How come all these nu-skool bikes are so heavy?

Home Forum Bike Forum How come all these nu-skool bikes are so heavy?

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 111 total)
  • How come all these nu-skool bikes are so heavy?
  • Enduro, innit.

    Premier Icon Bregante
    Subscriber

    Planted – not heavy

    Stevelol
    Member

    An alu 29lb bike is heavy?

    Premier Icon leftyboy
    Subscriber

    Bigger wheels add weight and the frames need to be stronger as the forces are greater. My T-130 Works, picking it up on Sat, is 13KG so for it’s size etc that’s OK. They ride lighter too and frankly if I want to lose weight I should just lose a stone of my fat body 🙂

    Premier Icon dangeourbrain
    Subscriber

    Because it’s all just pointless numbers used by marketeers to make their product sound better than X. Stop worrying about the weight and rtft. Unless you’re Julien Absalon what makes it slow is you, not the weight. Unless you’re Danny mac what stops you doing that stuff is you not the weight

    Premier Icon Jon Taylor
    Subscriber

    None of those are XC bikes, wouldn’t want something your doing jump on and crashing on to be that light.

    Strong wheels, strong stiff forks, proper tyres, dropper post. It all adds up.

    Premier Icon rhayter
    Subscriber

    Kona Process 111. Whyte T129 SCR Works. Transition Smuggler. All look fun/tasty and are starting to get good reviews. All 1×11. All tubeless. All 100-120mm travel. All 29lbs and change. How come? It’s got to be the frames, hasn’t it? Are they all 7.5lbs or something? I seem to remember Yeti’s SB75 frame getting a slagging for being that weight… What’s going on?

    Premier Icon jameso
    Subscriber

    Nu-school is heavy .. or is it old-school to think a few pounds matters?

    stoney
    Member

    What do ya mean heavy????. My Ti 456 was 26+lb… and no individual component was heavy on its own. I`m now on an HDR 650, 1X11… 28ib…. That is not heavy!

    stoney
    Member

    Sorry!! What Jon taylor said :mrgreen:

    Premier Icon chakaping
    Subscriber

    My money is on heavy OE wheels.

    enfht
    Member

    Bigger wheels and forks

    remoterob
    Member

    29lbs = so heavy?

    29lbs = so heavy? enduro right now.

    FTFY. 😉

    Premier Icon kimbers
    Subscriber

    Wish my enduro bike only weighed 29 lbs !

    Still I’ll ride it happily round a 50 k loop at Afan or an uplift day at antur

    Wouldn’t fancy that on 25lb xc noodle

    Lest
    Member

    Kona Process 111. Whyte T129 SCR Works. Transition Smuggler. All look fun/tasty and are starting to get good reviews. All 1×11. All tubeless. All 100-120mm travel. All 29lbs and change. How come? It’s got to be the frames, hasn’t it? Are they all 7.5lbs or something? I seem to remember Yeti’s SB75 frame getting a slagging for being that weight… What’s going on?

    Supply and demand I am afraid …. the Market concensus would seem to be that people are less inclined to ride up hill unfortunately.

    Supply and demand I am afraid …. the Market concensus would seem to be that people are less inclined to ride up hill unfortunately.

    Not that at all, uplifts are still a tiny minority, 4 or 5 busses spread over the entire UK, theres probably more riders at swinley every hour than the entire uks uplifts for a weekend. People are just not fussed about weight anymore, the difference in weight between a 24lb Fs and a 29lb fs will make so little difference on the climbs that buyers would rather bigger wheels (and associated longer forks/swingarms), dropper posts, wide bars, big rims and tyres etc. None of that was the case when Spesh were selling 25lb enduros 10 years ago.

    Premier Icon kimbers
    Subscriber

    Supply and demand I am afraid …. the Market concensus would seem to be that people are less inclined to ride up hill unfortunately

    Bullshine !

    the Market concensus would seem to be that people are less inclined to ride up hill quickly unfortunately. They’re more interested in getting up the hill at whatever speed happens and then schralping teh gnar on the way back down. Like many of us have been doing for a decade or more!

    FTFY.

    Superficial
    Member

    650b adds a bit of weight over 26″. 29er a bit more still.

    My hope would be that perhaps manufacturers are more realistic with weights. 29lbs is very reasonable for that sort of bike – providing it’s accurate. Even a posh lightweight XC full sus will be 23lbs in actual money, not made up internet “weights”.

    Premier Icon Northwind
    Subscriber

    29lbs is a pretty reasonable weight, for a durable bike. Especially with strong (not carbon) wheels and sensible tyres

    Premier Icon Rusty Spanner
    Subscriber

    You see that hill up there?

    Our lass could ride down that on her 100mm hardtail whilst reciting Vogon poetry and farting The Marseillaise.
    And she’s jeyer than a duet featuring JJ Burnel & JJ Cale.

    🙂

    My lightest FS trail bike was 28lbs. My current FS trail bike is 30.8lbs and has been ‘enduro’d’. What’s your point caller?

    Premier Icon chakaping
    Subscriber

    My hope would be that perhaps manufacturers are more realistic with weights. 29lbs is very reasonable for that sort of bike

    Agreed.

    No way is that Kona 29lbs anyway.

    mindmap3
    Member

    Supply and demand I am afraid …. the Market concensus would seem to be that people are less inclined to ride up hill unfortunately.

    Don’t agree with that all…after years of riding up hills not being cool as seen by younger cooler MTBers is not ok….in fact it’s now Enduro.

    As for the weight of bikes, I think most average riders would be better shifting a few pounds themselves, getting fitter and carrying less junk in hydro packs.

    I also think that lightish tough tyres make a big difference too. My Ru e isn’t light but the wheels and tyres are quite light compared to what I would have run in the past and to my legs it feels reasonably spritely. No XC whippet but it climbs and covers ground better than a 160mm travel gnarrpoon should be able too (imho).

    Premier Icon Onzadog
    Subscriber

    My “enduro” bike weighs about 36lbs. But it weighed the same back when it was an all mountain bike. In fact, the same bike has weighed about the same, with very similar kit, ridden on the same stuff since 2005. Lost count of how many “fashionable” names there have been for my mountain bike in that time.

    Premier Icon chakaping
    Subscriber

    And to the OP – These burly 29ers climb better than lighter 26in trail bikes in most situations anyway IME, despite weighing a bit more.

    Premier Icon cakefacesmallblock
    Subscriber

    My far to old to be cool 2008 bike / trail/ enduro….well the bike what I ride, comes in at a smidge under 29lbs , with dropper post, tyres that just clear the swing arm and grip a bit. It still has 3 chainrings and only 9 cogs. It has a 140mm fork and only 100mm at the rear.

    I know I should be thoroughly ashamed of its non 2015 spec. It goes up . It goes down. Quicker and with more panache now , than it ever did when I went all weight weenie with it and saved a whole 2lbs, at which point it was an utter bastard to descend quickly and in any sort of control.

    If this makes sense, riding it , a lot, has had more benefit in terms of speed and ease of riding than any pair of scales.

    moshimonster
    Member

    My 10 year old high end “Enduro” rig weighs about 34 lbs and that was considered pretty light back then – for a bike that could actually take a proper beating. All the sub-30 lb options back then were made out of cheese.

    So I think 29 lbs today for an alloy framed bike that can charge on properly tough trails is pretty good. Carbon framed equivalents I’m looking at right now are coming in at about 27-28 lbs.

    Premier Icon D0NK
    Subscriber

    Dropper posts and big wheels add weight straight off, 120mm 29er is arguably equivalent to 140mm 26er territory. 29lbs for a rufty tufty FSer sounds damn reasonable to me, pretty sure both mine are over that (30lb and 33lb rough guestimate – 26″ btw)

    Whyte m109 maybe more the thing for you if you want lightweight <27lb

    the difference in weight between a 24lb Fs and a 29lb fs will make so little difference on the climbs

    add a 5lb lead weight to a 24lb bike there won’t be too much of a difference, ride a 24lb fser then ride an equivalently priced 29lber with big bars, big sticky tyres, slacker angles, soggier/supple suspension and there IS a difference.

    The trade off for the downhill giggles is probably still worth it to some/many tho.

    mt
    Member

    Sorry but 29lbs is to heavy for me. Yes I know it’s old school not to want a heavy bike but then I’ve only been using MTB’s since 1986. Had various bikes (been as light as 20lbs upto 30lbs) and arrived the conclusion (whatever the wheel size) around 24 to 5lbs suits me. A grand day out requires a bike you can take anywhere and handle most stuff you are capable yourself. It’s your choice though ( which is brilliant). Remember the manufacturers would prefer your bike to be user proof to keep you safe and them out of court. Given what you youngsters get upto they are taking the right attitude.

    Premier Icon BigDummy
    Subscriber

    You can get a much, much lighter bike. But all the ones the OP mentions are going to have a Pike up-front.

    I don’t understand why anyone thinks a bike like that is going to be conspicuously light.

    The manufacturers would rather you swapped out your bike every year and will try and use whatever flavour of the month/fashion they can to persuade you that you should.

    I imagine they’ll be telling us that we should all ride lighter stuff at some point in the future?

    You can still go out and enjoy the trails on a fully rigid bike – it’ll be super light – it might not be as much fun or as comfy, but you won’t die and it’ll still be more fun than not going out at all?

    Premier Icon roverpig
    Subscriber

    It’s all marketing BS and always has been. You just take whatever is slightly different about your bike, bang on endlessly about the advantages that come from that difference and ignore the fact that a) the difference is so small that most riders probably wouldn’t notice if you didn’t tell them and b) every advantage brings with it a disadvantage.

    But it works. You can get people to spend hundreds of pounds to reduce the weight of their bike by less than the weight of a good poo, you can get them to spend thousands to change their bike for one with wheels that are 3% bigger and you can sell them a slightly different geometry that makes some bits of the ride more fun and some bits less fun. Viewed from outside the bubble it must look quite funny.

    moshimonster
    Member

    around 24 to 5lbs suits me.

    Well I really couldn’t build an all round trail bike at that weight (regardless of cost) that I would be happy to ride all day on interesting technical trails. You are obviously riding a different style of bike, guessing lightweight XC with sub 4″ travel or a HT. Nothing wrong with that of course and you may well have the skills to ride it over properly tough trails, but quite different to the bikes mentioned above.

    I like to make it a bit easier for myself and the extra 5 lb or so that goes into making a proper tough trail bike is well worth it – for me. All personal choice, but 29 lb is not heavy for the type of bike mentioned by the OP and won’t hold it back against a lighter bike on the sort of terrain intended. In fact should be much faster for the average rider. That’s why they exist.

    My current Banshee Spitfire weighs in around the 30lbs mark and it climbs a lot better than my old Stiffee did at 26lbs or my old Meta 55 which was about 32-34lbs ever did. My old Scott Voltage was a beast at 38lbs back when I rode that but I could still pedal it uphill at the end of the day.

    Even though the current crop of enduro/trail/nu skool seem heavy suspension design has come a long way and bikes pedal much more efficiently than they used too. I used to remember how badly pedal bob was on some bikes a few years back.

    munrobiker
    Member

    It does seem strange to me that you can buy a DH bike that is about 33lbs (like the Mondraker Summum which is 15kg) with 8″ travel, 203mm rotors, full chain guides and so on but you struggle to find a bike with 3″ less travel, less tough bits and narrower wheels and single ply tyres lighter than that for less than £3000.

    My bike is 160mm front, 150mm rear and weighs 26lbs. Spec is a carbon Stumpjumper Evo frame, Pike RCT3 Dual Positions, Easton Havens with XT brakes and a Zee drivetrain- it cost £2600 with a second hand frame and new everything else. It didn’t make sense for me to buy a complete bike for the same cost as they seem to have much higher weights and I suspect this is due to higher spec drivetrains being used with cheaper wheels and heavy bars/stem/tyres. There’s not really any need for it- manufacturers just need to get smarter with specs.

    The heaviest are obviously the 29ers and for me that puts me off them. I find a lighter bike less tiring to ride, easier to control both up and downhill and more enjoyable to ride. I’m about 11.5 stone and could lose half a stone but I know from experience that losing half a stone off me to get to my ideal weight will not make as much difference as the 7lbs (half a stone) I lost swapping from an Orange Five to the Stumpjumper.

    moshimonster
    Member

    The manufacturers would rather you swapped out your bike every year and will try and use whatever flavour of the month/fashion they can to persuade you that you should.

    Of course they would, but I’m sure they realise that only a tiny fraction of their market can actually afford a new bike on an annual basis.

    The less cynical viewpoint is that bikes are simply getting better and manufacturers are competing to get a slice of the market. As an engineer I see much better engineered bikes today than 10 years ago and there are a lot less dogs on the market.

    Sure you can enjoy riding almost any bike, but some are certainly more fun than others.

    Hob Nob
    Member

    Just give one to a STW rider, their magic scales will lose another 2-3lb off the weight for bragging rights.

    mt
    Member

    moshimonster

    As I said it’s your own choice. I’ve used FS and HT of various types for everything over the years, some of them with 140 travel up front but these days settled in on around 120. I’m no brilliant bike handler and know my limitations and like bike that can cover a bit of ground so balance out technical capability against distance capability. I have a choice of bikes but mostly ride my favorite HT, I just enjoy how how it rides. Have been to someplace that have had me and my bikes well out of there comfort zone :D, it’s all choice though and money :cry:.

    edit silly spelling

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 111 total)

The topic ‘How come all these nu-skool bikes are so heavy?’ is closed to new replies.