https://m.pinkbike.com/news/bike-check-dangerholms-insanely-light-scott-spark.html
This is the level you need to go to these days to get to a weight that was not unusual on the XC race circuit back in the 26er hardtail days.
He (gustav dangerholm) has done some other impressive builds, where lightweight is a feature, but not the only end goal, if you want to read about the level of customisation to achieve it.
Yeah sub 25lbs is a big ask on a full suss bike these days. You’re probably talking big money unless you’re going 100mm travel xc race rigs I’d have thought.
You missed off the bit about the 5010 CC where I said for your budget you could probably get it sub 30lbs. I wasn’t suggesting you go over 30lbs when you’d clearly stated you thought that was mental heavy already (it’s not).
I feel deja vu on this thread with someone else who’d been away a long while from mtb and couldn’t get their head round how things have changed and what’s good / what’s not good / what is important / what is less important etc.
https://m.pinkbike.com/news/bike-check-dangerholms-insanely-light-scott-spark.html
This is the level you need to go to these days to get to a weight that was not unusual on the XC race circuit back in the 26er hardtail days.
Now we're talking! 😀 The bootle cage reminds me of a prototype one I saw years ago, at a bike show I think. Made using kevlar shoelace impregnated with epoxy or something. Looked like it would snap in seconds, but apparently very strong.
The $11k sworks comes in at 22ish, but the more normal spec ones are hitting the 26-27 mark with pedals, on what is considered an exceptionally light weight bike these days.
Well there's a couple there that are sub-25lb, so that's encouraging.
Yeah sub 25lbs is a big ask on a full suss bike these days.
But why? People keep saying that bikes are 'far, far better' these days, yet many seem heavy. Whilst weight might not be a priority for others, it is for me. As I've said in my original post; my hiatus from MTBing was mainly due to injuries. I don't want to be putting myself at risk of further injuries, trying to lift a heavy bike over a stile, for example, so for me at least, weight is important.
You missed off the bit about the 5010 CC where I said for your budget you could probably get it sub 30lbs.
The lightest model is just a fraction under 30lbs. You could have suggested the Blur, which is a lot lighter.
But why? People keep saying that bikes are ‘far, far better’ these days, yet many seem heavy.
tyres are 20% wider, and 10% bigger diameter. Rims too, and they need to be stronger due to the bigger diameter. Fork legs have also lengthened, and as they are a cantilever, need more thickness for the same stiffness. Larger brake rotors are needed to get the same braking, as they are stopping a larger diameter wheel
we've ditched the tubes, but the tyre casing has often got a little thicker to keep it airtight.
The new rockshox Sid has 35mm stanchions. not long ago their downhill fork had 32mm. The DH ones were obviously thicker, and heavier, but the new Sid is still going to outweigh the old Sid.
Everone apparently needs huge 4 pot brake calipers even on trail bikes these days. (I've had my own thread about this, recently)
You could even say that as frames have got bigger - eg the reach has increased - they will weigh more. if you make a 10% longer beam it will have 21% more bending force in it, and therefore more material needed for the same strength and stiffness. Add in the extra length and you are at 30% more weight.
The dropper adds a pound or so, is well worth it, but especially as
I don’t want to be putting myself at risk of further injuries,
going "OTB" is staggeringly rare these days, (racing steep downhills at the edge of control, and messing up jumps excluded). The dropper and slacker head angle have "solved" this issue pretty much.
Every weight adding thing above has been partly counteracted by the weight saving improvements by the manufacturer. They havent quite kept pace.
Every weight adding thing above has been partly counteracted by the weight saving improvements by the manufacturer. They havent quite kept pace.
Right. But lightweight bikes are still available; the weights suggested for the Epic Evo, for example, are in the same area as 'XC' full suspension bikes were back when I was MTBing regularly. Perhaps a little lighter, even. 25lbs was around the mark, proper light bikes were 23/22lbs, and full on race weapons were 21lbs or lower. Hardtails were silly light. A friend had a Santa Cruz Blur (the original model) with full XTR, and that was about 23lbs I think.I know it didn't feel noticeably heavier than my Trek hardtail, with Hope and XT parts. There were quite a few 'freeride' bikes around, they tended to be upwards of 30lbs, and were fun for an hour or so, but then just felt sluggish once you got tired. I'm not as fit as I was back then, not likely to be so again, so a nice light bike will be of benefit.
The new rockshox Sid has 35mm stanchions. not long ago their downhill fork had 32mm. The DH ones were obviously thicker, and heavier, but the new Sid is still going to outweigh the old Sid.
The original Rockshox Judy DH forks had 28mm stanchions, I think. And 80mm of travel! The current Sid Ultimate is 3.4lbs, so a bit heavier than the 2.8lb versions that were around then, but as you say, they have to deal with having longer travel, and for bigger wheels etc, so are going to be beefed up a bit. Those earlier ultra light ones were quite flexy though, and 63mm travel? So I accept things have got stronger and more 'capable' as they've got heavier.
There were quite a few ‘freeride’ bikes around, they tended to be upwards of 30lbs, and were fun for an hour or so, but then just felt sluggish once you got tired.
That's not just the weight though - suspension kinematics and shock technology have moved on so much that a 32lb bike with 160mm of travel doesn't feel like you're pedalling through treacle any more.
Well, it does, and climbing entails a bit more than just ‘wiggling up trail centre switchbacks’. Try Alpine or Pyrenean mountain trails, where you can ascend many thousands of feet over a ride.
If you're not in a rush it matters far less than you might think.
The steeper it gets though the more the geometry plays a part.
Partly bigger wheels .. when you climbed on a 26" a small root would be a obstacle that doesn't exist on a 29er (I'm more a 27.5 guy but) so you can winch your way (in combination with modern suspension) rather than have to use momentum.
It really does go back to trying some ... even if that means delaying a purchase or just finding some local riders who'll let you have a go.
I lent a modern 27.5 HT to a mate of a mate on Saturday... he sold his really really nice but old Intense and bought a HT the same day!
The biggest thing I am trying to rationalise in my head is the lack of front derailleur. Been such a part of mt riding life for years that I am struggling to think about doing without it. Even though, if I'm honest, I very rarely used the granny ring. And the prices seem to have gone up a fair bit and not a big fan of how may are using SRAM. Maybe I'm just a bit of a Shimano fanboi in denial. 🙂 Although I don't need to change my bike at the moment I can't help thinking about it as I am still riding 26" rims. I really do like the composite frame and geometry of my bike (probably surprisingly old Giant XTC) and love the feel of it but can't help casting envious glances over at the 29er world. But finding something comparable for a reasonable price doesn't seem to be as easy as I thought it might be!
That’s not just the weight though – suspension kinematics and shock technology have moved on so much that a 32lb bike with 160mm of travel doesn’t feel like you’re pedalling through treacle any more.
This so much. We (as mtbers) have obsessed over and categorised bikes by weight, then suspension travel, then headtube angle.
Sometimes overlapping.
Statements like "bike A climbs better than bikes B and C" and "bike A has a head angle 2 degrees steeper" "bike C is 2lbs heavier" get combined into a possibly erroneous conclusion.
Something like a money no object, weight saving build on a Santa Cruz Megatower is going to come in lighter and in all probability climb better than my Alloy trail bike with DH rims, which comes in at 32lbs, and doesn't feel at all heavy.
Conversely I could drop a load of weight from my bike with some compromises and a lot of cash; but I don't want to, because after many years of breaking wheels, burning out brakes, but not using all travel or all the gears, I have arrived at the bike that works for me. And its great we all have that option.
But why? People keep saying that bikes are ‘far, far better’ these days, yet many seem heavy.
Better is very subjective... more fun and more versatile.
Back then (whenever) manufacturers convinced us lighter was better ... as it MTB matured people questioned that
as ajay points out
The dropper adds a pound or so, is well worth it, but especially as
People tried one, found riding more fun without all the OTB's .. found their pedalling position was better because they could optimise it .. and that it was actually better going up as well as down and the extra weight was well worth it.
the weights suggested for the Epic Evo, for example
Another mate sold his old Epic 26er last year after riding an Enduro for a year. He simply wasn't using the Epic even though his love is ultras and XC. He replaced it with a heavier ? XC 29er..
(?) is because i don't know the weight but I don't think he does either ...
(probably surprisingly old Giant XTC) and love the feel of it but can’t help casting envious glances over at the 29er world. But finding something comparable for a reasonable price doesn’t seem to be as easy as I thought it might be!
Make me a decent (sensible) offer and a 2015 - 27.5 medium advanced is yours.... (No Covid tax)
Santa Cruz 5010 CC
Too heavy. I’m looking for something around 25lbs or lower. I don’t mind a pound or so over that, but I really don’t want a 30+lb bike. I think I’ve said this enough times now.
Orbea Oiz. Mine weighs a shade under 25.5 lbs
But why? People keep saying that bikes are ‘far, far better’ these days, yet many seem heavy.
Because they are.
My Cotic Flare Max 29er is streets ahead of my old 2006 S-Works Enduro 26er in every single aspect, except weight, even though it's got less suspension travel it's still way, way better. In fact it's streets ahead of the 2015 Camber Evo Carbon 29er it replaced too.
It's ability to get down anything is unreal, stability at speed is brilliant and it climbs better than even my old Ti HT.
Take a look at a Cotic.
Ok. So it really is a matter of trying to filter out the marketing spiel, and looking at what people actually ride. I'm assuming a current XC type bike may be 'better' in some respects, than one from 15+ years ago. That, I would expect, given the amount of time technology has had to improve. I can accept a 30lb 'trail' bike might be 'better' in some respects than a 25lb XC bike from 15 years ago. It's still heavier, although I can accept this might not be quite the downside this once was. And I would ovbiously like to try some bikes out, this is not quite the right time for that. I'd planned to travel and hire bikes this last summer, and when that didn't happen, really thought I'd be doing that this summer. That's not looking likely either. Such is life. So it's probably good to enquire first, on such a forum as this. And it seems quite a number of people want something different from a bike, than what I do. We're all different.
Orbea Oiz. Mine weighs a shade under 25.5 lbs
And we're back on track. Thanks. They do look good; the Oiz M Pro TR looks good, but then the Oiz M Team has XTR...
Take a look at a Cotic
I did:
Weight - Gold Spec Bike 30.3lbs w/o pedals
I'll say it again, because some people obviously aren't paying attention:
I’m looking for something around 25lbs or lower
I’m looking for something around 25lbs or lower
And you're asking for advice, and we're telling you to ignore weight as your key requirement.
Or get a gravel bike - they're light. Although I've just added a dropper to mine 🙂
How much do you weigh OP? What percentage difference will ~5lbs make to the total system (you, riding kit and the bike) weight?
As everyone has said, suspension, tyres and geometry have a FAR bigger effect on how the bike feels/climbs. The only time I really notice the weight difference between my 27lb bike and 36lb bike is when I’m lifting it over/into stuff.
Your obsession with weight suggests you are after a pure speed machine. Lycra, disco slippers, performance over fun, than kind of thing.
For most of us though, fun is the key factor.
The original riding you described (Flat XC all the way up to 'proper' mountains), to me suggests you want a true all rounder, which to me means a 135-150 mm travel 29er (Santa Cruz Hightower as an example), but that's going to be even heavier than the 5010 you've already said is too heavy!
I’m looking for something around 25lbs or lower
It's REALLY not worth worrying about that.
I used to have a 21.5lbs top bling XC FS race whippet from 2007. After I'd ridden a rigid 29er for a while on some local rocky trails I decided to bring my race whippet out on a dry day to smash all my times. Not only did I not smash my times but it took me three goes to clear the big climb. That bike got stripped for parts PDQ.
The reason bikes are now heavier is that MTBers realised that light weight is not as important as a well functioning bike. I used to be a right weight-weenie (which is who I ended up with the above-mentioned bike at significant expense), but even now I've realised that whilst light weight is nice it's a lot less important than people used to think. I'm quicker up hills on my very much XC racey 29er because it is a 29er and it has better tyres at lower pressures.
OP, if you're happy to pay £6k it sounds like what you want is a Transition Spur X01 - 24.8lbs.
I just went back to check what you originally wrote and it included;
Mostly just having fun, riding along, enjoying the view, not about to break any speed records!
That seems entirely inconsistent with all the weight-weenying.
Make me a decent (sensible) offer and a 2015 – 27.5 medium advanced is yours…. (No Covid tax)
🙂
That's probably about the age of mine 🙂
That seems entirely inconsistent with all the weight-weenying.
I disagree. Hauling a heavy bike with big draggy tyres around is just a miserable experience, totally negating any pleasure to be gained from the view. I don't understand why people do it.
I'd love a Spur, but it's only a pound or so lighter than my Jeffsy, so I'll probably be sensible and not blow my pension on it.
I disagree. Hauling a heavy bike with big draggy tyres around is just a miserable experience,
So change the tyres? Spend a hundred, rather than thousands.
Forgot about the Spur!
OP - watch this and see if this is the sort of thing you're after:
if you’re happy to pay £6k
I'm not happy to pay £6k at all! It just seems that that is around the price the kind of bike I'd like, will cost. That does look quite nice though, so thanks. The frame is a little heavier than some others, but not too bad. The X01 appears to be 25.2lbs on Transition's website, but we'll not quibble over a few ounces. 😉 Can't find a price on the XX1 version though; that has the lighter wheelset. Of course, another option is a frame only build, might be a little more than a complete bike, but perhaps more suited to what I want.
That seems entirely inconsistent with all the weight-weenying.
My idea of 'having fun' is not
Hauling a heavy bike with big draggy tyres around.
So change the tyres?
A light bike, with light tyres, is still going to be a little more preferable to me than a heavy bike with light tyres.
The original riding you described (Flat XC all the way up to ‘proper’ mountains), to me suggests
I want a nice light bike. Yes I know, thanks.
OP – watch this and see if this is the sort of thing you’re after:
Well, apart from the looking scary in lycra bit, yes, pretty much. The Spur is perhaps a little slacker than some other 'XC' bikes, no? But it's in the right area, roughly. This is about getting an idea of what to be looking for; sorry to anyone who thinks' I'm being a bit dismissive of your suggestions, but there's literally thousands of different bikes out there, and the choice is utterly bewildering. I remember the days where you got a Raleigh, a Peugeot and that was about it! 😀 So if I can narrow the field down even a bit, it's very helpful.
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/yt-izzo-review-trail-bike-2020.html
26 and a half pounds without pedals. various levels of spec for different prices.
sorry to anyone who thinks’ I’m being a bit dismissive of your suggestions, but there’s literally thousands of different bikes out there,
And this is why the people who have been riding MTBs all of the time are telling you NOT to get hung up on weight. At least respect our advice enough to listen, eh?
At least respect our advice enough to listen, eh?
I am. But when yet another person comes along and suggests something that isn't what I've specified, it gets a bit tiresome. Remember; this isn't a bike for you, it's a bike for me. With my money. Quite a lot of my money, it appears. I've specified 'around 25lbs or below', to try to steer things away from 'oh what about this nice 30+lb bike?' type responses. To little avail, it seems. It isn't 'advice', as much as 'this is the bike I would buy'. Which isn't what I'm asking. I'd quite like my request to be 'respected'.
26 and a half pounds without pedals. various levels of spec for different prices.
Starting to creep up above my ideal 'zone', but I'll give it some consideration, thanks.
I get that, but the bikes that are intended for the sort of riding you want to do (general trail) don't weigh sub-25lbs any more! To get that sort of weight, you're looking at much more race-focused bikes, which won't be as suited for general trail riding.
Honestly, it's like rocking up to a car forum and saying:
"Right, I haven't had a car in 40 years; I want something for general everyday driving but it must weigh under 1000kg."
So everyone says:
"Well, cars have gotten a bit heavier, but honestly it doesn't matter as they're so much better now regardless."
They you ignore that and insist on some arbitrary number that isn't relevant any more, someone says "Well, the Lotus Elise weighs under 1000kg but it's not really the most suitable car for the driving you want to do."
See what I'm getting at here?
See what I’m getting at here?
Other than trying to explain something in a very bad way, no, not really.
the bikes that are intended for the sort of riding you want to do (general trail) don’t weigh sub-25lbs any more! To get that sort of weight, you’re looking at much more race-focused bikes, which won’t be as suited for general trail riding.
A bike with around 100-120mm travel is exactly the kind of bike I'm after. Just because they are 'race focussed', as you say, doesn't mean I can't just ride them on gentle trails, or in Alpine type areas, or indeed anywhere really. I don't have to race on one. And it appears there are bikes that weigh sub-25lbs; I've had several suggestions so far. Those are very close to what I'm after.
insist on some arbitrary number that isn’t relevant
To you. It's relevant to me. Because it's about a bike for me. If I'm after something like a Lotus Exige, why recommend a Ford Fiasco or whatever they're called these days? If I'm in a restaurant, and fancy something with chicken, why suggest something with beef? See what I'm getting at here? 😉
You know what, I've tried to help but I'm out.
. If I’m after something like a Lotus Exige,
But you are wanting that Exige to pootle to the shops, then occasionally drive across Europe. Great track day car, shit for the weekly shop or grand tours (or rather, there are much better options)
Did you mention how much you and kit weighed?
There’s nothing quite so irritating as someone who thinks they’re still an expert, asks for advice from people who know what the current state of whatever it is is, and then ignores any advice that doesn’t match with their outdated views. Welcome back to mountain biking. Update us next year when you realise you were wrong. Cheers.
https://enduro-mtb.com/en/cannondale-scalpel-se-vs-specialized-epic-evo-test/
Cannondale scalpel SE? Above article compares it to a more reasonably priced version of the Epic Evo.
A light bike, with light tyres, is still going to be a little more preferable to me than a heavy bike with light tyres.
Until you try ...
To you. It’s relevant to me. Because it’s about a bike for me. If I’m after something like a Lotus Exige, why recommend a Ford Fiasco or whatever they’re called these days?
Just because they are ‘race focussed’, as you say, doesn’t mean I can’t just ride them on gentle trails, or in Alpine type areas, or indeed anywhere really. I don’t have to race on one.
That's because we tried them ...
my full carbon HT weighs very little as like Molgrips I was bought into the weight weenie...
It doesn't climb any "better" just faster ... except stuff so steep the long stem shifts my weight forwards.. but it does feel like driving an exige over cobbled streets.
It's also not much "fun" unless its being pushed fast.
Even though its got fast rolling tyres on and I have a 25 mile cycle each way on mostly bridleway/towpath to my "local" trails and its much lighter and .... I still end up taking my modern steel hard tail that I have no idea what it weighs.
You'd think it would be fine on bridleways/towpath but as it's shared use I can't ride it at an acceptable speed and it feels like driving an Exige in 1st. (if that makes any sense - i.e. it feels wrong, jerky, unpleasant, out of its environment)
26 and a half pounds without pedals. various levels of spec for different prices.
I'd also suggest when you go look at bikes again, you take a pair of quality scales with you - nothing is ever as light as advertised etc.
You missed off the bit about the 5010 CC where I said for your budget you could probably get it sub 30lbs.
The lightest model is just a fraction under 30lbs. You could have suggested the Blur, which is a lot lighter.
You missed the context - I said if you couldn’t get over the 29er thing and wanted something 27.5 you may have to move a bit more towards trail than down-country. The Blur is a 29er.
Stop feeding the troll.
Cannondale scalpel SE? Above article compares it to a more reasonably priced version of the Epic Evo.
That's great, thanks. Seems they found the Cannondale better at climbing, but the Specialized to be the better all round bike. It also shows MTB 'journalism' hasn't changed much in all this time! 😀 But on the basis of that review, I think I'd probably go for the Specialized (the Epic Evo is currently top of my list so far from what I've seen).
You missed the context – I said if you couldn’t get over the 29er thing and wanted something 27.5 you may have to move a bit more towards trail than down-country. The Blur is a 29er
No that's fair enough; my initial misgivings regarding larger wheels seem to be a bit misguided. The early ones I saw and tried, were dreadful. So I'm more than happy to be enlightened about them. Seems all 'XC' type bikes now have '29er' wheels.
There’s nothing quite so irritating as someone who thinks they’re still an expert, asks for advice from people who know what the current state of whatever it is is, and then ignores any advice that doesn’t match with their outdated views.
Without wishing to continue this pointless argument any further, I'll just say that regardless of whatever you or anyone else might think, this is actually about me choosing a new bike, not affirming other people's egos. So if you think you've been 'ignored', then whatever. Not really my problem. I was MTBing before this forum existed, and probably way before a lot of people on this forum were even riding bikes. I have, as I've stated, ridden other bikes during the meantime as well. So, I'm not a totally ignorant newbie. I do have some idea of what I want, and this thread has so far been mostly very helpful. This is about me getting back into riding off road regularly, getting fitter, having fun, exploring and enjoying. My injuries have led to lengthy spells off any bikes, and mean I'm never going to be as fit or strong as I once was. Hence, I want a nice lightweight bike.
Welcome back to mountain biking. Update us next year when you realise you were wrong. Cheers.
You can bask in the warmth of being 'right', and I'll doubtless be enjoying riding a great bike, and having loads of fun, thanks.
“ I was MTBing before this forum existed, and probably way before a lot of people on this forum were even riding bikes.”
I’d say I’m younger than the average poster on here and I started MTBing in 1988.
“I have, as I’ve stated, ridden other bikes during the meantime as well. So, I’m not a totally ignorant newbie. I do have some idea of what I want...”
That was my point - you think you’re an expert because you know you’re not a newbie.
I didn’t contribute elsewhere to the thread because it looked like my words would be wasted.
Stop feeding the troll.
To be fair if you'd taken a decade or more off ...
Bikes no longer climb based on weight ... which is almost the complete opposite of what the bike industry was telling us in the past. It takes actually TRYING it to change (I know it did for me)
It takes actually TRYING it to change (I know it did for me)
I totally get that. As I've said several times already; it's not the best time to be trying stuff out right now. I have tried a few other bikes in the intervening years, I really don't know how many more times I can say this. I just haven't ridden regularly, or any bikes for any prolonged periods. I won't pretend to know how every single bike will ride, but I have enough experience to know that a lightweight bike will be a better bike for me, thqn heavier one. It's simple physics. I'm not going to be doing EWS/Megavalance type stuff, so I don't need an 'enduro' bike. So; something like the Specialized Epic Evo, would be a better fit than say the Stumpjumper.
I started MTBing in 1988.
So did I. I have no idea or interest in whose dad's the biggest.
"I have enough experience to know that a lightweight bike will be a better bike for me, thqn heavier one. It’s simple physics"
You don't and it isn't. All your data points are based on outdated geometry, suspension, tyres, and wheels. Simple physics will show you that variances in bike weights are insignificant unless at the sharp end of competition where fractions of seconds can win races. Complex physics, biomechanics and physiology will show you that other aspects of bikes are more important than weight.
If weight was as important as you think then we'd all still be riding 26" wheels with skinny tyres.