Saving Weight on a Spa Steel Tourer

[NetworkMan]

I've been trying to save some weight on my Spa Steel Tourer hoping to get the weight down from about 13.5 kg to around 12 kg. I realise that even though I only weigh about 60 kg., such a saving may not even be noticeable!
I've kept a record of weight saved and money spent so it's possible to calculate grams/£ saving.

1. Replace Topeak 750g carrier with Tubus Fly stainless
Saving 300 gm. Cost £65 Value 4.6 gm/£

2. Replace Brooks B17N saddle with Spa Aire Titanium
Saving 150 gm. Cost £68 Value 2.2 gm/£

3. Replace cheap Vavert mudguards with SKS Bluemels
Saving 140 gm. Cost £16 Value 8.8 gm/£

4. Replace heavy Rose Sari 18 wheels, plain spokes 36 hole with Spa cycles Kinlin XR22 rims 32 hole mostly DB spokes
Saving about 750gm. Cost £195 Value 4.0 gm./£

5. Abandon the 34T dinner plate cassette and change to a 13-26 one.
Saving about 150 gm Cost £11.50 Value 13.0 gm/£

Overall saving about 1.5 kg

Notes
2. I think I can feel the effect of the springier rails. It is, however, hard and will take some breaking in!
3. The old guards had thicker stays, chunkier fixing bolts and heavier gauge plastic. Guards are cheap and significant savings can be made.
4. Pretty sure that Rose quoted the wrong weight for these rims four years ago. They each weigh around 750 gm.; the Kinlin ones are only 450 gm.
5. Perhaps I don't really need a 19" bottom gear if unladen - will try 26T (25") and perhaps modify to 30T (22"). The big sprockets weigh about 100 gm each.

Possible further mods:
6. Abandon the steel frame and buy a Spa titanium one
Saving 400 gm. Cost £800 Value 0.5 gm./£
6a. If I'd bought the titanium one in the first place
Saving 400 gm. Cost £500 Value 0.8 gm./£
These both look poor value

7. Fit Schwalbe SV18 extralight innertubes
Saving 60gm Cost about £12 Value 5.0 gm./£
Possibly - the saving is worth double accelerating the bike,like wheel rims and may reduce rolling resistance. How durable are they?

8. Run the Vittoria Hypers tubeless - some people are doing this I read. Saving would be two tubes at about 150 gm each (less any sealant).

9. The bottom bracket is a possibility but a titanium one for £150+ and saving perhaps 150 gm is not very good value.

[whoof]

If you are going to ride it unladen then you could just buy a reasonably light-weight (sub 10 kg) road bike and use that knocking off at least 3.5 kg.
When touring I find that at some point I'm carrying a litre of milk, 500 g of pasta and various other food stuffs that all combine to well over a couple kgs, which take you back to square one.

[Cyril Haearn]

Plus One for marginal gains
You could sell the heavier parts and recalculate

[horizon]

f you are going to ride it unladen then you could just buy a reasonably light-weight (sub 10 kg) road bike and use that knocking off at least 3.5 kg.

I agree - it's the wrong strategy. The Spa Tourer is a (relatively) lightweight tourer but can carry heavy loads. The rear drop-out BTW is 132.5 which gives a clue as to what you could do with it. But if you really want a light bike (and don't mind sacrificing the load carrying capacity) then there are better starting points. Having said that, the frame weight difference won't be huge.

[Bmblbzzz]

I think you'll definitely notice a saving of 1.5kg, at least when unladen, in the way the bike handles. What it might not do is make you any faster. If funds and space allow, I'd be inclined to do as Whoof says; keep the Spa for touring and get yourself a proper fast bike for unladen riding (not necessarily a mamiloid fast bike, just something more inclined to riding with speed and effort). But it is going to cost more than replacing parts!

[PH]

Interesting stuff. Having sold my audax bike, I'm also on a similar mission to lighten my touring bikes. I have a good idea of their usage and the aim is to get them as light as possible without compromising that. Have you looked at seatposts and stems? It surprised me how different they can be. Also worth a look at what's carried, I've been through my everyday toolkit and taken 250g out of it. If you're carrying two tubes, double your saving on lightweights. Luggage is next, my traditional saddlebag and support is heavy for what it is, though I like the look. I'm also looking a QR for some kit, dynamo light, rack, guards, I have this stuff fitted even on rides when I know it won't be used, though I'm not sure I could be bothered to remove it even if it was easy.
Do your costings include the value of the surplus kit? My biggest single saving was a SS to Ti rack, selling the original gave a reasonable gm/£

Does it make any difference? I'm not convinced that it does much more than remove an excuse! I do notice when I carry it up the stairs, which is just about everyday. I'm also planning to lighten my camping kit by 3kg, so combined with bike and luggage that'll be a total of around 5kg, on a hilly tour I think that will be significant. Though not as significant as the rider shedding 10kg!

[PH]

When touring I find that at some point I'm carrying a litre of milk, 500 g of pasta and various other food stuffs that all combine to well over a couple kgs, which take you back to square one.

How are you back to square one? Wouldn't you have still bought the milk and pasta and therefore still have the same weight saving?
Plus not all of us buy kg's of shopping when we tour, or if we do it tends to be at the end of the day and we're not carrying it all the time.

[whoof]

When touring I find that at some point I'm carrying a litre of milk, 500 g of pasta and various other food stuffs that all combine to well over a couple kgs, which take you back to square one.

How are you back to square one? Wouldn't you have still bought the milk and pasta and therefore still have the same weight saving?
Plus not all of us buy kg's of shopping when we tour, or if we do it tends to be at the end of the day and we're not carrying it all the time.

Your back to square one as you have removed weight and then added it. I also try and buy food at the end of the day. But there are times, especially Sundays in other countries where the option to arrive at your destination in the afternoon or evening and find an open shop isn't there.

[Brucey]

it is worth mentioning that the costs of weight saving (making no allowance for the resale of the old parts) varies from ~£0.1/g to over £1/g so I guess an average is about £0.5/g or something. This being the case then any extra gizmo you carry that weighs (say) 100g might have 'cost' you about £50 or something in relation to potential weight saving via upgrades. Being careful about what you carry is the most cost effective way of going lightweight, for sure.

Also, it is usually cheaper to buy a new, lighter bike than to lighten an extant one, unless you are replacing parts that are worn out anyway, in which case you can apply a marginal cost increase vs benefit calculation. If you are built light, and don't need to carry a heavy load, there is much to be said for buying a lighter-built bike from the start; if you only weigh 60kg then you probably don't need a bike that is happy with a 90kg rider + 25kg luggage aboard.

Note that some (a few) lighter parts are equally strong but many are not, and have a more limited life expectancy. Thus a Ti BB is a lovely thing but mightn't last as long as a steel one and has different consequences to weight-saving via other means.

cheers

[whoof]

Note that some (a few) lighter parts are equally strong but many are not, and have a more limited life expectancy. Thus a Ti BB is a lovely thing but mightn't last as long as a steel one and has different consequences to weight-saving via other means.

cheers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeNU2HM6iOY

[fastpedaller]

I also have a Spa Tourer in steel, and when I investigated how much I could save by going lighter (but IMO maintaining function) the most I could save was 600g with a cost of £600, so I didn't bother. In this hot weather I've been taking along an additional bottle weighing 600g anyway , but it's better than dehydrating, which would slow me even more!

[NetworkMan]

If you are going to ride it unladen then you could just buy a reasonably light-weight (sub 10 kg) road bike and use that knocking off at least 3.5 kg.
When touring I find that at some point I'm carrying a litre of milk, 500 g of pasta and various other food stuffs that all combine to well over a couple kgs, which take you back to square one.

The frame and fork weigh virtually the same as the much acclaimed Thorn Audax; they are not particularly heavy. I also have a Dawes Audax which is only about 1 kg lighter or 500g since it has no carrier at present. Both these lack 35/37 mm flexible tyres run at low pressure which on rough surfaces roll much better and give a much better ride. This bike is intended to be run both laden and unladen!

[NetworkMan]

f you are going to ride it unladen then you could just buy a reasonably light-weight (sub 10 kg) road bike and use that knocking off at least 3.5 kg.

I agree - it's the wrong strategy. The Spa Tourer is a (relatively) lightweight tourer but can carry heavy loads. The rear drop-out BTW is 132.5 which gives a clue as to what you could do with it. But if you really want a light bike (and don't mind sacrificing the load carrying capacity) then there are better starting points. Having said that, the frame weight difference won't be huge.

What are these starting points if one wants to use wide 35-37 mm tyres? The frame is really not that heavy; the difference between it and a steel frame Audax bike is, I suspect, largely the lack of a carbon fibre fork and the relatively heavy tyres and tubes.

[NetworkMan]

I think you'll definitely notice a saving of 1.5kg, at least when unladen, in the way the bike handles. What it might not do is make you any faster. If funds and space allow, I'd be inclined to do as Whoof says; keep the Spa for touring and get yourself a proper fast bike for unladen riding (not necessarily a mamiloid fast bike, just something more inclined to riding with speed and effort). But it is going to cost more than replacing parts!

See previous comments.

[NetworkMan]

it is worth mentioning that the costs of weight saving (making no allowance for the resale of the old parts) varies from ~£0.1/g to over £1/g so I guess an average is about £0.5/g or something. This being the case then any extra gizmo you carry that weighs (say) 100g might have 'cost' you about £50 or something in relation to potential weight saving via upgrades. Being careful about what you carry is the most cost effective way of going lightweight, for sure.

Also, it is usually cheaper to buy a new, lighter bike than to lighten an extant one, unless you are replacing parts that are worn out anyway, in which case you can apply a marginal cost increase vs benefit calculation. If you are built light, and don't need to carry a heavy load, there is much to be said for buying a lighter-built bike from the start; if you only weigh 60kg then you probably don't need a bike that is happy with a 90kg rider + 25kg luggage aboard.

Note that some (a few) lighter parts are equally strong but many are not, and have a more limited life expectancy. Thus a Ti BB is a lovely thing but mightn't last as long as a steel one and has different consequences to weight-saving via other means.

cheers

Someone on here a little while ago made the comment that being low weight was a blessing. That may be true but there is a problem in that just about everything nowadays is over-engineered for thin lightweight people (including clothes which are usually too big!). For example, I can buy wheels with the lightest rims I can find without paying the earth but hubs with less that 32 spokes cost extra probably because there is little demand.
Agreed there is a difference between buying new to replace a worn out part and buying new and selling on the old one or throwing away something serviceable, Generally my my costings don't assume any value for the old parts, though in fact I'll certainly be using some of them.