike weighs like errrrrr 15.5-16lbs or so. It's good enough for me.

I know a guy who has his bike at what, 6kg or so? That's like err, 13lbs+? WHOA.


----------



## Yangpei

*12.69!*

That's super light! I'm wouldn't mind getting my bike a little lighter, but it'll never be nearly that light. I have a new Ksyrium ES wheelset (I know it's not the lightest) as well as a Easton EC90 carbon seatpost on order. I can probably get a lighter stem / bar combo, but the FSA K-force is comfortable. Eventually, a ceramic crankset may save a little more. Otherwise, I'm stuck between 16-17 lbs, which I can live with.


----------



## Mapei

Fixed. I base my 16 lb. assessment on an article I read maybe a year ago that gave the weights of all the team bikes in the TdF...for I believe 2005. Some were as high as 18.5, some were as low as 15.5, but most of the peloton bikes were between 17 and 17.5 lbs. I then subtracted a pound to a pound-and-a-half to account for technological advances and weight-weenieness, and came up with my wholly arbitrary number. Of course, as Juanmoretime says, that weight includes everything attached to the bike except for filled water bottles.

So sayeth the Mapei.


----------



## Jim Nazium

CoLiKe20 said:


> I think in the early 90's the bikes were pushing 16-17lbs. The absolute lightest frame back then was the Trek OCLV at 2.44 lbs sans paint (an amazing number for the day). No carbon wheels, bar, post, stem, cranks, etc. and those were old fashion headset/stem.


I think they were way heavier than that (although I admit memory is a little fuzzy at my age). The first generation STI / Ergo shifters added more than a pound to a downtube-shifter bike, and wasn't Indurain riding steel Pinarellos back then?


----------



## Juanmoretime

Yangpei said:


> That's super light! I'm wouldn't mind getting my bike a little lighter, but it'll never be nearly that light. I have a new Ksyrium ES wheelset (I know it's not the lightest) as well as a Easton EC90 carbon seatpost on order. I can probably get a lighter stem / bar combo, but the FSA K-force is comfortable. Eventually, a ceramic crankset may save a little more. Otherwise, I'm stuck between 16-17 lbs, which I can live with.


I find it benefical to study what others have done to look for light weight ideas. Here is a link to my Titus.


----------



## cerveloguy

How light is light enough? - Light enough that it's not stupid light where you get parts that fail or the handling, decending is compromised. In otherwords it still has to stand up to every day hard riding.

Building ultra light bikes is a sub cult within the larger cycling community, a hobby within itself, but in reality there is very little real world performance difference between a 13 lb and a 16 lb bike.


----------



## sevencycle

.
[/QUOTE]
Building ultra light bikes is a sub cult within the larger cycling community, a hobby within itself, but in reality there is very little real world performance difference between a 13 lb and a 16 lb bike.[/QUOTE]
Unless you live in Colorado!!!


----------



## terzo rene

Last year 12.5lbs was light enough for me, this year it's going to have to be ~11.5 though I will still allow up to 12.0 using a powertap wheel. Sometimes advancing technology really sucks for your wallet.

I think I am going to call a halt to the WW habit for a while after this year. I need to buy a condo in Honolulu before I blow too much more on bikes. I'm sick of rain and 40 degrees for 9 months out of the year. :-( Plus something fairly radical needs to happen in the world of composites before frames can the same degree of weight reudctions they have experienced in the last 5 years when the lightest frames lost close to 40% of their weight.


----------



## sevencycle

Hawaii has a few WW rehab centers on the beach. But be careful in Hawaii there are alot of Aero Weenies just waiting to get you hooked .


----------



## ETWN Stu

Dirt Boy that is some very good looking stuff on that web site of yours  I bet they climb like no tomorrow? Good to see that yours is being used daily as well.


----------



## Gnarly 928

I have my daily ride Look 585 at 15.18lbs. size 57, or XL as Look calls it. Without going cuckoo with the credit card for every last gram...Dura Ace, FSA, Modolo bars, old style single pivot brakes, Reynolds carbon wheels and tubulars...If it doesn't work properly, it is not on my bike. If it is too finicky and keeps me out of the saddle, it's not on my bike. If I have to adjust it every time before a ride, it isn't there. If I can't put in the miles with a part, no matter how light it is, it won't stay on my bike...I've been swapping stuff off and on for a year or two till I have a pretty good set up right now..

For a time, I had all kinda Zoot light stuff on a 'special' bike that I almost never rode...because it was too fragile, too finicky...What use is that, a bike you can't really ride? I guess it's a good way to get rid of money..buying $2000 ceramic bearings and titanium nuts and bolts that you can't afford to wrench on...

But I'd opine that a bike that is as light as possible without compromising it's functionality, that is "light enough" My Look, at just over 15 lbs gets trained on and raced a lot without undue problems. Seems light, perhaps a little lighter than most of the bikes I race against, but only by a few ounces..I guess if you didn't race you could have a really light bike to ride, when everything was "just right", That rarely happens when you are racing often (everything being "just right"...)

Don Hanson


----------



## sevencycle

Gnarly 928 said:


> I have my daily ride Look 585 at 15.18lbs. size 57, or XL as Look calls it. Without going cuckoo with the credit card for every last gram...Dura Ace, FSA, Modolo bars, old style single pivot brakes, Reynolds carbon wheels and tubulars...If it doesn't work properly, it is not on my bike. If it is too finicky and keeps me out of the saddle, it's not on my bike. If I have to adjust it every time before a ride, it isn't there. If I can't put in the miles with a part, no matter how light it is, it won't stay on my bike...I've been swapping stuff off and on for a year or two till I have a pretty good set up right now..
> 
> For a time, I had all kinda Zoot light stuff on a 'special' bike that I almost never rode...because it was too fragile, too finicky...What use is that, a bike you can't really ride? I guess it's a good way to get rid of money..buying $2000 ceramic bearings and titanium nuts and bolts that you can't afford to wrench on...
> 
> But I'd opine that a bike that is as light as possible without compromising it's functionality, that is "light enough" My Look, at just over 15 lbs gets trained on and raced a lot without undue problems. Seems light, perhaps a little lighter than most of the bikes I race against, but only by a few ounces..I guess if you didn't race you could have a really light bike to ride, when everything was "just right", That rarely happens when you are racing often (everything being "just right"...)
> 
> Don Hanson


 I have the same everyday durability as your Look 585.Its a Scott CR1 at 12.8lb (clinchers) & 11.8lb (tubulars).No finiky stop to adjust parts. With family & kids my ride time is important and can not be hampered with failed parts. I know the lightest bike does not win the race (even uphill) .It's just fun to hammer a work of art.


----------



## Mdeth1313

sevencycle said:


> I have the same everyday durability as your Look 585.Its a Scott CR1 at 12.8lb (clinchers) & 11.8lb (tubulars).No finiky stop to adjust parts. With family & kids my ride time is important and can not be hampered with failed parts. I know the lightest bike does not win the race (even uphill) .It's just fun to hammer a work of art.



Same here- my scott cr1 comes in at 12.7-12.8 w/ 46mm rims and 12.2-12.3lbs w/ low profile rims (both tubies- the hell w/ clinchers!)- its more of a hobby on top of a hobby- how light can I get it and still keep it functional. 
All I know is when I look at the bike I wanna ride it- when I'm riding it, I wanna ride longer-- that's what matters to me.


----------



## sevencycle

Mdeth1313 said:


> Same here- my scott cr1 comes in at 12.7-12.8 w/ 46mm rims and 12.2-12.3lbs w/ low profile rims (both tubies- the hell w/ clinchers!)- its more of a hobby on top of a hobby- how light can I get it and still keep it functional.
> All I know is when I look at the bike I wanna ride it- when I'm riding it, I wanna ride longer-- that's what matters to me.


Cheers, I just watched Amstel Gold race live on pc. Now I ride!!!!


----------



## danl1

*7.3 pounds...*



Fixed said:


> Speaking of which, what's the lightest fixie someone had seen? Seems light one could be *really* light -- 900 gram frame, 1000 gram wheels, and without derailleurs, shifters, one less brake, at least, one chainring, etc., sub 10 should be fairly doable.


http://bicycledesign.blogspot.com/2006/10/sub-7-pound-crumpton-from-groupe-de.html


----------



## Fixed

*holy cow!*



danl1 said:


> http://bicycledesign.blogspot.com/2006/10/sub-7-pound-crumpton-from-groupe-de.html


Now that's light. Don't think I'll try to outdo it, though.


----------



## jhamlin38

When I was in college, I could hammer out 20mph solo 2 hour rides regularly on a 20lb machine. Now 12-14 years later, I can hammer out a 40 miler at about 15 mph, on a 17 lb machine. Its the rider, not the bike.


----------



## sevencycle

jhamlin38 said:


> When I was in college, I could hammer out 20mph solo 2 hour rides regularly on a 20lb machine. Now 12-14 years later, I can hammer out a 40 miler at about 15 mph, on a 17 lb machine. Its the rider, not the bike.


Its the rider and the bike.


----------



## lookrider

Chassis, 19lbs, Engine, 170lbs. Gonna go work on the engine for a couple of hours. Later.


----------



## akatsuki

Is this for real: http://www.light-bikes.com/bikegallery/BikeListing.asp?id=747

That seems ridiculous, given that the fixie above was the same weight.


----------



## MrAnderson

What's the most common legal competition weight?


----------



## DIRT BOY

MrAnderson said:


> What's the most common legal competition weight?


6.8 kg UCI weight limit or 14.99lbs.


----------



## MrAnderson

Legal weight = 14.99lbs.

Than why would anyone want to make it lighter? If people cannot crank a 15lb bike up a paved road then they should get a motorcycle. That's how I see it.


----------



## estone2

MrAnderson said:


> Legal weight = 14.99lbs.
> 
> Than why would anyone want to make it lighter? If people cannot crank a 15lb bike up a paved road then they should get a motorcycle. That's how I see it.


because it's a hobby, dude.


----------



## MrAnderson

estone2 said:


> because it's a hobby, dude.


Or an obsession.


----------



## Juanmoretime

akatsuki said:


> Is this for real: http://www.light-bikes.com/bikegallery/BikeListing.asp?id=747
> 
> That seems ridiculous, given that the fixie above was the same weight.


One thing to keep in mind is that while Vic's bike is an amazing build it is also a specialty bike and not a daily rider. You can get under 10 lbs and keep it rideable.


----------



## sevencycle

MrAnderson said:


> Legal weight = 14.99lbs.
> 
> Than why would anyone want to make it lighter? If people cannot crank a 15lb bike up a paved road then they should get a motorcycle. That's how I see it.


 Why are cars made to go over 70 mph with 65 mph speed limit.They should buy a airplane. Thats how I see it.


----------



## sevencycle

Juanmoretime said:


> My Titus Solera comes in at 12.69 lb pedals, waterbottle cages and computer. I don't use a saddle bag since I prefer to carry my CO2 inflator and spare cartridges cash, spare tubes, patch kit, tire irons and Park Boots in a plastic bag that I rubber band together and carry in my jersey pocket.
> 
> I personally believe when you give a weight for a bike it should be ready to ride minus the filled waterbottles only.


Scott CR1 everyday ride 11.91 lbs sitting in garage ready to ride.


----------



## Juanmoretime

sevencycle said:


> Scott CR1 everyday ride 11.91 lbs sitting in garage ready to ride.


I could drop over a pound if I wanted to go carbonfiber for my frame, I don't.. I'm very pleased with the fit, ride and stiffness of the 1412 gram frame I'm using.


----------



## sevencycle

Juanmoretime said:


> I could drop over a pound if I wanted to go carbonfiber for my frame, I don't.. I'm very pleased with the fit, ride and stiffness of the 1412 gram frame I'm using.


 I could drop 1/2 to 3/4 lb. but It would cost big$$$.But hey the kids can pay for their own college.


----------



## DIRT BOY

sevencycle said:


> I could drop 1/2 to 3/4 lb. but It would cost big$$$.But hey the kids can pay for their own college.


I am with you. I could easly drop another 1-2 lbs, but the hassle of those parts and cost are slowing me down.

Biggest weight will come form new wheels. 

I am going to have my DT 190 hubs re-laced to LEW Tubulars. That's 200g+ right there.
CarbonTi POP saddle
A Easton EC90 SLX (Custom painted to match my frame)
Extralite The RoadStem OC
Maybe a AX-Lightness SB post.
That will put me into the lower 12lb range. I could go with PowerCordz cables, but they have been nothing but trouble for me. Back on Campy and the shifting is MUCH, MUCH better and smoother braking.

Everything else stays the same and I have a 12lb ride that is easliy durable for everyday riding. Even without the fork it's sub 13lbs!


----------



## sevencycle

DIRT BOY said:


> I am with you. I could easly drop another 1-2 lbs, but the hassle of those parts and cost are slowing me down.
> 
> Biggest weight will come form new wheels.
> 
> I am going to have my DT 190 hubs re-laced to LEW Tubulars. That's 200g+ right there.
> CarbonTi POP saddle
> A Easton EC90 SLX (Custom painted to match my frame)
> Extralite The RoadStem OC
> Maybe a AX-Lightness SB post.
> That will put me into the lower 12lb range. I could go with PowerCordz cables, but they have been nothing but trouble for me. Back on Campy and the shifting is MUCH, MUCH better and smoother braking.
> 
> Everything else stays the same and I have a 12lb ride that is easliy durable for everyday riding. Even without the fork it's sub 13lbs!


My look HSC5 fork is 256g (slx 310g before paint).Custom Zip 303's at 1055g.I feel Powercordz are one of those silly lightning things that dont improve performance. I also dont ride crazy light 160g tubulars. My Kona King Mt.Bike 22.5 lbs has 2.3 Conti's as I see low weight Mt. bikes not as capable for intended use as low weight roadie bikes.


----------



## Cevan

*Please show me a sub 10 pound bike thats*



Juanmoretime said:


> One thing to keep in mind is that while Vic's bike is an amazing build it is also a specialty bike and not a daily rider. You can get under 10 lbs and keep it rideable.


rideable everyday.


----------



## Juanmoretime

http://www.light-bikes.com/bikegallery/BikeListing.asp?id=1060


----------



## ritjobbie

This morning it was light enough just before 0600. Fifteen minutes later it was time for sunglasses.


----------



## DIRT BOY

Juanmoretime said:


> http://www.light-bikes.com/bikegallery/BikeListing.asp?id=1060


Yah, but this is were it gets subjective on what is an "everyday" biker and not a show/.specail occasion bike.

Personally, I fell that bike is NOT an everyday bike. For instance those tires. Unless you ride in a velodrome, those itres won't hold up or ride great. I have soem mounted that I was getting ready as spares. The ride was so harsh iot was scary on good to decent roads. Thos QR's I would not trust day in and day out.
Thos wheels even seem a bit scary for everyday riding/training.

See at least a guys like Heniz Wittman who has some of the lighest bikes on my site ADMITS that his bikes were built more for show or special events as it's a hobby for him.
The owner of these bikes has been know to stretch things out with his builds and has beenn accused of falsifing his weight on a German message board.

We have gone back in forth and he has been honest with me now when it comes to weights.

I am in the proccess of having the site redesgined. There will be a new catagoery for bike like this called "Double Diamond" and bike like this that are specila builds, shows bikes, not everyday rides, etc will be listed here.
A panel along with ME awill decided what goes there. Honest comments for owners will be highly taken in to consideration as well.

Also bike that show all these "tuned" parts that are lighter than the avergae WW build will HAVR to provide pictures on the scale for each part if they are questioned. Again someone could photoshop things, but this is the best was to police things.


----------



## terzo rene

Here is my latest effort and it's light enough until my condo plans are realized. It passed my final road test of 20 miles on dirt/gravel road last weekend. I was a bit worried about a passing 4WD kicking a rock into the frame and doing some harm to the tubing but otherwise no worries. The gold tape in the pics is long gone - dangerously slick (and heavy).

http://www.weightweenies.starbike.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=29247


----------



## Forrest Root

DIRT BOY said:


> Yah, but this is were it gets subjective on what is an "everyday" biker and not a show/.specail occasion bike.
> 
> Personally, I fell that bike is NOT an everyday bike. For instance those tires. Unless you ride in a velodrome, those itres won't hold up or ride great. I have soem mounted that I was getting ready as spares. The ride was so harsh iot was scary on good to decent roads. Thos QR's I would not trust day in and day out.
> Thos wheels even seem a bit scary for everyday riding/training.


See, this is where a little bit of actual knowledge will carrry someone a long way. Can you specifically say what's wrong with Tune Skyline skewers? No? I didn't think so. Perfectly fine skewers. You also might want to do a little analysis of skewer loads to get a grip on the reality of the situation.

You might also try reading what you type. You're nearly unintelligible. I hope you communicate better with your customers.



DIRT BOY said:


> See at least a guys like Heniz Wittman who has some of the lighest bikes on my site ADMITS that his bikes were built more for show or special events as it's a hobby for him.
> The owner of these bikes has been know to stretch things out with his builds and has beenn accused of falsifing his weight on a German message board.


Ah....the Lightbikes.com big guns...... 



DIRT BOY said:


> We have gone back in forth and he has been honest with me now when it comes to weights.


Uh-huh. 



DIRT BOY said:


> I am in the proccess of having the site redesgined. There will be a new catagoery for bike like this called "Double Diamond" and bike like this that are specila builds, shows bikes, not everyday rides, etc will be listed here.
> A panel along with ME awill decided what goes there. Honest comments for owners will be highly taken in to consideration as well.


What technical knowledge do you bring to your judgements? Or are your judgements based on other "stuff?" Just curious about your qualifications.



DIRT BOY said:


> Also bike that show all these "tuned" parts that are lighter than the avergae WW build will HAVR to provide pictures on the scale for each part if they are questioned. Again someone could photoshop things, but this is the best was to police things.


And all scales are accurate, right? Or are you going to enforce repeatable scale calibration?

As has been said in this thread many times, what is light enough is whatever works for the owner/rider. Critics most often bring very little or no technical knowledge to the debate. Most often critics cling to myths, old technology metrics, or fear.


----------



## DIRT BOY

Forrest Root said:


> See, this is where a little bit of actual knowledge will carrry someone a long way. Can you specifically say what's wrong with Tune Skyline skewers? No? I didn't think so. Perfectly fine skewers. You also might want to do a little analysis of skewer loads to get a grip on the reality of the situation.
> 
> You might also try reading what you type. You're nearly unintelligible. I hope you communicate better with your customers.
> 
> 
> 
> Ah....the Lightbikes.com big guns......
> 
> 
> 
> Uh-huh.
> 
> 
> 
> What technical knowledge do you bring to your judgements? Or are your judgements based on other "stuff?" Just curious about your qualifications.
> 
> 
> 
> And all scales are accurate, right? Or are you going to enforce repeatable scale calibration?
> 
> As has been said in this thread many times, what is light enough is whatever works for the owner/rider. Critics most often bring very little or no technical knowledge to the debate. Most often critics cling to myths, old technology metrics, or fear.


Like what you ever say is of any contribution to a thread .

Because I have seen those TUNE QR fail. That's why! Have you tried riding them? I know some people how have. I think they are just made too light to withstand daily use. I have seen guys put these on MTBs just to have the lightest bike. Then you read about them cracking.

There comes a point when parts can be too light even for their intended purpose. IMO, those Tune SL QRs are just too light. 

Ther were some stiffness test done on various QR's by GERMAN BIKE. These where not great.

if somone uses a decent quality scale, the weights will be accuarate enough. Should I require everyone have thier scales cailibrated and approved by you?? 

Now get a life! :frown2:


----------



## Forrest Root

DIRT BOY said:


> Like what you ever say is of any contribution to a thread .
> 
> Because I have seen those TUNE QR fail. That's why! Have you tried riding them? I know some people how have. I think they are just made too light to withstand daily use. I have seen guys put these on MTBs just to have the lightest bike. Then you read about them cracking.
> 
> There comes a point when parts can be too light even for their intended purpose. IMO, those Tune SL QRs are just too light.
> 
> Ther were some stiffness test done on various QR's by GERMAN BIKE. These where not great.
> 
> if somone uses a decent quality scale, the weights will be accuarate enough. Should I require everyone have thier scales cailibrated and approved by you??
> 
> Now get a life! :frown2:


Blah blah blah. You'd think a light bikes website guy and equipment uber dealer would be knowledgeable about all this stuff, even if his business is in Florida....er..or somewhere else....you know, whatever is convenient to get a customer off his back.

Mtn. biking places impact loads on QR's that are completely different than road biking. If you go to Weight Weenies and actually read, you'll find that nearly all of the Tune QR users are happy with them....and guess what: they didn't explode, fail, or any of that.

Stiffness test on QR's by a German mag? So? Are you able to correlate QR stiffness with performance? I didn't think so. Such tests are much like German mag's frame stiffness tests, i.e. they don't really tell you anything about the part's performance. If you're going to use such tests to buttress your arguments, you should understand the physics involved. Anyone can reference a test. That doesn't mean they understand its relevance. An aero test is relevant. Rolling resistance tests are relevant. Frame stiffness? There is no correlation between performance and frame stiffness. QR stiffness? Again, big number and big differences between numbers look impressive, but they don't mean squat without context and justification.

As to scale calibration and your list, I was just wondering with what expertise you were going to pass judgement? I think it's essential that the buying public understand that owning a business and having a web presence is no indication of technical expertise with products sold or anything in general. Moreover, it's a bit embarrassing, methinks, when self-promotion is coupled with displays of poor knowledge and attrocious communication.

As to the whole light enough topic, it's sufficient to say that it's up to the rider to determine what is light enough. However, inevitably someone...say, some dimwitted Giovanni or Joe Billy Bob.....wades into the discussion and makes pronouncements that have the pretense of technical justification, when in fact that person doesn't have the background or the scientific or engineering wherewithal to makes such statements. In other words, they perpetuate myth, and give bad info, all of which is a disservice to the cycling community. It's such bad statements that lead to things like people believing that aluminum rides harsh, CF explodes, and any bike under 18lbs will disintegrate if ridden outside.

As for my life, thanks I've got a fine life. Thanks for caring though.


----------



## DIRT BOY

Forrest Root said:


> Mtn. biking places impact loads on QR's that are completely different than road biking. If you go to Weight Weenies and actually read, you'll find that nearly all of the Tune QR users are happy with them....and guess what: they didn't explode, fail, or any of that.


 yes, I know MTB are different . Yah and how many guys on WW really care about quality of their rides over having the absolute lightest bike?
A lot of WW over there will ride anything just for the sake of having the lighest bike to brag about on the board.



> Stiffness test on QR's by a German mag? So? Are you able to correlate QR stiffness with performance? I didn't think so. Such tests are much like German mag's frame stiffness tests, i.e. they don't really tell you anything about the part's performance. If you're going to use such tests to buttress your arguments, you should understand the physics involved. Anyone can reference a test. That doesn't mean they understand its relevance. An aero test is relevant. Rolling resistance tests are relevant. Frame stiffness? There is no correlation between performance and frame stiffness. QR stiffness? Again, big number and big differences between numbers look impressive, but they don't mean squat without context and justification.


 No, but somethig too ight or fragile could fail. Kinda like those HS M2Racer was selling and saddles. Ever wonder why they went out of business? Oh yah, that BIG CF shortage .

As to scale calibration and your list, I was just wondering with what expertise you were going to pass judgement? I think it's essential that the buying public understand that owning a business and having a web presence is no indication of technical expertise with products sold or anything in general. Moreover, it's a bit embarrassing, methinks, when self-promotion is coupled with displays of poor knowledge and attrocious communication.

As to the whole light enough topic, it's sufficient to say that it's up to the rider to determine what is light enough. However, inevitably someone...say, some dimwitted Giovanni or Joe Billy Bob.....wades into the discussion and makes pronouncements that have the pretense of technical justification, when in fact that person doesn't have the background or the scientific or engineering wherewithal to makes such statements. In other words, they perpetuate myth, and give bad info, all of which is a disservice to the cycling community. It's such bad statements that lead to things like people believing that aluminum rides harsh, CF explodes, and any bike under 18lbs will disintegrate if ridden outside.

As for my life, thanks I've got a fine life. Thanks for caring though.[/quote]
Like I ever said those things? Oh, yes, picking the bikes will be subjective. You realize that the listing are for amusment purposes?

My knowlegde is fine thank you and somehow I managed to make a pretty decent living with it and have been growing my sites/business steadly over the last few years. My site does well as well and I am having fun with it and a lot of others are as well. I get more compliments a day on it then I can respond to. Do I know everyhting? No, but who does.


You on the other hand just sit here bash people, spew crap on these boards and add NOTHING to 99.9% of the post you respond too. Now I see why you were banned the first time.

Again, find something better to do than talk crap about people.


----------



## Forrest Root

DIRT BOY said:


> Now I see why you were banned the first time.


Excuse me? This is the second time you've said this. Do you know something I don't? I think you're confused. Clearly, your deductive skills need serious help.

As to your business, people might be interested to know about how your business changes locations when you've got customer issues....or how some of your "distributors" aren't really US distributors at all.....or how some of your "suppliers" close up shop when they run into trouble and then open up under another name.

As to the Weight Weenies claim that you make, well, you're way off. Whatever it's failings, Weight Weenies and the people there are a pretty critical bunch. They're not just making light bikes to say they're light.

As for your M2Racer claims. Well, I'd say you need to call and talk to them, yeah? As if you know anythng about them. You'll note that they had the character to point out an incorrect application of springs on their QR's to all those companies shamelessly ripping off their design. Have you displayed that much character? Is your business 100% above board?

Keep us posted on which companies have cut off or will cut you off in the future from their products, ok?

I do think it's sad that people get duped into thinking that they're buying stuff from a "reputable" source when they shop at some "Florida" websites.


----------



## DIRT BOY

Forrest Root said:


> As to your business, people might be interested to know about how your business changes locations when you've got customer issues....or how some of your "distributors" aren't really US distributors at all.....or how some of your "suppliers" close up shop when they run into trouble and then open up under another name.


 Huh? My location has always been the same.

Keep us posted on which companies have cut off or will cut you off in the future from their products, ok?



> I do think it's sad that people get duped into thinking that they're buying stuff from a "reputable" source when they shop at some "Florida" websites.


Whatever. No one is cutting me off.

It's sad then that your life life lately is nothing but bashing me for no reason. Your claims are just trash and bad mouthing!! Head back to your trailer park.

Welcome to my ignore list :thumbsup:


----------



## Jack Hammer

You guys should finish this "debate" via PM. It's not helping the thread.


----------



## Forrest Root

DIRT BOY said:


> Huh? My location has always been the same.
> 
> Keep us posted on which companies have cut off or will cut you off in the future from their products, ok?
> 
> I do think it's sad that people get duped into thinking that they're buying stuff from a "reputable" source when they shop at some "Florida" websites.


Whatever. No one is cutting me off.

It's sad they your life life lately is nothing by bashing me for no reason. Your claims are jsy trash and bad mouthing!!

Welcome to my ignore list :thumbsup:[/QUOTE]

See, this is what happens when it's uncomfortable to answer the honest questions re: credibility and honest business practices. Ah, that speaks volumes.


----------



## Forrest Root

Jack Hammer said:


> You guys should finish this "debate" via PM. It's not helping the thread.


Good idea. Done.


----------



## DIRT BOY

Forrest Root said:


> Whatever. No one is cutting me off.
> 
> It's sad they your life life lately is nothing by bashing me for no reason. Your claims are jsy trash and bad mouthing!!
> 
> Welcome to my ignore list :thumbsup:


See, this is what happens when it's uncomfortable to answer the honest questions re: credibility and honest business practices. Ah, that speaks volumes.[/quote]
What answer? About M2 Racer? They desgined and sold a HS that was recalled. Then they go out of business shortly after claiming a CF shortage.
Sure they were nice guys, but they sold a HS that was too light and it was a failed product. Im aure with all the refunds they were forced to close thier doors. They helped me in everyway. I just pointed out something that seemed pretty obvioius to most people.
They had soem good products but not perfect. Their saddles had isseus with cracking. Juanmoretime here cracked his. I had 3 post copme back for various issues.

Sometimes parts CA be made too light by pushing the envelope.

I will answer any legitimate annswer and I as honest as it comes. I just don't answer Internet Trolls....

DONE!


----------



## Ardent

Dirt boy, if you're doing this from the weight weenie aspect, why are you using 190 ceramics? They'll last a long time, sure, but if you want the absolute lightest hubs, the tune skyline (high-end tune) 45 and 140 hubs are by far the lightest I've ever seen, at 48 grams and 145 grams for a pair with carbon fibre and ceramic bearings which comes in 193grams, the same weight as a 190 ceramic rear. Just the same way that lightweight use the dt 240s for the ventoux lesser model and the tunes for the more expensive model.


----------



## DIRT BOY

Ardent said:


> Dirt boy, if you're doing this from the weight weenie aspect, why are you using 190 ceramics? They'll last a long time, sure, but if you want the absolute lightest hubs, the tune skyline (high-end tune) 45 and 140 hubs are by far the lightest I've ever seen, at 48 grams and 145 grams for a pair with carbon fibre and ceramic bearings which comes in 193grams, the same weight as a 190 ceramic rear. Just the same way that lightweight use the dt 240s for the ventoux lesser model and the tunes for the more expensive model.


Well, I don't carry/sell Tune. They DT 190's are new and I wanted to try them. This allows me to test and market them better. Also my wheels cost basically the same as just the Tune hubs would have cost me if I could get wholesale on them.
These were my first tubulars so I was also just trying to keep the costs down.

I was also not trying to build the lightest wheel just yet. I had some Extralite UltraClimb SP wheels that I sold off. Those were sub 1200g but I was worried about the rims and issues they were having.

I LOVE Tune hubs! I had some MTB wheels for a while and they were sweet! Eventually I will have my "best wheelset" built with Tune or Extralite hubs and the LEW VT-1 next spring. Most likely the those Tune hubs you mentioned if I can get better pricing. For now the 190s will be laced to the LEW later this year.

I REALLY need to build soem TRUE WW wheels. I would like sub 1100g Carbon Tubulars very soon. If I can get around 1110g for 40mm'ish wheels I would be happy. (That's the projected weight with the PRI hubs.)

But Tune and LEW rims will cost me a pretty penny!!! BUT would come in under 900g(?)

Do you run this site: http://www.rouesartisanales.com/


----------



## terzo rene

The lightest Tune hubs are also a PITA to service.


----------



## Juanmoretime

DIRT BOY said:


> Do you run this site: http://www.rouesartisanales.com/


That's Adrien.


----------



## Ardent

DIRT BOY said:


> Well, I don't carry/sell Tune. They DT 190's are new and I wanted to try them. This allows me to test and market them better. Also my wheels cost basically the same as just the Tune hubs would have cost me if I could get wholesale on them.
> These were my first tubulars so I was also just trying to keep the costs down.
> 
> I was also not trying to build the lightest wheel just yet. I had some Extralite UltraClimb SP wheels that I sold off. Those were sub 1200g but I was worried about the rims and issues they were having.
> 
> I LOVE Tune hubs! I had some MTB wheels for a while and they were sweet! Eventually I will have my "best wheelset" built with Tune or Extralite hubs and the LEW VT-1 next spring. Most likely the those Tune hubs you mentioned if I can get better pricing. For now the 190s will be laced to the LEW later this year.
> 
> I REALLY need to build some TRUE WW wheels. I would like sub 1100g Carbon Tubulars very soon. If I can get around 1110g for 40mm'ish wheels I would be happy. (That's the projected weight with the PRI hubs.)
> 
> But Tune and LEW rims will cost me a pretty penny!!! BUT would come in under 900g(?)
> 
> Do you run this site: http://www.rouesartisanales.com/


Haha, thanks, that's the best compliment that anyone's given me in a while 
No, I don't run the site, or have anything to do with it, but I have read it occasionally. The owner is a very lucky guy.

As for the 190S against the tune, I've a friend who uses tune hubs and really likes them. You get completely different prices to me, given that you get wholesale and live in a different continent, and for me the prices are fairly similar between the two. Though to be honest, I'd like to see how the reliability for the tune hubs hold up, against say zipp ceramics (which are lighter than the dt) or the dt ceramics. My friend hasn't put many miles on them yet, and I can't help but question the lifespan of something so light, whereas I've seen dt hubs go and go and go. I guess time will tell.

I'd be interested in hearing the price and weight of the VT-1 rims alone, actually. They claim what, 46mm deep for "<=300g". Compare that to say the dimpled zipp 285 rims, which are 44mm deep for 290grams stated, and are I'd guess cheaper, it's an interesting arguement, especially if you believe zipp's claims of how much difference the dimples make.

If you wanted to go balls to the wall WW you could go for zipp 250 rims (262g for 25mm deep), with tune hubs, on a 20/20 cx-ray spoke pattern, I'd guess that would come to 890g very roughly. My rough calc says that the same wheels (16/20 pattern) with the LEW VT-1 rims (estimating at 300g) would be 949g, and with the zipp 285 (16/20 pattern) 930g but your calcs may differ. If you're after mid 40s deep rim setup you should definately break sub 1kg for the pair though. From what I remember, the main weight saving on the LEW wheel was from the carbon spokes, since they were like 3g/spoke compared to cxray at 4-5g each or so.


----------



## Ardent

DIRT BOY said:


> I am with you. I could easly drop another 1-2 lbs, but the hassle of those parts and cost are slowing me down.
> 
> Biggest weight will come form new wheels.
> 
> I am going to have my DT 190 hubs re-laced to LEW Tubulars. That's 200g+ right there.
> CarbonTi POP saddle
> A Easton EC90 SLX (Custom painted to match my frame)
> Extralite The RoadStem OC
> Maybe a AX-Lightness SB post.
> That will put me into the lower 12lb range. I could go with PowerCordz cables, but they have been nothing but trouble for me. Back on Campy and the shifting is MUCH, MUCH better and smoother braking.
> 
> Everything else stays the same and I have a 12lb ride that is easliy durable for everyday riding. Even without the fork it's sub 13lbs!


If you're looking for more things, try the wipperman ti chains which can save a fair few grams, but are circa $500 last time I looked. Try the tune skylight cassette. The normal tune cassette is straight ti, but there's two other models: a ti nitride version which is much harder, and a Titanium Aluminium Carbonitrided version which is rated a just under diamond hardness (hardest possible material that there is) and uses ceramic spacers, that said it's about $700. Also, try talking to the guy at vertebr.ae who sells ceramic housing for gear cables, that could cut some weight down depending on your current system, though not cheap either. Offhand, assuming your shifters/bb/cranks/chainrings/skewers/brakes/clamp/pedals/headset spacers & upper bearing & top cap are already all as light as they can come, I think you'd actually be done.


----------



## thedips

ill go with the as light as money allows... since thats always the question.. if money were no object im sure id have a very nice light bike... but still somewhat durable and not with parts out of this world insane.. maybe some.. but not every aspect of the bike...

cervelo soloist in dual road/tri mode .. 17.5lbs


----------



## terzo rene

I finally looked at the ghisallo link above and a) it's not an every day bike in my book - just corima pads on carbon rims would rule it out for me, and b) the weights still look bogus.


----------



## perc

I'm not by far the fastest guy on the road but I met a guy who has a sub 11 lb. Litespeed that has cost him over $10,000 to build. I lifted the bike up and it felt that light. The other day I road up to him and passed him up quite easily. My bike has to weigh around 16 lbs. fully loaded. I sort of snickered to myself. I know that's only one instance, but do you really think weight is all that critical or is it just the obsession that some of us have to own a light bike? Just wondering.


----------



## jhamlin38

I'd be thrilled with 16lbs. But it really doesn't make that much of a difference. 15-20lbs. I weigh 190. 
Now, if I had unlimited funds, I'd go to 15. Not really that bigga deal. I climb faster on my steel fonriest than I ever did on ole' OCLV or lightweight aluminum framesets.


----------



## skygodmatt

DIRT BOY said:


> You nailed it Juan! Light to the point it's durable.
> My ride is 13.51lbs and gettign lighter. Nothing to worry about durablity wise.


...providing you discount the fact that the bike has a Carbon FSA ISIS drive crank... it looks great.


----------



## bdc88

Not sure where you were going with the FSA ISIS carbon crank post but I have 6 pairs of the FSA carbon cranks sets and have had ZERO issues with them. I do not run FSA ISIS BB's but the cranks have been very good. They may not be the lightest out there but for the money they are light enough.


----------



## DIRT BOY

skygodmatt said:


> ...providing you discount the fact that the bike has a Carbon FSA ISIS drive crank... it looks great.


 Huh? That MUST be a very ignorant comment! Why would you say that?

These are some of the nicest cranks I have ever used. Especially as they cost me $105!

I have the carbon Pro ISIS cranks on my MTB and they are 3+ yrs old, been banged up a bunch on rocks and roots are are STILL in perfect condtion.

ISIS BB for the road are just fine! I guess you bought into the whole Extrenall BB hype right? Yes, I like Exteral BB for the ease of use. But they are no better than a really nice ISIS BB. My TOKEN BB have amazing! SKS are also very nice as well as the FSA Mega-Quads!

I been thinking of going with the new RECORD UltraTorque or FSA K-Force Light or 08 FSA SLK-Light. But why?

The cranks are MORE than stiff enough, the TOKEN Ceramic BB spin sooo smooth and it cost me less than $300 with the BB, chainrigs and all tuned!


----------



## bdc88

I could not agree more with DirtBoy on this one. I have 4 pairs of the FSA Carbon Pro Elite Compact Road Crank with three of them ISIS and one pair Octalink. The three pairs that I have in ISIS are run using Token BB's and the Octalink is used with a Dura-Ace BB. I have never had one issue with the BB's. I was ablet pick up all of the cranks at a great price and their weight is great. The latest pair will get a custom carbon spiderless chainring for my SS/Fixed gear like I have done with my SS MTB build. 

The two pairs that I have on my MTB are the FSA Carbon Pro Team Issue ATB MTB which again have been great cranks with no issues. I am using these with the KULT ISIS BB but they are 68 X 108 instead of 113. Since I am using a 2 X 9 set up on the XC build and a carbon spiderless chainring on the SS, I do not need to use a 113 and like to keep things close to the BB. Way better Q-factor.

No external BB here either.


----------



## tempeteOntheRoad

*Giant alu = lighter*



CoLiKe20 said:


> I think in the early 90's the bikes were pushing 16-17lbs. The absolute lightest frame back then was the Trek OCLV at 2.44 lbs sans paint (an amazing number for the day). No carbon wheels, bar, post, stem, cranks, etc. and those were old fashion headset/stem.



Giant's alu (especially Jalabert's special unpainted frame) was reportedly lighter, @2pounds flat... Serial made TCR Alu was 2.2 pounds (Team ONCE)


----------



## bdc88

I have two of the 2001 TCR zero aluminum frames that come in at 1070g and 1082g. The one that is 1070g was stripped and repainted all black. The second frame is 1082 which is anodized in the back half and has paint on the front.

When I have the one frame stripped before getting it repainted, the frame weight was 1028g so these frames are very light. The other thing that I can not figure out was why they used a shim for the most to go from 31.6 down to 27.2

I am just in the process of changing both of the seatpost to 31.6 KCNC Ti Pro Lite which when just down to size will come in at around 125-135g which is lighter than running the 27.2 KCNC post with the shim.


----------



## tempeteOntheRoad

*reason?*



bdc88 said:


> I have two of the 2001 TCR zero aluminum frames that come in at 1070g and 1082g. The one that is 1070g was stripped and repainted all black. The second frame is 1082 which is anodized in the back half and has paint on the front.
> 
> When I have the one frame stripped before getting it repainted, the frame weight was 1028g so these frames are very light. The other thing that I can not figure out was why they used a shim for the most to go from 31.6 down to 27.2
> 
> I am just in the process of changing both of the seatpost to 31.6 KCNC Ti Pro Lite which when just down to size will come in at around 125-135g which is lighter than running the 27.2 KCNC post with the shim.


********

Most probably manufacturing too many 1 inch forks and 27.2 aero seatposts... At least that's my guess. My bike had all sorts of possible shims to accomodate the fork and stem combination, when a 1 1/8 would have done the trick, simple... Same with the annoying seat post shim; half plastic-hybrid metal that did not hold properly unless the post was sanded rough and the bold squeezed to the max... 

All gone now, but I loved the frame, geometry and overall performance.


----------



## bdc88

I have had any problems with the stem shim as I had the machine shop do some work on them to lighten them up and reduced them a little bit to work amazing.

The seat post shims do piss me off a bit as they were not needed at all if they just used a 31.6 seat post, which I am going to use on both bikes now.

Other than that, I do not see a reason to go carbon as the frames are light enough and I stiff enough as far as I can tell. I am sure that the carbon TCR's are stiffer but I most likely would not notice.

The only way that I would upgrade these frames would be to go with a RUE carbon or something significantly lighter and carbon.


----------



## bahueh

*the answer is...*



perc said:


> I'm not by far the fastest guy on the road but I met a guy who has a sub 11 lb. Litespeed that has cost him over $10,000 to build. I lifted the bike up and it felt that light. The other day I road up to him and passed him up quite easily. My bike has to weigh around 16 lbs. fully loaded. I sort of snickered to myself. I know that's only one instance, but do you really think weight is all that critical or is it just the obsession that some of us have to own a light bike? Just wondering.



you guessed it...NOPE. hardly makes a difference.
people who build sub 15# bikes only do it because they have $$ to burn. 
they just get that much more pissed off when they break it...

I watched a guy destroy a CF Fondriest with deep dish CF wheels at a Cat 4 race last year in a pileup...he was PISSED to say the least...turned red...girlfriend couldn't even calm him down...


----------



## CleavesF

You know what really matters to me. If you're worthy of the bike. 

Yes, worthy. I don't care if you're rich, poor, and something inbetween. The point is, if you're a fatty, and you think your 15 lbs bike is awesome, when I smoke you with my 18 pounder you sit there and wonder why I did. 

I honestly think people don't deserve the nice light rides unless they have the body to prove it. I don't think I deserve a 15 pounder and I'm only 135 lbs and ~5-6% bodyfat on average throughout the year. If I ever get to the elite 3% I might drop money for less weight, but until then, it's all muscles baby.

I had a huge argument with one of my friends about this, but bikes aren't like treadmills or cars. They're powered by us, and our own weight and fitness has a huge impact on performance. 

If I smoke a fatty on a 50 lbs walmart bike then they dont' deserve theirs. 'nuff said.
________
Suzuki gn125


----------



## Forrest Root

CleavesF said:


> You know what really matters to me. If you're worthy of the bike.
> 
> Yes, worthy. I don't care if you're rich, poor, and something inbetween. The point is, if you're a fatty, and you think your 15 lbs bike is awesome, when I smoke you with my 18 pounder you sit there and wonder why I did.
> 
> I honestly think people don't deserve the nice light rides unless they have the body to prove it. I don't think I deserve a 15 pounder and I'm only 135 lbs and ~5-6% bodyfat on average throughout the year. If I ever get to the elite 3% I might drop money for less weight, but until then, it's all muscles baby.
> 
> I had a huge argument with one of my friends about this, but bikes aren't like treadmills or cars. They're powered by us, and our own weight and fitness has a huge impact on performance.
> 
> If I smoke a fatty on a 50 lbs walmart bike then they dont' deserve theirs. 'nuff said.


Uh-huh. Nice attitude.


----------



## cpark

I just passed someone riding 16lbs bike quite easily on my 20 lbs bike the other day.
Was that you? Just kidding....


----------



## bdc88

CleavesF said:


> You know what really matters to me. If you're worthy of the bike.
> 
> Yes, worthy. I don't care if you're rich, poor, and something inbetween. The point is, if you're a fatty, and you think your 15 lbs bike is awesome, when I smoke you with my 18 pounder you sit there and wonder why I did.
> 
> I honestly think people don't deserve the nice light rides unless they have the body to prove it. I don't think I deserve a 15 pounder and I'm only 135 lbs and ~5-6% bodyfat on average throughout the year. If I ever get to the elite 3% I might drop money for less weight, but until then, it's all muscles baby.
> 
> I had a huge argument with one of my friends about this, but bikes aren't like treadmills or cars. They're powered by us, and our own weight and fitness has a huge impact on performance.
> 
> If I smoke a fatty on a 50 lbs walmart bike then they dont' deserve theirs. 'nuff said.



Wow, did someone not get anything other than coal for Christmas. I can sure see why you were not on Santa's good list this year. Well you have a few hours left to change your attitude before starting the new year.

Remember that you are on the SAVE SOME WEIGHT part of the site.


----------



## Fixed

*yes*



bdc88 said:


> Wow, did someone not get anything other than coal for Christmas. I can sure see why you were not on Santa's good list this year. Well you have a few hours left to change your attitude before starting the new year.
> 
> Remember that you are on the SAVE SOME WEIGHT part of the site.


Yes, the "YOU'RE NOT WORTHY" forum is elsewhere... ;-)


----------



## Fixed

*heck,*



cpark said:


> I just passed someone riding 16lbs bike quite easily on my 20 lbs bike the other day.
> Was that you? Just kidding....


Heck, I passed a Corvette on my 30 pound commuter bike on the way to work this morning. Talk about "not worthy"!


----------



## DIRT BOY

CleavesF said:


> You know what really matters to me. If you're worthy of the bike.
> 
> Yes, worthy. I don't care if you're rich, poor, and something inbetween. The point is, if you're a fatty, and you think your 15 lbs bike is awesome, when I smoke you with my 18 pounder you sit there and wonder why I did.
> 
> I honestly think people don't deserve the nice light rides unless they have the body to prove it. I don't think I deserve a 15 pounder and I'm only 135 lbs and ~5-6% bodyfat on average throughout the year. If I ever get to the elite 3% I might drop money for less weight, but until then, it's all muscles baby.
> 
> I had a huge argument with one of my friends about this, but bikes aren't like treadmills or cars. They're powered by us, and our own weight and fitness has a huge impact on performance.
> 
> If I smoke a fatty on a 50 lbs walmart bike then they dont' deserve theirs. 'nuff said.


At 135lbs you probaly don't have that much muscle unless your 5 feet tall.

You will never get to 3% BF. Just too low unless you take drugs and your are a body builder. Most folks who "claim" to be 5% BF are also FOS!


----------



## DIRT BOY

bahueh said:


> people who build sub 15# bikes only do it because they have $$ to burn.
> they just get that much more pissed off when they break it...


If you watch ebay, sales, etc a 14lb bike can be built for a pretty decent price and what an average bike at the LBS will cost you.

My sub 14lb cost me less that $3000. 

Ok, I am in the biz...

Still it can be done.

And those who complain about guys who do are just jealous.


----------



## terzo rene

Paolo Bettini only got down to 8.6% body fat at his best the last 2 years so I always wonder what measurement method all the people are using who claim to be significantly less.

People deserve whatever they can pay for or beg someone into giving them. Period. That doesn't mean we can't laugh at them and tell them they're wasting their money, before we climb into our $80K SUV and drive home to our $750K McMansion to watch our 72" HDTVs and talk some more about how foolish people are with their money.


----------



## DIRT BOY

terzo rene said:


> Paolo Bettini only got down to 8.6% body fat at his best the last 2 years so I always wonder what measurement method all the people are using who claim to be significantly less.


Exactly. Most use those dumb scales which are soooooo off or calipers. Most rainers using calipers are not very accurate either.

The lowest I ever got down to with extreme dieting and pharms was 4.7% BF. That was tested hydrostatically. I kept that BF for 1 week. Then it was between 5.9-6.7% and that it being shredded and a pretty good amount of muscle @ 169lbs/ 5' 7".


----------



## CleavesF

DIRT BOY said:


> At 135lbs you probaly don't have that much muscle unless your 5 feet tall.
> 
> You will never get to 3% BF. Just too low unless you take drugs and your are a body builder. Most folks who "claim" to be 5% BF are also FOS!



What's up with all the flaming? 

I didn't make fun of any of you guys, unless youre' all fatties  

anyways, I work at a gym and a coworker who's a personal trainer did the testing. Hence the benefits of working at a gym and not having to pay for this. 

I didn't say I was the faster best rider ever, I'm just saying why lose weight off your bike if you have a lot to lose on your body. 

I understand this is the weight weenie part of the site, and I love light bikes like all of you, hell I love all bikes for that matter. Point being, I can't really watch someone brag about their light bikes if their body doesn't reflect a significant amount of time on the bike. 

Now I understand there are some exceptions like riders that have taken decades off and are just getting back into it. But those outside those exceptions are those I am referring to.


----------



## Forrest Root

CleavesF said:


> Point being, I can't really watch someone brag about their light bikes if their body doesn't reflect a significant amount of time on the bike.


So, people have to limit their bike purchases and bike kit to what you think is appropriate for them?

How about this:
If it's your money, spend it as you see fit.
If you weigh 300lbs but think lightweight bike kit is cool, buy it if you like.
If the kit you buy gets you more excited about riding and gets you out on the road and on the path to being more fit, excellent!
Ride for your own reasons and your own pleasures, not those of anyone else, no matter how long they've been on a bike, no matter how many miles they've raced, and/or no matter how fit they are.
See No. 1.


----------



## cpark

CleavesF said:


> What's up with all the flaming?
> 
> I didn't make fun of any of you guys, unless youre' all fatties
> 
> anyways, I work at a gym and a coworker who's a personal trainer did the testing. Hence the benefits of working at a gym and not having to pay for this.
> 
> I didn't say I was the faster best rider ever, I'm just saying why lose weight off your bike if you have a lot to lose on your body.
> 
> I understand this is the weight weenie part of the site, and I love light bikes like all of you, hell I love all bikes for that matter. Point being, I can't really watch someone brag about their light bikes if their body doesn't reflect a significant amount of time on the bike.
> 
> Now I understand there are some exceptions like riders that have taken decades off and are just getting back into it. But those outside those exceptions are those I am referring to.


My $.02.
Nobody is flaming over anything.

Here are my suggestions,

First, as a new member, I sugeest that you sort of ease into the forum thread.
Second, if you don't have any nice things to say don't say anything at all.
Saying things like "fatties" is not very nice.
Third, everyone has an opinion but this is the type you ought to keep to yourself instead of posting it.
Will you be deciding who deserves a light bike?
Does this mean, I don't deserve a 16lbs Time since I'm a fatty (175lbs with BF around 10%) compared to you?
Anyone who weighs more than 135lbs and has higher BF % than yours don't deserve any bike lighter than yours?
And what's this about smoking people?
If you think you are that good, I suggest that you enter some races. I guarantee there are plenty of racers with heavier body weight/BF% who can smoke(?) you.

You just can't go anywhere with this kind of thread.....


----------



## clgtide1

Forrest Root said:


> So, people have to limit their bike purchases and bike kit to what you think is appropriate for them?
> 
> How about this:
> If it's your money, spend it as you see fit.
> If you weigh 300lbs but think lightweight bike kit is cool, buy it if you like.
> If the kit you buy gets you more excited about riding and gets you out on the road and on the path to being more fit, excellent!
> Ride for your own reasons and your own pleasures, not those of anyone else, no matter how long they've been on a bike, no matter how many miles they've raced, and/or no matter how fit they are.
> See No. 1.


Great post !!!
I sometimes ride with a guy who has a Litespeed Classic as well as a Scott CR1. He has gone from 270 + to around 195. He simply loves all things bike. He is one of the few people who will ride in the rain with me if I am crazy enough to do so. He volunteers with our local bike club. Even though sometimes he does ride with us skinny racer types he will still drag his large carcas up the mountains without complaining. So before someone looks down at him for riding a light bike and still having to lose a few more pounds I would suggest showing up at something like the Three State Three Mountain and trying to follow his wheel off Sand Mountain.


----------



## CleavesF

well I figured I was just sharing my own opinion. 

I didn't think I was gonna told off for saying it. 

As for the post above, losing ~100 lbs is a pretty awesome feat. And in my opinion is well deserved if that person has those nice bikes. But I'm talking about the people that don't have that love for bikes. They just buy the best to brag about the best as opposed to enjoy the best. I hope this makes more sense.


----------



## Forrest Root

CleavesF said:


> well I figured I was just sharing my own opinion.
> 
> I didn't think I was gonna told off for saying it.
> 
> As for the post above, losing ~100 lbs is a pretty awesome feat. And in my opinion is well deserved if that person has those nice bikes. But I'm talking about the people that don't have that love for bikes. They just buy the best to brag about the best as opposed to enjoy the best. I hope this makes more sense.


How can you tell who those people are, and more importantly, why do you care?

FWIW, unless you and another rider agree that you're racing up a hill, there is no "smoking" someone up a hill. People ride for all sorts of reasons and in all sorts of different ways.

I've never thought that someone on the road didn't deserve their bike. I don't even think anything like that.

The fatty talk is pretty inexcusable.


----------



## CleavesF

apparently you've never had a fattie talk down to you before the ride with a nicer bike. 

just because you don't think like me doesn't mean I'm completely wrong for thinking it. Or that the logic is completely incorrect AND unjustified. That's as crazy as ripping on people's religion. 

Never once did I say anyone here was wrong by stating their opinions, and once again... this negative elitism. I guess I'll try to stay away from the weight weenies on here, just a tad more aggressive here.


----------



## ultimobici

CleavesF said:


> You know what really matters to me. If you're worthy of the bike.
> 
> Yes, worthy. I don't care if you're rich, poor, and something inbetween. The point is, if you're a fatty, and you think your 15 lbs bike is awesome, when I smoke you with my 18 pounder you sit there and wonder why I did.
> 
> I honestly think people don't deserve the nice light rides unless they have the body to prove it. I don't think I deserve a 15 pounder and I'm only 135 lbs and ~5-6% bodyfat on average throughout the year. If I ever get to the elite 3% I might drop money for less weight, but until then, it's all muscles baby.
> 
> I had a huge argument with one of my friends about this, but bikes aren't like treadmills or cars. They're powered by us, and our own weight and fitness has a huge impact on performance.
> 
> If I smoke a fatty on a 50 lbs walmart bike then they dont' deserve theirs. 'nuff said.


I've held back for a few days before posting.

Whilst you are entitled to your opinion, you might like to think before you post it the way you did.

We don't know you from Adam. So when I read your comments, I have no idea if it's tongue in cheek or meant exactly as it's written. From your post I would deduce that you are a somewhat blinkered person. But I could be way off. 

I ride a 6.8kg bike and I weigh 78kgs so I suspect I am in your target group. Your comments certainly make me feel that way.

I don't race & never will. Why?

Because of the 2 plates, 10 pins and zero cartilage in my right ankle.

So before you post a seemingly narrow-minded comment think about how it will be read and you'll save yourself from looking like a fool.


----------



## Forrest Root

CleavesF said:


> apparently you've never had a fattie talk down to you before the ride with a nicer bike.
> 
> just because you don't think like me doesn't mean I'm completely wrong for thinking it. Or that the logic is completely incorrect AND unjustified. That's as crazy as ripping on people's religion.
> 
> Never once did I say anyone here was wrong by stating their opinions, and once again... this negative elitism. I guess I'll try to stay away from the weight weenies on here, just a tad more aggressive here.


What is it with you and the word "fattie?" Not only is it insulting to some, it has nothing to do with this thread, and it seems as if you're only using it to denigrate a certain group of people.


----------



## Firefly55

Lighten up boys


----------



## xjaysonx

So what do you guys think this will weigh.. i'm thinking 15's to start. i'm building a new road bike should be finished this week.

frame:Giant TCR Advance ISP size, M/L
groupo:08 campy record, 175mm
brakes:zero g ti's
pedals:speed play zero ti's
wheels:mavic sl premiums, as my daily wheels (going to build up a set of 303 tubulars, with dt 190s.) 
stem:110mm ea90
bar:44cm easton slx3
saddle:slr kit carbon flow
cages:elite patao


----------



## bdc88

12.78 as of this morning. Nice, light and rideable.


----------



## cpark

xjaysonx said:


> So what do you guys think this will weigh.. i'm thinking 15's to start. i'm building a new road bike should be finished this week.
> 
> frame:Giant TCR Advance ISP size, M/L
> groupo:08 campy record, 175mm
> brakes:zero g ti's
> pedals:speed play zero ti's
> wheels:mavic sl premiums, as my daily wheels (going to build up a set of 303 tubulars, with dt 190s.)
> stem:110mm ea90
> bar:44cm easton slx3
> saddle:slr kit carbon flow
> cages:elite patao


14.75lbs


----------



## xjaysonx

If i was going to change anything on that bike it would be the wheels. those look like crap on that bike. but AC's are cheep and light.


----------



## livin4lax09

Firefly55 said:


> Lighten up boys


+1

post filler


----------



## SleeveleSS

bdc88 said:


> 12.78 as of this morning. Nice, light and rideable.


Carbon chainrings. :eek6: How ridable are those?


----------



## Coolhand

58cm even. . . .


----------



## bdc88

Very ridable actually. The only thing is you can not hammer into the big ring like normal. You just have to change from small to big a bit more carefully and life is good.


----------



## SleeveleSS

bdc88 said:


> Very ridable actually. The only thing is you can not hammer into the big ring like normal. You just have to change from small to big a bit more carefully and life is good.


OK, so if they're ridable, what kind of mileage can you expect out of them compared to standard steel rings?


----------



## bdc88

I have a buddy that has over 5000km on his carbon rings so I would be happy with that. Actually since this is my WW build, I would be happy with half of that.

I did not build this to be raced so the carbon rings fit the build perfectly. I could have gone with a different set of light weight metal rings but that is not the direction I wanted to go with on the build. 

These were on the last build and were transferred over to the new build. They already have about 1500km on them and are going strong.


----------



## lydoss

CleavesF said:


> What's up with all the flaming?
> 
> I didn't make fun of any of you guys, unless youre' all fatties
> 
> anyways, I work at a gym ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Heh. Enough said.


----------



## DIRT BOY

SleeveleSS said:


> OK, so if they're ridable, what kind of mileage can you expect out of them compared to standard steel rings?


If they are Fiber-Lyte, then 2-3K MAX. Shifting is OK form big to little. Nothing bad but nothing great. If you ride really, realy hard in mashing gears, skip these. Lighter standrad rings will shift better and last longer. CarbonTi has a Carbom/Aluminum Hybrid that loooks sweet!

As much as I want those full CF rings, IMO they are just not worth it, even at my cost.

*CarbonTi









*


----------



## bdc88

Dirt Boy - They are Fibre-Lyte rings and I do have a buddy that has over 5000km on his. With that being said, I would be very happy with half that which fits into your 2k-3k statement.

Also as mentioned I could have gone lighter but these were too good to pass up for the price.


----------



## DIRT BOY

bdc88 said:


> Dirt Boy - They are Fibre-Lyte rings and I do have a buddy that has over 5000km on his. With that being said, I would be very happy with half that which fits into your 2k-3k statement.
> 
> Also as mentioned I could have gone lighter but these were too good to pass up for the price.


I am shocked on the 5K, but wow!

Lighter than the Fyber-Lyte rings or the bike? I don't think you could go much lighter without sacraficing durability. Now getting some $5000+ LEW wheels would without losing durability. That bike is LIGHT ENOUGH.


----------



## s2ktaxi

Coolhand said:


> 58cm even. . . .


is that with pedals?


----------



## bdc88

DIRT BOY said:


> I am shocked on the 5K, but wow!
> 
> Lighter than the Fyber-Lyte rings or the bike? I don't think you could go much lighter without sacraficing durability. Now getting some $5000+ LEW wheels would without losing durability. That bike is LIGHT ENOUGH.



Fibre-Lyte and other do make lighter chainrings but I went a bit heavier for the first trip around with carbon rings.

As for the wheels, even though it does look like I like to spend money on my bike, there is no way I can justify spending $5000 on wheels. Crap I have never spent more than $400 USD on a pair of wheels ever. That includes my pair of HED JET wheels, any pair of my American Classic wheels and my RENN disc wheel. I shop around a lot to get stupid low prices.


----------



## DIRT BOY

bdc88 said:


> Fibre-Lyte and other do make lighter chainrings but I went a bit heavier for the first trip around with carbon rings.
> 
> As for the wheels, even though it does look like I like to spend money on my bike, there is no way I can justify spending $5000 on wheels. Crap I have never spent more than $400 USD on a pair of wheels ever. That includes my pair of HED JET wheels, any pair of my American Classic wheels and my RENN disc wheel. I shop around a lot to get stupid low prices.


Yes, I know there re slighty lighetr CF rings, but the suck and flex!

I agree on the wheels. Again, nice build a seems pretty decently durable.


----------



## California L33

Fixed said:


> How light is *light enough*?


For a true weight weenie- when the negative weight of the bike assists you in climbing and encumbers your descents


----------



## homebrew

I just printed this thread. It weighs more then my bike. 

this thread must die


----------



## jzm

cpark said:


> 14.75lbs


What frame is that?


----------



## jzm

cpark said:


> 14.75lbs


What frame is that?
oops, my bad. This question is for bdc88.


----------



## AlexCad5

It's the Pedalforce RS2 unpainted.

I bought the same bike with the front half painted red. I'm just finishing up my build with Dura Ace 10 drive train, with some parts still in the mail. My innitial build up was 16.05 with 335 gram tubular clinchers- including cages and pedals (and mini-pump.) 

I can't afford to go too crazy, although I've just spent $800 fine tuning fit and weight. I've got to get off the SLR, I can't ride it long term. 400 miles and my but is worn out. I've got a Arione CX ordered. Hopefully it will come in at the advertised 159 gms. It should be a little more comfortable than the Arione I've nearly worn out, with it's uncured Carbon center.

I've just ordered some KCNC brakes which should drop close to 200gms from my ultegras stoppers. That's pretty over indulgent for me. When my chain and cassette wear out I'll get a Sram red cassette and a lighter chain than the ultegra I'm using now.

I'm tempted to buy the Parlee derailer hanger. $80 for @12gms. Kinda dumb? It all costs $$$. I'd just like to get it to 15lbs with all the gear. That would make me happy (for now.)


----------

