How light can a CSI get? Or does it matter?

[echap62]

I am not a weight weenie in general. I think it is a dangerous and needless occupation. I believe frame geometry and excellent materials plus good legs can make a bike as fast as feather weight components can. That being said, I made the mistake of putting my Serotta CSI with F-1 fork on a scale at the LBS the other day. The bike came in around 19.5 lbs. Any idea how light these were built up when they were raced by 7 Eleven professionals? THis is just purely out of curiosity.

[christian]

I'd guess they were between 19 and 20 pounds, based on size of frame etc.

[cmg]

what size frame is your CSI?

[ThomasAylesbury]

Size 48 X 52. 10 speed durace, new wheels really helped tubeless, Stans NO TUBES. Otherwise nothing is crazy light on bike. Tom

I am not really into the weight issue, I wanted lighter wheels and tubeless.

[c-record]

A CSI has to make no excuses or apologies. One of the nicest bikes I've ever ridden.

[David Kirk]

They would have been just a bit lighter than yours - not much.

The interesting thing to me is you could take your CSi and hang a new Sram Force kit on it, put a sturdy carbon post and bar on it and some 1500 gram alloy clinchers and be in the 17 pound range easy.

Modern components are MUCH lighter now and that is where most of the weight of a bike comes from. If your frame is 4 poundsish the frame is only 20% of the bike's weight and the rest of it comes from everything else. In fact if you took your older components and hung them on a 2 pound frame you'd still be at 17.5. New stuff is better.

dave

[Ahneida Ride]

I rode the last CSi made. By Kelly Bedford for Kelly Bedford ...

No .... I don't know the weight, but I did lift in up and it was light.
No special components either. Mostly Dura Ace with Old Mavic Helium wheels.

She was a 63 too. That was an amazing bike.

I am guessing in the 18 pound range.

[MattTuck]

Dave's point is interesting.

I wonder if the weight of the frame (as a % of total bike weight) has been decreasing, or if the total bike weight has been coming down due to lightness in all aspects of the build.

That would be an interesting chart. Someone with lots of old mags should get on that.

[palincss]

On the other hand, once you throw in the weight of the rider, it all goes down into the noise range anyway.

[RPS]

New stuff is better.

dave
At least lighter. ;)

[jr59]

On the other hand, once you throw in the weight of the rider, it all goes down into the noise range anyway.

In my case, VERY true!

lose 2 lbs off bike. Big $$$
lose 2 lbs off me; Don't eat dessert the nigh before!

[David Kirk]

At least lighter. ;)


Agreed in some cases. On the other hand I think components are by and large better now than they've ever been. Anyone who tried to get an original Super Record rear derailleur to drop into a 12 or get a brake pad toed in properly by bending the arms with an adjustable wrench.

I think that almost every component I can think of is easier to adjust, maintain and use than the equivalent from 10-15 years ago.

dave

[HenryA]

Agreed in some cases. On the other hand I think components are by and large better now than they've ever been. Anyone who tried to get an original Super Record rear derailleur to drop into a 12 or get a brake pad toed in properly by bending the arms with an adjustable wrench.

I think that almost every component I can think of is easier to adjust, maintain and use than the equivalent from 10-15 years ago.

dave

Absolutely!
Its almost a no-brainer to maintain current bikes.
The stuff just works.

[dd74]

Components: which is why I ask this (http://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=89127) question.

[thwart]

putting my Serotta CSI with F-1 fork on a scale at the LBS the other day. The bike came in around 19.5 lbs. 16 lbs CSI with steel forkAssuming modern components and commonly used wheelsets (no crazy light stuff), only one of these can be correct. I'll let you guess which one is more likely...

People talking about the weight of their bike is a lot like talking about how long the putt was, or how long was the fish they caught. :rolleyes:

Some frame weights, all with fork & headset, on the same scale:

Peg Marcelo, 58 cm, all carbon fork: 5.5 lbs
Peg Duende, 56 cm, all carbon fork: 5.4 lbs
Zanconato custom road (PegoRichie tubes), 55.5 cm, steel fork: 6.1 lbs.
Waterford 1200, 57 cm, steel fork: 5.6 lbs
Seven Axiom ti, 56 cm, alloy/carbon fork: 4.4 lbs
Serotta Hors Categorie ti, 56 cm, alloy/carbon fork: 4.8 lbs
Look 481 SL carbon, 56 cm, carbon fork: 4.1 lbs
De Rosa NeoPrimato, 57 cm, steel fork: 6.1 lbs

Suspect the CSI is probably around 5.5 lbs with the great (but admittedly heavy) F1 fork.
On the other hand, once you throw in the weight of the rider, it all goes down into the noise range anyway. Now there's some truth, IMHO.

[eddief]

so many threads about bike weight being the much smaller part of the rider/bike combined weight. i get that. i love my "heavier" all steel bikes. i don't love my extra blubber. and me and my extra blubber really do enjoy the flying feeling on the 17 lb. Fisher Cronus. not necessarily better, just a fine alternative. i think to keep poo pooing lighter bikes is poo poo.

maybe it is just psychological that me and the carbon bike go faster, accelerate faster, and climb mo betta.

[jlwdm]

Suspect the CSI is probably around 5.5 lbs with the great (but admittedly heavy) F1 fork.




My 62.5mm CSI with F3 Fork and Chris King headset is 5.7lbs.

Jeff

[jlwdm]

I rode the last CSi made. By Kelly Bedford for Kelly Bedford ...

No .... I don't know the weight, but I did lift in up and it was light.
No special components either. Mostly Dura Ace with Old Mavic Helium wheels.

She was a 63 too. That was an amazing bike.

I am guessing in the 18 pound range.


The bike is a little heavier than that now with my build but it is going on a diet. Monday installed new bars and a Bold Precision post, but I did not weigh it. Last item is some new wheels to replace the open pros. I could drop some weight with little things like cages but I am using the Arundel stainless to go with the all silver 2009 Campagnolo Centaur group. The cages look to good to replace. Using the new Ritchey Classic silver stem.

I will try to weigh it next time I am in Arizona.

Jeff

[zap]

Zips tig'd csi is in the 17lb range but it's a 48ish 650c. Nothing to light except for the Phil Wood Ti/Carbon bb and Grafton crankest.

[dbh]

Simple answer is lightweight tubulars and modern lightweight groupset. You don't have to spend a stupid amount of money to get low or mid profile tubies in the 12-1300gram range. Also, a modern DA/Force/Record group will shed a lot of weight. I have a 53cm CSI with steel with open pros and a Dura Ace/Ultegra group and it comes in at about 19.5. Throw on some weight weeny wheels and an all carbon fork (not an F1), and I bet I could get it down to 17 pretty easily.

[dbh]

I forgot to address the second half of the thread title, "or does it matter." No. the CSI is plenty stiff in the BB and will get you up hills quite fine. I would imagine for most of us (certainly me), we could lose a few more lbs off of our respective mid sections than drop the dough on weigh weenie upgrades and notice the performance improvements that way. Of course upgrading to new wheels and groups is fun as hell and provides that handy placebo effect.

[Hardlyrob]

The way I figure it is the next 5 pounds I lose is equivalent to my now 13 pound Kirk!

On a related note, gotta love the weight weenies with the giant camelback - hello?!?

Rob

[weiwentg]

My Vanilla with steel frame, fork and stem probably weighs in around 20 lbs. I can still keep up with most of the fast guys on climbs. I wouldn't object to a 15lbs bike that rode just as well, but I'm not losing sleep. I expect the OP isn't losing sleep over his 20lbs CSI, either.

[Charles M]

The Parlee I just built is 12.8 fully built without pedals. And none of the parts have weight restriction.

Solid ENVE bar stem post. Zipp wheels. Fizik saddle and SRAM red. None of it has been weenie tampered.


Frames are only a couple of pounds different from light to heavy in general terms... Forks have come a LONG way, relative to their stiffness and strength to weight ratio, in the last 3 years. I would guess that top performing forks have shed a general half pound over the past 3-5 years in general terms (yeah there have always been a few light forks but now there are a LOT in the 300's and they're much more solid performers).

Group set stuff has dropped a half pound + too. After market brakes are a dime a dozen(or ok... 3-5,000 dimes per set) and crank and BB set ups are really changing weights...


Depending on the bottom bracket standard, it's really easy to get even "heavy" bikes in the 16 to 17 pound range with no performance concerns at all that are a result of low weight...

I haven't built a bike over 14.5 pounds in the last 3 years and Ive not used any parts with weight restriction or durability concern.


If you want to build lighter, it's not hard. If you want to feel the weight loss, by far the biggest difference will be wheels, not frame. I've had guys borrow a set of carbon tubulars and literally fall over clipping in because there's so much less centrifugal force keeping them up at low speed... If I loan a set of tubulars to a friend that's never had a wheel below 1500 grams before, I make them come to my house and ride a few laps around the block with me to get used to them first...

[thwart]

Grams and pounds can make this all a bit unclear.

Going from Mavic SL wheels (1550 gms), for example, to lightweight ~ 1200 gram tubies (yes, of course, you can find lighter)... lose 350 grams, so about 3/4 lb. You'd lose more like a pound (454 gms) or even a bit more if going from OP/Ultegra wheels.

Going from current 105 (or Veloce) group to DA (or Record)... lose another 400-450 grams, around 1 lb. or so...

Going from a typical ~ 700 gram steel fork to a typical all carbon fork (say 350 grams or so), lose another 350 grams, ~3/4 lb.

So roughly speaking, making those 3 rather major (and somewhat expensive ;) ) changes will drop 1100-1300 gms (2.5 to 3 lbs) from your bike.

[Bob Ross]

I forgot to address the second have of the thread title, "or does it matter." No.

^^^This.


I will say however that whenever the "poo poo" starts about whether weightweeny-ism is a valid pursuit and/or whether or not we should shed weight from our bikes versus our bellies, no one ever seems to acknowledge one fundamental truth:

People argue about whether lighter bikes climb faster
People argue about whether lighter bikes descend faster (or slower)
People argue about whether lighter bikes offer any objective performance benefits whatsoever

But the inarguable truth is that lighter bikes weigh less ...and fwiw the only time I'm ever aware of my bike's weight is when I hoist it on my shoulder to carry it up a flight of stairs, or when I'm lifting it over my head to hang it from the ceiling hook where it's stored. And those times, I want a lighter bike.

[RPS]

The Parlee I just built is 12.8 fully built without pedals. And none of the parts have weight restriction.

Solid ENVE bar stem post. Zipp wheels. Fizik saddle and SRAM red. None of it has been weenie tampered.

Would you feel the same way about the durability and safety of that 12.8-pound bike if you weighed 200 pounds?

I get the parts have no weight limits, but isn’t that of little importance depending on application?

[benb]

How likely are any of those new 350g wonder forks going to fit on a CSI? I'd bet most of the crazy light forks have a 1 1/8" top and a 1 1/4" or 1 1/2" bottom and wouldn't fit in 99% of steel frames.

I don't even know what my bikes weigh.. but I still like light better then heavy and at some point you don't want to lose weight off your body anymore.

[WeakRider]

There is a 1" threadless version of the Easton EC90 fork that is really nice.

[victoryfactory]

I understand the argument about how fat you are, water bottles etc.

But no matter how fat I am, My performance and joy usually goes up on
a lighter bike.
It just feels.... lighter.

Grouches who say weight doesnt matter should really be saying "It doesnt matter to me"

My atlanta is 19.8 lbs with Ouzo Pro fork Open pro wheels
My legend is 17.8 lbs same fork same wheels

The difference in feel is huge
VF

[dbh]

How likely are any of those new 350g wonder forks going to fit on a CSI? I'd bet most of the crazy light forks have a 1 1/8" top and a 1 1/4" or 1 1/2" bottom and wouldn't fit in 99% of steel frames.

I don't even know what my bikes weigh.. but I still like light better then heavy and at some point you don't want to lose weight off your body anymore.

Serotta is or will soon be offering a 1'' fork as part of its new range of carbon forks.

[WeakRider]

I agree 100%.

I understand the argument about how fat you are, water bottles etc.

But no matter how fat I am, My performance and joy usually goes up on
a lighter bike.
It just feels.... lighter.

Grouches who say weight doesnt matter should really be saying "It doesnt matter to me"

My atlanta is 19.8 lbs with Ouzo Pro fork Open pro wheels
My legend is 17.8 lbs same fork same wheels

The difference in feel is huge
VF

[echap62]

My frame is a 54 (Serial No. CS54 1254)

[Charles M]

Would you feel the same way about the durability and safety of that 12.8-pound bike if you weighed 200 pounds?

I get the parts have no weight limits, but isn’t that of little importance depending on application?


I'm not saying that people should toss out common sense for the sake of argument...

I would guess that there are 15-18 pound bikes and parts in plenty of materials that are not completely suitable for 300 pound people. And a bad combination of road conditions and a 400 pound person might make any road product a bad choice.


But to answer the question, no. I would have no concerns what so ever if a 200 pound person were to spec that bike with those parts to be used for generally reasonable road conditions.

And Yes... of course everyone should consider themselves and their road conditions before making any purchase regardless of the weight of the part.



The point is that there are a lot of parts that are great quality and durability that also happen to weigh a lot less than the top spec parts from just a few years ago...

[RPS]

But to answer the question, no. I would have no concerns what so ever if a 200 pound person were to spec that bike with those parts to be used for generally reasonable road conditions.

You are not a lawyer by any chance? ;) Just kidding -- I know what you mean.

My next bike which I'll build as soon as I get around to it will be much lighter than the one I ride the most presently. Saving or adding a pound or two won't make much of a difference to me. Regardless of what I select it'll be lighter, and light enough for now.

[Charles M]

The sad part is I've been sued for a forum post before...(didn't lose and my day job features a cast of lawyers in multiple countries, so not an issue). I don't hide my identity and have to be careful and sound like I have a stick up my ass...(or maybe a "bigger" stick than I actually have... )

Some of the new stuff gets developed to new standards and reverse compatibility isn't always there for new stuff on old stuff. But lots of updates are available for sure...

I hesitate to call em "upgrades" because some folks dismiss any product development and worthless marketing driven etc... But I think a lot of the new stuff is fantastic and a lot better performing than my old stuff. That it's getting lighter too is just a bonus.

[dd74]

Yes, I agree with Pez and Kirk. If aesthetics are put aside, each new iteration of any component group seems better than the last.

I would think that at one point, though, a certain group becomes all a rider needs, which brings up a much different argument. I speak of those guys who believe an eight or nine-speed drivetrain is enough for them. IMO, there is something admirable about that.

[palincss]

My atlanta is 19.8 lbs with Ouzo Pro fork Open pro wheels
My legend is 17.8 lbs same fork same wheels
The difference in feel is huge
VF

The difference in the total weight of bike plus rider is around one percent. That's not "huge".

[Sheldon4209]

A couple of questions:

When the discussion talks about "old" and "new" componets, how old is "old"
and how new is "new"?

Do the ~15 lb. bikes always have carbon fiber bars, stems, and seat posts?
Thanks

[cnighbor1]

To help lower weight on my bikes I plug all frames tubes and fill with helium. Including tire tubes. That saves a lot. I estimate at least 10 pounds. I could be off just a bit however.
In 1987 Indurian won tour of france on steel while ti and aluminum frames were in the race. go figure!!
Weigth reduction is best limited to moving components.
Charles
Not a big loss weigth fan at any cost

[thwart]

To help lower weight on my bikes I plug all frames tubes and fill with helium. Including tire tubes. That saves a lot. I estimate at least 10 pounds. I could be off just a bit however. POTD. :D

BTW---Indurain must've been a fool... everyone knows absolute bike weight is hugely important. As little as 8 ounces could well be the difference in a long stage race like that.

Or not.

[Jangles13]

To stir the pot a bit:

Despite the bike being a small fraction of the riders' weight, it does indeed have some affect on performance. I present this correlation:

Wheel and tire weight on a performance car make a tremendous difference in acceleration, braking, handling, and ride quality. Not only do heavier wheel/tire combinations put a greater load on the engine and consequently affect acceleration, but also the location of the weight in the wheel (whether it is near the center or dispersed outward). This is due to mostly to rotational inertia.

So - on a performance vehicle weighing 3000lbs you might have a wheel combo of 45lbs per corner - that's only 180lbs or 6.0% of the total weight. And yet if you were to reduce that by 2lbs per corner, or 8lbs total, the car would actually feel roughly double that or 16lbs (a measly 0.5% of vehicle) Seems insignificant, and yet causes a measurable - and butt dyno confirmable - change in the vehicle performance.

Therefore, I present that the weight of the bike, or even more specifically that of the wheels, DOES indeed matter despite the small percentage of the combined rider/bike package.

Furthermore, you are accustom to supporting your body weight as it is constant and easily distributed around your body. When the weight of the bike is added, it is "new" and located below you, not strapped to your back or evenly distributed. I'm ignoring the fact that it is in fact supported by the ground, (we aren't actually carrying the bike) though we are still responsible for putting and maintaining it in motion. This could be demonstrated by the fact that you could increase your body mass by 20lbs and not feel labored, but if one day you decided to walk around with 20lbs in weights around your ankles it would be quite limiting.

All that said, I'm currently riding an old steel 12spd that probably weighs in at 25lbs and I'm not worried about it. Just don't try to tell me that a lighter bike won't accelerate better and climb easier, or that taking weight of myself is the same as taking weight of the bike.

[RPS]

Wheel and tire weight on a performance car make a tremendous difference in acceleration, braking, handling, and ride quality. Not only do heavier wheel/tire combinations put a greater load on the engine and consequently affect acceleration, but also the location of the weight in the wheel (whether it is near the center or dispersed outward). This is due to mostly to rotational inertia.
Can you try to quantify what tremendous means to you?


This could be demonstrated by the fact that you could increase your body mass by 20lbs and not feel labored, but if one day you decided to walk around with 20lbs in weights around your ankles it would be quite limiting.

Those two have completely different effects on the human body. It's hard to compare.


Just don't try to tell me that a lighter bike won't accelerate better and climb easier, or that taking weight of myself is the same as taking weight of the bike.
Yes, a lighter bike makes a difference. However, taking weight off your body probably makes even more of a difference than off your bike. In my opinion I'd be faster if I can take 5 pounds off my belly than 5 pounds off my bike.

[Jangles13]

Can you try to quantify what tremendous means to you?


In acceleration it can equate up to a tenth of a sec in 0-60 - doesn't seem like much, I know. However, turn in and overall vehicle handling is a more noticeable change in vehicle performance when discussing wheel weight reduction and that's more difficult to quantify. I think for the purposes of this discussion my definition of tremendous is probably insignificant to some. Perhaps I should have said "perceivable."


Those two have completely different effects on the human body. It's hard to compare.

I disagree, the difference between adding 25lbs of body weight over time, and carrying a 25lb pack once in awhile is easy to distinguish. Another perspective: I contend no one notices weight fluctuations of different clothing, but if I asked you to carry 5lbs in one of your hands you would continue to be aware of it.


Yes, a lighter bike makes a difference. However, taking weight off your body probably makes even more of a difference than off your bike. In my opinion I'd be faster if I can take 5 pounds off my belly than 5 pounds off my bike.


Same as above - the external, or intermittent weight and it's location in relation to your body make a substantial difference in perception and performance.

We also must consider that reducing your body mass is actually difficult without increasing muscle mass which increase your strength out put, thus changing the scenario involving strict mass reduction.

Let me put for this argument this: If you reduce the weight of your bike by 2lbs, and carry that 2lbs by wearing an additional shirt or otherwise similarly dispersed, you would note the decrease in bike weight (and consequently increased performance) and timed straight runs would be faster.

Maybe I should submit the above to Mythbusters or similar for proper testing.

[oldpotatoe]

They would have been just a bit lighter than yours - not much.

The interesting thing to me is you could take your CSi and hang a new Sram Force kit on it, put a sturdy carbon post and bar on it and some 1500 gram alloy clinchers and be in the 17 pound range easy.

Modern components are MUCH lighter now and that is where most of the weight of a bike comes from. If your frame is 4 poundsish the frame is only 20% of the bike's weight and the rest of it comes from everything else. In fact if you took your older components and hung them on a 2 pound frame you'd still be at 17.5. New stuff is better.

dave

New stuff is at least lighter....

Force stuff, carbon post and hbar, lighter wheels...WAY more than the $1 per gram test...2(or 4!!) pounds, 1800 grams on a pretty standard 84,000 gram package means almost or actually nada.

[93legendti]

My '97 CSi with an Alpha Q carbon fork and Ultegra 6600 10 speed and std clincher wheels feels plenty light. 16.5-17 lb range I'd say.

[RPS]

In acceleration it can equate up to a tenth of a sec in 0-60 - doesn't seem like much, I know. However, turn in and overall vehicle handling is a more noticeable change in vehicle performance when discussing wheel weight reduction and that's more difficult to quantify. I think for the purposes of this discussion my definition of tremendous is probably insignificant to some. Perhaps I should have said "perceivable."

I personally wouldn’t equate tremendous with a 0.1 second improvement in 0 to 60 times for say ….. a private family vehicle. In competition that may actually be a tremendous difference if the race is decided by 0.002 seconds. Unfortunately that’s just not the world I live in.

By the way, heavier tires and wheels can actually improve 0 to 60 times under the right circumstances. That’s not a myth, but fact. It’s actually quite common so assuming that lighter tires and wheels lead to faster acceleration is not a good idea unless you happen to know the specifics of what you are estimating.

[RPS]

I disagree, the difference between adding 25lbs of body weight over time, and carrying a 25lb pack once in awhile is easy to distinguish. Another perspective: I contend no one notices weight fluctuations of different clothing, but if I asked you to carry 5lbs in one of your hands you would continue to be aware of it.

I didn’t word it clearly enough. I meant it’s hard to compare in an apples versus oranges context. It’s more like comparing the performance of the Space Shuttle to a John Deere tractor. I find it pointless to compare things that are not similar enough as to be comparable. That’s the context I meant it in.

[RPS]

Same as above - the external, or intermittent weight and it's location in relation to your body make a substantial difference in perception and performance.

We also must consider that reducing your body mass is actually difficult without increasing muscle mass which increase your strength out put, thus changing the scenario involving strict mass reduction.

Let me put for this argument this: If you reduce the weight of your bike by 2lbs, and carry that 2lbs by wearing an additional shirt or otherwise similarly dispersed, you would note the decrease in bike weight (and consequently increased performance) and timed straight runs would be faster.

Maybe I should submit the above to Mythbusters or similar for proper testing.
It’s more like perception of performance IMO. What we feel and what actually occurs are not necessarily the same.

Don’t get me wrong, everything else being equal I like light too. I just know the actual gains and don’t lose sleep over insignificant (to me) improvements.

[Chousen One]

Dave's point is interesting.

I wonder if the weight of the frame (as a % of total bike weight) has been decreasing, or if the total bike weight has been coming down due to lightness in all aspects of the build.

That would be an interesting chart. Someone with lots of old mags should get on that.

If you're considering all types of bikes, you certainly can't overlook frames like Scott's Addict R1 which has a (frame only IIRC) weight of 790(!) grams. Obviously, when you look at frame weight as a percentage of total bike weight, you gotta consider material. Overall there has been an across the board decrease in %total weight as metallurgy and material development have followed their courses, but certainly each material is limited by certain things. Of course they also have their distinct benefits eh?

Couple that with the super light components these days and you're getting bikes that are weighed down to make the UCI minimums.

[Chousen One]

My '97 CSi with an Alpha Q carbon fork and Ultegra 6600 10 speed and std clincher wheels feels plenty light. 16.5-17 lb range I'd say.

Not to troll, but "feels" light and "is" light are two different things. I had an 09 TCR Advanced 2 with 6600 and some Chris King Wheels, EC90 goodies and it was 16.5 with Look carbon Keos on a good day, about the same build as your CSi. If CSi's are hovering around ~4lbs for frame/fork (I see your Alpha Q would drop a bit off that), and TCRs are around 1100g (~2.4ish lbs), I doubt your CSi was the same weight.