Riding heavier bike - am I missing something?

[carpediemracing]

I'm one for lighter bikes, to a point anyway, and I also think that lighter wheels help me, based on my somewhat specific riding needs/style.

I'm exploring tire rolling resistance as a factor as I didn't realize that rolling resistance can account for as much as 2/3 of my power output in a race (120w rolling resistance based on Velonews tire test chart, 180-200w avg power, with a more efficient pair of tires lowering that 120w to something like 65w).

However for more normal people, meaning those a bit stronger than me but also those that maintain a more consistent/steady pace, a heavier bike might not be a bad thing. Link without specifics although I think he had a more detailed write up somewhere on his site:
http://www.biketechreview.com/index....inflated-tires

Incidentally maintaining 300w for 9 miles for me, which is what he did, is pretty much undoable. It's why he was a Cat 1 for some time and I am a Cat 3.

[purpurite]

I'll also throw in my side on the lighter equipment. I'm 140 pounds soaking wet, and not gifted with tremendous strength. A lighter bike is very noticeable to me, especially on climbs or long rides.

I spent years mountain biking on hard tails—light ones, in the 21-22lb range, then decided I "needed" full suspension. One season on a 27-28lb suspended rig was enough for me. I couldn't wait to get back on a lighter hardtail. It felt like I was riding in sand EVERYWHERE, and I was miserable on every trail.

On road or trail, I want to be able to spin up wheels quickly and slow down as fast as my brain thinks I should be able to. While I'm not a full-on weight weenie, I do take the weight of components in a build seriously, and will spend extra money on lighter higher mass components, especially if they are spinning (tires, tubes, wheels, cranks, pedals). It makes a big difference to me.

You can say it's bunk or a placebo, but all things being equal, I want a lighter bike under me for many reasons.

[sitzmark]

Riding heavier bike - am I missing something?

Sort of an age old question, is it not? Outside of competition at its pinnacle, what does "x" give me? Pick the product/activity and it relates.

For the VAST majority of people who will own and ride a bicycle, anything more than a basic bicycle will be a luxury they will never pursue. They'll ask what does a $1,000 bicycle get me .. A $3,000 bicycle ... A custom bicycle ... Most will scoff at the idea of such extravagance. And, rightly so. There are differences that result from weight, flex, positioning, etc. They will all ride slightly different, but is there any one bike that parts the red sea? No. And thus why N+1 exists.

Everyone should ride what they like and what fits for them and forget about what anyone else rides. IMHO

[gone]

On what kind of riding you're doing. TdF against equally fit pros up mountains, big difference. JRA with buddies, small difference.

Having said that, on long rides (600K-1200K) the extra effort required to push additional weight adds up both in terms of how long you're in the saddle and how tired you are at the end of the day (and how much you have in the tank for subsequent days).

Still, even on long rides comfort trumps weight but if you can have it all, why not?

I admit that prior to a 1200K I obsess over weight (including my own). Everything on the bike has to "pay" for itself in terms of need, comfort, etc.

[livingminimal]

If I had 8% body fat instead of 18%, and I raced road, I might be concerned with bike weight.

Bike weight's big advantage is more or less limited to going uphill anyway. So where you live and ride may dictate that a 10lb (30...dang that is a lot) delta over a modern bike that would be considered "heavy" (like my steel custom w/ disc, di2, and a bulletproof wheel set) wouldn't make a damn bit of difference.

I live where its a little hilly. My pegoretti is much lighter than my Stinner, and sure, I can notice it, but really, I don't care unless I make myself lighter. I have PR's on both bikes depending on how I feel the conditions outside, how much Ive been riding, yada yada yada...

[dgauthier]

I never understood the appeal of light bikes. I want a *fast* bike...

[Ralph]

You can't deny the physics of a lighter bike. The question is......everything else being equal (and it rarely is)....how much difference does it make to most of us. I'm 155 and I ride a 17 lb bike sometimes and a 19 lb bike some times. That's unladen. With my normal bag of tools and two large water bottles, weight of both go way up. On mostly flat to rolling terrain, I really can't tell any difference for my kind of riding with my old buddies. Some of you guys who ride a lot faster, or ride where it is a lot steeper, maybe can tell a difference. I can't much.

[bikinchris]

Originally Posted by numbskull

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?

True, but on level ground momentum helps a lot. That's why a heavy bike and wheels doesn't slow you down on the flats. Also on true rolling hills weight doesn't hurt. My tandem did really well on a road called the roller coaster between Pennsylvania and Maryland when we did Cycle Across Maryland. We passed pacelines of riders both going up and down and never went below 30mph. Our weight actually helped us because I understood momentum building going downhill was the key.

[zap]

Light bikes are fun. Lighter wheels better still. Massive difference between a 1400g wheel set vs 2000g.

Me, I really can't get any lighter.

Aero matters more.

Training smartmore is most important.

[weisan]

True story.

A few months ago, I got on our regular group ride in East Austin. Was simply JRA and basically going up and down the paceline regardless of the speed we were going almost effortlessly chatting up with anybody and everybody....about 8 or 9 miles into the ride, I discovered I had forgotten my water bottles!

hmm....no wonder.

[OtayBW]

I prefer lighter myself. I love riding my DeRosa lugged and brazed (though not really a 'lightweight', it's not bad with the EL-OS tubing), but I sure tend not to take it out if I'm going out for a tough day in the hills. If I'm riding anything heavier than the lugged steel, it going to be dedicated to some purpose - i.e., light touring or something.

[weisan]

Originally Posted by OtayBW

If I'm riding anything heavier than the lugged steel, it going to be dedicated to some purpose.

Otay pal, I do the same with my MX Leader. It goes out only when I am riding up the mountain to visit the EM Shrine.

[OtayBW]

Originally Posted by weisan

Otay pal, I do the same with my MX Leader. It goes out only when I am riding up the mountain to visit the EM Shrine.

Whoa! That is some shrine! You're not some kind of stalker are you?!?

[nmrt]

The math here is correct but it is the logic that rubs me.
A lighter bike no matter how significant (or not) percent of the total weight will feel and handle very different from a heavier bike. Some like this feeling and some may not.

And the other thing about the math: so when does a percent become significant? I am not taking about concrete aerodynamic gains. I am talking simply about feel. Yep, that same feeling that lets many of here spin tales about their ancient steel machines. And no, I have no problem with those tales as I know we all ride bike, above other things, for feelings.

Originally Posted by Peter P.

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.

[Ken Robb]

While we are laughing about how much bike weight REALLY matters when we are climbing maybe someone can explain how/why some makers claim shorter chainstays help a bike climb better??