# Sub 8kg bike for not too much money



## Rooster1 (16 Mar 2015)

My main criteria for a new bike is weight, and I have set a max weight of 8kgG on a budget of £1000 for complete.Road Bike from new. Naturally one assumes only carbon can deliver this sort of reasonable weight.
It's annoying that most manufacturers and some review sites don't give a total weight for a given specification.

Sound impossible?

My findings thus far....

Worlds lightest bike is *£N/A* *2.7 kg*/ 6lb

Giant Defy 3 (Alu) *£699* - *9.5kg *total (For comparison to what I have)

Trek Emonda Sl5 (Car) *£1900* - *8.1 kg* (frame 1,050g)

Viner Gladium SRAM Rival 22 Road Bike (Car) *£799.99* (frame 1,124G) - Don't have total weight.

Fuji Roubaix 1.1 (Alu) *£875* *8.58kg*/18.93lb

KTM Revelator 3300 (Car), *£1299* - *8.37kg*/18.46lb

Canyon Ultimate CF SL9.0 (Car) *£1899* -  *7.45kg
*
_*Then I came across the ....*_

Trek Madone 2.1 Alu, *£1000 -* *8kg *as reviewed in Cycling Weekly

Any other suggestions ?

@ianrauk I hope this thread has sufficient info


----------



## Markymark (16 Mar 2015)

Yeah. Adjust the overall weight by losing some and making sure the money is spent on decent components.


----------



## Rooster1 (16 Mar 2015)

I also posted previously a separate thread, "How to lose 2 stone instead of buying a lighter bike", except that was two years ago and I lost the weight already.


----------



## jack smith (16 Mar 2015)

Build your own, i built a scott foil with sram rival 22 that came in at 7.4 kilo for way under a grand, my current cervelo r5 is the same along with the tarmac and venge i built just keep a. eye out for second hand, ex display or on sale frames and build it up with good wheels and components


----------



## ianrauk (16 Mar 2015)

What about Rose?
They have some lightweight bikes at good prices.


----------



## Rooster1 (16 Mar 2015)

ROSE XEON CRS-2000, approx. 7.05 KG - £ 1,340.41 

Awesome.


----------



## mattobrien (16 Mar 2015)

Cube Agree GTC Race £1,399 & 7.9kgs here

Cracking value with full Ultegra and carbon too.

Only a mere 40% above your £1k budget


----------



## vickster (16 Mar 2015)

Under 7kg apparently http://www.rosebikes.co.uk/bike/rose-xeon-rs-3000-669083/aid:669196


----------



## Dave Davenport (16 Mar 2015)

Why does it have to be under 8kg?


----------



## Markymark (16 Mar 2015)

Dave Davenport said:


> Why does it have to be under 8kg?


Cheaper postage? 

PS OP, well done on the 2 st weight loss.


----------



## Rooster1 (16 Mar 2015)

Dave Davenport said:


> Why does it have to be under 8kg?



I wanted to set a bench mark to compare to, and as my current bike is 9.5 KG, 8 KG seemed like a good weight. I figured 7KG would be too light to get in budget.


----------



## Drago (16 Mar 2015)

What's the point of an 8kg bike if it flexes like John Inman's wrist in a semaphore class? It needs to be light, stiif, and complaint in the required directions. Mass alone is a very poor indicator.


----------



## youngoldbloke (16 Mar 2015)

Most of the Rose road bikes are listed as below 8kg - even those under £1k, but my Xeon CRS3000 is actually over 7kg with pedals, bottle cages, computer etc, fitted and I don't think it was ever as light as the quoted figure.


----------



## BrianEvesham (16 Mar 2015)

Is 8.9 kg to heavy?
http://www.decathlon.co.uk/alur-700-road-bike-id_8290145.html
Lot of bike for £600


----------



## Dave7 (16 Mar 2015)

I really dont want to ignore your question as it was quite specific but TBH you could end up with a super light bike that rides like a bag of spanners if that is your main consideration. Good frame with the best components for your budget would ensure a better ride than simply the lightest bike.
That Decathlon bike Brian has pointed out seems like a lot of bike for the money.


----------



## Levo-Lon (16 Mar 2015)

Planet x pro carbon ultegra for 700,800 around 8kg


----------



## wxbull (17 Mar 2015)

my secteur is probably 11kg or more but aiming for personal 8 kg loss this summer so will be like riding 3kg by august


----------



## Saluki (18 Mar 2015)

meta lon said:


> Planet x pro carbon ultegra for 700,800 around 8kg


7.82kg mine came in at.


----------



## Tojo (18 Mar 2015)

Saluki said:


> 7.82kg mine came in at.


I've got mine down to 7.2kg, changed seat, hb stem, seat and have got my Zondas on, med frame by the way....


----------



## steveindenmark (18 Mar 2015)

Is 2 kg going to make any difference?


----------



## MrGrumpy (18 Mar 2015)

err yes it does, its certainly noticeable but the best investment in bike lightening other than the rider losing weight is some proper stiff lightweight wheels!


----------



## tincaman (18 Mar 2015)

Rooster1 said:


> My main criteria for a new bike is weight, and I have set a max weight of 8kgG on a budget of £1000 for complete.Road Bike from new. Naturally one assumes only carbon can deliver this sort of reasonable weight.
> It's annoying that most manufacturers and some review sites don't give a total weight for a given specification.
> 
> Sound impossible?
> ...



2015 Trek Madone is quoted as 8.9Kg, by Trek which means its probably a bit portlier


----------



## Rooster1 (18 Mar 2015)

Tojo said:


> I've got mine down to 7.2kg, changed seat, hb stem, seat and have got my Zondas on, med frame by the way....


I think Planet X is where I will go - looks lush


----------



## Mugshot (18 Mar 2015)

steveindenmark said:


> Is 2 kg going to make any difference?


Does it matter? Rooster has some cash he wants to spend and he knows what he wants to spend it on.


----------



## vickster (18 Mar 2015)

Don't forget to allow a quarter of your budget for decent wheels. The Planet X carbon frame is £300, build your own bike, although with decent wheels, the price will creep up

The ultegra build is £900 now, although 105 isn't much heavier


----------



## ianrauk (18 Mar 2015)

steveindenmark said:


> Is 2 kg going to make any difference?




Out of interest, how much does your scooter weigh?


----------



## Rooster1 (18 Mar 2015)

Mugshot said:


> Does it matter? Rooster has some cash he wants to spend and he knows what he wants to spend it on.



To me yes, I've been climbing the same hills on the same bike for five years, the bike is older, and I am older, but I can't eeek out anymore speed - so I wan't to cheat and get a lighter bike so my climbs are quicker. I will still use my Alu Defy in the winter and training - but I wan't a smart summer "dry" weather bike. I can't afford or justify anything over £1100/1200, so I need the lightest machine for the least outlay.


----------



## Rob3rt (18 Mar 2015)

What you want is what you want and you should spend the money how you see fit.

That being said 2kg won't make much difference to your climbing speed unless you are pretty lightweight overall. Probably almost undetectable (I await the anecdotes about sensations of floating uphill, Strava KOM's and Sportive conquering's), you are talking a couple of seconds here, a couple of seconds there. If that is what you are expecting, then great, if you are expecting a world of difference, it might be an idea to align expectations with reality.


----------



## cisamcgu (18 Mar 2015)

Regardless of the weight of the bike, I *always *climb better on a new one, at least for the first day or so, then normality returns 

Never under-estimate new-bike syndrome !


----------



## Smokin Joe (18 Mar 2015)

steveindenmark said:


> Is 2 kg going to make any difference?


There's no such thing as a free lunch, every extra gram requires more power to move it.


----------



## Mugshot (18 Mar 2015)

Rooster1 said:


> To me yes, I've been climbing the same hills on the same bike for five years, the bike is older, and I am older, but I can't eeek out anymore speed - so I wan't to cheat and get a lighter bike so my climbs are quicker. I will still use my Alu Defy in the winter and training - but I wan't a smart summer "dry" weather bike. I can't afford or justify anything over £1100/1200, so I need the lightest machine for the least outlay.


Exactly, the point I was making is that you have a clear idea of what you want and it's your money to spend as you see fit, because before long the thread will decend into a will you climb faster or not debate, which isn't what you asked for


----------



## Arrowfoot (18 Mar 2015)

Rob3rt said:


> What you want is what you want and you should spend the money how you see fit.
> 
> That being said 2kg won't make much difference to your climbing speed unless you are pretty lightweight overall. Probably almost undetectable (I await the anecdotes about sensations of floating uphill, Strava KOM's and Sportive conquering's), you are talking a couple of seconds here, a couple of seconds there. If that is what you are expecting, then great, if you are expecting a world of difference, it might be an idea to align expectations with reality.



If all the things remains equal including riders weight and fitness, 2 kg or estimated 20% less bike weight would make an appreciable difference. Its science.


----------



## Rooster1 (18 Mar 2015)

I've read a few books on sport and weight, and I appreciate that 2lb off of me, will be a far greater improvement over 2lb off of the machine. But I literally don't have much more I can lose. I will keep trying though.


----------



## vickster (18 Mar 2015)

Why not try better wheels on the Defy for a bit while the weather is still unreliable. Zondas or Fulcrum 3s are popular at under £300. Then you can shift them to the new bike later


----------



## Rob3rt (18 Mar 2015)

Arrowfoot said:


> If all the things remains equal including riders weight and fitness, 2 kg or estimated 20% less bike weight would make an appreciable difference. Its science.



It will make a difference, the magnitude of the difference however will not be particularly large, probably not legitimately perceptible real time (unless the rider is very light) and timed efforts up the same climb would vary by only small amounts.



Mugshot said:


> Exactly, the point I was making is that you have a clear idea of what you want and it's your money to spend as you see fit, because *before long the thread will decend into a will you climb faster or not debate, which isn't what you asked for *



Oop's.... to be fair, the hope of climbing faster was one of the drivers in asking the question, as such it is not really irrelevant to consider/discuss the realities of this.


----------



## Mugshot (18 Mar 2015)

Rob3rt said:


> Oop's.... to be fair, the hope of climbing faster was one of the drivers in asking the question, as such it is not really irrelevant to consider/discuss the realities of this.


 And to be fair there was no hope that it wouldn't become the expected discussion anyway.

Edit: However I do find it a little frustrating sometimes when people say what they'd like to spend _their _money on and are then questioned not from the angle of challenging expectations in order to help but more as a thinly veiled attack because it isn't what the questioner would spend their money on.
I know you weren't doing this by the way.


----------



## youngoldbloke (18 Mar 2015)

I have 4 bikes. It is easier to climb a given hill on the lightest one. The lightest has the best wheels. The next 2 have the same wheels. Hills are easier on the lighter one. Gearing is very similar on all of these 3, though I find I am not using as low a gear on the lightest as on the others. Weight does make a difference. Maybe not faster, but easier. BTW I'm under 62kg, could lose another few kg maybe, but not over weight. Also 68 this year, so figure I'll take advantage of any help I can get .


----------



## Justinslow (18 Mar 2015)

Off topic but - there must be a point where the rider can be too light and therefore not have enough muscle strength to actually pedal the thing very far?

And are all the weights quoted by your good selves with the addition of real world items such as - pedals, tools, computers, lights, saddle bags, bottles, etc etc. if you are just weighing it as it came out of the box what use is that? And if you carry your "stuff" in your pockets you need to include that aswell I would have thought, as it would otherwise be in a saddle bag attached to the bike. Surely the weight figure needs to be as "you" would take it out for a "reasonable" ride.
For instance, my bike comes in at around 9kg bare but with the addition of all the tat goes up to something like 10.5kg.
Edit. And if I fill both my bottles it goes up to 12kg!
Edit 2. If I fill both bottles and I get on to ride, my "all up" weight is 87kg.


----------



## steveindenmark (18 Mar 2015)

ianrauk said:


> Out of interest, how much does your scooter weigh?



I have 2 Ian. A steel one andan alu one. The alu one is lighter and faster, but I put that down to the wheels more than the weight. But as I dont have gears to help, maybe the lack of weight does help.

The alu one weighs 6.9kg and the steel one weighs 10kg. The steel one is more akin to a mountain bike and the alu to a road bike.


----------



## nickyboy (18 Mar 2015)

Using www.bikecalculator.com if you reduce bike weight by 2 kg you can expect to reduce a 24 minute climb by 29 seconds


----------



## vickster (18 Mar 2015)

A 24 minute climb  I'd be dead and buried by the top!

(trying to recall how long it took to get up Box Hill last time...not that long)!


----------



## MrGrumpy (18 Mar 2015)

/looks at bathroom scales 94kg then over at the lightweight carbon steed 7.5kg. Hmmmmmmm.


----------



## Levo-Lon (18 Mar 2015)

http://www.planetx.co.uk/i/q/CBPXRT...271811285&mc_cid=04fbfa1459&mc_eid=1f08b6a32f


----------



## nickyboy (18 Mar 2015)

vickster said:


> A 24 minute climb  I'd be dead and buried by the top!
> 
> (trying to recall how long it took to get up Box Hill last time...not that long)!



Put in the parameters for my local climb, Snake Pass

Anyway, it's the same % reduction in time give or take for a given hill. About 2%


----------



## vickster (18 Mar 2015)

nickyboy said:


> Put in the parameters for my local climb, Snake Pass
> 
> Anyway, it's the same % reduction in time give or take for a given hill. About 2%


I've driven across it, that was tiring enough  In fact I was a passenger  Lovely scenery though


----------



## ColinJ (18 Mar 2015)

nickyboy said:


> Using www.bikecalculator.com if you reduce bike weight by 2 kg you can expect to reduce a 24 minute climb by 29 seconds


Interesting ...

It won't be a scientific test, but I might do the Cragg Vale climb twice on the same day in the Spring, once on my Basso (about 22 lbs) and once on my Cannondale (about 18 lbs). I reckon I could do it at least 29 seconds quicker on the Cannondale because it weighs less, is stiffer, and has a newer, much nicer transmission. (It feels more efficient. What that actually translates to on the road is another matter.)

If I do my little test, I'll come back to this thread and post my results below. (I'll ride the Basso first in case the second ride is slower due to fatigue. If I save 29 seconds on the second ride, then it might have been even quicker if I hadn't done the other ride first.)


----------



## nickyboy (18 Mar 2015)

vickster said:


> I've driven across it, that was tiring enough  In fact I was a passenger  Lovely scenery though



Any time you want to ride it let me know . Strava tells me I've ridden up it 65 times in the past two and a half years so I have a fair idea. Still not very quick though


----------



## vickster (18 Mar 2015)

I think it's unlikely but I know @jefmcg wanted to ride up in the peaks again...let me get my knees sorted and we'll be in touch!!


----------

