 | Home > Off Topic > Bike weight vs human weight? |
 
|
|
|
| ZeDefender Member Since: 15 Sep 2011 Location: Munich Posts: 4731   
|
Please can someone (e.g. MTB biker) settle an argument between a colleague and me?
If I try to make cycling easier by buying a bike weighing 4kg less than the one I currently have, wouldn't me keeping my old bike and losing 4kg off my lard-ar$e have the same effect (assuming same fitness level)? He insists a newer, lighter bike is far more important than the weight of the rider. I'd rather spend the money I'd save on mods. Anyone? Cheers Matt Tell someone you love them today because life is short. But shout it at them in German because life is also terrifying and confusing... |
||
11th Mar 2013 9:27am |
|
) reckon the lighter bike is the way to go 
| Caterham Member Since: 06 Nov 2008 Location: Birmingham Posts: 6306  
|
i suppose there's similaritys to a car.....
all well and good making the car lighter ie by 20kg but the effect of losing 20kg off unsprung weight and rotating mass ie suspension uprights and wheels will be far better. I think  |
||
|
11th Mar 2013 10:36am |
|
| ZeDefender Member Since: 15 Sep 2011 Location: Munich Posts: 4731
|
Aha
We hadn't discussed jumping anything or travelling at speed (two things I always try to avoid), so I guess you and he have a valid point... not that I'm going to tell him 
Many thanks Matt Tell someone you love them today because life is short. But shout it at them in German because life is also terrifying and confusing... |
||
|
11th Mar 2013 10:38am |
|
| x-isle Member Since: 26 May 2011 Location: Midlands Posts: 1327  
|
No, it's not the same.
A heavier bike and lighter rider weighing the same as a lighter bike and heavier rider is not the same. The dymanics are very different due to the weight being high up and distributed around the bike. There's a lot more to it than that too, as it's all about where the weight is at any particular time whilst completing a technique. I've spent a long time coaching the dynamics of weight distrubution within a Mountain Bike. Of course, then there is the problem of a Mountain Bike that weighs too little.........sometimes weight is your friend. Craig Rogers 2007 Puma 110 XS 2011 Evoque Coupe Dynamic Lux www.craigrogers.photography |
||
|
11th Mar 2013 10:50am |
|
| davew Member Since: 02 Jan 2012 Location: North Yorkshire Posts: 888 
|
I'm "on the fence" as I think it depends where the weight is.
You see a lot of MTB riders who look to save grammes on components when losing a kilo of their own weight would be better for them and a LOT cheaper. This also applies to Land Rovers of course 
IMV the only place that weight saving on the bike gives a real gain are on items that you have to move directly. The wheelset, for example, is well worth saving weight on as the lighter the wheelset the less mass you have to spin. Having gone from a pretty heavy wheelset to a relatively light wheelset I noticed a real difference. Changing from a heavy frame to a medium weight frame made less of a difference, barely noticeable in fact in most conditions. A lighter bike is always going to be better than a heavier bike for control and response but given a limited budget I don't think it's as beneficial as the elite would have you believe and not worth paying double for a component that weighs a few g less than the next model down. The 2 out of 3 rule always applies with the highly engineered MTB parts - cheap, light and strong - pick any 2. http://www.yorkshireoffroadclub.net/ |
||
|
11th Mar 2013 11:01am |
|
| x-isle Member Since: 26 May 2011 Location: Midlands Posts: 1327
|
It's not just about the spinning bits, it's the weight distribution for control, cornering, drop offs etc..... The entire weight of the bike has a big impact on the control part.
A light frame with a heavy rider distributing their weight around the bike is very different than a light rider distributing their weight around a heavy frame. Of course, you can't also compare just a light frame and a heavy frame. A well balanced, well built heavy frame will perform far better than a cheap badly designed/built light frame. I have a few MTBs all with various weights from 23lbs to 36lbs. Which one handles better? The lightweight XC bike is rubbish on rough stuff as it's far too light and just bounces around. The 36lbs Freeride bike is far better in that situation. Get on the flat or a climb? The 23lbs bike wins. The "just get it lighter" argument falls into "horses for courses". Also, you have to remember that MTB bikes are very different to Road bikes in the way the weight matters. Then one last thing, there is Mountain Biking and Mountain Biking..... If Mountain Biking is riding around a few parks, lakes or maybe some forest fire roads, then a lot of the dynamics don't come into play. If you're blasting around rocky tracks in the Peak District for instance, then the dynamics really come into play. Craig Rogers 2007 Puma 110 XS 2011 Evoque Coupe Dynamic Lux www.craigrogers.photography |
||
|
11th Mar 2013 11:29am |
|
| me@td5.org Member Since: 16 Jan 2011 Location: Warwick Posts: 856 
|
I am as light at I can healthly be so I spend a lot of time trying to save weight on the bike.
I've owned 13lb MTBs but these days I focus more on function. 17lb gives the right balance for me. Too light a tyre will punture easily, you also need to know it won't break underneth you! Rotational wright is the most important area on a bike, espcially of a 29" wheel. Much more important than the frame. |
||
|
11th Mar 2013 12:32pm |
|
| x-isle Member Since: 26 May 2011 Location: Midlands Posts: 1327
|
 13lb MTB??? WOWZER! You must be talking close on £20K at least for a bike that light! 13lb Road Bike would be £10K! Was the frame filled with helium?
17lb MTB, still WOWZER! That's around the Pro level weight. Craig Rogers 2007 Puma 110 XS 2011 Evoque Coupe Dynamic Lux www.craigrogers.photography |
||
|
11th Mar 2013 2:00pm |
|
| WarPig Member Since: 04 Dec 2009 Location: Sheffield Posts: 1748 
|
Im as heavy as I can healthily be  |
||
|
11th Mar 2013 5:00pm |
|
| ken Member Since: 18 Aug 2009 Location: Banging Birds with my bitches !! Posts: 4328 
|
Cant you just fit an engine to make it better
|
||
|
11th Mar 2013 5:30pm |
|
| ZeDefender Member Since: 15 Sep 2011 Location: Munich Posts: 4731
|
+1 
So, thanks to reading all of the above, I could argue that being a fatty on a feather light bike was probably not a sensible direction for me. It was agreed that, as punishment for my excesses, I should ride my 17kg steel dinosaur (which I love) until I lost 17kg in weight and then buy something less rusty
I'm still jealous though, as my son just bought a new 12kg beauty and he doesn't even need to lose weight 
My wife wants an E-bike "to get fitter" - I give up 
Thanks again to all for the great info  Tell someone you love them today because life is short.
But shout it at them in German because life is also terrifying and confusing... |
||
|
11th Mar 2013 7:41pm |
|
| me@td5.org Member Since: 16 Jan 2011 Location: Warwick Posts: 856
|
Not quite that much and it was a rigid single speed! There was a lot of carbon, chainring included, Cost me about £6000 in total back in 2003. The frame was Steel! Columbus Foco, and it's still in one piece, although it's been hung up for many years now. |
||
|
11th Mar 2013 7:50pm |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2025 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
