Looking at http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesLessWeight_Page.html lightness really doesn’t seem to do that much in making one faster on the bike.
Why then are we all so obsesed with products that are lighter. Specifically with non-rotational items like frames, seatposts, brakes, handlebars… it seems like we are falling for marketing campaigns instead of holding true to things that actually matter.
What are your thoughts? Would it bother you to ride a 22 pound bike at Lake Placid?
Everything posted here seems to say “aero trumps weight”, so I don’t know that this crowed could be considered to be “obsessed with products that are lighter”.
Victor
My own experience is that it does not matter that much. I had some of my best races ever( including some sub 5:00 hr IM bike splits and sub 2:20 1/2 IM bike splits) on an early Softride model( Solo) that was a tank compared to what guys are riding today. The one thing that I do notice when I am riding on a really light weight bike, is that feeling when you get out of the saddle and climb standing up. I don’t know if it does translate into faster riding or not, but when you get out of the saddle and start to climb on a 15 pound bike, it feels totally different and way better than when you do the same thing on an 18 - 20 pound bike. Just my very unskilled and crude observation.
I could have told you that.
People obsess over reducing the weight of their bike, IMO because it is fun and the belief that it will make them faster without having to physically work harder.
Now reducing the weight of your running shoes WILL make a much bigger difference.
I was speaking about the other people out there… not Slowtwitchers. The less-informed consumers who go into a bike shop and buy anything they are told is lighter and faster… 
I figure for an extra grand or more I could probably drop a lb off my Kestrel through lighter (and much more expensive) components. So for a grand I could go from 16.5 lbs to 15.5 lbs.
Unless you’re climbing the Alps every day, weight is irrelevant. On a tri bike aero is the only thing worth considering. My Utegra equiped P2K was close to 20 lbs, about 3 lbs heavier than my road bike, but so what?
There is a sub cult in cycling who are into the hobby of building up lightweight bikes just for the heck of it, which is OK if that’s your thing, but if anyone thinks spending a lot of extra cash to save a lb or two is going to give them better performance, they really need to get a clue.
People like to be able to see something quantifiable when they put out their hard-earned cash. Weight falls clearly in this category. You can very easily compare weights from one part to another and thus, lighter must be better.
The current obsession with power meters to determine good bike position is the same. If I don’t generate more power in a lower position during a fitting then it must not be good for me. What they can’t measure–without a wind tunnel–is how many watts they are wasting by pushing a bunch of air with their non-aerodynamic but “powerful” position.
People like to see numbers and you can publish charts of component/bike weights.
Chad
If you are riding on a totally flat course with no hills and not accelerations/decelerations, I would agree that weight is not much of a factor. In real riding conditions there are other factors to consider.
If you are climbing up a steep hill where you are going slow enough so that wind resistance is not a factor, then weight will make a difference. Weight will also make a difference in your ability to accelerate (Newton’s Second Law of Motion).
Having said that, many cyclists would be better off trimming down their own body fat then quibbling over a few grams here and there on their bikes.
Agreed. Wasn’t there a quick formula like a pound lost in rotational weight is like three pounds from the frame?
Why then aren’t more people ignoring the static things and purchasing things like:
Rocket 7 shoes
Carbon Wheels
Carbon cranks
Very light pedals
and… what about having a nice suspension bike (like a softride that was previously mentioned) for comfort and better run splits? Why not?
i don’t know. Seems to me that the graph shows that the less weight you are moving around the greater the advantage going up a hill. Now I’m sure that if you get into the nitty gritty and see how much each gram is effective it gets pretty small.
Another thing to consider is is how much weight effects response in sprinting. Now we triathletes don’t give a hoot about sprinting, but roadies do. how many more watts does it take to overcome the moment of inertia of a 22lb bike vs the 14 lb bike while trying to get the jump on another guy.
Obviously the difference is not as significant when you start talking about a gram or two here or there, but all those grams come frome some place and 14lb bikes don’t happen by accident.
I would take a 17 lb bike over a 22 lb bike any day, particularily in Lake Placid.
People like to be able to see something quantifiable when they put out their hard-earned cash. Weight falls clearly in this category. You can very easily compare weights from one part to another and thus, lighter must be better.
The current obsession with power meters to determine good bike position is the same. If I don’t generate more power in a lower position during a fitting then it must not be good for me. What they can’t measure–without a wind tunnel–is how many watts they are wasting by pushing a bunch of air with their non-aerodynamic but “powerful” position.
People like to see numbers and you can publish charts of component/bike weights.
Chad
You’re absolutely right about weight being quantifiable, therefore easier to obsess about.
However, power meters can be used for field testing that can, if done properly, very accurately quantify the tradeoffs of aerodynamic positioning vs. power loss. If you’re doing fitting on a stationary trainer, and monitoring your power output, that’s another story, you could make bad assumptions based on the power meter.
As for why weight is such a cause for obsession in the general cycling world, you’ve got to remember that in cycling road races, the selection is usually made on the hills, and as such, weight is more important than during races against the clock. This leads to an overemphasis on weight as a performance factor. And let’s face it, light weight sells and adds considerable profit.
I don’t think it’s quite accurate to say that weight doesn’t make a difference – it does, on the hills. If you have a 22 pound bike and replace it with a 15 pound bike, you are going to definitely see a difference on the hills. What is quite accurate to say is that spending substantial sums of money on component upgrades to save grams generally has an absolutely abysmal price-performance ratio, especially in tris & TTs.
Ok, I’ll play contrarian for a while…
While it’s true that time lost climbing due to increased weight (body and/or bike and/or all the heavy crap on your bike) is somewhat regained while descending, weight does matter on hilly courses because:
The increased descending speed of a heavy rider+bike will be reduced by increased air resistance due to his higher speed – so he will never completely make up for his slower ascending speed.
If the heavier rider+bike has to sit up or brake while descending because his higher descending speed is too high to descend safely, even more time is lost.
The faster descending speed of a heavier rider+bike means that he will spend more time spun out and coasting, resulting in less average power applied, and slower overall time.
Unless the heavier rider+bike is geared proportionately lower, on steep climbs he will have a lower cadence (due to his slower ascending speed) and correspondingly higher force on the pedals, resulting in increased leg burn.
The heavier rider+bike is forced to expend more energy while climbing, which is counter to the goal of maintaining constant effort through the ride. (Despite the increased Energy expended, the increased Power produced could be eliminated by gearing and pacing, except that the typical rider’s power already peaks when climbing, and the peak is higher for the heavier rider+bike.)
The heavier rider+bike will have slightly increased rolling resistance. This will be true for flat courses as well.
Light bikes ARE better! So are carbon bikes, Cervelos,…
they think its a better investment to buy lighter components than to lose 10# of fat.
I think that you would be better off losing a few pounds of fat from your body and riding an 18lb bike than you would being heavier as a person and riding a 15lb bike. Plus, if you drop the weight off your body, it will help your running as well.
I agree that saving weight to just say you have a light bike does not make sense for a triathlon/tri bike but at the same time if you are saving weight and becoming more aero at the same time, then I think it is worth it. I have tricked out my Dual pretty much but I did this with some ideas in mind that I wanted to save weight while replacing the stock parts to get more aero. At the same time, I am working on getting my body weight lower and being able to get into a more aero position on the bike. Not all my purchases were to get more aero but I would argue that a 15.5 lbs Dual is faster than a stock 21 lbs Dual on any course at any wattage in any conditions. The lower weight and more aero parts will make the bike faster.
I would say that an Easton Attack TT with Bontrager levers is more aero and significantly lighter than my Syntace Stratos basebar, C2 aerobars and my Diacompe 188 levers. I would say that this was a good way to get more aero and at the same time go lighter.
I agree with what a few have said. If you are doing a lot of climbing and turns that you have to accelerate out of then I think having a lower bike weight is a benefit. There is not one ride that I do that I am not climbing up a hill that is at least 6-8% or bigger and on one of my routes I have a hill that is 24% grade for 500 meters.
Keep in mind that we are talking about the bike and not the body. Everyone knows that a lighter body is better. Power to weight increases and you should be going faster at the same wattage.
It always turns into a “lose weight of the body” but maybe the OP is already at 5% BF and can not lose another 10 lbs. Lets keep the talk strictly to bike and not include the body.
SLIM,
What about the benefits of training on a 2500g wheelset at a lower psi (100) and racing on 1200-1500g aero wheels or lighter at higher psi (125-135)?
i don’t know. Seems to me that the graph shows that the less weight you are moving around the greater the advantage going up a hill. Now I’m sure that if you get into the nitty gritty and see how much each gram is effective it gets pretty small.
Another thing to consider is is how much weight effects response in sprinting. Now we triathletes don’t give a hoot about sprinting, but roadies do. how many more watts does it take to overcome the moment of inertia of a 22lb bike vs the 14 lb bike while trying to get the jump on another guy.
Obviously the difference is not as significant when you start talking about a gram or two here or there, but all those grams come frome some place and 14lb bikes don’t happen by accident.
Of course, the less weight you have going up hill, the faster you go. It’s when you sacrifice aerodynamics for weight and you have to go back down the hill that you lose.
As for your 22lb bike vs. the 14 lb bike: all other things equal, analyticcycling.com says that the latter would be ahead after 250m by maybe .1 second. Whoop-de-doo.
14lb bikes don’t happen by accident: they happen by marketing.
Amen! I am living proof of that. 15# is a HUGE difference when running and climbing hills.
Anyway, I like my heavier bomb-proof bike!