Bike weights.....

[Specialeyes]

Ah, but we can't all do that - @blazed was one of the best

 

[Ajax Bay]

Was?

 

[Specialeyes]

I used to cycle a lot, I was one of the best.

To revert to topic, I've just been and weighed my Kuota Kiral, with 2 bottle cages, front and rear lights and 25mm Gatorskin Hardshells on: 8.2Kg.

I suspect my Tarmac's become a gnat's lighter since I put 11-speed 105 and decent wheels on it, but it's attached to the turbo at the moment with the back wheel off!

 

[carcharodon]

My bike is a bit on the hefty side, Avanti Circa 1 cx : 11.25 kg...but I need to lose 5 kg's.

Funny thing is it doesn't feel hefty, maybe the Hollowtech BB and alloy frame design? Efficient power transfer to the wheel? I don't know.

 

[RobinS]

I weighed my Revolution Country Explorer - it came in at 40.2kg! It does have front and rear racks, lights, mudguards, three bottle cages with full drink bottles, seatpack toolkit, four ortlieb panniers, a barbag, full camping/cooking kit, clothes, some food etc with everything test packed for a three month tour! It only feels heavy if you try to pick it up.

 

[Fnaar]

I weighed my Revolution Country Explorer - it came in at 40.2kg! It does have front and rear racks, lights, mudguards, three bottle cages with full drink bottles, seatpack toolkit, four ortlieb panniers, a barbag, full camping/cooking kit, clothes, some food etc with everything test packed for a three month tour! It only feels heavy if you try to pick it up.

I have one of those too, with probably a similar weight for touring purposes. It's built like a tank though, and seems fairly indestructible!

 

[bozmandb9]

No it's not. Climbing has little to do with weight and more to do with power-weight ratio. I weigh in at 104kg but I'm fairly handy at going up hills.

Not wanting to get involved in the handbags, but not sure about this? I get that power to weight ratio is vital for hill climb races, but surely on a long ride the higher weight will only ever be a disadvantage.

Do you believe this (ie what you say you've read somewhere) and if so, please explain what 'worth 4 times' means in reality, and how that 'worth' presents itself when riding?
If you lost 2kg of weight off your body weight, would you expect your older (2kg heavier) bike similarly to 'feel more responsive'?

I bet if you stick 3.5 to 4kg wheels on your road bike you'll no longer need him to explain what wheel weight matters in reality! Specially when you go up a steep hill!

 

[Ajax Bay]

bet if you stick 3.5 to 4kg wheels on your road bike you'll no longer need him to explain what wheel weight matters in reality!

I suggest that going up a hill, especially a steep hill, it's the all up weight that matters. Light bike with heavy wheels weighing the same as a heavier bike with lighter wheels will need very similar amounts of power from the same rider to climb the hill. And if you have a lighter rider on a heavier bike she will have to put out the same power (to go up the hill at the same steady speed) as the bloke who's heavier but on a UCI @huwsparky 6.8kg bike, if the bike + rider overall weight is the same. Weight in the wheels matters for acceleration, not at constant speed.

 

[HLaB]

I'd love to weigh my 4.75kg TREK Emonda SLR 10, unfortunately I've not got one

 

[classic33]

I don't know anyone who carries anything on their bike that doesn't need to be there anyway.
Why?

On it's own, approx 40 kilo. Loaded, anything upto 380 Kilo.
Fast enough to set speed cameras off on some local inclines, unloaded. And about four grand to replace, new.

 

[2IT]

Just because someone is lightweight does not make that person a good cyclist nor necessarily good at going up hills. One could weigh very little and could have trouble lifting their own weight.

The point of the thread was sharing bike weights. Handy information because some manufacturers have stopped listing weight so this is good.

MOD NOTE:
Some of this post has been Deleted, as it quoted a Deleted post.

 

[bozmandb9]

I suggest that going up a hill, especially a steep hill, it's the all up weight that matters. Light bike with heavy wheels weighing the same as a heavier bike with lighter wheels will need very similar amounts of power from the same rider to climb the hill. And if you have a lighter rider on a heavier bike she will have to put out the same power (to go up the hill at the same steady speed) as the bloke who's heavier but on a UCI @huwsparky 6.8kg bike, if the bike + rider overall weight is the same. Weight in the wheels matters for acceleration, not at constant speed.

We weren't specifically talking about going up hills. I would certainly notice a difference between an extra 2kg on my wheels (in fact I massively noticed a 1kg weight reduction, and yes, it certainly felt more responsive. My bodyweight can fluctuate much more than 2kg, and I don't notice the same difference at all. To me, wheel weight is a very important factor. I guess the bottom line is on a typical ride, one doesn't tend to spend loads of time at a constant speed. Junctions, corners, hills, traffic lights, etc all seem to get in the way of this. Not sure about the science, but I would certainly much rather be tacking hills with ultra light wheels, and a couple of kg in my pockets, rather than heavy wheels. Most hills I know have varying degrees of incline, hence acceleration and deceleration.

 

[Ajax Bay]

I bet if you stick 3.5 to 4kg wheels on your road bike you'll no longer need him to explain what wheel weight matters in reality! Specially when you go up a steep hill!

We weren't specifically talking about going up hills.

Well I think you were (see first quote) and I was, specifically. I get that lighter wheels will feel more responsive and also that you don't sense when you've put on a couple of kilos on your (albeit minimal) gut - so you can't "feel" the latter. On a typical ride you do spend a lot of time (ie a high percentage) at a relatively constant speed eg 18kph + or - 3 YMMV and the RATE of acceleration is, as @nickyboy puts it it an earlier post "glacially (s)low".

Not sure about the science

I think you suggested that weight on the wheels was 4 times weight on the bike/gut. How do you fancy climbing a decent long hill with lighter wheels and 4kg of extra weight in, say, your saddlebag as opposed to your normal svelte self unloaded, with normal wheels?
@nickyboy was dead on:

The position of the mass on your bike only matters when accelerating or decelerating. Less mass on the rotating bits rather than on the non-rotating bits make acceleration easier (and deceleration less easy). But if you do the maths, unless you're one of those crit riders constantly accelerating and decelerating, the effect is so small as to be virtually unmeasurable. The actual rate of acceleration by a cyclist is glacially slow

 

[nickyboy]

And just to finally put this issue of rotational mass, acceleration etc etc to bed once and for all.....

Sure you can accelerate up a hill. In doing so, having less mass in the wheels rather than elsewhere on the bike will be beneficial. Of course, when you do the maths, the benefit is incredibly small. Much too small to be felt by a cyclist.

However, it's there....BUT....the opposite applies to deceleration. So when you arrive at a steeper bit and slow down you slow down more quickly with light wheels. It is a nil sum equation. The benefit you get from lighter wheels in being able to accelerate more quickly is given back by decelerating more quickly too

 

[Ajax Bay]

Thank you @nickyboy - I considered making the point about increased rotational inertia working both ways (ie during deceleration) but decided it would muddy the point without sufficient benefit. Couldn't you wind entropy into the discussion?

just to finally put this issue of rotational mass, acceleration etc etc to bed once and for all.....

You can dream. Others can dream and TMMV.