Old bikes were lighter?

rustyroger

Active Member
Interesting article.
However for hobby cyclists there must be a balance of weight, durability, and price.
I am reminded of an article I read by someone who prepared cars for rallying, he pointed out that over engineering strength inevitably led to performance inhibiting weight, too little and parts wouldn't last the distance. I think he summed it up neatly when he wrote; "You have done a perfect job if the car falls to bits as it crosses the finishing line in first place". ^_^

Roger.
 

screenman

Legendary Member
Interesting article.
However for hobby cyclists there must be a balance of weight, durability, and price.
I am reminded of an article I read by someone who prepared cars for rallying, he pointed out that over engineering strength inevitably led to performance inhibiting weight, too little and parts wouldn't last the distance. I think he summed it up neatly when he wrote; "You have done a perfect job if the car falls to bits as it crosses the finishing line in first place". ^_^

Roger.

I remember that being Colin Chapman's words.
 

Drago

Flouncing Nobber
As regards whole bikes, there is no industry standard for quoting. You can't compare sizes, as few manufacturers sizes exactly correlate with one another. Some quote ready to ride, some without tyres and pedals, and some not at all.

The whole thing is guff. Provided the bike isn't an after anvil it really is irrelevant. Even for top flight competition, pound for pound money spend on aero development brings a greater performance gain than mass reduction, so why people get so fixated with the minutiae of it is beyond me.
 
OP
E

Eziemnaik

Senior Member
As regards whole bikes, there is no industry standard for quoting. You can't compare sizes, as few manufacturers sizes exactly correlate with one another. Some quote ready to ride, some without tyres and pedals, and some not at all.

The whole thing is guff. Provided the bike isn't an after anvil it really is irrelevant. Even for top flight competition, pound for pound money spend on aero development brings a greater performance gain than mass reduction, so why people get so fixated with the minutiae of it is beyond me.
Agree, nevertheless if given a choice between 2 identical in functionality bikes most of us would pick up a lighter one
 

Drago

Flouncing Nobber
But if you could determine that the heavier bike was more aerodynamic, would you still pick the lighter one?

And what if the lighter one actually had heavier wheels, and thus more rotating mass, which in performance terms is worth 3 or 4 times it's own weight in non rotating mass? This is why bikes with a greater overall mass can sometimes feel significantly faster and more flighty than supposedly lighter machines.

People would blindly pick the lighter one, even when it goes against all logic.

And how would you know which is the lighter bike when there is no industry standard for declaring bike weight? Bike shops are pretty accommodating but generally draw the line at punters turning up with luggage scales.
 
Last edited:
Location
Brussels
Okay I was wrong, 28 spoke not 24.

I also loved that disc brakes add weight, followed by you can use a lighter rim if you are using disc brakes.
 

12boy

Veteran
Location
Casper WY USA
I've read the article as well and that Peter Weigle bike is very light, is probably very durable, and would be incredibly expensive. I wouldn't be surprised if you wouldn't wait a year or two to get one. I am sure you could get some carbon framed bike in that weight for far less, but a bike like the Weigle is in a very different class, kind of a work of art. Having said all that I ride for exercise, trying for 20 miles a day, most every day, and 5 pounds more is not a problem for me. I will concede I don't feel that way about studded snow tires, which while good on ice and snow, are not a lot of fun to ride on due tontheir sidewall rigidity and overall heaviness. There's a lot of sprightliness lost with those tires.
 

HMS_Dave

Senior Member
Location
Midlands
Nothing wrong a heavy bike unless you're a pro and it's your living. I own a fat bike (steel) and an elephant bike (even heavier) and only 3 speed. Because I am a large bloke as well, It's difficult at first but your muscles soon catch up. I'm more power over cadence now. My thighs are like tree trunks and surely they would be for nearly every day I've for 9 months or so I've been peddling over 300lbs around. My legs have never felt stronger in my life. I think we can adapt (within reason) to any bicycle.
 

Algarvecycling

Well-Known Member
My 8.4kg Trek Madone SLR is faster than my 5.8kg Wilier Zero.6. Everywhere except steep hills, that is. Both have 50mm aero wheels. The Trek is far more aero overall and my own experience is exactly what the science shows, aero beats weight in most situations. I recall my bikes from the 90's were around the weight of my Trek. Not nearly as quick though - although, back then, I was much quicker than I am now but engine aside, modern bikes are faster.

Aero and light? Surely the best combo.
 
Top Bottom