My golden rule about buying bike gear for 99% of triathlons is, compared to aerodynamics: "Weight don't matter shit".

Instead of spending the $$$ to reduce weight, why not try to spend your cash trying to reduce drag? In terms of dollars per second saved, I'll wager you'll get 5-10 times better value for money. Weight can even go up in order to reduce drag, and it would still be a big time-saving. Try comparing the speed benefits of a $500 aero front wheel over a $500 super light carbon crankset.

Call me old fashioned, but both weight and aerodynamics are things that you worry about last. If you want to go faster, decrease your body weight, and/or increase your power. While aero does matter, the majority of wind resistence comes from you and any changes you make on the bike result in pretty minimal advances.

Obviously, this assume that you already have a halfway decent bike and are staying in the aero bars. Only if you're riding an ancient heavy beater bike would I worry about weight and/or aero.

Of course, I am as guilty as the next guy in buying all sorts of fancy race wheels, etc, in the hopes of going faster. But, for me most to this stuff is "feel fast" equipment that makes me pshyched to race and train. When I get to the point where my equipment is the limiting factor in my performance, then I'll start shaving grams.

Amen.

Weight saving, unless you are talking in terms of several pounds, is NEGLIGIBLE.

Lose 5kg of body weight, save less than a minute over 180km. The majority of air resistance comes from your body position, not your weight.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

I could have guessed what reply you would get to that question. The people on this site always say the same thing. Work on the engine. And I know they are right, but come on! You CAN buy speed! I have moved up 4 times in 3 years. Each time lighter and each time faster. Im on a 2007 Madone 5.5 110 carbon, dura ace etc. I smoke my time on my alum equinox 9 tri bike(very aero) How come everyone who passed me this year had 5-10 thousnd dollar bikes? I know the argument. A 25 handicap golfer isnt going to get much better with a set of new Calloways, but he will most likely improve a little! I dont begrudge a hack from trying to improve his game. I play with great clubs, why shouldnt they? These hard core tri guys

always say its not the bike blah blah, but they ride NICE bikes. Weight does make a difference dont kid yourself. Having said that, find the right fit as well. Good luck

---

"Im not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde

>>Lose 5kg of body weight, save less than a minute over 180km. The majority of air resistance comes from your body position, not your weight.>>

When I recommended losing weight as one option, I meant as a way to improve climbing speed. You're right - everywhere else it doesn't matter much.

If it comes down to pure weight of a bicycle, I think cervelo has the best answer you'll get. See the "weight" heading. Look at what you get with 5lbs weight savings and the .5lb of aerodynamics you'd lose in the process.

http://www.cervelo.com/...g&i=Aerodynamics

Yeah, i'm curious about this too.

i know all the arguments, but hey - i've lost at least 15 pounds of body weight, maybe more like 20, and i ride up all the hills i can find.

for me, it's a question of finding the best $$ per gram ratio.

-charles

I would say you most likely moved up 4 times in 3 years, because over that time your engine was getting faster, not the bike change. Buying a super light bike for tri, on most courses, is not going to help. It's fun, and I'm all for it, but do it becaues you want a cool bike, not because you're really going to be faster.

---

-Andrew Saar
It is better to do the right thing and be paid poorly,
than to do the wrong thing and be rewarded richly.

However, if you lose body weight, you are also likely to be more aerodynamic than before. Unless of course you are able to fashion your extra body fat into an airfoil shape.

---

- Nick
Now that I know some of you guys look through the special needs bags for kicks, I'm gonna put some really weird stuff in mine. I can see it now. "What the heck was he going to do with a family pack of KFC chicken, a football helmet full of peanut butter, a 12 inch rubber dildo, and naked pictures of Bea Arthur?"

Think it'd amount to 30 seconds difference over 180km?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

well of course that would depend on how much weight you lost and/or your ability to mold fat.

But in all reality, aero takes precedence over weight on a flat course.

---

- Nick
Now that I know some of you guys look through the special needs bags for kicks, I'm gonna put some really weird stuff in mine. I can see it now. "What the heck was he going to do with a family pack of KFC chicken, a football helmet full of peanut butter, a 12 inch rubber dildo, and naked pictures of Bea Arthur?"

Don't get carried away by weight. The lighter you go, the more chance there is for a mechanical failure of some sort. Have you ever seen super light heat-treated handle bars explode under a rider? It's not pretty! Instead invest your money in good coaching and you will go far faster than any equipment will make you go.
Mike Fraysse

I am also curious about this, because I am a small, lightweight woman. I cannot lose any more weight. Yes, I can improve my "engine" and I do work on this, and have seen a good 10% improvement this year by training on hills and doing it repeatedly. I have a good position and am very fast downhill and have all the speed I can handle there. However, with regard to going up hills and bike weight, do you all not think that reducing bike weight by 4-5 pounds would make a difference to a 112-pound person? My current bike is about 19 pounds, and 15 pounds is feasible. Think of the relative weight compared to my body frame.