Modern bike weights

[Si]

Interesting how light road bikes have gotten. Although some seem to be getting heavier again with the advent of disc brakes.

Of course, at the end of the day, Chris Froome (and half the people on this forum) would still beat me up any hill if he were on a Rayleigh Stowaway and I were on the lightest bike available! And I'm sure that when the journos talk about a bike 'feeling' fast or slow half of them actually mean that they think it's fast because it feel stiff and unyielding rather than actually being fast.

Looking at certain mag they had a review of £500 road bikes....that's just a bit more than my hand built 653 frameset alone cost 20 years ago (a gift from that nice police man who didn't understand giveways!). The bikes are all reported as being lighter than my 653 when it was built up as a multi geared bike. Just goes to show that what we once thought of as a bit of a special bike would very much be seen as lower end of the market these days if you go on weight alone. 'Tis all relative.

[blackbike]

Interesting how light road bikes have gotten. Although some seem to be getting heavier again with the advent of disc brakes.

Is a bike with disc brakes really a road bike?

Aren't they called sportive or endurance bikes or other such names to distinguish them from pure road bikes?

[Psamathe]

In the real world and from the weights quoted above, does it make a big difference when, avoid that extra cup of coffee and you've saved third of a Kg, and on the basis that many of us would probably suffer few ill effects were we to lose a few extra Kg excess body weight, etc.

So is bike weight different from overall weight e.g. cycling along person(70Kg)+Bike(11Kg)=71Kg vs person(73Kg)+bike(8Kg)=71Kg - is there a difference due to the weights (rather than from the different frame geometry given that the lighter bike is maybe designed for different type of riding)?

Ian

[foxyrider]

Here are my actual bike weights as weighed ready to ride including pedals (i'm sort of known hereabouts as the weight weenie - I weigh everything!)

gravel/adventure: 10.5kg Al frame, lighting, discs, fat tyres, racks

Can you tell me about the spec/model here?

Strictly speaking it's a CX bike, a 2014 Focus Mares AX - it was delivered with guards and dyno hub and Shimano Tiagra 10s - Not being a Shimano fan I binned that stuff and it now runs Campag 11s mix and match set up ( bits of Veloce (fm), Athena (carbon ergos), Record (Ti mid rm) and Super Record - well the chainset was sitting doing nothing). 50/34 chainset 12-29 Miche cassette, Shimano PDM540 pedals (the only bit of Shimano that i've found to work on a par with Campy!)TRP HyRd brakes with 180 front rotor and a bunch of tyres from 28 Gatorskins to Schwalbe Ice spikes depending on requirements. It gets used for non tarmac stuff, touring, camping, training and commuting - well pretty much anything. It was @ 1kg heavier ex factory.

A lot of off the peg 'Gravel' bikes are much heavier and poorly specced - lack of rack/mudguard mounts, poor choice of wheels/tyres and even gearing. My original gravel bike was put together in 1978 - apart from the brakes it was everything and did everything the 'new' machines do. It was cheap, basic and a lot of fun in its various guises across ten years or so. Of course we didn't call them gravel bikes then - it was the winter hack - weighed a ton of course but nobody cared as everyone used something similar hereabouts. (a Sunday run would often include several miles of bridleway/green lanes - you wouldn't even contemplate going out without guards if you wanted to go out again!)

Them was the days!

[foxyrider]

Interesting how light road bikes have gotten. Although some seem to be getting heavier again with the advent of disc brakes.

Is a bike with disc brakes really a road bike?

Aren't they called sportive or endurance bikes or other such names to distinguish them from pure road bikes?

Disc brakes are banned from the euro 'sportives' i've ridden - it's a UK thing to have them as there are a lot of gullible buyers out there.

Without allowing for beefed up frames/forks and bulkier Sti's etc you can expect disc brakes to add @500gr to a road bikes weight.

[Bmblbzzz]

Isn't that because many European sportives are run in accordance with (but not under the auspices of) UCI rules? The UCI will inevitably allow disc brakes in road competition again with the next couple of years, if only because of commercial pressure, and once that happens, there will be competitive pressure to lighten them.

[whoof]

Interesting how light road bikes have gotten. Although some seem to be getting heavier again with the advent of disc brakes.

Is a bike with disc brakes really a road bike?

Aren't they called sportive or endurance bikes or other such names to distinguish them from pure road bikes?

Disc brakes are banned from the euro 'sportives' i've ridden - it's a UK thing to have them as there are a lot of gullible buyers out there.

Without allowing for beefed up frames/forks and bulkier Sti's etc you can expect disc brakes to add @500gr to a road bikes weight.

The UCI has allowed 'trials' of disc brake in Pro races to start again this season. According to the link below they were allowed again in sportives from June 2016.

http://www.sportive.com/cycling/523005/ ... -sportives

[Samuel D]

Without allowing for beefed up frames/forks and bulkier Sti's etc you can expect disc brakes to add @500gr to a road bikes weight.

Allowing for those changes, which are necessary after all, the weight penalty seems to be around 1 kg.

It’s interesting to note that many pro racers ride bicycles well over the 6.8 kg UCI weight limit. Kittel’s new disc-braked machine weighs 7.95 kg, and he’s already won on it. This supports my suspicion that bicycle weight isn’t a big deal for non-racers except in their heads.

(The climbers’ bicycles are closer to 6.8 kg on hilly stages. I suppose disc brakes will be a while coming to those machines.)

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
I am well out of fashion starting life on a rod brake bike which was shared of course.
Newest bike is 96 Raleigh, unless you count skip trainer where the frame and some other stuff cost a fiver was made in 2000

I am curious, does a 7.5 kg bike have a 15 year guarantee and is it non CF ?

[foxyrider]

Hi,
I am well out of fashion starting life on a rod brake bike which was shared of course.
Newest bike is 96 Raleigh, unless you count skip trainer where the frame and some other stuff cost a fiver was made in 2000

I am curious, does a 7.5 kg bike have a 15 year guarantee and is it non CF ?

What do you think will be guaranteed for 15 years? The only thing I can think of will be post Brexit woes.
Pretty sure you should at least try a newer bike - things have changed this century! Who knows you might even like some of it

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
I am well out of fashion starting life on a rod brake bike which was shared of course.
Newest bike is 96 Raleigh, unless you count skip trainer where the frame and some other stuff cost a fiver was made in 2000

I am curious, does a 7.5 kg bike have a 15 year guarantee and is it non CF ?

What do you think will be guaranteed for 15 years? The only thing I can think of will be post Brexit woes.
Pretty sure you should at least try a newer bike - things have changed this century! Who knows you might even like some of it

Sorry the question was specifically aimed at frames as my Raleigh was guaranteed for 15 years.
I am assuming that a 7.5 kg bike is CF?

I bought a Koga-Miyata new in 83 that was state of the art.
Also a motorcycle in 83 new state of the art.

If I could afford new bikes then I might be tempted, I am not dismissing modern tech just questioning

[The utility cyclist]

For the sake of argument:

• road/race replica: 8 kg (7 kg if you spend car money)
• audax: 10–11 kg (mudguards, comfy saddle, dynamo lights, three chainrings, etc.)
• road endurance: 9 kg (carbon, disc brakes)
• gravel/adventure: 12 kg (steel, discs, big tyres, etc.)

Exceptions abound, of course. If I bought a ‘race’ bike it would likely be steel and therefore more than 8 kg.

What is car money, £250, 500, £1K, £2K, £3K, £10K, £20K. £40k, £100k, £250k, £1M ...? A brand new mini in 1976 cost £1248 (now £15k), a Hugh Porter 'Bantel' with weinmann brakes and 5 gears was reduced to £50 in Argos from £72, any idea how much a top of the range 1976 bike was, that's right, "car money" bikes are much more affordable now.

Realistic weight ranges based on what is available/ridden
Race rep 5.5-7kg
Audax sans kit 8-11kg
Road Endurance 7-9kg
Gravel adventure 7.5-11kg
Touring 7kg upwards
to compare a higher end team Raleigh weighed c.21lb with tubs in 1976, 1971 Carbon fibre bike (at York Rally 1971) 13lb 10oz Panaonic track (1975) 10.5lb

The weight diff isn't massive in some instances but what is is how convenience/ease of braking and gear changing, transfer of effort is much more effective. Also affordability but biggest of all is choice it's massive from bikes to components to accessories/clothing.

[Bonefishblues]

Can you tell me about the spec/model here?

Strictly speaking it's a CX bike, a 2014 Focus Mares AX - it was delivered with guards and dyno hub and Shimano Tiagra 10s - Not being a Shimano fan I binned that stuff and it now runs Campag 11s mix and match set up ( bits of Veloce (fm), Athena (carbon ergos), Record (Ti mid rm) and Super Record - well the chainset was sitting doing nothing). 50/34 chainset 12-29 Miche cassette, Shimano PDM540 pedals (the only bit of Shimano that i've found to work on a par with Campy!)TRP HyRd brakes with 180 front rotor and a bunch of tyres from 28 Gatorskins to Schwalbe Ice spikes depending on requirements. It gets used for non tarmac stuff, touring, camping, training and commuting - well pretty much anything. It was @ 1kg heavier ex factory.

A lot of off the peg 'Gravel' bikes are much heavier and poorly specced - lack of rack/mudguard mounts, poor choice of wheels/tyres and even gearing. My original gravel bike was put together in 1978 - apart from the brakes it was everything and did everything the 'new' machines do. It was cheap, basic and a lot of fun in its various guises across ten years or so. Of course we didn't call them gravel bikes then - it was the winter hack - weighed a ton of course but nobody cared as everyone used something similar hereabouts. (a Sunday run would often include several miles of bridleway/green lanes - you wouldn't even contemplate going out without guards if you wanted to go out again!)

Them was the days!

Thanks, am pondering a bike for all (my) purposes so starting to think about specs etc. Thread likely incoming...

[Samuel D]

So is bike weight different from overall weight e.g. cycling along person(70Kg)+Bike(11Kg)=71Kg vs person(73Kg)+bike(8Kg)=71Kg - is there a difference due to the weights (rather than from the different frame geometry given that the lighter bike is maybe designed for different type of riding)?

To a first approximation, there’s no difference.

Your climbing speed is simply proportional to your power output divided by your all-up weight. How that weight is divided between cyclist and bicycle makes no difference in itself (though as you suggest, bicycles of different weights may have other differences; likewise, cyclists of different weights may actually have different power outputs).

Your acceleration on the flat also depends on power and all-up weight. How the weight is split between rider and machine makes no difference. A recent thread shows that even splitting the weight differently between rotational and static parts makes little difference within the small range of practical possibilities. So, roughly speaking, light wheels only matter to the extent that they reduce the total rider-and-machine weight.

On the flat at cruising speed, weight is almost completely irrelevant because it’s not being accelerated and it only fractionally changes the rolling resistance, which itself only accounts for a fraction of power consumption.

All that said, a light bicycle often feels nice to ride and is easy to carry up stairs, etc.

What is car money

Well, it typically costs about £3k to £4k to get the weight down to 7 kg. Though you can spend over £8k for a similar weight if you want something like Chris Froome’s bicycle. No doubt you can get to 7 kg for less than £3k if you shop for a month, but my list of weights was typical weights, not foolish minimums. I’d like to see what passes for a tourer at your suggested 7 kg! And while you gave 7.5–11 kg for gravel/adventure, most such bicycles actually being sold weigh more than even your upper limit.

As a side note, manufacturers’ claims aren’t a good guide to weight, because they usually fib and don’t include pedals.

[Si]

We also have to remember that there is a these on paper calculations may give relative comparisons for a particular lab conditions instant but dont always work so well in the real world. For instance the two bikes i used to use for audaxes: one light and stiff, the other heavier, flexier and with squishier tyres. If i were to jump on them now and time myself up my road the lighter one would undoubtedly win due to simple physics. But on audaxes the heavier one seemed to get round quicker especially as the distance increased. All simply because it was more comfortable so i felt less fatigued from road buz and aches in the latter halves of the rides.
However if i was a tdf rider doing the same thing the lighter bike may well be faster as the rider would be more atuned to the less comfortable bike and generally less sensitive to fatigue.
From which i deduce that its not just horses for courses but also horses for riders.