genejockey 

Your assertion was disproved. Take your medicine and stop wasting our time.

asgelle

My assertion that a lighter bike will be faster on level ground because of a decrease in rolling resistance? OK.

tomato coupe

No, no, no, no, no. You do not get faster by adding weight -- you get faster by improving the aerodynamics, the cost of which is (likely) to be a higher weight.

genejockey 

Okay, since nobody disputed that, what are you talking about?
No, your assertion that anyone disputed that.

UniChris

Water is wet, film at 11

genejockey 

It's briefly entertaining to watch someone who has staked out an untenable position as they twist and turn and act smugly condescending trying to brazen their way out of it. But only briefly.

asgelle

"Riding on nominally flat terrain I wouldn't expect to pick up any time on a lighter bike."

genejockey 

I cannot believe you tried to pull that s*** again after being called on it.

YOU CANNOT EXTRACT A SINGLE SENTENCE FROM A POST TO CLAIM THE POSTER DENIED AN ASSERTION WHEN HE AGREES WITH THE ASSERTION IN THE SAME POST. It makes your entire point self-refuting.

livedarklions

So are you withdrawing your "clarification" that you knew the person who posted that did not mean that there was no speed difference?

​​​​ You already got busted doing this out of context quoting, now you're just making an ass of you by repeating it.

So would this drive you nuts? "It was absolutely dark in the room. There was a small red LED glowing on a charger but it wasn't bright enough to see anything."

I'm sure you'd post several times scolding the writer that that wasn't absolute darkness because there's some light, and how dare he contradict himself.

Seriously, that's the absurd level you're arguing at.

woodcraft

You ride 1220km on a 30-35 lb bike?? Maybe you should START obsessing about bike weight.

UniChris

Maybe you should re-read the part where they specifically said it depended what they were carrying, then think about what it would make sense to bring on a 1220 km ride.

If it's going on the ride it counts - being part of the bike vs strapped to it vs worn by the rider vs part of the rider only really matters if the location adds a specific extra cost. Most seem to feel weight on the frame beats weight on your back for example.

The Chemist

Yep. Just checked it again this morning to confirm. Including the rack, handlebar and trunk bag, and fenders, it's pretty much spot on 15kg.

GhostRider62

I have to ride a recumbent nowadays due to age related spine issues. They are pigs. The basic bike is close to 30 pounds but my CdA is down around 0.150-160 m^2......that is where the real savings are.....imagine how fast such a bike is.....you'd think GhostRider himself blew by you.....LOL. Light weight is nice on hills. The video model is a bit of joke but it is true, weight isn't as important as we would like to think. My upright bikes weigh 16-18 lbs but it isn't all that hard to get an upright down to 15 lbs with money

woodcraft

Yeah I've ridden with some recumbents where I had to work to keep up. I imagine there's some energy savings from a more supported body position as well.

ColonelSanders

When people compare bike weight, they are usually referring to just the bike, and don't include any add-ons like the rack, handlebar and trunk bag, and fenders.

The Chemist

Not sure why. If you're riding with them they add to the bike's weight. Regardless, such things barely add 2kg to my bike's weight - it's hardly a featherweight even completely 'naked'.

Regardless, I have no desire to go lighter. My bike rides perfectly well as is, is reasonably fast, and I don't have to worry about carbon fibre's much greater likelihood of getting damaged even by minor incidents as compared to aluminum / steel.

livedarklions

And therein lies a bunch of fallacies about the importance of bike weight. Obviously, the heavier the add-ons, the less important differences in the weight of the actual bikes as that difference is a smaller percentage of the vehicle's gross weight (rider + bike + add-ons).

terrymorse 

Because it then becomes easy to compare different bikes.

When you go for a medical checkup, do they weigh you wearing clothes, shoes, jacket, and carrying keys + wallet?

Metieval

You should do you, and I should do me.

I obsess over weight on more than just bicycles. I obsessed on weight on the van build. I obsessed over weight on travel trailer. I obsessed with weight on backpacking equipment.
I wear work boots some days, I wear running shoes some days. I definitely do not like running in heavy work boots. I definitely do not like hiking in running shoes. But for a lightweight over of ankle supporting boots for hiking, I will obcess.

Go green. Lighten your load. Use less fuel!

Eric F 

Why would you worry about something that is non-existent?

PeteHski

Yep, 30 seconds every 100 miles and I would wager that most of that 30 seconds was from the elevation change on that route (500 m) because of course it wasn't perfectly flat. That's the great thing about physics. You don't have to guess whether or not something is worth having. Remember this is dropping 2kg off your bike, not some trivial amount. So just to be clear I would NOT expect to pick up any SIGNIFICANT time on a flat course with a lighter bike. Is that more reasonable for you?

Trakhak

Ondrej Sosenka set a Merckx-style (conventional handlebars, no aero equipment) hour record in 2005 on a velodrome while riding an unusually heavy track bike. It's likely that the heavier bike proved to be faster than lighter versions in test rides. Otherwise, why use it?

From this page:

"In his attempt, Sosenka was using a 54 x 13 gearing, a 3.2-kg (7-pound) wheel and 190-mm cranks, with his bike weighing a total of 9.8 kg (21.6 pounds). The reason for the heavy wheel was that although it was harder to get up to speed, it was easy to maintain it."

By the way, I suspect that whatever benefit was conferred by the use of the heavier wheel, the effect would have been the same regardless of whether the wheels were heavier than usual or not, as long as the overall weight of the bike was still 21.6 pounds. Or maybe not. No idea whether the flywheel effect is significant at the rotational speeds and weights encountered in such circumstances.

Eric F 

From my own non-scientific experience with some heavy areo wheels I borrowed from a friend many years ago, and used for a few crits, the flywheel effect felt pretty real. Those wheels were a bit sluggish to get spinning, but when speeds got north of 30mph, they just wanted to keep going. Winding them up to a full sprint at 40+mph was super fun. I liked them if there was a good long drag to the finish line. If the final corner was less than 200m from the line, I preferred something that felt a little quicker to accelerate.

PeteHski

Yep, a bit like ummmm.. a flywheel!

tomato coupe

There's no maybe -- it's not the same.