Bike weight vs rider weight.

[Over The Hill]

The difference between what is regarded as a lighweight bike and a more middleweight one is only about 4kg. Your really would not notice that weight given the whole bike and rider are probably around 100kg.
Going from what The Doctor says 90% if the weight issue is with the rider.

 

[TrevorM]

So if I have understood the previous replies, for the type of riding that most of us do, (not racing at 35mph), lightweight bikes are not faster and are not more efficient. So are people who buy carbon frames just wasting their money? I've always had steel frames and assumed carbon was better, faster, (stronger?). I'll stick with steel then.

 

[Smokin Joe]

So if I have understood the previous replies, for the type of riding that most of us do, (not racing at 35mph), lightweight bikes are not faster and are not more efficient. So are people who buy carbon frames just wasting their money? I've always had steel frames and assumed carbon was better, faster, (stronger?). I'll stick with steel then.

The lighter bike will require less effort to propel (or will go faster for the same effort), unless someone has re-invented physics since I was at school.

Whether it makes a difference to you depends on what you use it for. Short flat commutes no, racing or meeting a climb at the back end of a 100 mile ride, yes.

 

[yello]

[quote name]So are people who buy carbon frames just wasting their money?[/quote]

No, not at all. They're are all manner of valid reasons for buying carbon, including vanity and/or fashion victim. We're all adults (well....), can spend our money on whatever we like and it's of no concern to anyone else (except praps the other half )

...not that I own, or even want, a carbon fibre frame.

 

[GordonB]

Having lost more weight in the last 18 months than two of my bikes weigh I can certainly testify to an increase in speed associated with a loss of overall mass. However, I sometimes wonder how much benefit there is to buying light components in comparison to reducing frictional losses in the drivetrain and wheels. I know my bike buddy (Rezillo) swears that as soon as puts wider tyres on his speed drops, and I tend to agree. I've just bought a Vitus 979 and for the first time I've ridden a bike with 21mm tubs on. Pumped up to 140psi there seems to very little rolling resistance, definitely less than on my other bikes that all have 23mm clinchers (either Vittoria Rubino or Gatorskins) and I reckon this may be more important than shifting a few grams off the weight, and probably cheaper too. It also helps that the hubs are probably the smoothest I have ever known, spin the front wheel while the bike is on the workstand and it seems to spin forever.

Gordon

 

[Ozrider]

Hi All

If I can throw in some personal experience over the last few months....I weigh a tad over 100kgs and have recently gone through a few upgrades.

Firstly I upgraded the wheelset on my Alloy Frame to a set of Fulcrum 5's, next I replaced my Alloy Forks with a full carbon set, then a couple of months later a deal on a Felt Carbon frame come up that was to good to pass up.

1. Wheelset - this made a huge difference, the bike felt faster and easier to keep moving forward when I hit a rise or hill.
2. The carbon forks basically had the same effect as the 38mm tyres I have on my Flatbar, it soaks up the bigger bumps.
3. The Carbon Frame feels more flexible and again soaks up the bumps so is a lot more comfortable.
4. The Carbon Frame feels more responsive, i.e. when I hit a rise or a hill it feels easier to keep the momentum going.

To put this all into perspective I took my old steel Flatbar out yesterday as it was cold and wet, I rode it on a regular route and overall it was around 10kph slower in all areas. I have bar ends fitted and the bike is as close to the road bike as I can get it as far as riding position.

In Summary, Wheelset made the biggest difference, followed by the Forks. Overall Weight, 8.6kg compared to my 14.5kg Flatbar 10kph difference.

 

[JtB]

Losing the weight on the bike gives you the benefits only while you're cycling, but losing the weight on the body gives you the benefits in other areas too ;-)

 

[TrevorM]

Whether it makes a difference to you depends on what you use it for. Short flat commutes no, racing or meeting a climb at the back end of a 100 mile ride, yes.

I agree with that. Which means, as I said, for the type of riding that most of us do, they are a waste of money.

 

[subaqua]

Losing the weight on the bike gives you the benefits only while you're cycling, but losing the weight on the body gives you the benefits in other areas too ;-)

yeah losing weight on a bike costs a fortune ( well Ok £500 for me) and also a fortune in new clothes due to losing approx 2.5 stones in 3 months.(15 kilos so 34 odd pounds ) next target another 2.5 stone by easter.

 

[Ozrider]

Losing the weight on the bike gives you the benefits only while you're cycling, but losing the weight on the body gives you the benefits in other areas too ;-)

For me losing a couple of Kilos of the bike is a damn site easier than me losing weight, the older I get the fatter I get.

 

[GordonB]

For me losing a couple of Kilos of the bike is a damn site easier than me losing weight, the older I get the fatter I get.

My doctor recommended an infallible regime for weight loss, the Elf* diet, worked for me.

Gordon





*Eat less food

 

[dan_bo]

Actually, where IS Jimbo?