My new 2024 Domane SL 5 is .95# heavier than it should be.
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 7,214
Bikes: Trek CheckPoint SL7 AXS, Trek Emonda ALR AXS, Trek FX 5 Sport
Liked 2,052 Times
in
1,161 Posts
A lb seems like a lot, considering that not only is a 50cm frame smaller than the 56cm reference, but it also has 4cm narrower handlebars, 2cm shorter stem and a 4cm shorter seatpost. Interestingly though the 50cm comes with a wider saddle (155mm vs 145mm).
I know you have tubeless tires, but to confirm, the bike is setup tubeless and doesn't have tubes installed? Are there any tools included/not included in the in-frame compartment?
I know you have tubeless tires, but to confirm, the bike is setup tubeless and doesn't have tubes installed? Are there any tools included/not included in the in-frame compartment?
#52
Senior Member
Goodness gracious sakes alive! They publish "optimistic" weights!!! Unheard of!!!
Are there any bike or component companies that don't publish "optimistic" weights? The only companies that I've dealt with are those (very few) that actually weigh the stuff they ship. Most all of the bike parts (frames, forks, and every other part) I've bought in the past couple of decades (never weighed anything before that) has been a few grams heavy over advertised. It adds up. It would be impossible to predict the actual weight of a complete bike. Noone should ever think advertised weighs are accurate.
That's why among the weight weenies, there are extensive shared data on actual measured weights. It's a fun hobby - researching and looking for value in lightweight parts from front to back on a bike. I used to do it and enjoyed it. Now I've lost interst in it but don't rrot out the old chestnuts like "lose a pound of body weight" or "a pound is less than a full water bottle" or the most clever: "take a dump before the ride". Those people don't get it.
Are there any bike or component companies that don't publish "optimistic" weights? The only companies that I've dealt with are those (very few) that actually weigh the stuff they ship. Most all of the bike parts (frames, forks, and every other part) I've bought in the past couple of decades (never weighed anything before that) has been a few grams heavy over advertised. It adds up. It would be impossible to predict the actual weight of a complete bike. Noone should ever think advertised weighs are accurate.
That's why among the weight weenies, there are extensive shared data on actual measured weights. It's a fun hobby - researching and looking for value in lightweight parts from front to back on a bike. I used to do it and enjoyed it. Now I've lost interst in it but don't rrot out the old chestnuts like "lose a pound of body weight" or "a pound is less than a full water bottle" or the most clever: "take a dump before the ride". Those people don't get it.
Last edited by Camilo; 04-29-24 at 09:34 PM.
#53
#54
Sunshine
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 17,039
Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo
Liked 8,066 Times
in
4,473 Posts
All seriousness, yeah I would be annoyed because with your bike's size, you would think it would be 1.25# less than the claimed weight.
But my annoyance would be pretty short lived.
It's a Domane- those things don't look light and aren't designed to be light. While that doesn't justify a bike being heavier, it definitely should provide some perspective since it isn't meant to be a light weight.
Personally- if weight were a motivating factor in which bike to purchase, I would look elsewhere and find one that weighs what it's claimed to weigh.
Of course if you weigh other bikes, you may find the Domane is in line with competition...and then what?
#55
The bike weight was misrepresented by a big margin. Weight is the biggest determinant of bike speed/performance, and so I'd be upset about this too. When you've ridden a 16 pound road bike, any 20 pound bike is sluggish and boring.
But the elephant in the room is that this $3,000+ supposedly high performance bike from a leading manufacturer weighs 20 pounds. I have a line on a 10-year old local bike that is in excellent condition, and it weighs 3 pounds less and will cost me $300.
But then the older bike comes without the unnecessary ballast of disc brakes, the slow pokey wheels with farm tractor tires found on current endurance/gravel bikes, and (Thank God) full external cable routing so that routine yearly maintenance takes minutes, not hours.
The defeatists and apologists in the forum will squeal that weight doesn't matter and you should take a dump before your ride and fat heavy tires are actually faster blah blah blah, but if you want to travel long distances at high speed, or you want to hang with the fast boys, then weight really really matters. The industry will obviously try and convince you that weight doesn't matter, because heavy is cheap and easy to build.
But the elephant in the room is that this $3,000+ supposedly high performance bike from a leading manufacturer weighs 20 pounds. I have a line on a 10-year old local bike that is in excellent condition, and it weighs 3 pounds less and will cost me $300.
But then the older bike comes without the unnecessary ballast of disc brakes, the slow pokey wheels with farm tractor tires found on current endurance/gravel bikes, and (Thank God) full external cable routing so that routine yearly maintenance takes minutes, not hours.
The defeatists and apologists in the forum will squeal that weight doesn't matter and you should take a dump before your ride and fat heavy tires are actually faster blah blah blah, but if you want to travel long distances at high speed, or you want to hang with the fast boys, then weight really really matters. The industry will obviously try and convince you that weight doesn't matter, because heavy is cheap and easy to build.
#56
The bike weight was misrepresented by a big margin. Weight is the biggest determinant of bike speed/performance, and so I'd be upset about this too. When you've ridden a 16 pound road bike, any 20 pound bike is sluggish and boring.
But the elephant in the room is that this $3,000+ supposedly high performance bike from a leading manufacturer weighs 20 pounds. I have a line on a 10-year old local bike that is in excellent condition, and it weighs 3 pounds less and will cost me $300.
But then the older bike comes without the unnecessary ballast of disc brakes, the slow pokey wheels with farm tractor tires found on current endurance/gravel bikes, and (Thank God) full external cable routing so that routine yearly maintenance takes minutes, not hours.
The defeatists and apologists in the forum will squeal that weight doesn't matter and you should take a dump before your ride and fat heavy tires are actually faster blah blah blah, but if you want to travel long distances at high speed, or you want to hang with the fast boys, then weight really really matters. The industry will obviously try and convince you that weight doesn't matter, because heavy is cheap and easy to build.
But the elephant in the room is that this $3,000+ supposedly high performance bike from a leading manufacturer weighs 20 pounds. I have a line on a 10-year old local bike that is in excellent condition, and it weighs 3 pounds less and will cost me $300.
But then the older bike comes without the unnecessary ballast of disc brakes, the slow pokey wheels with farm tractor tires found on current endurance/gravel bikes, and (Thank God) full external cable routing so that routine yearly maintenance takes minutes, not hours.
The defeatists and apologists in the forum will squeal that weight doesn't matter and you should take a dump before your ride and fat heavy tires are actually faster blah blah blah, but if you want to travel long distances at high speed, or you want to hang with the fast boys, then weight really really matters. The industry will obviously try and convince you that weight doesn't matter, because heavy is cheap and easy to build.
#57
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,854
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Liked 1,612 Times
in
1,060 Posts
#58
Mostly Harmless
Thread Starter
Yes, there are many parts and accessories that the claimed weight is almost exact to the actual weight. Tires, pedals, and lights are three things that come to mind. I’ve bought many of them. The claimed weight is either dead on, or even a gram or two lighter.
#59
#60
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,854
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Liked 1,612 Times
in
1,060 Posts
#61
Same here. For example I weighed some DA pedals recently and they were as advertised. I’ve had tyres weigh above and below spec, so there is some variation there. The rolling resistance website publishes measured vs advertised weights for tyres and they are usually pretty close and not always overweight. Shimano component weights are usually very close to spec from what I’ve seen.
#62
Senior Member
I just picked up my new Trek Domane SL 5. I had it weighted at the shop and with Race Face Chester pedals (360 grams per pair) already attached it was 21 pounds 7 ounces. This is with with tubeless tires. Deducting the pedals, it comes out to 20.64 pounds (sorry for mixing pounds and ounces, grams, and decimal pounds).
The Trek site says a size 56 cm 2024 SL 5 weighs 19.69 pounds (tubeless, no pedals). My frame size is 50 cm, so if anything I would expect it to be lighter. I know there is some variation with carbon frames, but is almost a whole pound out of the ordinary?
It is still a nice bike, and I am looking forward to taking my first real ride on it tomorrow. But I also feel that I didn’t get everything that I paid for.
The Trek site says a size 56 cm 2024 SL 5 weighs 19.69 pounds (tubeless, no pedals). My frame size is 50 cm, so if anything I would expect it to be lighter. I know there is some variation with carbon frames, but is almost a whole pound out of the ordinary?
It is still a nice bike, and I am looking forward to taking my first real ride on it tomorrow. But I also feel that I didn’t get everything that I paid for.
as some other people have stated that's assuming that the pedals also weigh 360g, but either way I doubt the pedals are anything or than 50g over the manufacture stated weight.
Are you sure you got the new Gen 4? Because the weight you described is spot on for a last gen at 21.80 lbs
Likes For Jrasero:
#63
Senior Member
BTW the standard Emonda frameset is a joke. The SL Disc frame weighs 1245g while their Emonda ALR DIsc 1257g especially considering these are climbing frames. The SLR while light is still 760g and is a $4200 frame while in contrast an Aethos Fact 10r is $3000 and 699g
Point being all of Trek's bikes are pretty beefy. The Domane has always been a pig weight wise and the Madone while lighter than previous gens still is one of the heavier Aero bikes
Point being all of Trek's bikes are pretty beefy. The Domane has always been a pig weight wise and the Madone while lighter than previous gens still is one of the heavier Aero bikes
#64
Senior Member
Without a doubt a bad value but Trek is not known for their weights. IMO if OP cared about weight they should have gotten a Specialized and I am not even talking about a SWORKS since the Trek Domane SL 5 Gen 4 is a $3500 bike and weighs 19.69lbs that is the same price as a Crux Comp at 18.73lbs, a $3500 Roubaix SL 8 18.95lbs, or an Aethos Comp 105 Di2 for $4K but would have weighed 17.16lbs
Likes For Jrasero:
#65
BTW the standard Emonda frameset is a joke. The SL Disc frame weighs 1245g while their Emonda ALR DIsc 1257g especially considering these are climbing frames. The SLR while light is still 760g and is a $4200 frame while in contrast an Aethos Fact 10r is $3000 and 699g
Point being all of Trek's bikes are pretty beefy. The Domane has always been a pig weight wise and the Madone while lighter than previous gens still is one of the heavier Aero bikes
Point being all of Trek's bikes are pretty beefy. The Domane has always been a pig weight wise and the Madone while lighter than previous gens still is one of the heavier Aero bikes
#66
Senior Member
485g just for a frame is a massive amount of weight especially since this is a lightweight climbing bike that doesn't prioritize aero. The fact that trek is marketing the SL line as a climbing bike should be fraud and yes weight is one of the main parameters to compare a climbing bike with another climbing bike lol. Trek IMO with all their road lineup is severely bloated in weight and that's even with their new Domane and Madone which to your point maybe weight shouldn't matter, but for the Emonda yeah 485g difference is insane or the fact that a SLR frame still costs $4K when you can get a handful of cheaper frames that are under 800g
#67
485g just for a frame is a massive amount of weight especially since this is a lightweight climbing bike that doesn't prioritize aero. The fact that trek is marketing the SL line as a climbing bike should be fraud and yes weight is one of the main parameters to compare a climbing bike with another climbing bike lol. Trek IMO with all their road lineup is severely bloated in weight and that's even with their new Domane and Madone which to your point maybe weight shouldn't matter, but for the Emonda yeah 485g difference is insane or the fact that a SLR frame still costs $4K when you can get a handful of cheaper frames that are under 800g
Likes For PeteHski:
#69
This 50cm bike weighs under 20 with Look delta pedals:
Likes For Kontact:
#70
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Québec, Canada
Posts: 2,201
Bikes: SL8 Pro, TCR beater
Liked 601 Times
in
453 Posts
BTW the standard Emonda frameset is a joke. The SL Disc frame weighs 1245g while their Emonda ALR DIsc 1257g especially considering these are climbing frames. The SLR while light is still 760g and is a $4200 frame while in contrast an Aethos Fact 10r is $3000 and 699g
Point being all of Trek's bikes are pretty beefy. The Domane has always been a pig weight wise and the Madone while lighter than previous gens still is one of the heavier Aero bikes
Point being all of Trek's bikes are pretty beefy. The Domane has always been a pig weight wise and the Madone while lighter than previous gens still is one of the heavier Aero bikes
#71
OM boy
Without a doubt a bad value but Trek is not known for their weights. IMO if OP cared about weight they should have gotten a Specialized and I am not even talking about a SWORKS since the Trek Domane SL 5 Gen 4 is a $3500 bike and weighs 19.69lbs that is the same price as a Crux Comp at 18.73lbs, a $3500 Roubaix SL 8 18.95lbs, or an Aethos Comp 105 Di2 for $4K but would have weighed 17.16lbs
Weight... did some homework... because I have the option to 'return' Emonda SL5 within 30 days, full refund - Bought at our local TREK (overdone, blocky logo of no real design merit ) store.
Actual bike weight with older Ultegra SPD-SL pedals - 21.4 lbs , 9.72 Kg
so ACTUAL stock Emonda Wheel weight - both wheels, with tires, stock rotors and 11-30 105 Cassette. = 8 lbs 3.7 Kg !!!
IF I were to go with a CF wheelset of, say, 1450 g, add some good. light tires, use TPU tubes, nice rotors and the current cassette, that comes to 5.8 lbs, 2.65 Kg
so a savings of 2.2. lbs, 1 Kg
so bike weight of 19.2 lbs. , 8.7+ Kg
Pedals I have on bike, some older, heavier Ultegra SPD-SL. If I change to the Eggbeaters I mostly use - that's -100 g
so now 18.9+, 8.6 K,
Further savings could be had with a much lighter saddle - seat mast is alloy, could go to TREK CF mast = $$... CF Bar/Stem
Given this version of Hydraulic Disc is prolly 500 g additional weight over a good Rim brake system... we're still talking 8.1 ish Kg... over what was a decent rim brake weight ... in 2009...
...looking for a 17+ ish lb , 7.8 Kg Disc Bike is prolly in the $5000 - $6000 + price level....
I'm on the fence about returning and looking elsewhere...
I do like the 'fit' of the bike - so the Q is : Will the Better wheels transform the nag into a race horse ???
I have had that happen before...
Thoughts ?
Yuri
Ride On
Last edited by cyclezen; 05-01-24 at 11:14 AM.
#72
Senior Member
Maybe Trek weighed the bike without Di2 battery or cables.
I've heard of brands weighing their bikes without paint, which is definitely disingenuous.
They could even soak all of the parts in degreaser before assembly - lubricants weigh something, as well. I've heard of car manufacturers doing something like this - listing a car's weight while 'dry,' ie, no motor oil or fluids of any kind.
I've heard of brands weighing their bikes without paint, which is definitely disingenuous.
They could even soak all of the parts in degreaser before assembly - lubricants weigh something, as well. I've heard of car manufacturers doing something like this - listing a car's weight while 'dry,' ie, no motor oil or fluids of any kind.
#73
Mostly Harmless
Thread Starter
as some other people have stated that's assuming that the pedals also weigh 360g, but either way I doubt the pedals are anything or than 50g over the manufacture stated weight.<br /><br />Are you sure you got the new Gen 4? Because the weight you described is spot on for a last gen at 21.80 lbs
Edit to add: I don't think they still sell the Gen 3 SL 5.
Last edited by Tony_G; 05-01-24 at 04:56 PM. Reason: Add info about Gen 3
#74
Banned
So will OP keep it or ask for a refund?
#75
Senior Member
Agree with 'Porky' and to some extent 'somewhat LOGO BLOAT'... Logos, can be and are 'design elements', but BLOAT is disconcerting and ugly - as with my 2009 Tarmac (which I dearly love... best bike ever...) which has logos on EVERY TUBE !!! one suffers ... and 'imperfect is the state of our universe - and glad for it !!! 'Wonderful' is much more important.
Weight... did some homework... because I have the option to 'return' Emonda SL5 within 30 days, full refund - Bought at our local TREK (overdone, blocky logo of no real design merit ) store.
Actual bike weight with older Ultegra SPD-SL pedals - 21.4 lbs , 9.72 Kg
so ACTUAL stock Emonda Wheel weight - both wheels, with tires, stock rotors and 11-30 105 Cassette. = 8 lbs 3.7 Kg !!!
IF I were to go with a CF wheelset of, say, 1450 g, add some good. light tires, use TPU tubes, nice rotors and the current cassette, that comes to 5.8 lbs, 2.65 Kg
so a savings of 2.2. lbs, 1 Kg
so bike weight of 19.2 lbs. , 8.7+ Kg
Pedals I have on bike, some older, heavier Ultegra SPD-SL. If I change to the Eggbeaters I mostly use - that's -100 g
so now 18.9+, 8.6 K,
Further savings could be had with a much lighter saddle - seat mast is alloy, could go to TREK CF mast = $$... CF Bar/Stem
Given this version of Hydraulic Disc is prolly 500 g additional weight over a good Rim brake system... we're still talking 8.1 ish Kg... over what was a decent rim brake weight ... in 2009...
...looking for a 17+ ish lb , 7.8 Kg Disc Bike is prolly in the $5000 - $6000 + price level....
I'm on the fence about returning and looking elsewhere...
I do like the 'fit' of the bike - so the Q is : Will the Better wheels transform the nag into a race horse ???
I have had that happen before...
Thoughts ?
Yuri
Ride On
Weight... did some homework... because I have the option to 'return' Emonda SL5 within 30 days, full refund - Bought at our local TREK (overdone, blocky logo of no real design merit ) store.
Actual bike weight with older Ultegra SPD-SL pedals - 21.4 lbs , 9.72 Kg
so ACTUAL stock Emonda Wheel weight - both wheels, with tires, stock rotors and 11-30 105 Cassette. = 8 lbs 3.7 Kg !!!
IF I were to go with a CF wheelset of, say, 1450 g, add some good. light tires, use TPU tubes, nice rotors and the current cassette, that comes to 5.8 lbs, 2.65 Kg
so a savings of 2.2. lbs, 1 Kg
so bike weight of 19.2 lbs. , 8.7+ Kg
Pedals I have on bike, some older, heavier Ultegra SPD-SL. If I change to the Eggbeaters I mostly use - that's -100 g
so now 18.9+, 8.6 K,
Further savings could be had with a much lighter saddle - seat mast is alloy, could go to TREK CF mast = $$... CF Bar/Stem
Given this version of Hydraulic Disc is prolly 500 g additional weight over a good Rim brake system... we're still talking 8.1 ish Kg... over what was a decent rim brake weight ... in 2009...
...looking for a 17+ ish lb , 7.8 Kg Disc Bike is prolly in the $5000 - $6000 + price level....
I'm on the fence about returning and looking elsewhere...
I do like the 'fit' of the bike - so the Q is : Will the Better wheels transform the nag into a race horse ???
I have had that happen before...
Thoughts ?
Yuri
Ride On
I just think even with the upgrades 19lbs for a entry level climbing bike even with pedals that's really heavy for a "lightweight" or "climbing" bike. Now if weight doesn't matter to you than yeah again the Emonda is a good bike but at $3500 I'd rather spend $500 more and get a Ultimate CF SL 7 Di2 18lbs or an Aethos Comp Di2 17lbs at $4000
Last edited by Jrasero; 05-02-24 at 08:51 AM.
Likes For Jrasero: