[Closed] It's worth the weight

I favour durability over weight.

Well my lighter hardtail is easier tompedal than my heavier full suss and it certainky made a difference when I made the effort to take off the dual ply alps tyres (saved a kg a wheel I think 😳 ). I have never weighed either bike and I wouldn't iay extra for slightly lighter components. I probably have 1 kg of non-needed stuff in my camel back and usually finish a ride with at least 1 kg of water left, so lots of places to save weight if I really wanted, Note I am a full on bimbler.

Started mountain biking in 1990 and yeh it was all about the weight 🙂

Not bothered these days about the weight of my mountain bike or commuter but do like my road bike and cx bike to be nice and light.

jimdubleyou - Member

I favour durability over weight.

This, whilst carbon is the current must-have material like Alu before it, it's rarely sold as being a superlight version, they talk about stiffness mostly.

"light enough" is good enough for most people, unless you're talking rotaional weight.

I weigh 120lbs so a 30lb bike makes itself known uphill.

Durability and capability over weight.
That said, there is a limit to weight. I think you're right with the 30lbs max weight.

I was chatting to a chap at the winter XC series (Dash in the Park) who rides an S-works Epic. He was saying that its hideously unreliable. He has to meticulously maintain it and find things cease/wear if not maintained after every ride. Sounds horrendous!

Plenty of gram-counters on here, despite it being well established that it has little effect compared to how it was once touted.

Not particularly bothered about my MTB weight, but like my road-bike to be as light as reasonably practical whist still staying reliable.

Since getting into bikepacking, weight-saving has become an ever-more-expensive indulgence. So, it's not just about bike weight but also about reducing the load carried.

Riding styles/locations make a huge difference. If you have to lift bikes over fences and across peat hags then every gramme makes a difference on a long day.

For your average trail rider, I reckon there is such a thing as too light. If I rode my Superlight (2.5lbs) in the Peak it would be like playing pinball. 30lb seems to be about the right weight for rocky stuff, although my 27.5lb Bronson works cos it's stiff. It's as light as I'd want to go though

Not particularly bothered about my MTB weight, but like my road-bike to be as light as reasonably practical whist still staying reliable.

This. Not much else to say, really.

I like a light bike but I also like bikes that work so it's a balance (makes it more interesting too!) So I've worked pretty hard to keep my big bike's weight down without making it fragile. You could look at it another way and say it's unusually tough and capable for its weight, rather than unusually light for its toughness and usefulness.

cynic-al - Member

Plenty of gram-counters on here, despite it being well established that it has little effect compared to how it was once touted.

"Well established" for people who already weren't bothered about weight, at least.

I try to strike a balance.

I weigh around 90kg and am not a particularly 'finesse' type of rider, so I want stuff that won't break under me. Having said that, I don't want to try and pedal a DH monster around.

Currently, something around 14kg is a reasonable compromise for me (my Rocket weighs that, and the Alpine I had previously was the same weight) - frame and kit strong enough to take Alps/Lakes/Peak/Wales/etc. abuse, but still light enough to not trouble me on an all day ride in the hills.

I could go lighter and just as strong, but then expense becomes a consideration...

YMMV.

I don't have a target weight but I don't fit components that are recklessly heavy or labelled gravity/DH etc. By the same token stiffness is a priority and I find there's a dangerous middle ground of aspirational lightweight components that are horribly twangy

Weight isn't the be all and end all, but it's a significant consideration. Usually function first, then weight, then price. On the "cheap/light/strong - pick 2" front, I'm definitely on the light/strong side.

It's also about knowing what you can and can't get away with. I ride technical Peaks/Lakes stuff most of the time, so there's no point in compromising on tyres. But as a relative lightweight, I'm happy to use silly light saddles, and I'm not generally a wheel bender (I dink them instead) so light spokes & ally nipples work for me. Ally bolts where sensible, Ti ones where not. Carbon bars a given; Carbon cranks - not a hope - they'd get destroyed by the local grinding paste.

Currently my Soda is a chunk under 23lb, my Rocket (26) just scrapes in under 30lb.

My summer road bike is a proper weight weenie effort though - 16.5lb for a steel framed bike ain't too bad I think!

The soul I've just built up weighs in (on my fairly cheap digital luggage scales) at 26.5lb with pedals. My 26" Zesty is 31.5lb. I don't think people care that much about weight now unless they are XC/CX/road racing.

That's a large frame, 2.3" front tyre, 1800g (650b) wheelset, 2x10, no dropper. Goes well. Struggle to see where I could save much weight and it still take the abuse well and be comfortable.

Personally if I buy an 'upgrade' i'd rather it were stronger and lighter than the part it replaces.
Riding a fully rigid fat bike that started out at over 32lbs it's now 27 (in the summer) and the majority of that is saved in the wheels / tyres over the OEM - a kilo each end. It's the only area imo you'll see an instant difference in performance purely on weight saving.

My FS has a advertised weight of 29lbs (never checked it though). Sure i'd like a lighter one but not at the costs that would be involved. My mate has the carbon version, it's 2lbs lighter but £700 more. There comes a point where it's just not justifiable and then there's the question of carbon durability too.

In similar news though, I saved 12g the other day by removing the wheel stickers! 😉

Weight isn't the be all and end all, but it's a significant consideration. Usually function first, then weight, then price. On the "cheap/light/strong - pick 2" front, I'm definitely on the light/strong side.

This.

Carbon road bike 16lbs
Carbon trail fs 26lbs
Carbon 100mm XC 29er 27lbs
Steel gravel bike 27lbs
Carbon enduropoon 29lbs
Alu Fatbike 32lbs (inc dropper, tubes, oem 4.6" tyres and blutos)
Alu ebike 44lbs

Guess which I'm quickest on?

I think back in the day it was all about being light as we focused more on climbs and getting up the hills, there's no way I'd be able to ride my old rigid bike like I do my fs bike now, now it's more about going fast on flat and downhill. I'm still doing my old routes in the same times I did back in the early 90s but that's probably due to good suspension, brakes etc

Of course it matters, but I don't think many people will go down the drillium route these days.

I counted the grams but ended up with a 28lb or so hardtail recently. Might be a bit less now I've dropped 100g or so from the saddle (I couldn't face putting a nice saddle on the commuter when one of the rails on the commuter fatigued, so it had to go on the HT).

It makes a big difference if you're carrying it, and a fair difference generally riding it. Going lighter does take a bit of adjusting to though, I put a lighter front tyre on recently and I think I need a couple of rides to be dialled into the feel from it.

Weight definitely comes into it for me. Heavy bikes which to me is +28lbs "feel" heavy and sluggish for the kind of riding I enjoy. I don't care if science says It's only fractions overall, a light responsive bike adds to my riding enjoyment. Undulating fast swoopy trails on my 22lb carbon f/s are heaven 😀

DP

[quote=tomhoward ]
This.
Carbon road bike 16lbs
Carbon trail fs 26lbs
Carbon 100mm XC 29er 27lbs
Steel gravel bike 27lbs
Carbon enduropoon 29lbs
Alu Fatbike 32lbs (inc dropper, tubes, oem 4.6" tyres and blutos)
Alu ebike 44lbs
Once upon a time I could have told you the weight of my bikes. Now, I've no idea. They are what they are, but if I'm changing components for some reason then I'll likely compare weights too.

I much prefer something sub 24lbs I've got heavier bikes and although they are more comfortable and are far more forgiving of bad line choices they still have a hefty slightly sluggish feel to them on anything other than descents.

It's funny how unimportant weight became once bike companies started to market full suspension bikes. Prior to that weight seemed to be a standard entry on any specification table.

Guess which I'm quickest on?

I expect it's the one with a motor unless the road bike gets a run out on any alpine descents.

Was never too hung up about the overall weight of the bike, but liked the wheels & tyres/tubes to be reasonably light, with as little tread as I could get away with on the tyres . Then I got a fat bike ....& that went out the window too ....

TBH I weigh them once when I build them, out of curiousity, and just remember that. I used to be constantly changing parts trying to find lighter/better set ups, now I build the bikes and ride them.

Does anyone still fret about these things?

I don't fret about it any more, partly because it's become incredibly expensive to do so. I do pay attention though.

A 26lb bike feels nicer to ride up hill than a 31lb bike. Personally I'd put the 'light enough' bar around 26-27lbs.

Cycling in general back then was the reserve of pencil-thin racing whippets.

Looking at society as a whole nowadays, muffin tops are cooler than Versace, so no big surprise that bikes are bulking up too.

</tongueincheek>

As a 60kg female to me yes weight matters and where possible I'll pick or buy things because they're lighter so for example I've just bought the lighter weight MM despite having a perfectly fine one already just to save some weight. However likewise I have components that I use because of their performance and not weight. So again for example I use hope brakes despite being heavier than shimano because I dislike shimano. I have bike scales but I don't use them often because I already know what my bikes weigh. For me a heavy bike is just too hard work in terms of manoeuvre ability and therefore my enjoyment on it.

Mountain bikes BITD were pretty rubbish on technical or downhill terrain - useless brakes, no suspension etc, so inevitably people focussed on making them quicker uphill, which means losing weight.

Yes I kind of matters to me. Wouldn't say I 'fret' about it though.

Reasons being;
1) I'm fairly light. So lugging a heavy bike about is rubbish.
2) I really like technical challenging climbs, so the bikes got to be kind of light to even allow you to test your skills.
3) Lighter bikes are more fun too. Easier to pop, hop and jump about on!

Never weighed a bike or really thought about it. Due to my questionable riding skills I prefer bombproof to lightweight.

I like a light bike circa 12.25-12.9 kg so I can lift it easily over farmers gates etc ,

Overgearing is far more a concern for me, 120mm travel is great for my riding and my bigger travel FS just feels heavier although it's similiar weight ballpark, it's far more sluggish uphill

I'm 90KG and have always had light bikes which I ride hard. Never broken any components at all and don't know anyone who has. I'm not obsessed with it but I do prefer lighter bikes. Current XC bike is 21lb and takes my weight at full pelt down and up Welsh mountains. Why would I choose a heavier bike other than saving money on components? Nothing wrong with saving money but don't pretend high end parts are less capable due to weight!

have always had light bikes

Current XC bike is 21lb

😉

thats a lardy bike

Why would I choose a heavier bike other than saving money on components?

I had a 21lb bike. It was light and a rocket up hills and as capable as you'd expect down hills. Didn't have to hold back in races.

But

A 30lb 6" travel bike is in a totally different league. Totally.

I'm building a FS+ at the mo, won't be anything like 30lb though! Yes it's a different league, but the Genius is still a light bike which was kind of my point.

It's not only the weight - the fact that bikes designed for more speed downhill end up heavier. No-one knows what a 21lb enduro bike would ride like...

Oh it won't be 21lb but nowhere near 30. Not sure if you're saying the Scott Genius isn't a capable bike for descending? I'd argue it's pretty good judging by a test ride but have yet to build my one (silly LBS!)

Interesting to see so much quoted in inches and pounds 😉

It'll be a good bike, for sure. But there's quite a difference between something like that and proper big bike. Have you ever owned a 'big' bike?

No I haven't but it was you that said 6", are you now looking at something bigger?

I saw a carbon bottle cage on CRC the other day, it was £40!! But it's a bottle cage..... It's job is to hold a big, heavy bottle full of water. I don't get it. I ordered one that cost £1.95.