Not counting grams but kilograms. My favourite road bike has 6.1 kg, the favourite road bike from my wife has 5,2 kg (all is 2nd hand from ebay for a bargain). Easily 2-3 kg less than the current aero road bikes and even more compared to current triathlon superbikes. I like such a weight advantage when it really counts, i.e. for the KOM battles during our weekly group ride. Taking over fully outfitted triathletes at the hills is particularly funny.
Triathlon Forum
Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
Re: Who Counts Grams for Cycling? [candyman]
[ In reply to ]
Re: Who Counts Grams for Cycling? [burnthesheep]
[ In reply to ]
burnthesheep wrote:
Two seconds gap in time expressed as a distance is a lot shorter on the climb at 12mph versus after the top at 60mph downhill and 30+mph on the flat to the finish. It’s not draftable. So they are dropped:Yeah, that's why even a bike length difference over the top of a climb can have dramatic effects. You don't want to give someone like Pogacar when a wheel length gap. He will punish you for it.
Re: Who Counts Grams for Cycling? [BergHugi]
[ In reply to ]
BergHugi wrote:
Not counting grams but kilograms. My favourite road bike has 6.1 kg, the favourite road bike from my wife has 5,2 kg (all is 2nd hand from ebay for a bargain). Easily 2-3 kg less than the current aero road bikes and even more compared to current triathlon superbikes. I like such a weight advantage when it really counts, i.e. for the KOM battles during our weekly group ride. Taking over fully outfitted triathletes at the hills is particularly funny.Putting aside that 2-3kg is a tiny margin between body weights of competitive athletes. On very steep climbs where aero is insignificant every pound is worth ~1w.
Using VAM P=VAM*m*g = (1000/3600)*1*9.8= 2.7w/kg = 1.23w/lb.
This changes when the rate of ascent changes, rather intuitively, faster vertical ascent is a higher power/mass multiplier.
So on your steep climb a 3kg advantage is ~8w. It's not nothing, but it's not that much/
Re: Who Counts Grams for Cycling? [mathematics]
[ In reply to ]
Re: Who Counts Grams for Cycling? [candyman]
[ In reply to ]
Yes I DO !
And I measure it based on the hole being used by my belt buckle !!!
This applies to all endurance sports. I have one heart and two lungs and if the larger diameter buckle hole is in use, I need to provide oxygen to the additional useless mass signified by said belt buckle hole !!!
If I was swimming 50's I would not care. Anything above 12 second duration, largely you need to be worried about mass being hauled around that needs oxygen!!!
For the record, I have missed a Kona slot by 8 seconds and made a Kona slot by 30 seconds....so seconds DO matter, but often weight on the bike (I said often) does not matter if that weight comes with better aerodynamics. If it does not come with better aerodynamics then that is useless mass and it all adds up
And I measure it based on the hole being used by my belt buckle !!!
This applies to all endurance sports. I have one heart and two lungs and if the larger diameter buckle hole is in use, I need to provide oxygen to the additional useless mass signified by said belt buckle hole !!!
If I was swimming 50's I would not care. Anything above 12 second duration, largely you need to be worried about mass being hauled around that needs oxygen!!!
For the record, I have missed a Kona slot by 8 seconds and made a Kona slot by 30 seconds....so seconds DO matter, but often weight on the bike (I said often) does not matter if that weight comes with better aerodynamics. If it does not come with better aerodynamics then that is useless mass and it all adds up
Re: Who Counts Grams for Cycling? [DrAlexHarrison]
[ In reply to ]
DrAlexHarrison wrote:
trail wrote:
candyman wrote:
In road races the climbs are often the critical parts of races. And being just a handful of seconds faster/slower over the top of a serious climb can mean the difference between competing for a win and finishing 20 minutes behind the winner. A very recent roadie example is Richard Carapaz got within about a wheel length of Pogacar on the La Redoute climb. And was maybe 6 seconds behind him over the top. He finished in 26th place. So weight really matters a lot if in those situations.USAC Road nationals is probably a great example of this. Flat boring course with laps, except for two major decisive climbs each lap. It's been the same story for a decade. When it was in TN (it's in WV now) it was also several laps of a mostly boring course with one major decisive very steep climb. The rest of the race, 50% of the racers could have solo'd around the race course at the same speed as the peloton because they, quite frankly, dog the flat sections.
Every year, the make or break moment happens on the steepest portion of the climb, and all the attacks, all race, happen up and over the same steep section of the same climb. You make the split, and you're in it for the win. Every year. Same story.
This is where the (fun) multivariate analysis can begin.
Imagining a situation where the rider can save ~5w in aero in exchange for being ~5w faster up the climb. Maybe a frame difference, wheel depth, etc. Depending on the specific physiology of the rider and race day speed and tactics of the pack the best choice is a coin flip.
If the field goes HAM into the the climb you've saved 5w that while time and might be the only one left under threshold, losing those watts from weight will only matter if the climb is very long. Opposite is everyone stares at each other and only attacks on the uphill, now you've carried extra weight for no real reason. There's hundreds of variables and the best you can do is guess. Unless you're on Alpecin/UAE/Ineos/LisaBike and can determine the race. The indeterminate nature is what makes bike racing so great.
--------
FWIW in 90% of races I'd carry the extra weight in exchange for aero gains. The only reason why Pogacar et al run 40mm rims is because the have a guaranteed draft into the climb. Even the best domestic cyclists are exposed to the wind more than world tour team leaders. Also, if you do the math 80ish mm rims usually come out the fastest. They're untenable to ride in a pack, or with any kind of wind. Of course the actual optional depth changes with course, tire, weight, speed.
Re: Who Counts Grams for Cycling? [mathematics]
[ In reply to ]
I don't think it's a coin flip - I think it depends very much on your strengths and weaknesses as a rider, and the race in question. In a hilly race, if you are a strong climber you know you are unlikely to get dropped on the climbs so maybe for you the aero is more important. On the other hand, if you are a weaker climber then the chances of you losing contact on the climb are much higher, and therefore minimising weight probably makes more sense. That said, I totally agree that it is a fun multivariate analysis, but I don't think the end result is a coin toss.
Re: Who Counts Grams for Cycling? [synthetic]
[ In reply to ]
synthetic wrote:
removing chain links? the point of a lighter bike its to go faster up hills.... without the chain links cant shift into the granny gears so the point of lightness would be defeated. Maybe removing low gear cogs in the back...If your chain is so short that you can't go into the granny gear while on the small ring, then your big ring will be useless.
Re: Who Counts Grams for Cycling? [candyman]
[ In reply to ]
I count grams... grams of carbohydrate, and grams of drag.
Re: Who Counts Grams for Cycling? [Mudge]
[ In reply to ]
Mudge wrote:
I count grams... grams of carbohydrate, and grams of drag.Drag should considered in unitless coefficients, not grams. Mass units are good for....mass.
trail wrote:
Mudge wrote:
I count grams... grams of carbohydrate, and grams of drag.Drag should considered in unitless coefficients, not grams. Mass units are good for....mass.
Okay, Professor Newton