Frame weights?

It’s an open ended question with many variables but how much difference will there be between similar frames made from different materials? Thinking more carbon and aluminium as I have a Cube C:62 atm which I like, especially the weight but am considering swapping the frame for something a bit longer.

Neither the Cube or it’s replacement are top end but not budget either so if I went for aluminium what sort of weight penalty can I expect? Thinking xc rather than enduro.

Seems to be little information online about frame weights in general?

Carbon isn’t guaranteed to be lighter, but unless the respective frames are exceptionally light/heavy, there’s normally less than a pound difference between carbon and aluminium, an amount that could easily be lost or gained in different components on a finished build.

Ballpark figures:

Carbon Road bike or HT ~1kg, equivalent Aluminium frame maybe 1.5-1.7kg, Steel 2kg+ (all very approximate).

Bouncy bikes vary as much, plus the more travel and meatier the shock the heavier they get obviously.

The real question is does it actually matter? 500g for choosing Al over Carbon doesn’t seem like a huge penalty (IMO) and you can throw the money saved on the frame at lighter wheels or finishing kit.

Cheers Tom. I have a steel ht too that’s miles heavier than the Cube but then is built much burlier. The puzzle is keeping them apart so they both have a place and keeping the weight down on the xc achieves this. Should be easy enough to change to aluminium, tweak a few bits and keep the overall weight the same.

Possibly looking at a Clockwork Evo btw, apparently ‘super light’. 130mm compared to the Cube’s 120mm so not miles off. In my head I want proper xc but the head tubes are too short ( Trek Procaliber, cheap Paul’s Lapierre) and front too low so thinking more down country, or whatever it’s called but without increasing weight.

Carbon XC frames often have flex stays so use less bearings than an aluminium frame. That saves wieght too.

Carbon frames mignt end up with added rubber protection which adds wieght.

All depends on the frame.

Possibly looking at a Clockwork Evo btw, apparently ‘super light’. 

But what does it actually weigh?

Carbon Road bike or HT ~1kg, equivalent Aluminium frame maybe 1.5-1.7kg, Steel 2kg+ (all very approximate).

You’ll be lucky to get a modern ‘adult’ sized alloy HT frame under 2kg and unless looking at full-on XC bikes even carbon will be nearer 1.5kg.

Example: my old 456Ti frame in 20″ was 1.7kg and a bit of a flexy ‘beast’, 26″ wheels too – so factor in 29″ and weight will be added.

Aluminium hardtails have always been easily “light enough” for me.

I think it’s full-sus bikes where metal frames can get (and feel) notably heavy.

XC bikes even carbon will be nearer 1.5kg.

Plenty are sub 1kg, Specialized epic HT, for example.

Ti isn’t that light.

FWIW i’ve had a top end carbon and an aluminium version of the same frame in my hands at the same time. Same size as well, ready to be built up as “race” and “training” for a friend a couple of years ago.

The aluminium was almost twice the weight of the carbon, and had the same “bits” attached (Headset and bottom bracket IIRC. Carbon was almost bang on 1 kilo, Aluminium was about 1850. Final weight of the bikes was a bit over 2 kilos difference. Most of the rest was in the fork and wheels.

Have also done the same with a longer travel FS (so no flex elements) the percentage difference was smaller, i guess as a lot of the weight was in the linkages and reinforcement for bearing mounts etc from memory there was about a kilo difference, something like 2.8/3.8 kilos.

On the road front, a rule of thumb i’ve heard is that if a frame is designed for the same purpose (e.g. superlight road race frame) aluminium will weigh about twice that of carbon and steel 3 times. Which to be fair, hasn’t been a million miles out.

My 2p.

Steel these days isn’t as nice as it used to be. It has other advantages but it’s a case of if you want a steel bike, get it, don’t compare it to other materials.

Aluminum might not be quite as good as carbon (less stiff and/or compliant where you want it to be).  But any weight gained in the frame is saved in the components at a mid-tier price point.  So if you fix the budget then it wins on that metric. XT, nice wheels and finishing kit versus SLX, basic wheels and OEM kit, the cheaper frame + nice kit is probably going to be substantially lighter.

Or just don’t worry about it.  Bike fit, geometry and component performance will make you quicker than a 500g weight saving. I’ve weighed my bikes, and consider the weight of replacement parts when they’re needed. But don’t bother upgrading anymore, and only consider the weight once everything else is sorted. e.g. I have Stooge Moto bars with 15deg and high rise on my nice bike, probably half a pound at least over the carbon bars that I had in the spares box, but I’ll enjoy the comfortable bars far more than theoretical seconds saved.

For the most part, a hardtail frame is more about feel than weight; hence why despite the weight penalty, steel is a popular choice; however, for xc, you’re probably better with Alu or Carbon; on balance, best bet is focussing on wheel and tyre choice, as that is where weight savings are most noticeable.

I’ve just been looking at this as I’m trying to figure out which Genius ST to buy for my ripper.

Scott’s top end hmx carbon genius frame is 2295g, the normal hmf carbon front with alloy chain/seat stays is 2795g and the full alloy is 3299g.

So, add 500g (1.1lbs) as you decrease through the  range but add more still as full build component weight also increase.

I’ve been fortunate to have hmx bikes and hmf/alloy bikes typically built with the same components and can say with certainty that the lighter frame full hmx carbon build has been the better bike every time.

In the xc/DC theme, here are the spark frame weights..3 versions of full carbon build

Scott Spark HMX SL – 1,870g

Scott Spark HMX – 1,999g

Scott Spark HMF – 2,150g

Scott Spark HMF/alloy rear – 2,590g

Scott Spark Alloy – 3,290g

That’s a surprisingly impressive chunk of weight saving considering the full alloy version ain’t even coming close to heavy,   Transition also do a good job saving over  a kilo between alloy and carbon,  that’s a fair bit more than a pound saving,  I doubt careful component selection can beat the carbon over alloy frame weight saving, makes you wonder why Nukeproof could only manage about 60 gram difference for an extra £700.

Thanks for the input all. My main issue is that unless I really like a bike and enjoy looking at it I tend to get wandering eyes. The Cube is my most ridden bike, it’s light enough and xc enough to not feel like a chore on longer, gentle rides and is more comfortable than the Trig it replaced. Problem is it was a bargain, rather than something I really wanted so just a tool (Although less so than the Whippet I had for a while).

My Pace is a lump but excels when things get a bit tricky, is ace for what it’s built for and I invested time in to the build so I feel more connected to it. Same as my Stage 5 but neither are suited to the xc rides I do the most so I want something that I like as much as those two but is completely different, if that makes sense?

The answer is something carbon xc really but having had the Trig + Cube I just don’t think the lower XC stance works for me so that rules out the traditional options such as the Procaliber or the Epic ht. The thought was to use the Cube’s kit with something like the Clockwork Evo frame and get the best of both worlds. I’m just rambling now!

Based on I can find no info online for the weight of the Orange frame I’m concluding that it’ll be heavier than you hope it is – when you get it, weigh it please and let us know.

Wouldn’t the answer be to get a carbon frame with a more modern geometry i.e. Scott Scale?

Cube also sell an Al version of the Reaction – how much difference is there between the C62 frame and the Reaction Pro frame?

From the title I thought this was going to be a thread about some weird training aid – ‘frame weights. Add extra mass with these handy bicycle-specific weights. Designed to rapidly build muscle on climbs, increase power through greater effort on the flats, and nurture faster reactions with greater momentum on the descents’.

I think it’s all been said. It depends. You’d expect the same frame design to be lighter in carbon than aluminium. But different designs and manufacturers will make a carbon vs aluminium general comparison a bit fuzzy.

when I had the choice of carbon or aluminium when I last bought a FS I opted for aluminium. I figured: cheaper; weight difference wouldn’t make much difference compared with other variables (pies, water, etc); handling would be similar.

Yeah, the latest xc kit does seem to be creeping away from the usual xc numbers. Unfortunately at the moment I’m limited as to how much I can spare to spend so it’s sale bikes or aluminium frames only atm.

Yeah, I usually don’t pay much attention to weight but the Cube is so much better at gentle pottering that I’d be reluctant to swap it for something more hefty. In that case I may as well just ‘more xc’ the Pace.

There are light carbon hard tails that have plenty of stack. This based on random googling

Ibis dv9 claimed weight about 1.4 kg. But it’s quite expensive

There is also the yeti arc but I can’t see a frame weight

Regards FS frame weights and the seemingly signifcant saving – the different between the allor Spark and the cheapest Carbon version for instance.

This is something that was notable with my Alloy Hightower too.

The frames are designed in Carbon – and part of that is not just functionality but also their corporate ‘look’ and aesthetics.

They are then redeveloped into their budget alloy versions

The alloy Hightower worked great but was very heavy. The Alloy Sparks (which also use flex stays, not a pivot) no doubt work great but are clearly signifcantly heavier than even the basic carbon.

They typically use large, chunky, cast, minimnally machined or relieved sections, and all the ‘add ons’, eg cable ports, shock mounts, hardware etc add signifcant weight.

If you were designing a frame to be be made in alloy – it wouldnt look like a carbon bike at all – Nicolai, Orange, I’m looking at you, for instance.

( And Orange aluminium frames are significantly lighter, from personal experience! )

I created a spreadsheet of all the “trail” FS frames i was looking at 2 years ago. Weight diff between alu and c seemed to be around 1kg.

I then bought a steel one.

Sounds like a Yeti Arc would do the job – except for price. There were some heavy discounts a few months back on them but they all seem to be £1k ish now.

I’ll have a look, cheers.

 I doubt careful component selection can beat the carbon over alloy frame weight saving

I bet you can, bear in mind the lightest on that list is £5600 (out of stock) as a frame+ fork combo and the cheapest is a £2700 full bike.

It’s a poor comparison as the alloy bike only comes with a Judy fork (heavy), but even the 950 with Pikes is ‘only’ £3700 online. £1900 buys some seriously light wheels, cranks, finishing kit etc. And you’ve still got to build the top model up.

It’s more obvious in road bikes because at ~£2500 you’re looking at a mix of 105, ultegra, carbon and aluminum bikes. And pricing and performance  tends to be more consistent between comparable brand. And in general the aluminum bikes come out ~500g lighter.  The caveat is obviously that a lot of that saving is often in the wheels and tyres, which are the first upgrade anyway.  So in some ways the carbon frame is better value as you’re ditching a heavy wheelset like Askiums rather than a mid-range wheelset like Kysriums.

Off road I’d buy the bike I wanted with the best overall performance (irrespective of weight / materials) .  On road I still think alloy will give a better bang for your buck unless we’re at a price point where you’ve hit diminishing returns for wheels, groupsets, finishing kit etc and 300g off the frame weight is cheaper than 300g off the groupset.

Or put the other way, that Alloy spark is a poor bike because it has Judys, not because of the frame. If they offered the options I’d take it with alloy frame and decent fork/wheels over a carbon frame and Judys if those models existed.

What size are we talking? I’ve a large clockwork 129 frame (same as the evo as far as I can tell) I’ve been meaning to move on. I could weigh it later but I’ve only got bathroom scales and I’m not minded to remove the xt bb and angleset that are currently installed.

I doubt careful component selection can beat the carbon over alloy frame weight saving

Easily, and probably cheaper too.

“Upgrading” to a carbon frame from aluminium is not a particularly cost effective way of saving weight, even though it might give you other benefits though, i.e. a lighter platform to start with, better geo etc.

(Obviously as long as the aluminium you start with isn’t equipped with 3 kilo wheels and a £150 quid fork with optimism for damping.)

Fwiw, my 2021 Orange Clockwork Evo 29er Frame size XL weighed 2300 grams with rear axle and seat clamp. So not especially lightweight.

I was referring to a near 1.5 kg saving on the frame,  trying to do that with components instead is a big ask if your stuff is already reasonably light,  I could probably save the odd 100g here and there on some of my kit but dropping 1.5 kg ain’t happening especially without worrying about it being up to the abuse.

Cheers for the 129 offer but unfortunately I’m XL. Reckon I just need to be more patient and save for something like the Yeti.