Why not lighter?
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
Why not lighter?
I have two bikes, one carbon and one titanium, both weighing in at 14.0 lb. Both were built up by me with a combination of used and new, LBS and ebay parts for about $3200 - $3500 each. I see best of the best bikes in Bicycling Magazin costing $10,000-12,000 and weighing from a little more to plenty more. Nothing on my bike except the wheels is crazy light. Wheels are 1250 g for the pair. Even giving up 250 grams or so for more substantial wheels, I would be right in there. Lately I have seen the top Willier and Canondale frames at 780g and 695g, respectively. That is about 500-600 g lighter than my frame. Then with the lightest FSA crank and BB30 bottom bracket, that is another 160 g that could be saved or about 1.5 lb. So if I could easily have a 13.0 lb bike with pretty substantial wheels or 12.5 lb with the wheels I prefer. So my question is why can I do it, and the big boys don't? I'm talking Red groupo except for crank and brake calipers which are zero gravity. Continental Grand Prix 400 tires. Terry Falcon Y saddle. Performance Pro Carbon post. FSA lightweight carbon bar and stem. 240 g Look Keo pedals. And a 1,200g + frame with 350 g fork. Like I said, nothing crazy. I will give you back the 60g for brakes and still come in arond 13.0 lb. So why are the premium manufacturers charging $11,000 and wasting 1.5 lb. I just don't get it.
Robert
Robert
#3
Two-Wheeled Aficionado
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Wichita
Posts: 4,903
Bikes: Santa Cruz Blur TR, Cannondale Quick CX dropbar conversion & others
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
you have weighed your bikes on a decent scale and got 14.0 pounds, or you added up all the parts and came up with 14.0 pounds?
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Copperas Cove, TX
Posts: 54
Bikes: 2011 BMC Road Racer, 2004 Lemond Beunos Aires
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
"For all road, cyclo-cross and track events there is a minimum weight requirement of 6.8
kg (14.99 lb). Ultra light road bikes and many track bikes may weigh less than the
minimum weight. These are not allowed without adding additional weight to the bicycle
to achieve the minimum weight. Water bottles, tool bags, pumps and such items that can
simply be removed from the bike are not counted in the minimum required weight."
Your bikes are illegal. Bike manufacturers are not going to make bikes that are not legal for competition when most of their clientele that is willing to pay $11,000 for a bike is probably going to compete in something.
kg (14.99 lb). Ultra light road bikes and many track bikes may weigh less than the
minimum weight. These are not allowed without adding additional weight to the bicycle
to achieve the minimum weight. Water bottles, tool bags, pumps and such items that can
simply be removed from the bike are not counted in the minimum required weight."
Your bikes are illegal. Bike manufacturers are not going to make bikes that are not legal for competition when most of their clientele that is willing to pay $11,000 for a bike is probably going to compete in something.
#5
Should Be More Popular
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Malvern, PA (20 miles West of Philly)
Posts: 43,611
Bikes: 1986 Alpine (steel road bike), 2009 Ti Habenero, 2013 Specialized Roubaix
Liked 9,555 Times
in
4,415 Posts
Lighter is not always better.
My bike is amazingly good and weighs approx 17 pounds.
p.s. Bicycling Magazine? That's an effing joke. You lose a lot of cred in here by referring to that rag. You sure you are not trolling??
My bike is amazingly good and weighs approx 17 pounds.
p.s. Bicycling Magazine? That's an effing joke. You lose a lot of cred in here by referring to that rag. You sure you are not trolling??
#6
pan y agua
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 31,464
Bikes: Willier Zero 7; Merlin Extralight; Calfee Dragonfly tandem, Calfee Adventure tandem; Cervelo P2; Motebecane Ti Fly 29er; Motebecanne Phantom Cross; Schwinn Paramount Track bike
Liked 883 Times
in
453 Posts
Tons of Cat 2,3,4,and 5's race bikes below the UCI weight limit.
And a number of bikes, including the EVO, are sold that weigh below the weight limit.
Bike manufacturers continue to make lighter and lighter bikes because people will buy them.
__________________
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
#7
Administrator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Posts: 13,573
Bikes: Cervelo C5, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Liked 2,358 Times
in
1,567 Posts
It takes an awful lot to get a complete bike (such as pedals and cages) down to 14.0 lbs. As already asked, did you weigh your bike on an accurate scale? If so, how about showing a pic? I can see a complete CF getting down close to 14 but not a Ti.
I've got 56cm bikes built with DA, Zipp (clinchers), pedals (SPD-SL) and other normal parts and the CF weighs 16.2 and the Ti (which is a very light Ti frame) at 18.2 lbs
I've got 56cm bikes built with DA, Zipp (clinchers), pedals (SPD-SL) and other normal parts and the CF weighs 16.2 and the Ti (which is a very light Ti frame) at 18.2 lbs
#8
Mostly Harmless
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: At Large
Posts: 57,052
Bikes: Have two wheels
Liked 4,915 Times
in
2,642 Posts
#9
pan y agua
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 31,464
Bikes: Willier Zero 7; Merlin Extralight; Calfee Dragonfly tandem, Calfee Adventure tandem; Cervelo P2; Motebecane Ti Fly 29er; Motebecanne Phantom Cross; Schwinn Paramount Track bike
Liked 883 Times
in
453 Posts
Also the OP is not comparing apples to apples when he's talking brand new bike full retail, and a bike cobbled together from used parts, and carefully sourced deals.
And just as the scale may be a little light, the accounting may be light on odds and ends, and things like shipping.
__________________
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orange, CA
Posts: 2,201
Bikes: Roubaix / Shiv
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
1 Post
Yup, weigh your bike and get back to us.
My DuraAce S-works cost me $3350 and weighed in around 14.4lbs. MSRP was $8000'ish, but that doesn't mean deals can't be had - just as you may not have paid full MSRP for the parts you bought to build your bike.
My DuraAce S-works cost me $3350 and weighed in around 14.4lbs. MSRP was $8000'ish, but that doesn't mean deals can't be had - just as you may not have paid full MSRP for the parts you bought to build your bike.
Last edited by jmX; 06-05-12 at 01:20 PM.
#12
Throw the stick!!!!
My Red equipped Colnago CX1 weighs 16 pounds. Pretty impressive that you managed to get two "budget" builds down to 14.0 pounds without even trying. I weighed mine on a Feedback Sports bike scale for what it's worth.
My former race bike built with Campy Record, Zipp 404 tubulars, and a very light Fuji SL1 (C10 carbon) frameset weighed 14.2 pounds and I spent a small fortune on it.
My former race bike built with Campy Record, Zipp 404 tubulars, and a very light Fuji SL1 (C10 carbon) frameset weighed 14.2 pounds and I spent a small fortune on it.
__________________
I may be fat but I'm slow enough to make up for it.
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Near Sacramento
Posts: 4,886
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I recently built up a bike that spec'd at just over 13 pounds. Actual weight was 14.7. I probably forgot some stuff in the spec, and spec weights are often low.
__________________
-------
Some sort of pithy irrelevant one-liner should go here.
-------
Some sort of pithy irrelevant one-liner should go here.
#14
Two-Wheeled Aficionado
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Wichita
Posts: 4,903
Bikes: Santa Cruz Blur TR, Cannondale Quick CX dropbar conversion & others
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
here's the betting lines on what the OP does next:
weighing his bikes on a credible scale, taking pics and posting them = -300
replying and admitting his bikes aren't near 14.0 pounds = -550
coming back and assuring us they are 14.0 pounds, but no evidence of such = +400
never replying again = even
#15
Should Be More Popular
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Malvern, PA (20 miles West of Philly)
Posts: 43,611
Bikes: 1986 Alpine (steel road bike), 2009 Ti Habenero, 2013 Specialized Roubaix
Liked 9,555 Times
in
4,415 Posts
exactly.
here's the betting lines on what the OP does next:
weighing his bikes on a credible scale, taking pics and posting them = -300
replying and admitting his bikes aren't near 14.0 pounds = -550
coming back and assuring us they are 14.0 pounds, but no evidence of such = +400
never replying again = even
here's the betting lines on what the OP does next:
weighing his bikes on a credible scale, taking pics and posting them = -300
replying and admitting his bikes aren't near 14.0 pounds = -550
coming back and assuring us they are 14.0 pounds, but no evidence of such = +400
never replying again = even
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Ithaca, NY
Posts: 4,852
Bikes: Click on the #YOLO
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times
in
13 Posts
Light, cheap, durable. Pick two.
OP, why don't you go into business building these bikes and selling them for $5k? You're making a grand per bike, while still undercutting named manufacturers by more than half.
Now think about warrantying them- well, that's going to take some money saved up, now isn't it?
How are you going to distribute them? I'll venture that takes money.
You going to sell them yourself, or franchise in a dealer network? Takes money to hire sales reps.
What about getting the word out, sponsorship, advertising, or manufacturer incentives? Yup, you guessed it, more money!
Now think about the scope of your brand, will you remain a boutique maker or will you create a line of models? R&D costs money, and the lower end has an even worse [sometimes breaking even or worse] margin than the halo bikes.
What about sourcing the latest and greatest? Going to take prestige (created through marketing money) or straight cash in the form of large orders to parts suppliers to get noticed. Plus, ebay and LBS deals come in lots of at most ten- trying to create a consistent product from an inconsistent input stream seems like a fool's errand.
There are a ton more, but I'm getting depressed about finally thinking through the logistics of my dream career, and you get the point anyway.
OP, why don't you go into business building these bikes and selling them for $5k? You're making a grand per bike, while still undercutting named manufacturers by more than half.
Now think about warrantying them- well, that's going to take some money saved up, now isn't it?
How are you going to distribute them? I'll venture that takes money.
You going to sell them yourself, or franchise in a dealer network? Takes money to hire sales reps.
What about getting the word out, sponsorship, advertising, or manufacturer incentives? Yup, you guessed it, more money!
Now think about the scope of your brand, will you remain a boutique maker or will you create a line of models? R&D costs money, and the lower end has an even worse [sometimes breaking even or worse] margin than the halo bikes.
What about sourcing the latest and greatest? Going to take prestige (created through marketing money) or straight cash in the form of large orders to parts suppliers to get noticed. Plus, ebay and LBS deals come in lots of at most ten- trying to create a consistent product from an inconsistent input stream seems like a fool's errand.
There are a ton more, but I'm getting depressed about finally thinking through the logistics of my dream career, and you get the point anyway.
#17
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
exactly.
here's the betting lines on what the OP does next:
weighing his bikes on a credible scale, taking pics and posting them = -300
replying and admitting his bikes aren't near 14.0 pounds = -550
coming back and assuring us they are 14.0 pounds, but no evidence of such = +400
never replying again = even
here's the betting lines on what the OP does next:
weighing his bikes on a credible scale, taking pics and posting them = -300
replying and admitting his bikes aren't near 14.0 pounds = -550
coming back and assuring us they are 14.0 pounds, but no evidence of such = +400
never replying again = even
Weight isn't everything, but it is a thing. And it happens to be the thing I am posting about. If you don't care about weight, don't respond. What I am challenging you to do is tell me what is wrong with a Red/Zero Gravity/FSA equipped carbon or titanium bike that weighs 14.0 lb such that a major manufacturer wouldn't want to emulate it. I am not inviting you to tell me I am lying to you, or I don't know what I am talking about. Maybe instead of the worthless drivel you write back, you should be asking yourselves why I can do it, but you can't? Oh, you can't do that, you would have to be admitting I could be right. Well for one thing, 1,250 gram wheels are a pound lighter than 1,700 gram wheels. So all you guys who are riding wheels speced like boat anchors probably can't reach 14.0 lb. That's too bad. But you would be a closer with a less klunky set of 1,500 g wheels
As for racing weight minimums, that's not my concern. Plenty of the bikes I am comparing to do weigh less than the minimum of 14.99 lb that was quoted. Just not as much less as they could.
Hey, you don't want to ride a lighter bike, don't ride one. But what is it to you if I do?
If you care, here is the recipe for the carbon bike:
2007 Giant TCR Advanced M Frame (not SL) and fork. Frame weight is 1207 g, 227 g (0.5 lb) HEAVIER than an early review promised.
Red Groupo except for Zero Gravity (195 g) brake calipers and KMC lightest chain
Red inner and outer cables
Performance Pro Carbon seat post
Terry Falcon Y (227 g) saddle
FSA OS-99 stem
FSA SLK bar
Cane Creek IS-8 headset
American Classic Micro 58 and Road 205 hubs
Kinlin SR 200 rims - 20/24
Sapim C-XRay spokes
Ritchey rim tape
Continental GP 4000 tires 23mm
Performance Lunar Light tubes
Look Keo carbon 240g pedals
So what can you find fault with. Not the Giant frame, one of the best in the world from the most experienced factory on earth. Not the SRAM Red group. Not the FSA bar and stem, among the most popular in use. Not anything really except maybe the low spoke count, ultralight rims. Fair enough. But as I said these could be beefed up considerably for less than 200 g sacrifice. Still plenty of room to spare in a head to head with Trek or Specialized. And that is not even considering the reductions available with the newest and lightest frames that come in at 700-800 g.
Oh yeah, and I'm sure you could tell from a picture what the bike weighs.
Get a life. Or better yet, get a REAL bike. The good news is that you COULD afford it. If you take your head out of you butt, off course.
Robert
#18
Two-Wheeled Aficionado
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Wichita
Posts: 4,903
Bikes: Santa Cruz Blur TR, Cannondale Quick CX dropbar conversion & others
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
damn, I could've made some good money on that. I knew you were going to assure us of the weight but not provide any evidence beyond more words. I give the rant 3.5 out of 5... I downrank it for a lack of swearing and it was a bit repetitive.
#19
Or, you could take seriously the serious answers and accept that "weight ain't everything." You did ask "why not lighter?" The simple answer is that weight is only one component of the whole bike equation and is often a trade off for other desired characteristics. Many of which are far more valuable and therefore command a higher price.
#21
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
Or, you could take seriously the serious answers and accept that "weight ain't everything." You did ask "why not lighter?" The simple answer is that weight is only one component of the whole bike equation and is often a trade off for other desired characteristics. Many of which are far more valuable and therefore command a higher price.
I guess this isn't the time to mention that my Ritchey Break Away steel only weighs 16.3 lb. No, I didn't think so.
Robert
#23
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
Light, cheap, durable. Pick two.
OP, why don't you go into business building these bikes and selling them for $5k? You're making a grand per bike, while still undercutting named manufacturers by more than half.
Now think about warrantying them- well, that's going to take some money saved up, now isn't it?
How are you going to distribute them? I'll venture that takes money.
You going to sell them yourself, or franchise in a dealer network? Takes money to hire sales reps.
What about getting the word out, sponsorship, advertising, or manufacturer incentives? Yup, you guessed it, more money!
Now think about the scope of your brand, will you remain a boutique maker or will you create a line of models? R&D costs money, and the lower end has an even worse [sometimes breaking even or worse] margin than the halo bikes.
What about sourcing the latest and greatest? Going to take prestige (created through marketing money) or straight cash in the form of large orders to parts suppliers to get noticed. Plus, ebay and LBS deals come in lots of at most ten- trying to create a consistent product from an inconsistent input stream seems like a fool's errand.
There are a ton more, but I'm getting depressed about finally thinking through the logistics of my dream career, and you get the point anyway.
OP, why don't you go into business building these bikes and selling them for $5k? You're making a grand per bike, while still undercutting named manufacturers by more than half.
Now think about warrantying them- well, that's going to take some money saved up, now isn't it?
How are you going to distribute them? I'll venture that takes money.
You going to sell them yourself, or franchise in a dealer network? Takes money to hire sales reps.
What about getting the word out, sponsorship, advertising, or manufacturer incentives? Yup, you guessed it, more money!
Now think about the scope of your brand, will you remain a boutique maker or will you create a line of models? R&D costs money, and the lower end has an even worse [sometimes breaking even or worse] margin than the halo bikes.
What about sourcing the latest and greatest? Going to take prestige (created through marketing money) or straight cash in the form of large orders to parts suppliers to get noticed. Plus, ebay and LBS deals come in lots of at most ten- trying to create a consistent product from an inconsistent input stream seems like a fool's errand.
There are a ton more, but I'm getting depressed about finally thinking through the logistics of my dream career, and you get the point anyway.
Robert
#24
Senior Member
Not everyone can ride a medium frame--so some frames are just heavier.
Not everyone cares to ride such lightweight wheels---they prefer more durable--so heavier
Not everyone wants a carbon bar and stem--they prefer not to risk what goes with that--so heavier
Not everyone wants light weight tubes--because they prefer better puncture resistence--so heavier
Etc. etc. etc.
You built your bikes with light first. Others built their bikes for what they want. If all things are equal you go lighter. If things are not equal--you pick out which is important to you and you go that route.
Manufacturers don't do what you did because as soon as the 300lb person starts breaking spokes, getting flats, has a handlebar break after a crash, etc. etc., they get drug through the mud for having an "unreliable" bike.
Not everyone cares to ride such lightweight wheels---they prefer more durable--so heavier
Not everyone wants a carbon bar and stem--they prefer not to risk what goes with that--so heavier
Not everyone wants light weight tubes--because they prefer better puncture resistence--so heavier
Etc. etc. etc.
You built your bikes with light first. Others built their bikes for what they want. If all things are equal you go lighter. If things are not equal--you pick out which is important to you and you go that route.
Manufacturers don't do what you did because as soon as the 300lb person starts breaking spokes, getting flats, has a handlebar break after a crash, etc. etc., they get drug through the mud for having an "unreliable" bike.
#25
I let the dogs out
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 1,934
Bikes: 2011 Fuji Roubaix 1.0, 2003 Ti Merlin Solis, & 1994 Raleigh MT200
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Your question has been answered. Let me sum it up for you: weight isn't everything and there is a UCI-enforced minimum weight requirement. It's also about marketing. If a company can market a bike as "the most aerodynamic" or "the stiffest", that distracts from the weight and allows them to keep the price up.