|
|
|
|
#31
11-12-2019, 06:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
chasing waddy 
|
|
#32
11-12-2019, 06:35 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
 Quote:
lets talk non physics: a lighter bike is a more fun bike.
__________________
Jeremy Clarksons bike-riding cousin
|
|
#33
11-12-2019, 06:51 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
A lighter bike is more fun for you! There I fixed it for you! No need to get offended as we all clearly have our preferences and more fun is a subjective term. I prefer a sturdier bike that isn’t sub 16lbs. I have found that wheels and tire combos make a bike more fun to ride than the actual weight of the bike. I am also overweight and don’t look for minuscule gains by making my bike lighter. I am more about being comfortable while riding. I prefer heavy leather saddles and 32 hole wide clinchers and 28mm+ tires most of the time. All subjective things that I prefer on my bike. I certainly don’t think everybody has the same preference or that there is anything wrong with building up your bikes as light as possible. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
|
|
#34
11-12-2019, 06:52 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
-you lose about 20 psi over 24 hours....so even on a 5 hour ride, you only lose about 3-4 psi... -practicality is in the eyes of the beholder. For some, tubeless is pretty 'impractical' to set up and use too... I don't see any advantage to using tubed, clincher tires other than the ability to change a punctured tube on the road.....ACK!!! No, not meant to be a tubular war thread, it's not even winter yet....
__________________
Chisholm's Custom Wheels Qui Si Parla Campagnolo
|
|
#35
11-12-2019, 06:57 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#37
11-12-2019, 07:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#38
11-12-2019, 07:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
My current ride started out well over 8kg and over the course of the last 3 years, I've gotten it down to just barely over 7kg.
I'm pretty much the same weight, which is to say relatively lean at 70kg and 178cm, and I gotta say that the bike is much more fun to ride now than it ever was. But I do wonder if there is a point of diminishing returns when dropping weight on the bike.
|
|
#39
11-12-2019, 08:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
it depends.
it depends on your weight. it depends on your power output. it depends on your riding style. it depends on what the bike is made out of, and how it's made, and what it's built with. generally speaking a lighter bike is going to climb better than a heavier one. duh. it might feel more sprightly, if it's built well and the geometry is agreeable to such behavior. generally speaking a lighter bike is going to descend worse/handle worse in a variety of conditions than a heavier bike, because less mass, but also less mass to dampen vibration and smooth chatter, even with optimal handling geometry and fit. of course, this is a highly variable question, one that can't be answered simply by saying "my 9.7lb Parlee descends like a dream", or "i have a 14lb steel bike". i'm a powerful, bigger (~175lbs) rider who likes to go fast down hills. i've ridden a large gamut of bikes (argonauts to baums to lightweights to mosaics to factors and everything inbetween), and find that while an ultralight bike tends to have that first-sensation acceleration jam that we all prize, ultimately there's a tradeoff (for a rider like me) when i start drifting under ~15lbs, wheel dependent. flex becomes a thing, road feedback becomes a thing, getting tossed around on descents definitely becomes a thing. holding a line is key, and often a lighter bike will struggle with that, especially one built with hyperlight wheels. the tactile sensation of continued ascent was far worse on my 14lb factor o2 than on my 18lb pegorichie lugged steel bike (same wheels - hyperons), and actual times were just about the same. ymmv. i get the sense a lot of folks talking about their superlight bikes are smaller folks who don't suffer the same issues. like all things with bikes, it depends on YOU and how you ride/what your dimensions are.
|
|
#41
11-12-2019, 08:16 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I was 59 when I took a trip to France to climb L'Alpe d'Huez. I stayed at the King of the Mountain Inn, run by an English couple. The lady of the house decided that an older, overweight man might have a problem on the climb, so she rode with me. The one thing I remember her telling me that is appropriate for this discussion is that falling going up a climb wouldn't kill me, but falling on the descent might. She was telling me this just before we began the descent. I was on a rented bike, not knowing anything about its history. Made sense to me. Same thing makes sense to me with ultra lightweight bikes--they may make the ascent easier, but a failure on the descent might kill me.
|
|
#42
11-12-2019, 08:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Good discussion. I'm 5'5 and 135 or so, and all of my bikes are "light". To get really light, say under 14 lbs, almost certainly means carbon, and usually very stiff high modulus carbon. As a result, while the bike is super responsive and seems to float uphill, it tends to be a horror show on anything other than a smooth descent-it skips and chatters around. Not dangerous or uncontrollable, but not relaxing or necessarily enjoyable. The thing is, the person that most benefits from the light bike, a light rider, contributes to this issue.
The sweet spot for me is a ti or mixed ti/carbon bike, built to around 15lbs or so. Light enough to feel like a light bike, but with enough resilience to avoid the chatter issue. Building a really light bike is more of a mental exercise and challenge than a real world benefit for most riders. Still fun though, if its not the only bike in the stable.
|
|
#43
11-12-2019, 09:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Note 1: Clinchers have lower rolling resistance than tubulars when both have similar casings and treads. Note 2: It is possible to build tubulars with thinner casings and treads than clinchers so that they have lower rolling resistance than clinchers - but these tires are very delicate, and basically only suitable for racing on velodrome tracks with very good surfaces.
|
|
#44
11-12-2019, 09:55 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Small comment from an old guy--my first "modern" bike was a properly sized* Colnago CT-1 with a crabon fork--not super light, but lighter than the 20-ish pound Reynolds 531 frames that I was used to... Probably built up it was still ~17+ pounds for a 57cm frame (Colnago '59')
I remember the first shakedown ride in Prospect Park--and being unnerved by how much if moved around in crosswinds--not uncontrollable, but really different-feeling. But as has been said, once the feeling of 'newness' passed, I never really thought about it again. (*Sizing--I was brought up to think a larger frame was a better choice, and probably rode too large a frame even when I was racing, so going smaller also was a real weight saving.)
|
|
#45
11-12-2019, 10:04 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Lighter.... 
__________________
Chisholm's Custom Wheels Qui Si Parla Campagnolo
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
