Why do people want lighter bikes?

[Spoked Wheels]

Thought of another point this morning while cycling in. Components.

I replaced my Cassette about a year ago and it cost me £10. Now if I had a bike with high-end (read "lighter") components, I would feel obliged to replace them like for like. If I had to buy a Shimano Dura Ace R9100 11-Speed Cassette it would cost me north of £150!! for the same part! Just lighter. What is the point in that when I am not racing?

Also serviceability. Many of the parts on a dirt cheap bike are fully serviceable by the user whereas on the higher end models they are sealed and or not serviceable.

It's a shame those who disagree or who seem annoyed with my suggestion seem determined to derail the conversation to the point a mod closes the thread (nice tactic by the way...). Very transparent.

You are absolutely right on the price of high end components and just functional components, however, I think the new very cheap components are throw away stuff, at least is what I saw with some derailleurs.... I'm afraid this is going to be the trend.

 

[DCBassman]

Yes but taking a reasonable, measured, and contextualised approach is pretty rubbish for generating heated online debate, isn't it??

Whither anti-social media then???

Rats, got serious for a moment!

 

[Dogtrousers]

If I had to buy a Shimano Dura Ace R9100 11-Speed Cassette it would cost me north of £150!! for the same part! Just lighter.

Wow. Are you suggesting that Dura Ace isn't the best value for money for a commuting hack? What a profoundly interesting and useful insight.

 

[Blue Hills]

Isn't this a matter of horses for courses?

My light bike is about 7.5kg and I use it to keep up with other riders on club rides but otherwise it's not very practical for me as I can't carry anything, can't fit proper mudguards and can't fit fatter tyres for winter BUT I still love riding it when it is the bike for the occasion.

My 1990 Reynolds 531 weights about 12kg with mudguards, Schwhalbe Marathon tyres, triple crankset and a rear rack.... it's perfect for just about anything that I need to carry something where the Van Nicholas is not appropriate for.

My Surly Ogre is setup for touring ATM and weights about 14.5kg with touring Schwhalbe touring tyres, heavy duty wheels, mudguards, racks and suspension seatpost. This bike is for comfort and go anywhere. On club rides some riders go off rode for sections of the route to make rides more interesting to them and I can join them with this bike but also for comfort this is the bike I pick everytime.

So, I'd say, ride whatever you feel happy with, for me, there's no need to justify my gear in terms of fitness efficiency, I personally ride for the enjoyment of it and my bike selection is based on whatever fits the occasion to make the ride more enjoyable.

I don't think that contradicts beanybot.

 

[Blue Hills]

You are absolutely right on the price of high end components and just functional components, however, I think the new very cheap components are throw away stuff, at least is what I saw with some derailleurs.... I'm afraid this is going to be the trend.

Genuine question - which range of shimano mechs do you consider throwaway?

 

[Blue Hills]

Wow. Are you suggesting that Dura Ace isn't the best value for money for a commuting hack? What a profoundly interesting and useful insight.

Always interesting and informative to see the higher count posters put down the lower. Just the thing cchat needs to attract a wide range of new cyclists.

 

[Dogtrousers]

Always interesting and informative to see the higher count posters put down the lower. Just the thing cchat needs to attract a wide range of new cyclists.

I didn't check on the poster's post count I'm afraid. I'd reply in like kind if you made a similar statement of the bleedin obvious.

 

[beany_bot]

I didn't check on the poster's post count I'm afraid. I'd reply in like kind if you made a similar statement of the bleedin obvious.

I deliberately took the example to the extreme. I OBVIOUSLY don't expect people to commute on DURA ACE components (although many do). Same point with a £20 cassette if you prefer...No need to be so literal.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Nowt wrong with dura ace. I have dura ace bar end shifters, cost £50 for the pair, lighter than any dual control shifter setup, and will be super reliable for lifetime of bike. Nowt wrong with using them for commuting.

 

[Spoked Wheels]

Genuine question - which range of shimano mechs do you consider throwaway?

I believe it was Shimano Altus.... I saw them on a new bike recently.

 

[Dogtrousers]

OK ... final answer.

Bikes are chosen on many criteria other than weight. For commuting the criteria will be different to club riding, different to audax, to touring, to off-roading and so on.

Not everyone can, or wants to, own a huge stable of different bikes so we often end up with a compromise of the differing demands of practicality, comfort, fun and the user's budget.

As a result some people may commute on high end lightweight bikes, because that's what they own and that's what they enjoy. That's their business. Some people tour on Bromptons. Some people do Audaxes on fixed. It's all good. And it's nobody's business but theirs.

The OP is pushing an agenda that for commuting and leisure it's better to have a bike that's heavier, and proposes bunch of reasons: it gives a harder workout (no it doesn't); it's less likely to get nicked (no - thieves will nick anything not properly secured); it's cheaper (not if it means buying yet another bike it isn't) and so forth.

It's not better to ride one kind of bike or another. There's point in trying to justify the bike you ride, and there's especially no point in trying to argue that your way is better. Because it's a meaningless point to make. There is no "better". The whole idea is pointless.

Now, on a more serious point, I've noticed that my black bike is no faster since I had the wheels rebuilt with black rims. I find this puzzling.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Black wheels on a black bike causes two opposing superheated layers of air. This causes strong eddy currents where the rim passes closest to the black frame. The effect is even greater with black carbon forks due to the electron arrangement and super conducting qualities in the graphite contained within. This causes the black wheels on black frames to encounter a force opposite to their direction of motion. Hence you go slower.

 

[mudsticks]

Well not to be contrary, but my new dark grey bike with black rims

(AND mango flashes)

Is definitely faster than my previous moonshadow bike with silver rims

I wonder could the mango flashes be a contributing factor??

It's so difficult to distinguish between causation and correlation.

Doncha find??

 

[Markymark]

OK ... final answer.

Bikes are chosen on many criteria other than weight. For commuting the criteria will be different to club riding, different to audax, to touring, to off-roading and so on.

Not everyone can, or wants to, own a huge stable of different bikes so we often end up with a compromise of the differing demands of practicality, comfort, fun and the user's budget.

As a result some people may commute on high end lightweight bikes, because that's what they own and that's what they enjoy. That's their business. Some people tour on Bromptons. Some people do Audaxes on fixed. It's all good. And it's nobody's business but theirs.

The OP is pushing an agenda that for commuting and leisure it's better to have a bike that's heavier, and proposes bunch of reasons: it gives a harder workout (no it doesn't); it's less likely to get nicked (no - thieves will nick anything not properly secured); it's cheaper (not if it means buying yet another bike it isn't) and so forth.

It's not better to ride one kind of bike or another. There's point in trying to justify the bike you ride, and there's especially no point in trying to argue that your way is better. Because it's a meaningless point to make. There is no "better". The whole idea is pointless.

Now, on a more serious point, I've noticed that my black bike is no faster since I had the wheels rebuilt with black rims. I find this puzzling.

All very sensible points but failed at the last two. Your black rims do make you faster but you’ve got older and fatter since changing them.

And there is better. I am better then all of you.

 

[mudsticks]

Black wheels on a black bike causes two opposing superheated layers of air. This causes strong eddy currents where the rim passes closest to the black frame. The effect is even greater with black carbon forks due to the electron arrangement and super conducting qualities in the graphite contained within. This causes the black wheels on black frames to encounter a force opposite to their direction of motion. Hence you go slower.

Ha, so what you need for that, is counteracting fruit coloured decals.
They will sort out your electron thingummy wotsts