Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Thu Dec 08, 2016 11:22 pm

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 119 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 10:34 am 
Retro Guru

Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 6:15 pm
Posts: 523
Chopper1192 wrote:
"Light" doesn't automatically mean "good", especially when it's at the expense of efficiency, durability or comfort.


I could not agree more, I used to have a sub 20lb custom Ti hardtail and it was by far the worst bike I owned. I sold it on pretty quickly as whilst it was the fastest bike I owned it wasn't a fun ride.

It all depends what kind of riding you do, racing vs riding with your mates:

I use to think that being a sub 140lb rider that I would notice the difference between a light bike and a heavy bike more than most riders, and the truth is I do. A few years back when I had the aforementioned Ti bike I spent a summer recording my times round the local trails on various bikes, and yes the light weight Ti bike constantly recorded the fastest times, and surprise surprise my Orange Five AM set the slowest times, however the Five was a lot more comfortable and fun to ride. If I was to have gone into racing it would have been a no brainier as to which bike to use. These day's I've stopped riding on my own and ride with the misses a lot more, whilst she is marginally quicker than me down hill I find winching back up a lot easier (and quicker) as such I no-longer benefit from having a light "race" bike but I do benefit from having something that's fun to ride. So whilst I try not to carry nu-nessessary weight but at the same time I'd rather spend £100 on a nice evening out than a set of Ti bolts that save a few grams.

As I'm not a competitive racer I don't need to keep secrets so here's my tip if you want a faster bike: Rather than spend vast sums of money chasing lighter & lighter bikes invest in the best bearings you can (and the truest wheels you can get) until you experience it you won't believe the satisfaction you get from coasting past someone who's spinning out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 12:42 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 4:47 pm
Posts: 1401
Location: Cheshire
I got an alpinestars al-mega down to 23lbs ish, was quite nippy but it also felt twitchy off-road.

I haven't weighed my M-trax recently, but I'm hoping to get that too 24lbs with front sus and 3x8 gears.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 12:52 pm 
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:26 pm
Posts: 16945
Location: 54 Festive Road Winchcombe GLOUCS Yarp...
:lol: Scales (and mother in law) here. Any guesses before I go down to the shed and measure it for a couple of hours!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 2:14 pm 
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:26 pm
Posts: 16945
Location: 54 Festive Road Winchcombe GLOUCS Yarp...
Well thanks to all those who had a stab at the weight of my bike..........drum roll................

Weight as shown with full bottle is ...........32.8 lbs

Best guesses - Neil 33lbs and drcarlos 32.5 lbs very impressive. As for ibbz at 24lbs, if only!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 2:29 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider

Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 11:58 pm
Posts: 2362
Location: Bournemouth
History Man, you are a Retrobiker now, you should know the rule on owning bikes. It is n+1, where n is the number of bikes you own. Therefore to reduce the weight, you need to buy another bike. When that is built, another ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 2:56 pm 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:33 pm
Posts: 11105
Location: The Home Of Mountain Biking, And All Great Things.
Why wait to build it? The thing to do is amass a huge collection of 'potential' bikes in parts and frames all over your gaff.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 5:00 pm 
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:26 pm
Posts: 16945
Location: 54 Festive Road Winchcombe GLOUCS Yarp...
Just bought 4 tyres and another pair of bar ends plus another saddle .......... And so it begins..............

:wink: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 6:24 pm 
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:26 pm
Posts: 16945
Location: 54 Festive Road Winchcombe GLOUCS Yarp...
If I took off the bottle, cage, bag, mudguards and bar ends would be 30 lbs or less. Apparently light for a FS even by modern standards.

Is this how the madness takes hold............ :facepalm:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 9:16 pm 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:15 am
Posts: 7563
Location: North Yorkshire
Bit late to the party, but being a self confessed WW, I would say the lighter the rider, the more effective weight saving on the bike is.
It's all a question of physics. If you're 6 foot plus and heavier built, then the bike will be a lesser percentage of the total of the bike and rider combined, so less important. But if your a 10 stone race whippet, bike weight becomes much more significant, as it's a higher percentage of the combined weight.
Saving weight on the wheels has the highest effect on performance foremost.
A lot of newcomers to the hobby often buy a budget (and heavy) bike and soon find it "hard Work" and abandon the sport. Light bikes are much nicer to ride, particularly up hill!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 9:18 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 11:59 am
Posts: 4437
Location: Near Southampton
Wold Ranger wrote:
Bit late to the party, but being a self confessed WW, I would say the lighter the rider, the more effective weight saving on the bike is.
It's all a question of physics. If you're 6 foot plus and heavier built, then the bike will be a lesser percentage of the total of the bike and rider combined, so less important. But if your a 10 stone race whippet, bike weight becomes much more significant, as it's a higher percentage of the combined weight.
Saving weight on the wheels has the highest effect on performance foremost.
A lot of newcomers to the hobby often buy a budget (and heavy) bike and soon find it "hard Work" and abandon the sport. Light bikes are much nicer to ride, particularly up hill!!



Right so as a heavier built fellow, I'll opt for a Raleigh Activator! :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 119 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: cherrybomb, Factory Jackson, jmacbrid86, themountie, Yahoo [Bot] and 45 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group