COOLWALL: Sub 20ib mountain bike? Weight saving gone too far

Super lightweight tricked out sub 20 ib bikes? Cool or rubbish?

  • No way - pointless - feel like riding uncooked spagetti. Wouldnt risk my life.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Kinda ok

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Awesome weight engineering prowess. I'd drill my tyres if I could.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
I remember when one American mag (I forget which one) built a 19.5lbs Merlin Ti softail - my friends and I drooled over that for months, and started drawing up lists of ultimate bikes and their weights, trying to get to that mythical 20lbs mark...

Whilst fragile bikes are never good to ride, as an exercise in engineering, and simply for the wow-factor: :cool:
 
In the time before suspension, most quality MTB's were light and flickable. This was a golden age of handling and sensitivity, and many of us are returning to this very time. To test the theory, select your favourite off road route and then hammer it on a lightweight bike...you'll soon realise whether you're a good rider or not!!

Let's not forget that the materials used are almost as equally important as their respective weights.

But before I get technical, yes...THE LIGHTER, THE RIGHTER!
 
I got drawn into all this lightness lark too.....alloy & ti bolts, ditching the plastic caps from the cranks and the seat QR, even milling a groove in the front of my LX cranks :shock:

Now I'm older (and a little heavier!) I'll settle for durability.....what was it Keith Bontrager said, strong, light, cheap pick two, I'll go for strong & cheap :D

Stu
 
It was slightly before my time.
I used to work with some guy who:
cut his gripshift in half
only used half the barend clamp on the bar, so he could have narrower bars
used ritchey canti's, which meant his frame didn't need the spring holes on canti mounts

:LOL:
 
Benandemu":rljx5g1w said:
In the time before suspension, most quality MTB's were light and flickable.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyones saying light and flickable isn't good, but the point at which the drill comes out is when its gone too far imho. So is sacrificing ride characteristics for weight as in the case of very narrow bars.
A bike should be as light as it can get without me ever wondering 'should I ride that with 'x' component?'
 
stevet1":3sddh89z said:
Benandemu":3sddh89z said:
In the time before suspension, most quality MTB's were light and flickable.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyones saying light and flickable isn't good, but the point at which the drill comes out is when its gone too far imho. So is sacrificing ride characteristics for weight as in the case of very narrow bars.
A bike should be as light as it can get without me ever wondering 'should I ride that with 'x' component?'
Click to expand...

I dont think anyone would disagree with that. however theres something incredibularly cool about 1 off, or limited season race bikes. I'm thinking Neds 1990 worlds ultimate, henriks P20TEAM extended seattube frame etc, etc. a good friend has 1 of steve peats old GT DH frames & thats waay liter than normal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jonnyboy666
1989 (i think) Muddy Fox Seeker! the prodigal bike returns!
2
Replies
12
Views
932
elite504
elite504
C
2011 Intense M9 FRO - owned from new and rebuilt
Replies
4
Views
474
Cloverleaf
C
S
Re ignited love and a Canadian adventure
2 3
Replies
22
Views
6K
kingoffootball
kingoffootball
john
  • Article
Article Ten Speed Cassette Conversion for Mountain Bikes
Replies
7
Views
2K
BTCEB Blog » Blog Archive » BTCEB Blog
B

Latest posts

Back
Top