Riding heavier bike - am I missing something?
 

So I like to carry stuff that i need on my bike and I don't necessarily like to dump a bunch of money into getting the lightest component or wheelset to lighten up my bike. Been riding for 30+ years, I have never ridden a bike lighter than 20-21 Ibs without the water bottles. Even on hilly rides, like D2R2, I was riding on a bike that weighs about 30 pounds with all the onboard cameras, and other equipments that I carry inside a frame bag. I guess it just never bother me.
On the most part, I was able to keep up with my buddies in group rides, climb with the best of them.
Am I missing something?
I guess the easiest answer would be to go try one (a lighter bike) someday and see it for myself, but so far I haven't had the luck or chance to do so and I hate riding on bikes that don't fit me exactly.

Keep up?!?!? C'mon weisan-pal, who wants to "keep up"??? Get yourself that Crumpy SL and put your buddies in the hurt locker!!! :D:D:D

That's because the weight savings has less importance than the marketing people would have you believe.

You have to consider the bicycle PLUS the rider when considering weight savings, and the performance advantages aren't directly proportional to the savings.

For instance, a 150lb. rider with a 30lb. bike = 180lbs. That entire mass must be accelerated, carried up hills, etc. .

Put a 20lb. bike under the same rider and you have 170lb. package.

170/180lbs = a 5.6% weight savings. You DO NOT increase your speed 5.6% if you drop 10lbs. off your bike.

While for sure, a lighter bike will technically ride faster, specifically up hill, the advantages aren't what they're advertised to be. On flat ground at steady state efforts, the improvements are not worth the investment.

Reality, what a concept. If I lose a SBW(SBW=Standard Bike Weight)-20 pounds, my bike will weigh..nothing.

Only 2 things you can really measure about a bicycle, weight and price. As a gent from Gita once told me , 'a lighter bike isn't necessarily better, just lighter'...

All things being equal, one hill climb to the next, will a lighter bike go up the hill faster..yes, but how much is a question and maybe, if the rider doesn't feel it, maybe slower. BUT to really lose a LOT of weight on a bike..like 4-5 POUNDS, better bring your wallet. AND the carbon wonder machine, too bad if it rides like crappola to you.

IMHO, YMMV, blah and all that.

I'm reasonably entertained by the idea of carrying around a spare BBW. It could just be boasting to one up the guys only carrying around a spare tire.

You pals are making too much sense, stop it before you take down the whole bike industry! :D

Lets not confuse logic and reality with the cool sensation of lifting a really light bike off the ground....priceless...OK it has a big price but it is still cool.

Lets take this a step further, next time any of us our tempted to pick up someone's bike to feel how light it it, we should instead pick up the rider :)

The really cool sensation is when they lift your 30# bike after D2R2 and wonder why their lightweight marvel didn't make the difference promised...

You are correct.
When I worked at a shop we used to always joke. People would test road bikes by picking them up. Mountain bikes they would stand next to it, push on the bars and check the front suspension and pump both brakes.
Thats a proper bike test.

If you rode the Tour de France it would :)

Power to weight matters but only matters going up. Its a lot more fun to work on the power aspect and carry a reasonable body weight.

My MTB bike is 30lbs but I wish it were 20 since flat riding is not a big part of trails around here. My road bike is 20+ easy and I am fine with that.

I have a heavy bike and a light(er) bike, I love riding both. My heavy bike has both heavy and light wheels, it rides well with both. I find that the first half mile on either bike reminds me of how much I love to ride.

I do think that the lighter bike helps on full days in the mountains, especially the ones with 2 or more passes or over 80 miles. But either is fine for my normal 30 mile rides on the Front Range.

Where I really notice the difference is riding the tandem with my daughter, who doesn't peddle all that much. 45 lbs of bike and another 50 lbs of daughter and you can feel the difference going up hill.

Wheels with great hubs makes all the difference to me on the flats and hold (up and down). The lightest bike will suck with bad wheel, and the heaviest bike will feel lighter with the right wheels.

I have had multiple bikes under 14lbs, and (a) you do not have to spend a fortune to achieve it - just say, and (b) I actually prefer a heavier bike, which is likely do to my riding style (I.e., muscle my bike through corners and going up).

I am with the OP that I prefer to carry less and strap as much as possible to the bike.

It strikes me that over the past hundred years the combined experience of innumerable serious cyclists is that lighter is indeed "better". Such universal shared experience over so much time is unlikely to be imagined or marketing hype.

I suspect one issue is that body weight and bike weight are not interchangeable parts of the system. When you push on a pedal it goes down and you go up. The more you go up the less the pedal goes down. The heavier you are the less you go up and the more the pedal goes down. For a bike/rider system of a given weight the heavier rider can generate more downward pedaling force (up to the limit of their physiology). For the same muscle strength (and net aerobic capacity), a 160# rider on a 20# bike is going to be faster than a 130# rider on a #50 bike.......I think.

I also suspect there is a physiology issue going on. When muscles are working at their most efficient level, a small increase in load (i.e., weight) likely has a much greater proportional drop off in performance. Since each pedal stroke is an acceleration (even when riding on level ground at steady speed) this performance impairment is multiplied by 70-100 x a minute and likely becomes magnified and more noticeable than the simple percentage increase in system weight would suggest.

I swap between heavier and lighter bikes without really noticing the difference. For a while, I had crummy tires on my commuter, and that made a big difference. And in the winter when I have studs on the commuter, vast difference. There is no doubt you can feel a difference in response when you first get on a lighter bike. Not sure it really lasts very long. I certainly wouldn't sacrifice reliability for weight

I suspect this is not correct. Power to weight matters during acceleration.......but each pedal stroke is an acceleration even on level ground at constant speed. It has to be in order to counter the decelerations of air resistance and friction. Weight may not significantly increase the decelerating forces of air resistance and friction, but it seems to me that you still have to accelerate that weight with each pedal stroke to overcome their effect. Am I wrong?