10.3 lb parlee - fad or future

[wc1934]

Of course not heavy enough for the pros, but will light bikes find a spot in the everyday marketplace - Is durability/safety an issue?

http://www.bikerumor.com/2011/01/27/fast-not-cheap-and-under-eleven-pounds-10-36-lb-parlee/#more-27260

[hookookadoo]

Maybe I'm an outlier but I have no desire for a super light bike as(and maybe I am wrong) I would think the ride itself would be awful. That said, if we participate in a sport where Weight Weenies is part of the common language then, to answer your question, it likely is part of the future.

[Charles M]

"Weight" doesn't make a bike ride like crap...



I have a few bikes that sit in the 13's and their silk and have zero weight limits on very sensible parts that I dont have to care about when I ride.



But start playing with unpadded saddles and carbon chain rings and the choices some folks make for the sake of the scale or the look will start to play with function, ride quality and durability.

I cant build lighter than the high 12 pound range without using parts that require me to ride with a lot more care and I just wont do it...

That said, 10-11-12 pound bikes are here now and have been for a while... It's not new, or "the future". Folks look at these bikes and point every so often and have for a while...


In fact the weights like this have been built to for more than a decade and what's changed most is that a 10-11-12 pound bike today is a HELL of a lot more all round usable and durable than a bike of that weight 10 years ago...




But let the Hypocrisy begin...

Lets all jump in and call poo at what other folks will spend their money on as if everything we do is classic conservation...

[rounder]

I don't know what a light bike should weigh. But i went to a Serotta presentation last year where Ben was there. The whole lineup was on display including the feature bike a Meivici AE that weighed about 17 lbs. Ben said that he could build lighter bikes but he also said that a bike needs to weigh at least a certain amount to be functional and reliable (or something like that).

I did not take that to mean 17 lbs should be the minimum. I thought that Ben meant that there are tradeoffs when it came to weight.

[54ny77]

what kind of parlee frame is that?

looks interesting for the sake of interesting, i.e., "just because."

that said, i think i've eaten and drank meals that weighed more....

[krhea]

[QUOTE=PezTech]"Weight" doesn't make a bike ride like crap...

I cant build lighter than the high 12 pound range without using parts that require me to ride with a lot more care and I just wont do it...


What bikes do you have in the "high 12lb range" that use "normal" components?


Curious KRhea

[Blue Jays]

If frame breakage was a concern each time one ran across a crack in the asphalt...suddenly riding wouldn't be as much fun anymore.

[Pete Serotta]

At that weight it is probably an event bike. I am not even sure it is even a season bike, It is definitely not multi season. Take away weight and you are taking away longevity to some extent -- for you are using same materials but less of them.

this is not a note to bad mouth light weight or those who make them - but it is fragile. If someone wants a light bike and it puts the smile on their face that is good!!!

THe brand will not be stated but I know of two, for in the last year they fell over and a crack was put it the top tube. Yes they were replaced and they light the ride :bike:

and no it was not a SEROTTA - and we never are the lightest.

Pete

[FlashUNC]

There's obvious advantages with having a bike that weighs, in some cases, half as much as what's underneath a rider these days.

But, for me, the cost and the durability are two enormous concerns, particularly on some of the awful roads my fat butt rides on a regular basis.

Its cool and I won't begrudge anyone who falls in love with the superlight craze, but it ain't for me.

[ahumblecycler]

I have an idea ... wait for it ... ride the bike you want and let others ride the bike they want :hello:

I have ridden bikes from 22 lbs (my CX) to 14 lbs (friends HI-MOD), and honestly, I can feel the difference. The HI-MOD was the best, hands down. My CAAD10 is upper 15 lbs and rides just fine. A previous bike, Roubaix S-Works was low 15 lbs, and I did not like the lightness.

So honestly, it depends on the bike. If Ben believes his best bike feel comes from the 17 lb mark than so be it. Me, I would not hesitate to jump on a 14 lb (or lighter for that matter) HI-MOD and descend 50mph plus through windy roads ... again :D

Ciao

[Charles M]

(54) The last few customs have all been in that range with stock Zipp 202's... Even the Meivici sat right at 13.4 lbs and that was stock sram, Zipp cranks and ee brakes, a padded saddle, stainless cages and look Keos. That bike would sit on a scale in the high 12's with a couple different cranks available and it has a couple hundred grams of paint. neither of which I would have given up. The Cyfac sat at NAHBS in the low 12 range. It's 12.9 with Madfibers and high 13 with metal clinchers. The Parlee Z was right at 12.8 with 202's M5 brakes and speedplay pedals... I just had a look 695 that was 12.9 with zipp 303, look keos, Fizik Antares etc... I have a BMC SLR01 here with Madfiber wheels, stock sram red, san marco mantra saddle, ritchey bar stem, look keo ti and it's 13 dead. It's also got at least an extra 150 grams of custom paint and has been cleared again.

None of these bikes were made to try and meet any weight goal at all. I just chose the parts that I lust over and the weights were incidental...


Weight threads sometimes turn into a pissing contest about how bikes like these ride poorly, the or how low weight makes no diff etc and sometimes it's just sour grapes / excuses. It used to be easy to hit 14-15 and 15-16 and give up nothing but excess weight (and cash). The numbers are shifting... Parts and frame tech are advancing...



I dont think a pound here or there is a killer or a big win, but getting bikes in the high 12 13-14 pound range can be done all day long. The talk about lowe-ish weight bikes in that range always meaning sacrifice is as much straight bull***** as saying a 15 -16 pound bike is too heavy.

[Fixed]

i have a 15 pound fixed gear mt. bike it is fine
on a rough road i like a little more heft
but that's me
cheers

[Charles M]

That's a great example... I like skinny tires on a soft tail Ti mtb as a set up too. Different prefs just are what they are.

Personal taste and comfort zones are more important than a scale number, higher or lower...

[champ]

Two years ago I raced for a shop, the owner of which had a unique relationship with Bob Parlee. Bob sent him a prototype version of the bike in question here that weighed 9.75lbs or so. Same frame (Z3 UL? but unpainted and waxed), same Clavicula cranks (BB30 and alu rings), same saddle, same RD, same shifters, similar THM fork, same post, stem and bars but with some crazy light chain, the standard version of the carbon brakes and a climbing version of the same wheels. He said the frame was great but some of the parts just werent practical for everyday use. A few sketchy moments descending in races and that was it. The bike pretty much sat up on a pedestal with a "do not touch" sign and wasnt ridden much. It was something to pick it up and marvel at its lightness.

[nahtnoj]

Why not? Time marches on. Today's reliable 13-14lb bikes will most likely be in that range in 8-10 years.

[RPS]

It's about time more designers finally accepted the simplicity and efficiency of the V-brake concept and applied it to road bikes. It surprises me that it's taken so long.

To avoid thread drift, I'm going to start a new thread on this brake.

[gone]

I'd never ride a bike that light but I see this sort of thing as a win for everybody. Component & frame builders get to experiment with building something super light and eventually the technology trickles down to the mainstream.