Tin Pot
Guru
But the weight minimum was to prevent frames getting lighter and dangerously weak - if ballast is used then it's a bit of a joke. Isn't it?
Is it really 95% the Rider and 5% the Bike...
- Thread starter bpsmith
- Start date
- Status
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
But the weight minimum was to prevent frames getting lighter and dangerously weak - if ballast is used then it's a bit of a joke. Isn't it?
winjim
Straddle the line, discord and rhyme
Well yes, at three and a half grand for the frameset I'm sure it'll be an earner for them. I notice their quoted weight of 780g for the frame is for the matt black version, since the celeste paint job is measurably heavierWell you could have a lighter bike than the pros.
Some folk think it's 95% bike and 5% legs.
Clean bikes are the fastest by 1000% don't you know.
Citius
Guest
It is a bit of a joke, but I think that's why Mr Cookson is open to reviewing the UCI limit again soon, mainly because materials are now at the point where perceived frame weakness is less of an issue. Outside of the world tour, bikes keep getting lighter simply because manufacturers see a market for lighter bikes. Mainly because - to the uneducated - lighter must mean faster.
Crandoggler
Senior Member
That's true though isn't it?
Citius
Guest
Sorry, what is?
Crandoggler
Senior Member
Light = fast?
Tin Pot
Guru
I've dropped 4kg body weight since August 1st, and yet hills are still really tough. Outrageous.
It's a rip off - I want my 4kg back (in lost wine and cheese evenings).
Citius
Guest
Only to people who don't take the time or trouble to fully understand the issue.
Crandoggler
Senior Member
If it makes you feel better, I managed to gain 8lb since I started cycling. I'm no racing snake either! Weight should come off, not on.
- Citius, I was winding you up mate.
fossyant
Ride It Like You Stole It!
- Location
- South Manchester
Well yes, at three and a half grand for the frameset I'm sure it'll be an earner for them. I notice their quoted weight of 780g for the frame is for the matt black version, since the celeste paint job is measurably heavier
Paint adds 300g or more.
When I specced chromed rear triangle and forks on my best bike many years ago, the frame builder said it was heavier than paint....
I had just specced the Columbus SLX tubing that was 25g heavier than SL due to the rifling within the tubes to increase strength (like Pinarello do now with plastic - not new tech).
Citius
Guest
Sorry - remind me to add a laughing smiley next time..
On the 'light = fast' point though - it's fair to say there is a massive amount more to it than just that simple equation.
This is well worth a read if you have the time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_performance
fossyant
Ride It Like You Stole It!
- Location
- South Manchester
I lost 6kg recently. 10 days off the bike and its re-appeared. WTF.... 
Of course it's mainly the rider, when the bikes are levelled in such a manner.
If bikes don't make any difference though, then why not pick something heavier?
Tin Pot
Guru
Who, on this thread, do you think is arguing that bikes don't make *any* difference to cyclist performance?
swansonj
Guru
Yeah, but if everyone is agreed that bikes do make a difference, why are we on the twelth page of bad tempered argument?
- Status
