Personally I think there's a trade-off between a bike being super-light to fly up the climbs, and having some mass so it doesn't get bounced off line on big rocky / rooty descents (hence the phrase "all-mountain").
My question is - where do people think that balance point is? For me, it's somewhere in the 27-28lb region.
30lbs id say!
Just under 32lb (only because that's what mine is)
30lb would be better, and do-able if I changed to air from coil up front, but coil just feels so much nicer.
Ehhhhhh?
My singlespeed - not as light as I'd like
My 456 - a bit heavier than I'd like
30lbs seems to be the benchmark but i've struggled to get anything under that
I don't really care. The main point is to get parts that are at a pretty equal level strength wise.
That said, my AM bike is around 14.5KG whatever that is in lb's. I could lose a bit of weight but it would either compromise strength or really cost an arm and a leg.
The optimal weight is always the one I can't afford
Can someone explain why the weight of the bike makes much/any diference to it's ability to hold a line?
Or do we associate other characteristics with heavier bikes, eg stiffness.
don't think the weight of the bike really has much to do with it directly- it's suspension/geometry/wheels/stiffness which make the difference.
My Stumpjumper FSR is quite a light Trail bike at circa 27lbs, so you are doing well to get 30lbs for an all mountain bike.
The optimal weight is always the one I can't afford
Nonsense, just ignore the magazines and tell yourslef that heavier is better, the optimal weight then becomes cheeper!
My 456 hit 40lb (including pedals and mud) over the summer 
so it doesn't get bounced off line on big rocky / rooty descents
Surely its the riders ability and not the weight of the bike that makes the difference here.
Can't wait until I hear this
"Yeah I wasn't able to ride that descent as quickly as you cause my bikes not heavy enough.."
So I think its got to be completely dependant on the riders weight and how smooth they are (if heavier = stronger). I've ridden up and down mountains on my 25lb hardtail, but then I'm very light. If you're a big fat guy you might want to beef it up to 30-35lbs for peace of mind.
weight of the bike or the weight of the rider being more influential?
seems to be some confusion about 'all-mountain'
All-mountain:
(1) Riding XC race course style terrain at "fat family, sweating on cannal towpath" pace.
(2) Being so overbiked for your ride that you feel the need to justify it by inventing anew sub-genre of riding.
(3) Freeride for wuss'es, who are unfit so can't ride XC out of embaresment, so ride XC on freeride bikes and excuse their speed with their suspension/weight/saving energy for the downs, however they can't actualy drop or jump.
So the optimum weight is clearly the weight of the most expensive, underbuilt, bike 6"-7" travel bike you can find you can find, but not so light you run out of excuses on the climbs.
seems to be some confusion about 'all-mountain'
There certainly does on your part. 
edit: how on earth did your 456 hit nearly 40pounds?
'all-mountain' ...
you can only ride 'all' of some mountains, many are too snowy or pointy and in that case some climbing boots under about 1.5kg for the pair may be better )
Somebody's got a bit of a chip on their shoulder.
My answer: About 28 to 31lbs.
My Epiphany is between 25-26lbs, if that is considered 'all mountain' enough..
I think that under 12.5kg (you people should stop living in the dark ages, ever heard of international unit system or metrics) you start gambling your safety...
Well that V10 on the front page is 34.5lb...is that too light?
Funnily the lighter the bike, the higher the CofG of bike & rider.
unfit so can't ride XC out of embaresment, so ride XC on freeride bikes and excuse their speed with their suspension/weight/saving energy for the downs, however they can't actualy drop or jump.
Hiya!
From the Leith Hill car park I'd say 28-30lbs ish of 6" travel carbon fibre
18" steel frame, 150mm RC2 Z1's, dual ply maxxis 2.5's, heavy-ish wheels, 205mm brakes, burgtech pedals, double and chain device, deore cassette, etc etc etc
Basicly everything was DH bike components or comparable weight, plus a few heavy component choices (cassette and pedals for example). Went like a tank over rough stuff, but was a pig where some manouverability was needed. Was a nice experiment to see what it would be like, but next year it'll probably be 30lb, its 27lb at the moment, but I reckon I can get 95% of the big builds performance from lighter bits (touch wood).
My epiphany ranges from 24-25 lbs depending on rubber and has 140mm fox's on it so I gues it could be "all mountain" but to me it's a mountian bike, does there need to be any more definition than that or is it all just marketing bunkum?
All depends if you go for suspension out back or not. When I used to have a hardtail it seemed a bit pointless not to have the lightest bike I could afford (but with a decent fork-100mm or so). That bike got down to mid 20s.
But bought a full suss that will never be in any 'light' category just because everything has to be that much stronger and more bits and pieces. So seemed no point to try make it particularily light. My Blur LT was 28lbs which was plenty light enough for everything I rode. But as my preference for enjoying the downs more than the ups increased (and my fitness) another 10% weight seemed like a none issue. Factor in a sack full of tools and water on my bike, the odd pound here and there beomes insignificant.
Summary- performance of bike eclipses weight preference. But current bike 30lbs and rides up and down better than the 25lb hardtail.
Freeride for wuss'es, who are unfit so can't ride XC out of embaresment, so ride XC on freeride bikes and excuse their speed with their suspension/weight/saving energy for the downs, however they can't actualy drop or jump.
At least I'm not alone in this category then 
my "all mountain" build is 33lb (sorry 15KG) so quite heavy compared to what's mentioned above
Who gives a toss?
When I've ever started to consider a lighter "all mountain" build (which I take to mean "do it all"), I've remembered that I could lose a load more from my arse than bike!
Given the build below out of interest where could I loose weight without loosing strength and durability?
Frame Cove G Spot
Forks 2010 TALAS 36 RC2
Brake Levers XT*
Front Brake Calliper Saint M810*
Rear Brake Calliper Saint M810*
rotors Shimano 180 + 203*
Wheels Hope Hoops Flow Rims
Front Mech XT*
Rear Mech SRAM X9
Gear Shifters SRAM X9
Pedals Shimano M647
Headset FSA Extreme Pro
stem Thomson X4
handlebars FSA Gravity Lite
bottom bracket Shimano SLX M660
seat post Thomson Elite*
cassette Shimano XT
tires/tubes Maxxis High Roller*
chain Shimano HG93
saddle SDG Bell Air*
2 x derailleur cables xtr
cranks Shimano SLX M660
Grips ODI
Skewers XT*
got my alpine to 32.3 lbs. not far from stock either. i used to have a commencal meta 5.5 uk and a meta 5 vip. both 32lbs and flew up and downhill. both called am bikes to. changed as wanted bigger travel. it was the alpine or meta 6. orange won because of the great reviews. i always think the lighter bikes are great for climbing but i prefer more weight when im heading dh. bike feels more planted and controllable. not light and skittish.
You camel pack 
Doesn't it depend more on the weight of the rider? Heavy, strong rider equals burly bike, lanky weakling like me equals lighter bike.
30lbs is a nice arbitrary number. My Hemlock usually tips in at about 28lbs with its dropper post and fat tyres, I figure if I can take it to innerleithen uplifts or down the world cup dh at fort william but ride it up down and around the pyrenees or the highlands or some of them stanes, it's an all mountain bike. Added Lyriks lately which I'm not sure really bring much to the party, having never broken the Revelations. But I'd say, that's not an "optimal" weight, it's just quite a nice one, if I could afford to I'd drive it down further without weakening it but that'd mean expensive parts.
Today it was 35.6lbs in its beefcake guise with Lyriks, DH tyres and 729s on, didn't like pedalling it up much though...
Not really sure what an all mountain bike is - rode a Bullit for years and put in many a long day of technical trail riding - 40, 50, 60 miles and much more 8 - 18 hrs.
Depends how fit you are, how far you ride, how efficiently the bike pedals and the weight of your wheelset. 35lbs is really getting up there for a fit rider / all day riding imo.
Why am I answering this - who gives a sh1t 
Whatever its genre, mine weighs about 31lbs.
It's good for uplift days, alps/BC, all day rides, trail centres and pretty much anything else which might entertain me.
Belsen escapees like realman might get away with stick bikes but anyone with a bit of muscle would want something a little more substantial.
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
