[Closed] Is bike weight much of a muchness in the grand scheme of things?

Its about a "Calderdale ish" weight tbh. If you're not looking to be fixing it all the time, want stiff to last, and your bike to not break. I appreciate that for different parts (less steep) of the country its probably on the high side of what's acceptable.

That is much more succinct than my withering up there. ?

😈

Look wider than the forum and the picture is different.

That surprises me. Most MTBers I see are either:

- trundling around on any entry level bike from the last 20 years
- trundling around on a mid range general XC bike
- winching some incredibly expensive off the peg new looking Enduro bike up climbs

with the first two being by far the majority.

Weight weenies seem very thin on the ground in the real world. Unless.. you live in the South East perhaps?

Its about a "Calderdale ish" weight tbh. If you're not looking to be fixing it all the time, want stiff to last, and your bike to not break. I appreciate that for different parts (less steep) of the country its probably on the high side of what's acceptable.

Hmm. It's plenty steep and rocky where I live and I'd still call that very heavy.

I honestly have no idea what any of my bikes weigh, I feel the need to fix that somehow

My brompton feels heavier when it's folded than when it's unfolded, work that one out. It's not just me either, others who have tested this theory also agree

OP - you're overthinking it.
Just buy the prettiest one - you're going to have to look at it for the next 14 years! 😉

4lbs is within the range where tuning, geometry, equipment etc etc will make more difference.

But what about 10lbs ? The point here is that most would care about weight at a certain point. That certain point differs by person.

I ride very easy XC and mostly fire roads and the bike I use weighs around 15.5lbs. Adding 4lbs to that would be very noticeable to me.

I wish when people say "weight doesn't matter" they actually say "weight doesn't matter to me".

Most Strava threads seem to be people complaining about how awful it is as a concept. There are some training threads (in which the focus is all about training oneself), but few racing ones. So I'd disagree.

I wouldn't. And threads about Strava aren't where I'd be looking. Whenever there are threads on tyres, geometry, fatbikes, the "are they better" discussion inevitably goes to some sort of comparison of kit and experiences, which is where the Strava comes in.

"My hills are steeper/more gnarly than yours",
"I actually ride my bicycle quickly, so what might work for you isn't relevant to my interests"
"I ride my bicycle long distances, so your bike won't work for me"

That doesn't get you very far, because most people don't know each other on here, or where or how they ride. So then you get into attempts to validate and compare, which is when you turn Strava, speed and efficiency.

"Actually, my rides have this many HillFeet per Mile and I ride this far" and
"When I rode this bike, compared to one of my other bikes, I set a new personal best up a certain climb - I'm now 5/713 on Certain Climb, so I am actually fast and my opinion is valid."

Whenever there are threads on tyres, geometry, fatbikes, the "are they better" discussion inevitably goes to some sort of comparison of kit and experiences, which is where the Strava comes in.

Usually as an aside. It's not normally 'I love this kit BECAUSE I saved 3s on Strava'.

So, my bikes end up at about 30lbs,

These 30 lbs sound like a sound "limit".
Below this limit: think I don't feel the difference on the trail. But I'am not doing "races".

A well balanced bike is more important for me. And a bike which survives three years without cracking.
About or a bit lower than 30lbs works out fine for me and my fun biking. Including drops, jumps, nasty trails...
🙄

I'd still call that very heavy.

fairy nuff

Taxi25, yes, you're right, will try to do that in the future.

Rockhopper70 and I have exchanged some more details about the Habit Carbon SE but I thought i’d respond to this. Firstly, for Kimbers’, the 27lb weight is accurate with lighter tyres set up tubeless. The standard tyres and tubes are unnecessarily heavy and slow for the type of bike that the Habit is.

Now, about weight. I have an alloy Yeti, the Habit and a super light Cannondale Carbon 29er hardtail XC racer. The Yeti and Habit have the same head angle and wheel size and the Yeti weighs only 1lb more than the Habit despite having a heavier frame, thanks to some s****y components and carbon wheels. Travel isn’t massively different at 140/127 vs 130/120. The hardtail weighs 21lb.

I used to think that weight was everything, back in the days when I was an XC racer and bikes were all about going up hill fast. Weight is still important. I’m 6’2 and 71kg so can’t lose much more weight so it has to come from the bike. But, here’s the thing, i’m no longer sure it’s purely weight that makes the hardtail the fastest of my three bikes on a woodland trail. So much of its performance is about the much more aggressive geometry. On the same 1.7 miles climb that I’ve used to compare the three bikes(I have the KoM) the hardtail is 4 minutes faster than the Yeti and about a minute faster than the Habit. On the 0.9 mile descent I used to compare them - fast in part and technical for the last 0.2 mile - the Habit is the fastest by 15 seconds over the hardtail and 30 seconds over the Yeti. Move the bikes to somewhere seriously rocky, up or down, and I wouldn’t even take the hardtail due to its 71 degree head angle and 90mm of fork travel, flexy frame and narrow bars. In this terrain, the Habit climbs much faster than the Yeti and feels like an XC bike in comparison but is noticeably slower and more sketchy on the descents. The Habit rails berms much faster than the Yeti. Why so many differences when they have the same head angle and wheel size and weigh about the same? The Yeti feels utterly solid. The frame is nearly 3lb heavier and a lot of that is in the rear triangle, which is laterally stiff. The Yeti has much longer chain stays so is super stable, the Habit has a steeper seat tube angle which helps when climbing. The Yeti has a lower BB which helps on downhills. The Habit has 3mm wider rims which seem to help in berms.

So, is weight the biggest issue? Probably not. But a lot depends on where and how you ride. The differences due to frame design and components seem to be more important, but, again, you need to be honest about where and how you ride before choosing the right bike for you.

I think it depends how and where you ride. If you're an aggressive up and down trail rider in an area with lots of short, techy, kicky climbs, then all other things being equal, a lighter bike just feels livelier on the ups and the transitions from flat to up in particular.

If you're not bothered about that sort of thing then it won't bother you. Source: going from a Ragley Blue Pig to a Ragley Ti with similar specs and saving four or five pounds in the process - lighter forks too. The Pig used to feel sluggish on the ups, particularly in places where you really needed instant drive over rocky steps or up loose steeps. The Ti, in the same places, feels turbo-charged.

That stuff matters to me, but it might not matter to you. What was the question again?

Two bike .. hardtail 24 lb full 160 31lb

Both climb well both come down well, and the only time im bothered about weight is when ive got to shoulder the 160...only at that point does the weight bother me .. but needs must

Totally agree BadlyWiredDog. A lighter bike often feels more alive. My hardtail boosts off the smallest of trail features when hairing through woodland singletrack whereas the Yeti just ploughs through it all. Boring. You have to take the Yeti to the Lakes for it to come alive and there the hardtail is just a waste of space. So don’t listen to others unless they ride like you, ride where you ride and have similar levels of fitness.

short answer: It probably doesn't matter as much as we all think it does.

Does 2kgs bike weight matter if the rider is 85 with 3kgs water and another 2 kgs of stuff in a backpack!
Ultimately being fitter and riding more will make more difference.
Just in case though do watch this on how to be a mountain biker. 😀

If you're an aggressive up and down trail rider in an area with lots of short, techy, kicky climbs, then all other things being equal, a lighter bike just feels livelier on the ups and the transitions from flat to up in particular.

Spot on. My local woods to a T, love it when the trails are dry attacking every sharp bank and undulation. My 22 lb xc f/s really does come alive then. I don't care if it's only a little bit faster, for me heavier bikes just don't give that experience for that kind of riding 😀

Whilst a light bike is fractionally faster than a heavy one, even a slight drop off in fitness makes a far bigger difference. Obvious I know, but often overlooked

When it comes to buying speed, the only time I think its really noticable is when you go aero on the road bike. On the flat I instantly recovered all the speed I'd lost through being unfit by buying an aero helmet and wheels. Made me 1.5mph faster overnight. Still slow as anything on a hill however..

For the first time today I went riding without my camelbak,I had transferred tools,tube and water onto the frame-by using 2 bottles and wrapping spare tube round seatpost.....early days and I'm sure 'I' will re-calibrate but I certainly felt the additional 4lb weight on the frame leveraging the bike over beneath me from side to side in the tighter funner turns-my timing seemed off and I was making a hash of things.
It was great not having to deal with a sodden and muddy hard to clean/dry back pack though,so I think it's a winner anyhow 😀 I'll just need to eat some more Shreddies and adapt a bit.

To clear up some points;

You can lose body weight AND have a lighter bike
You can become fitter AND have a lighter bike
You can improve geometry and bike fit AND have a lighter bike