prob dot on 60… only 5’6″ ish though.
added camelback etc, more like 63… bikes only 13ish I guess, so about right for me…
I’m not sure I see the relevance though; the earth doesn’t crumble beneath me or anyone else I know as I/we roll along; has more to do with if you use good technique (amount of braking etc) – walking or biking – surely than the physical weight?
I’m sure at the extreme end of things it comes into it a little, (130kg of bike&rider under locked brake on a gradient >15% perhaps – but if done scientifically that would be excluded unless the actual focus of the study) but if we are comparing averages, then it needs to be on a trail with particular construction standard rather than user weight? Maybe if also inc horses and the enormous variance there, then fair enough, but not biker vs walker, surely?