Why do many bicycle manufacturers not list the weights on their bikes?
#76
Thread derailleur
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Glendora, CA
Posts: 777
Bikes: Croll '94 & Cannondale Supersix '15
Liked 546 Times
in
311 Posts
My Cannondale Supersix (non-EVO) carbon fiber all DA with Campagnolo Bora Ultra tubulars tips the scales under 15lbs.
I achieved this with major parts swapping from stock. With SRAM, Cannondale advertised as 16.5 without pedals.
That "without pedals" thing always bugged me. As if anybody rides without pedals.
I achieved this with major parts swapping from stock. With SRAM, Cannondale advertised as 16.5 without pedals.
That "without pedals" thing always bugged me. As if anybody rides without pedals.
Likes For roadcrankr:
#77
All manufacturers list high-end bike weights without pedals for the simple reason that pedals are not included with the bike. They don’t include the weight of bottle cages either, for the same reason.
Likes For PeteHski:
#78
Senior Member
Higher end bikes come without them for a good reason. They are enough of a personal preference item that there is no way of knowing what pedals will be added. It can be assumed that on a high end bike that the rider will most likely use clipless, but which system? Even if the rider prefers platforms thay are likely to have enough of a preference to change them from what would be provided.
Other items like saddles or bar tape may be somewhat personal preference, but a lot of riders will use what comes with the bike. On high end bikes that isn't the case for pedals.
#79
An idea would be for high-end bikes to ship with a really cheap demo saddle like they do with those plastic demo pedals.
Likes For PeteHski:
#80
Senior Member
I would actually prefer it if expensive bikes came without a saddle too as I often change it anyway. I was lucky with my last new bike that it happened to come fitted with my preferred saddle, but that was just sheer luck.
An idea would be for high-end bikes to ship with a really cheap demo saddle like they do with those plastic demo pedals.
An idea would be for high-end bikes to ship with a really cheap demo saddle like they do with those plastic demo pedals.
Even I wouldn't mind buying my favorite saddle along with a new bike.
#81
With a mighty wind
A few years ago I was on the Surly website reading about mountain bikes.
On the Krampus under the FAQ it asked “what does this bike weigh”. The answer was “I don’t know but we’re thinking about filling it with lead”.
I did end up going a different direction for my bike choice but it wasn’t because of weight.
On the Krampus under the FAQ it asked “what does this bike weigh”. The answer was “I don’t know but we’re thinking about filling it with lead”.
I did end up going a different direction for my bike choice but it wasn’t because of weight.
#82
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2023
Location: NorCal
Posts: 828
Bikes: Santa Cruz Blur 4 TR, Canyon Endurace cf sl, Canyon Ultimate cf slx, Canyon Strive enduro, Canyon Grizl sl8
Liked 1,569 Times
in
578 Posts
I haven’t seen any published bike weights that seem unbelievable. For example Trek are claiming 7.10 kg for a top of the line £14k Madone SLR9 size 54 cm. Without pedals and bottle cages, I’m sure it won’t be far off. Canyon claim 7.52 kg for their Aeroad MVDP. Again that seems reasonable. My own Canyon Endurace was listed at 7.76 kg. I should weigh it really to see how close it actually is 😂
Likes For Sierra_rider:
#83
The Canyon weights are fairly accurate IMO. I just purchased an Ultimate SLX that's listed as 16lbs/7.25kg on their site. I don't know what size frame their weight is based on, but my size medium comes out at 16.2lbs/7.35kg according to my cheap scale, so pretty close.
Likes For PeteHski:
#84
Advanced Slacker
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,252
Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt
Liked 2,571 Times
in
1,451 Posts
No, it does not hold water. It's like saying that when a car manufacturer states a weight for a certain model, spesific engine and size that they can't do it because maybe the buyer puts on different tires (heavier/lighter), extra lights and installs a big music system in the car. Well, I'm talking about the specified weight of each specific model before the buyer makes their modifications. Withholding information about the product is the kindest thing I call it.
hsea17
hsea17
Nobody is going to care if their cars is off the published weight by 5%. But they will raise hell is their expensive bike is.
And that is a problem, because if you have ever weighed components, you’ll see those claimed weights are often not quite accurate. And it may not be the same batch to batch. Most of the weight of a bike consists of parts that bike manufacturer does not control production of. In most cases the only part the bike company has direct control over is the frame.
So is it better to give an unreliable number, or not make any specific claims?
#85
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Do you have any data as to how accurate published weights for cars are?
Nobody is going to care if their cars is off the published weight by 5%. But they will raise hell is their expensive bike is.
And that is a problem, because if you have ever weighed components, you’ll see those claimed weights are often not quite accurate. And it may not be the same batch to batch. Most of the weight of a bike consists of parts that bike manufacturer does not control production of. In most cases the only part the bike company has direct control over is the frame.
So is it better to give an unreliable number, or not make any specific claims?
Nobody is going to care if their cars is off the published weight by 5%. But they will raise hell is their expensive bike is.
And that is a problem, because if you have ever weighed components, you’ll see those claimed weights are often not quite accurate. And it may not be the same batch to batch. Most of the weight of a bike consists of parts that bike manufacturer does not control production of. In most cases the only part the bike company has direct control over is the frame.
So is it better to give an unreliable number, or not make any specific claims?
hsea17
#86
Advanced Slacker
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,252
Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt
Liked 2,571 Times
in
1,451 Posts
Well, in reference to the new "Giant TCR" in the OP the base model of Giant TCR advanced mechanical gear weight in at 8.3Kg so if IMO should come out as the weight is actually 8.5 Kg, I don't see that as unreliable. However, if the top model "Giant TCR SL which is promoted with a weight of 6.4Kg should weigh in at 8.5 Kg then yes unreliable.  Btw, car weight affects fuel consumption so do bike weight affect energy consumption to a bike rider.
hsea17
hsea17
#87
Do you have any data as to how accurate published weights for cars are?
Nobody is going to care if their cars is off the published weight by 5%. But they will raise hell is their expensive bike is.
And that is a problem, because if you have ever weighed components, you’ll see those claimed weights are often not quite accurate. And it may not be the same batch to batch. Most of the weight of a bike consists of parts that bike manufacturer does not control production of. In most cases the only part the bike company has direct control over is the frame.
So is it better to give an unreliable number, or not make any specific claims?
Nobody is going to care if their cars is off the published weight by 5%. But they will raise hell is their expensive bike is.
And that is a problem, because if you have ever weighed components, you’ll see those claimed weights are often not quite accurate. And it may not be the same batch to batch. Most of the weight of a bike consists of parts that bike manufacturer does not control production of. In most cases the only part the bike company has direct control over is the frame.
So is it better to give an unreliable number, or not make any specific claims?
I think it is pretty easy for manufacturers to provide reliable bike weights and mostly they do, which is why I would question the validity of the thread title, which appears to relate specifically to Giant in certain markets.
#88
climber has-been
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,536
Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1
Liked 4,077 Times
in
2,009 Posts
In reality component weight variation is very minor and is statistically unlikely to result in an extreme error eg all components on a specific sample bike weighing in at the very top or bottom of their typical variation.
I think it is pretty easy for manufacturers to provide reliable bike weights and mostly they do, which is why I would question the validity of the thread title, which appears to relate specifically to Giant in certain markets.
I think it is pretty easy for manufacturers to provide reliable bike weights and mostly they do, which is why I would question the validity of the thread title, which appears to relate specifically to Giant in certain markets.
I just went to the Specialized site to check the weight of their Aethos configurations, for which light weight is their main selling feature. No weight shown:
S-Works Aethos - SRAM Red eTap AXS
#89
I have found the opposite, that manufacturers rarely publish their bike weights.
I just went to the Specialized site to check the weight of their Aethos configurations, for which light weight is their main selling feature. No weight shown:
S-Works Aethos - SRAM Red eTap AXS
I just went to the Specialized site to check the weight of their Aethos configurations, for which light weight is their main selling feature. No weight shown:
S-Works Aethos - SRAM Red eTap AXS
6.36 kg size 56
#90
climber has-been
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,536
Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1
Liked 4,077 Times
in
2,009 Posts
I did a page search for “weight” and “kg”, which came up with nada.
Either the page was updated, or operator error. Hanson’s razor says operator error.
#91
Senior Member
When a bike manufacturer's spec sheet includes the disclaimer " specifications may change" You can be sure that any weight listed is a fiction
#92
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,929
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Liked 3,933 Times
in
2,053 Posts
Ummm ... there are a lot of people who would choose one bike over another based on a few hundred grams .... and also, it is a matter of percentage. After all, 300 grams is over half a pound .... a fair chunk of weight on a 16-pound machine.
#93
Junior Member
Thread Starter
hsea17
#95
Senior Member
That's a bit confusing. Your previous two comparisons, in the same paragraph, were 8.4 versus 8.5 kg (acceptable) and 6.4 versus 8.5 kg (unacceptable). Your post above referenced the first of the two comparisons, I guess.
#96
I was confused by that too. None of the reputable manufacturers are attempting to pass off 8.5 kg bikes as 6.4 kg so it’s not really a problem.
Likes For PeteHski:
#97
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Fargo ND
Posts: 962
Bikes: Time Scylon, Lynskey R350, Ritchey Breakaway, Ritchey Double Switchback, Lynskey Ridgeline, ICAN Fatbike
Liked 583 Times
in
332 Posts
Okay... one more time. Every component that goes into a bicycle has a manufacturing weight tolerance range. I use my wheel set as an example: 1518g (±50g) is the weight currently listed on the Winspace web site for the Hyper 67 wheel set.
Add up all the components and you get a range. Weight of X+- Y. It is probably a marketing decision to not list this number, and if you look at very many threads on this fine website you can see why. There are too many people who would loose their<expletive> over that, so better to leave it out.
Add up all the components and you get a range. Weight of X+- Y. It is probably a marketing decision to not list this number, and if you look at very many threads on this fine website you can see why. There are too many people who would loose their<expletive> over that, so better to leave it out.
Likes For DangerousDanR:
#98
Okay... one more time. Every component that goes into a bicycle has a manufacturing weight tolerance range. I use my wheel set as an example: 1518g (±50g) is the weight currently listed on the Winspace web site for the Hyper 67 wheel set.
Add up all the components and you get a range. Weight of X+- Y. It is probably a marketing decision to not list this number, and if you look at very many threads on this fine website you can see why. There are too many people who would loose their<expletive> over that, so better to leave it out.
Add up all the components and you get a range. Weight of X+- Y. It is probably a marketing decision to not list this number, and if you look at very many threads on this fine website you can see why. There are too many people who would loose their<expletive> over that, so better to leave it out.
#99
Advanced Slacker
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,252
Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt
Liked 2,571 Times
in
1,451 Posts
For those not buying the reasons given for why a company might reasonably choose to not list weights, I am curious what they think the REAL reasons are?
Is there some nefarious plot? Just lazy?
Is there some nefarious plot? Just lazy?
#100
Well Giant state that you should pop into your local Giant dealer and ask them to weigh the bike you are specifically interested in. Other major manufacturers do actually list bike weights. Do any of the others not list them? Specialized, Trek and Canyon all list weights on their websites.