Forum menu
Yeah for sure lower weight is generally better, especially when climbing the 3 flights of stairs to my Flat!
A huge consideration on feel is where the *low weight* is. Stick some 1200g wheels (pair) on and the handling totally changes.
I had a 19lb singlespeed rigid a few years ago, the thing was as lively as hell, I also broke it. For me I have settled for a 25lb ss hard tail built with light/durable and it perfect.
My 16lb SS ti cx bike is the loveliest thing (bike) I have ever ridden. A lot nicer than the 22lb bike is was based on (Specialized Tricross)
There was a fad when people put their DH bikes on a diet - this person got their [s]coke can[/s] session 88 under 30lbs. ( http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=230348 )
The conclusion was that they were too light - so they piled on the pounds again. 35lb is still considered light for a DH bike.
I'm of the opinion it's better to loose the weight from yourself, before you go mental on bike dieting.
I'm using a 22lb FS, great for Hike-a-Bike, sits great on the back of my rucksack, however when gravity takes over things can get a bit twitchy, getting 6lb off the waist is cheaper and easier than 6lb off your favourite bike
Psychological in my opinion. My HT weighs a lot more than my last HT and I am conviced I go slower on it. Difficult to prove objectively but it certainly makes me want a lighter bike.
I'm always surprised by how much heavier my bike is once I've attached a full bottle and saddlebag to it. Does a few extra pounds make any difference once I'm on it? Tyres, frame and suspension haven't changed, so no.
IMO, you're mile's better off spending money/time improving your fitness - not necessarily losing weight, unless you're lardy.
A few years ago my FS bike hit 45lbs and my HT was 35lbs... I'd built them up heavy to make sure I didn't break them, the problem was they were a bastard to cycle anywhere which removed some of the fun. I would only use the FS where I really needed it and often rode the HT where I should have had the FS. Two years ago I replaced them both and my current FS is 33lbs and my HT is 26lbs, and they are much better bikes because it. I can now ride the FS and the HT everywhere, I love my lighter bikes, no going back.
my quake is near enough 40lbs. Take on everything from XC jaunts in the Peaks to bikepark days and enduro events in Finland. It climbs well, etc as expected but my god it is knackering towards the end of the ride.
But it is 32t front. No granny gear so every climb is harder than it needs to be.
My ibis mojo HD 160mm is 29.2 lbs and is generally easier over any distance than the 32lb enduro it replaced, not sure if that is due to the lower weight or a more efficient suspension design or a bit of both.
I do tend to get a bit confused about what's right and what's wrong when it comes to bikes. My large framed, rigid Pipedream R853 Sirius built up with solid, reliable kit(and which spends most of its time on-road) is 27lbs. When the frame was released loads of people went on about how it was too heavy at over 5lbs (although I like it, it's fun to ride and seems to do everything I want of it).
Now people seem to be banging on about how great their steel framed 'fatbikes' are which must be monstorously heavy, presumably with a significant proportion of that being rotating weight in the rims and tyres. I'd have though they'd be really hard work and sluggish, but apparently they're great fun. I guess if you're a racer weight means a great deal,but for me comfort, durability and overall 'enjoyment factor' are more important.
Now I know Njee s bike is proper weight 🙂 it takes a lot of cash to get to that level and I suspect he'd agree that he wouldn't rag it down an alpine rock garden.
I do think there is a tipping point which for me was when the AM hit 34lbs I really noticed the difference uphill. Almost as much as when I replaced my rear tyre from a High roller to a Larson..
Most 'red' trails at trail centres aren't going to trouble modern mountain bike components but take it to the lakes/Scotland/alps or start taking on drop offs and jumps regularly and lightweight takes second place to robust.
..says he currently in the process of building a 120mm Nicolai below 21lbs including a reverb dropper 😀 but it ain't cheap and when the going gets steep out comes the big hitter....Winch and plummet 😆
Pjay, fat bikes gather a lot of momentum. They do take a bit of winding up but once going are hard to deviate! The tyres also act a bit like 80mm of undamped travel, which can feel like a mahoosive hoot, until it gets very rocky anyway, then it does get a bit bouncy.
I did Trans Provence on my Rigid but Fat front Jones (31.5lb) last year and the very rocky parts were, errr, challenging! See the videos and pictures here...now that had Saint components on it for that race, nowt broke, quite a few other bikes did, including carbon loveliness...there was a bit of climbing too iirc
Pjay, fat bikes gather a lot of momentum. They do take a bit of winding up but once going are hard to deviate!
And sometimes these are some of the 'faults' people level at 'heavy' mountain bike where flickability and lots of speed and direction changes might be necessary. Like I said, I'm often confused about what's 'right' and 'wrong' in the world of bikes, so I probably just don't bother. I enjoy what I've got and that's the main thing. I personally think that the weight thing is overdone a bit (unless you're a racer I guess) and if it works for you that's what matters.