My daily commute is 7-10km each way, so I'll continue to worry more about the stationary time at lights vs anything else. On longer rides, I'm only concerned with the scenery. Wouldn't want to miss a good view while staring at the clock!
@איתי מהדב It doesn't matter much except for very short efforts. The energy isn't lost, it's returned through inertia. In the same way, a lighter system requires more "regular" input, as it decelerates quicker too.
Biked across America on the Trans Am, the bike shop before leaving said, "You'll never make it with flats." I often feel the bike industry has forgotten that to move forward all you need to do is keep pedaling. Old Tour De France photos is always my motivation to care less about gear.
I went shopping for camping stuff. I told the sales person it was going to get used while bike packing, and he starting listing them all by weight. I was like, "sure sure, but which one takes less VOLUME?" I think that's a more limiting factor on what you can take with you on a bike assuming you don't get new bags.
Anaconda stores got rid of all their bike parts. Kmart got rid of all their bike parts. Business goes out of business this way. The world champion didn't answer a question. And He was the store owner And salesman. Makers And designers aren't approachable. The city culture mine has removed all culture ingredients.
You are right - Volume is a huge factor. Most "ultralight" items also tend to be smaller in volume than heavier options (applies to sleeping bags, tents, clothing, etc).
That’s why I like my REI in my town. I was asking about blankets, and I was shown a gorgeous down quit that was super light but it packed pretty thick. I mentioned I was bike packing and I was instantly shifted over to the hammock under quilt or top quilt as a possibly better solution as while they slept a little cooler, they packed much smaller.
all of my information has come from racing, and I am not nor have ever been a racer. I tour. you do a great series of productions on relevant and useful points. thank you. great service.
Well I asked the world champion a simple basic question and he walked away not answering the question. So I stopped buying from his shop. Racing is just an ego display. Look at motocross, the bike suspension fails 100 times during a race. They fail to take turns at most corners, the suspensions forms a solid link from the rider to the track. The next thing to fail is the riders bones. And they break and break often. Racers don't know the features. The pide pipper leads everyone off the cliff.
My information just comes from maintenance and MTB. So weight isn't really all that important for me but it is a nice QOL improvement as long it's not that expensive
Average bikes 18-25lbs, carbon frames usually hit 12lbs or so... basically about every 10lbs is worth anywhere from $500-$1000 on a bike, lose 5lbs and instantly upgrade your cycling value by $250-500. That's a nice upgrade. Do another 5lbs... That's a whole new bike on another planetary level....lose 20lbs, you're riding le tour de France alongside athletes.... your endurance will lengthen due to lighter weight ,more focus on building muscle and increase your top speeds.
The rock has made a career out of putting on more weight. He's obviously the best bike sprinter in the world. He just doesn't care about writing his name in books.
Great! Now widh good luck to the people trying to loose that weight on their bikes (like actually shaving 8kg from de bike itself). But here is one thing to consider. Get a heavy bike to start if you are fat. Use it for 1-3 months and sell it to buy a mid tier lighter but not so light bike. Use it for 9-12months and sell it for a new featherweight bike as light as you can afford. Then, gains will be inmense!
Having a really light bike is one of lifes nicest pleasures. Just loading it on/off the bike rack, carrying it up/down steps, seeing friends lift it to feel the weight, not to mention riding it... a light bike is always a joy.
I am a professional wheel builder who has been building since 1973. The weight of the individual components in a wheel are my very last concern. There are so many more important things to consider than the finished weight of a pair of wheels. My clients often obsess about weight and it's madness.
@@vladimirzrada4195 Hi Artem. This is a gigantic subject that could result in a small book to answer your question properly, so I will give you a very condensed version. Hub weight is immaterial. Make sure they have high quality bearings and worry not about their weight. If you are racing in a serious way the only things that really matter are rim, tire and tube weight. Having said that, your rim choice should still be determined by your actual weight. Meaning if you are a heavy rider you will need rims that will support your weight or else your wheels will be too soft and the sponginess will result in too much flex and therefore waisted watts. Same goes for spoke count. If you weigh 135 pounds you can get away with a very low spoke count. If you weigh 180 then you should move up in spoke count to support your weight or you experience too much flex and then waisted watts. A professional wheel builder should be able to walk you through the exact weight of each component if you are racing and require the lightest wheels that will work for you. If you are not racing then don't concern yourself with weighing anything. Just buy well designed components that will last you a long time and are repairable. Forget about buying proprietary wheel designs. A waste of money and often difficult to repair. I hope that helps!
As long as I’m pedaling down the road or trail I’m happy. I don’t understand people’s obsession over speed unless that’s your career. I get a great work out on my heavy bikes and lots of smiles.
I ride solo since I bought my bike and every ride, I usually have a speaker with me on my fatbike. Even when I go home from my dormitory near school (40km every weekend), with a crate at the back containing numerous cargo like food, my raincoat or even 1.5liter soda and snacks, and most of the time groceries asked by mother to buy, I never had time to put on proper speed higher than my usual 20kph. Riding solo from school to home takes 1hr 30minutes and it's this time that I take my time to relieve some stress from school. It makes me happy.
@@icouldntthinkofagoodname7216 Sure, speed is not my job, and I am by no means small. But there is a very beautiful feeling in cruising at high speed for an extended period of time. It just hums, the breathing, the cadence, everything just falls into place.
I take your point. I just watched a GCN video where they did a blind comparison between 10s dura-ace and 105 groups, both mechanical, on a trainer. The presenters were at a loss to tell the difference based on shifting performance. In a video sponsored by Shimano. Oops! They went to great pains to highlight the marginal weight differences, and just how *sexy* those dura-ace components look. On the inverse, though, I think weight should at least be something to keep in mind especially when loading up a traditional touring bike, because things can get out of control quickly otherwise. At that point overpacking can start to affect handling, and I find it begins to affect your enjoyment of a longer trip. Hikers face the same challenge, and it's as much about reducing weight as it is just learning to say no to things you don't truly need. That kind of windom applies to all things in life. Bikepacking is less of an issue since you're so contrained on volume, but if you're crossing technical terrain, a bit less weight can make things a lot more fun.
I own both groupsets. The difference can be told when you're pushing them performance-wise. Dura-Ace will undeniably shift more reliably under the most extreme heavy load of power, BUT...how many of us do that often enough to justify the difference? For the record, I could tell the difference between them shifting. It's like .02% or something like that (#sarcasm), but that's on a bike stand. On the road? I'd have to look down to see what I'm riding if you asked me what's the difference. Sure, Dura-Ace is 1lb lighter, but not only does 105 last longer and requires less tuning (actually, almost no tuning), it's WAY cheaper to replace when the time comes. All my bikes are going to be 105 from now on. In fact, my bikepacking ride is happily 105/Ultegra. I don't need Tour De France performance on a multiuse trail. I just need it to take me out there and bring me back home.
@@jochenkraus7016 dura ace is something for professionals who count tenths of a second, in this segment the price don't really matter. Hobby cyclists however won't really have advantages, but they have to pay the extra money for it
Not being able to tell the difference between 105 and dura ace in a video like that is called good marketing. Most people can't buy Dura Ace just based on sheer quantity produced alone. A video like that actually helps convince the average buyer to raise their bike budget up to 105 level where bikes start to get more profitable. Higher cost consumables once they are hooked too.
@@pratikpramanik7782 You're spot on. No average consumer is going to be swayed to buy Dura-Ace by a GCN video. If you buy DA it's because you already know you want DA. An average consumer might however be swayed to spring for 105 instead of Tiagra if "GCN says it performs as well as DA".
3 ปีที่แล้ว +45
So sad I can't use my heavy bike as an excuse for being slow anymore.
I set a Strava PR this week on an uphill segment, whilst pulling my single wheel bike trailer while out running errands. Bike weight is not the limiting factor most of the time.
YES. And thats why i recently upgraded to LATEX inner tubes. Which are ironically a bit lighter than butyl as on top of the RR gains, smoother rider, more resistant to deforming. I see these guys obsessed with shaving grams whats the point man? everyone wants to be a racer? Funny if people treated cars the same way like everyday theyre competing in a massive race.
@@Cyclingabout A 190g ultralight tire turns into a 7kg tire when you have to push the bike it's mounted on home because it catastrophically failed on the road. Give me the extra 15 or 20g of a better built tire any day of the week. If you're not riding your bike becuase it keeps breaking down, it's not ultralight, it's weightless because it's not being used.
Why do people always seem to think its a choice? Like I can either reduce rolling resistance or reduce weight? Or I can reduce my body weight or reduce my bike weight? Why am I not allowed to maximise everything?
I really noticed how little the weight made when I put a child seat on the back of the bike and was riding around with my young son on the back. Maybe added 17kg all in but it only felt slightly harder when accelerating and barely noticed at all once up to speed. So glad I am subscribed to this channel, always put out really informative and relevant content 👏
I rode for 7 years in Florida and learned real quick that weight didn't make a difference unless you were doing hills. And even then, being just a tiny bit more in shape was way more effective than reducing a few kg's.
Unless you're racing at world tour level or have a lot of money to spend, it's not really worth worrying about. A better way to gain speed would be to lose weight on your person. If you get super excited about trying to shave every gram off your bike, well have at it 😄 To each his/her own. There's no right or wrong way to approach cycling. Personally I like to train with a heavier bike.
Me too training with heavier bikes bigger tires and spending more time on the bike overall. Another way is when using a different bike a lower speed cassette ( 7 speed) with less you have to do more because ever gear is the right gear works for me. It's improved my power output especially when I switch to a 9 speed Sorry for the long post
My experience was that the handling part mattered the most. It's just incredible how good the gravelbike still handled with bags directly mounted to the frame with the center of mass below the handlebar.
I've been trying to convince my doctor that weight isn't all that important for years now. Hasn't gotten me anywhere. But maybe that's why I had to buy a touring bike just to hold up to my my fat ass.
Weight isn't all that important. Since muscle can weigh more than fat. Too many people when they're dieting focus on weight when they should focus on getting in shape.
in Germany we say "Friss die Hälfte", which is a really good weightloss tip. It translates to "Eat half" of whatever you are eating, implying on reducing your calorie intake
Appreciate your analysis here regarding how little weight matters while touring. One additional analysis to note here is the inertial component to get the bike up to a speed. Especially during touring when you might be stopping a fair number of times. I read an article that hinted that this inertial component could account for as much as half of the total energy spent during touring. Would love to see that added to your analysis.
@@pkelly20091 On the contrary science almost never affirms, but rather observes. Here, "hinted" may not be the most scientifically accurate term, but it does reflect scientific temperament.
@@adityapathak5761 good point - but the idea that up to half the energy spent during touring is due to inertia bringing the bike up to speed does sound rather implausible - would love to see the article.
@@pkelly20091 Did a quick calculation and found it to be around 20% (assuming 100km ride, 120kg weight, 25 km/hr, and stopping every 200 meters). more details here: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HkyM2pFpH6AACbbMhNUikzbf1k9ZtaIBf20zw48InlA/edit?usp=sharing This calculation totally ignores slowing down (eg. corners, obstacles) which can lead to larger energy expenditure. Also, your estimate of how often someone stops depends on the person (I find myself stopping very frequently to take pics) Again, would love if Alee does a more rigorous study. I wouldn't be surprised to see good fraction of time to overcome inertial component)
You ever ride a 35 pound enduro bike after riding a 25 pound XC bike? Its like piloting a monster truck after getting out of a go kart. Weight matters when its accelerating, AND decelerating, AND turning, AND getting bumped around 100 times a minute.
@@marcalvarez4890 oh shut it, show off. And yes, I have ridden long distances, cause I'm Dutch. And therefore by birthright a super Sayan in the cycling world.
Put 15kg on your bike and tell me complaining about the difference is ridiculous... Riding my bike in its normal 7kg spec vs its touring 20kg spec is night and day. Its not aero either, riding my bike with the packs on but empty is significantly different from when they are heavy but the same shape.
@@marcalvarez4890 Exactly. I hate all these channels that do tests on long open roads. I live in the real world, a huge city like most of the population. A long ride for me is 80km or so of coming to a complete stop every minute or so, sometimes every 100m. Do that and see how much weight matters to you.
At my age (61) and weight (142lbs) a lighter bike is much easier on my knees pushing up hills. I used to wear a backpack for hydration but switched to a fanny pack to get the weight lower on the bike. Another aspect is light, carbon wheels, which you've talked about before. Getting low rotational mass with fast rolling hubs and tires can completely offset bike weight. Thanks and be safe out there!
Weight for non-racing bikes to me means energy expended and how I feel at the end of the ride. Comfort won that debate since lighter weight cost at least double.
My steel Surly LHT weighs well over 30 pounds with racks, fenders and 36 spoke rims. I have no problem at all with that. When I'm riding fully loaded I want a good sturdy bike. Light bikes have a place, but probably not so much in the touring realm. Good video.
I have found focusing on weight to be very important over the years; having a loaded steel bike means that whenever I ride unloaded, I notice how much the bike's engine has improved!
I like my semi-lightweight road bike, but when I go touring I carry so much gear that weight of the bike is irrelevant. I just want my bike to be comfortable and sturdy enough so it can handle the carried equipment and the tough "road" conditions.
I'm coming from the hiking world, so every freaking gram I can get off my back is well worth it to me. A kilogram of saved backpack weight is a complete game changer. But I agree, with bikes it is totally different and there really is no need to chase weight in the same manner!
Backpacking and Mountain Biking share a LOT in common. The boot weight is tire weight. The pack weight is total bike weight. The poles weight is suspension weight. The pad and tent weight are the water bottles and tubes. Weight DEFINITELY matters off road, where every step or pedal can go up, down, sideways, or even twist. I won't carry more than 25 pounds no matter what...same goes for my XC mountain bike. On road?...yeah, aero and rolling resistance are everything.
For me, using an internal frame backpack vs an ultralight backpack that has no frame, I prefer internal frame (aka heavier) packs. Besides the extra padding contributing to the comfort, the frame distributing the weight more across my hips than wherever the loadout decides in a frameless pack is worth the extra 2lbs. Ultralighters claim they can go farther with less weight (whatever that math is), but for me, I go farther when I'm more comfortable. For thru-hikers who have the options of staying at hotels and in towns or even trail shelters, they can afford to get away with ultralight packs I think.
@@solitaryrefinement6787 I think you just described having a full suspension XC bike, versus a hardtail XC bike. 2 pounds more but worth the increased capability.
Great content as always! But as a bikepacker who leans towards more offroad routes where hike a bike can easily make up 10 - 20% of a route, I'd love to see time tests done with this in mind. Heavy bikes when you're pushing it with your arms are crushing! I know you mention it briefly in the video, but I feel it's downplayed a bit for more aggressive routes perhaps? Just my two cents :)
Agreed. On rugged terrain a rider on an unloaded bike is already not far off from redlining just to make it up the hill. Yes lower gearing is a good idea. When talking about steep technical climbs unless your speed is at least a certain amount it's a struggle to not fall over. Momentum is good. Speed and momentum up a series of steep climbs all day long, day after day is too much. You can only spend so much time being redlined per day or multiple days in a row before you're cooked. Thus weight of one's bike and equipment is a legit concern. Also with rugged terrain you're likely having to regularly lift your bike over obstacles such as fallen trees and rocks or carrying it across rivers.
@@mikekrasovec6390 agreed , I think the margin of gain for a lighter bike weight is much greater over real world terrain .I often walk up hills to save me going into the red and conserving my knee and back joints . Ofcourse I know personally I can lose about 10kg of body weight which also makes a difference
If you're talking touring with camp gear I'd rather shave weight off the gear not the bike. Light camp gear works for hiking as well. 2-5 lbs difference in an Enduro mountain bike (something in the 30-38 lb range) for me wouldn't be a big deal for "hike a bike" stuff through rough terrain if I was just riding. If I was going touring on that same bike I'd much rather skinny my gear up before changing anything on the bike. 80%+ around me ride Enduros or aggressive trail bikes due to the terrain. It can involve a decent amount of lifting the bike or pushing.
This video which contradicts the notion that a lighter bike is so much better than a heavier bike also reminds me of when I saw a study that showed that clipping in your foot to the pedal didn't add any power. And yet every weekend warrior I see still clips in. But I love this weight video. thanks again Alee
You're right, for most riders in most situations, there is no difference in power output if you use clip-in pedals. There are still other advantages though, which I list on my website: www.cyclingabout.com/clipless-pedals-advantages-disadvantages/
yes but clipping in makes climbing significantly less tiring because the pedaling motion is so much more circular. Without clips, all the power basically comes from the quads and glutes. With clips, you can involve your hamstrings and calfes as well
@@MiGujack3 Yeah man I been riding on heavy 2.6 tires with tubes in them intentionally, I feel it has helped a bit. I also sometimes like to put small hand egg weights (the kind for boxing) in my saddle bag, that also provided a bit of resistance training. I seem to be currently in a bit of a plateau after losing some weight initially. I may need to analyze my diet, or go on longer rides maybe.
Great vid! I had a physics professor who was asked about weight vs aerodynamics (on cars, but the principles here work for bikes). He replied, "A parachute is very light, but sure slows you down!" When it comes to speed and/or efficiency: aerodynamics > weight
www.bicyclerollingresistance.com You are welcome friend! This site is how i chose my MTB tires. I chose the ones he rides. They also happen to be the lightest, which in MTB actually matters quite a bit.
Always great content. I'm still lugging my Salsa Fargo around and taking grief from all my titanium/carbon riding pals. I love my old bike and I do actually carry a better sleeping pad. Because some things are just not negotiable, like a good night's sleep. Travel safe!
Good analysis that quantifies and supports what I already know from decades of bicycle commuting, bikepacking and long distance touring. I often use a single wheel Bob Trailer, and when I do so the bike itself carries a lot less (smaller panniers or no panniers) than it otherwise would. I'm absolutely sure that the trailer configuration confers a noticeable advantage in terms of wind resistance because the trailer is low to the ground and tucked tightly behind the bike that in many circumstances overcomes the added weight of the trailer itself.
Agreed! When I worked at a bicycle store I couldn't believe how much money cyclists would spend to shave a few grams off their bikes while they are walking around with beer bellies. So much cheaper to just lose the weight from your body.
I just completed the 633km 4 rivers ride in South Korea. My bike and gear weight was 40kgs and I weigh 124Kg, add these two together for a total of 164kg. I rode with a number of different people from a 19 year old on a 14kg bike to club riders all riding ultra lite mountain and road bikes. I found that I had no issues maintaining a 20-23km/h average speed which match their riding speeds. This really amazed me as I'm 62 years old and by no means as fit as 19 to 30 year old riders. My daily riding speeds averaged out at 17.6 km/h. This proves your video and thanks for all the great content. This was one of the things that inspired me to do this trip. Regards Daryl
A calculation I learned was that every 12lbs of weight equals a loss of 1mph. Which while is meaningless on a short ride, can add up on a all day ride.
Interesting video that didn't match my experiences and expectation. I could swear adding 4 liters of water on my bike had a distinct effect over 180-200 km á day over 6 days. All weight combined was 87-91kg. Every extra kilogram felt like a slog. Possibly because it's hilly here in Norway. The feel wasn't like gradual sapping, but felt exponential. By the end of those long days with extra water, I didn't need much convincing to sleep. 😁 I'm probably missing something here. Thank you for the contrary information, it's food for thought.
This analysis doesn't cover the calories burned to carry extra weight. The only thing really affecting cycling speed is your bikes gearing and wind resistance. With same gearing, you can ride the same velocity on 75mm tires as you would on 25mm. What's different is the vastly increased amount of force you must apply to do so, and the tax on your body to do it. That being said, his analysis rightly points out that these changes are miniscule in terms of total system weight. And, we tend to perceive slight changes in weight distribution pretty dramatically at first. I always feel sluggish running in winter sweats vs summer clothes. Proprioception is funny that way.
If you already had the perception that weight slows you down a lot, the mind will be especially good at convincing you of things that don't match the physical properties of the universe! 😉
Hi @@cjohnson3836 There's possibly something to the calories. I don't know. When I go at that high tempo, it's an all out eating contest of chugging carbs to keep the furnace going for 10-12 hours. If I have to depend on fat or protein, then the engine goes tits up after 3 hours. 🤪 I'm pushing my own envelope. The facts says one thing, but my heart tells me those 4 kilos will kill my legs. Ha ha. 😁 Thank you. I appreciate the input.
THANK YOU for this video. The obsession on weight is so frustrating. There are so many other factors that are more important that it rarely even comes down to weight as a tie-breaker.
Should have waited to comment: Good point on the ride feel and 'snappy' response to unexpected conditions such as off-roading. I'm an amateur and even I notice that!
I started my biketouring when I bought a 25 kg e-bike. It made me ride more often and further and made me loose 15 kg bodyweight. Last weekend I did a trip of 50 km with an older friend on his 8 kg racing bike. He asked me if I had place for his cable-lock..... I had no problem keeping up with him, was faster on the climbs due to the electric motor, faster on the downs due to more weight and grip and in the end I only use like 75 wH from the battery........ If the above is confusing, it is because it is not all about weight ;-)
So you're telling me, if I lose all of my overweight (30kg to spare) I'd be 30min quicker on the same 100km ride compared to now? Right now, despite bringing 115kg to the scale, I had an epic 110k ride with 27km/h (4h 5min - 140w roughly) That would mean, shaving of these 30kg without getting any fitter would result in 3h 35min = 30,7km/h Or on my other ride yesterday: 60km in 2h 05min = 29km/h -30kg = 60km / (125 min - (30min * 0,6) * 60 = 33,6 km/h Holy shit! That would be awesome! :) That's a good motivation!!!
Actually, no. This was for a profile with a lot of climbing. The time difference for a flat course where the extra weight just adds some additional friction is minuscule. Weight only matters when you are racing. I never understood the obsession with bike weight for non-pros. Even tiny differences are essential when you are riding the Tour de France because everyone else is trying to shave off every gram. But for everyone else the difference is insignificant.
Wrong! You like cycling, less wheigt, less time on the bicycle. That means when I open a pack chips now, not only I will have instant gratification, in the future I will be longer on the bicycle. 👍👍👍
I usually go for fast 2-3 hours ride on hilly forest roads. And I can tell you, riding my under 7.9kg CX bike is pure joy. When I take my brother's 12kg bike on the same path it is a torture.
I need to tell that my weight is 75kg, I am not any racer, just regular guy (just to take into account total mass). Uphill I am almost alway faster than many MTB bikers.
I cycled across Australia on a light weight carbon bike with very little gear then did the same across Canada but this time on a steel bike with 4 panniers and loads of gear. I was much more comfortable on my second touring trip. I had most of the necessary and comfort gear I needed. It was no longer a race against myself but rather I got to enjoy the time cycling, resting, and camping. My tips to touring heads: the quality of the gear is vital. Good steel frame, thin tires, rohloff hub. I also would recommend against getting the new Ortlieb panniers, they used to be the best, new models are rubbish.
Such a useful video. We've spent forever trying to explain this to friends who would not admit the facts. Also, when touring in some parts of the world, a steel frame can be fixed in any workshop that can weld metal. Try that with Aluminium!
@@jaro6985 we're talking about touring or bike packing. That's not done with an aero racebike. I don't really get your point. Besides, my aero racebike is 7.8 kg and noticably faster at high speed than my regular race bike. Both high end bikes.
@@jaro6985 If you want trouble, go ahead and put lightweight aero wheels into your touring bike. Hope the road surface will be in excellent condition and you're gear is next to nothing.
I have a Cannondale Caad9 triple (about 19-20lbs) and a Masi Giramondo (about 27-28lbs, has Panaracer slicks) that I use regularly. Over my usual 14 mile route the Cannondale is about 10 minutes faster, which I put down to slightly faster climbing speeds and faster descending speeds. The Cannondale has higher gearing, but less weight, and is a bit less tough on longer hill grinds. But, I enjoy them both and I'm not racing. I tend to take the Cannondale in very hot weather/humidity as the overall effort is a bit less, but the difference is not all that extreme at the end of the day.
Test how extra weight affects biking times when commuting with a lot of stopping and going. Not fun to push a heavy bike from start. I think there we will see a bigger difference.
Unless your commute is exceptionally long it’ll still be negligible. Now it might be worth it to get something that feels better to ride, whether that is down to the right geometry and fit or weight or rolling resistance is probably down to preference.
Again though - your body weight and the base bike weight itself dwarfs the 1kg you might save. That’s the weight you need to start up each time. Saving 1% there is just not a huge factor.
You have become such an important source of information for me over the last month. I really appreciate your work mat! Thank you. Also: Planning to use your bike planner to buy myself a travel bike (mountainbiking currently) towards the start of 2022. Really excited for it!
Yeah basically. I stop caring about weight around when 1oz = $100. 1lb tent system for $600 or my 2 lbs for $130? Going with the extra lb. The only time I ever concern myself with weight is when it comes to mountain biking because, as you say, it's about achieving a certain ride quality. Bikepacking and hiking? Nope. Ultra lighters should see the stuff we had to haul around in the military. My old government issued 4 season sleeping bag would take up a whole pannier.
Yes militairy pack weight is off the scale . From personal experience with backpacking , I make effort to go light as a bit older and better for the body ..soldiers mostly young ! So can endure loads better. And the other thing is soldiers are just so much fitter ten times over . Most of us backpackers including me are just not at optimum fitness 😅👍
@@Foxtrottangoabc lightening is fine. I switched out my old 6lbs cheap tent for a "cheap" $130lbs tent at 2lbs. 30% of the weight and volume. Is a good upgrade I think. But going any smaller means exponential increase in cost. Same with the sleeping bag. I don't need a 4 season bag that takes up a house. Got a store returned/refurbished down bag for $115. Now my entire sleep and shelter fits into my sweet roll bag. It's not the lightest, but it's all less than 12lbs (tent+fly+footprint, bag+air pad, pillow) but all told was less than $300. "Proper" ultralight would be $1k. Point is, there's a massive diminishing return on cost per gram. I just don't see the point, particularly after what I used to carry. There's a happy medium between the extremes.
You missed one point, where bike weight actually matters: Rough terrain. When you really need to push and pull on the bars, brake and accelerate very often or shift weight from the front to the rear and back, a heavier setup gets you exhausted much, much faster.
Yes good point , , all these small differences do make a big difference after one day . Did a bike pack recently over constantly undulating terrain sometimes only a metre or two then upto 5o and 100m difference in height over grooved dry mud and the constant changing in gearing to adapt was noticeable as for brief moments I was often in the wrong gear taking the weight strain when pedalling . I was cooked though was out of shape as well 🙂
@@leonawroth2516 Yeah, I know what you mean. Dunno, I might have misunderstood that part. To me, he didn't show, that this also can be extremely exhausting. I got this part as more skill is needed.
I wish to do bike touring in my life and you are the only and great video maker for that! I really like your technical backing, gives me a reason to do it and not just blindly follow. Thanks!
as pretty much light person with humble in average 62 kilos, lightness is the key in cycling. I think its all about proportion your weigh to equipment ure using. still my gbike is around 10kilos and im using it also as a road bike for training
It's probably cheaper to buy lighter tent/tools/bags, than a lighter bike. And if you are anything like me, loosing a couple kilos is as cheap as cutting back on the junk food and riding more.
To a point but honestly there's really quickly approaching diminishing returns on any of this stuff wrt $$$ and weight. Generally, I think the better approach is to just consider ride requirements and object necessities. Do I need this tool or thing? If not, don't take it. I prefer this over trying to spend $$$ on a lighter version of it. But everyone has their own preferences.
True. One big trade off with lighter equipment is the price goes up fast, and it can get harder if not impossible to repair. So if you plan on going remote almost anywhere you could get a steel frame fixed
1:32 As I found out, that ultra light tent may not be for everyone - 15D/20D fabric used in many ultralights is a lot more transparent than the heavier 210T fabric so the heavier tent gives you a much more "fortress" feel and doesn't wake you up as early when the sun comes up.
Funny thing. My Dad and I were just talking about frame and overall bike weight vs my weight. Now we’re both working on getting back in shape. I dropped out of cycling for a few years, family and work carved up my riding time to zero. Dad had a hip replacement and then dealings with cancer. Now he’s in his 80s and I just turned 60. We’re both a good 30 - 40 pounds over weight. And I started looking into getting a new gravel bike. Looking into bike weight verses cost, aluminum vs carbon fiber, or getting a bike for around $1600 vs $5200. Never mind the guy on the bike is 30 pounds over weight. I’m going with an aluminum frame. If can get my body mass index down to 4% instead of nearly 40% I’ll consider a carbon fiber frame. Beside the slightly heavier bike will make me burn more calories. 😎
Aluminum is the sweet spot in frame materials cost and performance wise, lightweight durable metal and it does not rust. I'm a pretty big guy at 240lbs and I ride some fast bumpy trails and even jump my KHS Alite 2000 hard tail from time to time on some down hill trails. I ride it 3/4 of the year nearly daily since 2012 when I bought it. I've got a lot of miles and have changed almost every drive train part on the bike and some parts like the cassette, chain rings, chain, rims and tires have been replaced a few times after a lot of wear but the frame has always been fine. I have a small rack and frame bag to with about 10 lbs of food, water, tools and gear that I strap on for longer rides to. I'm sticking with aluminum also!
I had trained for road racing and then got away from riding altogether for a couple years. Now I'm building my cross bike up to be my daily commuter and having to remind myself that I don't need to worry about the bike weight when I buy gear for it. I'd rather have something that lasts than paying more for something that's a few grams lighter. Your tire resistance article is really quite fascinating. Great video!
Switched from commuting on a 14kg surly to sub 8kg carbon bike. Makes a big difference in the peak district where I live. I don't save any time, I just don't feel fatigued when I get to work. Which is good when your facing a 12 hour night shift. I built up my carbon bike relatively cheaply, picking up deals over time, and buying top end 9 speed gears 2nd hand.
@@cipher.u.justice Yes and no...I believe, that there is something about a simple bicycle, where the journey itself is in focus and the bicycle is just there as a tool.
@@fnjfrancis That's not mutually exclusive. You can enjoy working on your bike and building it with nice parts while also fundamentally love riding under your own power. There is no one exclusive way to love cycling that is better than all others, it's all under the same umbrella.
Never gave a rat's ass about my bike's weight or whatever technology it was fitted with as long as i felt that it worked for my needs, it's a bicycle, keep it simple and have fun cycling.
My mantra is "UltraRIGHT over UltraLIGHT". I'm all for not carrying unnecessary weight, but I prioritize durability & reliability over grams. I built up an ultralight bike that kept breaking parts and I got fed up with it. It turned out that I barely added 1/2 a pound more to my final build with much burlier bits and I never had any problems after that which lead to my coming up with "the right weight is the lowest weight you can go with where your bike doesn't break down" theory and I've been totally happy with my arriving to that point. Now, I still have a light carbon bike at 15.47lbs, but it's built with solid parts and I don't have to worry about it leaving me on the side of a road. My aluminum version (same geo, similar build) was barely 1.5lbs more, but holding the bike, I couldn't tell that much of a difference. They both felt light-light. My latest build is a stainless steel all-road rig that's 18.67lbs, but is far smoother and more comfortable and of course, is built up with burlier parts for taking on off-road paths & trails. At the end of the day, I'm far less beat up riding the heavier steel bike and end up wanting to ride more. I can understand how those who race bikes (especially climbers) benefit from an uber-light plastic bike, but for the overwhelming majority of us mortals, a pound or two more isn't going to take away from the smiles per miles and might even yield a more comfortable experience.
You've done the cycling community a great service by quantifying the effects of weight savings. To echo some of the comments, I've been counseling cyclists as follows: 1. Static weight (in the bike, in the rider, in the luggage) means much less than rotational weight. And even rotational weight is less impactful if a steady pace is maintained. 2. If additional money is to be spent, it should be in lighter wheels. But it must not be done at the expense of reliability, safety and comfort. An adventure/mountain bike's tires need to be fat enough to be aired down when the terrain demands it. Pick just the right rim size, and you may be able to have your cake and eat it too -- consider swapping out your slower, grippier tires when your long trek gets to a long stretch of pavement. Remember, when the other pair of tires is folded up, it's just some extra static weight. Reduced rolling friction will more than compensate for the weight. 3. Wind resistance more than weight should dictate the type of bags used. Put wide panniers on just the wrong rack and you will quickly appreciate that wind is your enemy. That said, those who rarely ride faster than 20 mph may not perceive the difference between a traditional touring and a backpacking configuration. 4. Saving your life is more important than saving some weight. Never leave behind items that are truly essential to sustain life.
Importance of rotating weight is a myth www.reddit.com/r/Velo/comments/29oedw/the_case_against_rotating_weight/ The worse case scenario for rotating weight would be a F1 (with its gigantic tire) on a twisty track like Monaco. And even so, F1 engineer explain that the stress on rotating weight comes from a confusion about unsuspented weight. OK.... maybe top-fuel dragster is the worse scenario... But F1 engineers actually say that rotating weight doesn't matter much
When a bicycle accelerates, the human's power is used to spin up the wheels, and of course other, more significant things, such as building up the translational energy of all masses involved. It is physically impossible *not* to contribute to the angular momentum of the the two wheels. That said, if you (and the F1 engineers) maintain that wheel spin-up energy is an insignificant contributor to the total, I can concede that.
This video is surely for those who are obsessed with lightweight despite being broke af. Lightweight is a rich men's game. They can afford the technology. After all, lighter bikes are not slower than heavier bikes.
Yesterday I was on a trip with my scott unitrack bike, i had about 5-10kg in my backpack, and was lightly raining when I left the city,. Went about 40km, and I can say, the backpack played a small role in my trip, like the wind and the weather conditions are more important, the food also, rest time, considering in my backpack was useful stuff that you need in adventures like this.
I remember in the 2000s a friend of mine and I went to the bike store. He wanted to buy a super light weight carbon MT bike. He ended up in a heated discussion other the price with the store owner. It ended with the store owner yelling at my obviously obese looking friend "why don't you just loose 15kg and a normal aluminum bike practically becomes weightless for you". Well, he didn't make this sale and I laughed so hard that I had to walk home. :D
Excellent summary. Couldn’t agree more. All the fuss about saving a few grams here and paying a fortune for it is over the top.. Carbon fibre being made lighter than dust only to fall about later on. A bit of weight makes you a fitter rider. A sensible balance is what one needs and as you say choosing the right tyre for less rolling resistance is the key.
Great video! I use my roadbike in the city and weight is a huge factor there as well - you constantly need to break and accelerate for traffic lights, pedestrians and so on
I agree for a big part. But if you consider a distance where you have lot of stops and so accelerations weight because als more crucial. You have to push harder to accelerate or longer in both cases you have more fatigue. But overall you are quiet right, and if you want a lighter setup start with you self is in 80% of the riders the best option.
I love how we've been discussing weight all these years, especially from an athletic focus in cycling, yet the bikes and their space-age materials aren't really significantly lighter than those of yesteryear. Sure, your frame might be stiffer or more aerodynamic, but the marketing teams trying to convince me it's "so much lighter" just gets under my skin and annoys me. If a bike is 14kg or less, I'm happy.
Tyre pressure, chain lubrication, seating position, wind resistance and rolling resistance make a bigger difference than the weight of bike frame. On the other hand larger wheels provide better rolling momentum. Lighter and slightly smaller wheels provide more snappy acceleration which is good for racing and attacking corners. Larger wheels are more suited for touring bikes.
Anytime I think about spending money to reduce the weight on my bicycle, I take a grab of the skin around my middle, and declare as soon as I loose the excess weight on my "frame" I'll consider spending money to reduce the weight on my bicycle! Taking the weight off my own frame is the least expensive upgrade I can do.
I try to go quite lightweight when bikepacking but not really to save time as I'm not usually in a hurry. I just enjoy a light and agile bike, and ride feel is one of the most important things for me when bikepacking. Still I wouldn't pay 500+ bucks for a tent or sleeping bag and most of my equipment is either second hand or self-made. I ride an entry-level gravel bike that's not very light and about 5-6 kg / 11-13 lbs of luggage including full camping gear.
Its all about what your comfortable with. I suggest ride with ride with a load you want to tour with. Go for a day ride. This gives you a chance to move stuff around. How weight are distributed. Before the tour. Great stuff!🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗
It's not speed on the bike that is the best reason for keeping thing's light, it's just ease of general travel. My fully loaded (ie tent, sleeping bag, cooking stove, clothes, etc) gear fits in a saddlebag and a handlebar bag and weighs 18lbs and I put it on a 19lb bike which means I can easily pick the whole thing up to lift over fences or up stairs in motels. The volume of my set up is also small so I can travel easily on buses, trains and planes because my two bags are hand luggage. Keeping things simple and light by carefully choosing equipment and not carrying those little extras makes for efficient camp set up and packing too. There is the added advantage of making climbing a bit easier too. Many people use 4x panniers weighing 40lbs or more and have a great time, it's just not for me anymore.
Great video! I was always very skeptical about this obsession with weight, especially if it's coming from someone who is personally obviously overweight. Saving grams, while eating kg before the tour. Now I have the facts to back up an argument. I'm enjoying my cargo bike anyway :D
I've been commuting for years on a cheap steel frame chain store bike weighing 18Kg (39lbs), I went to a local cycling charity and picked up a 1995 Trek ZX8000 alloy bike for £30 ($36 US) and it's made my ride to work so much easier because it weighs just over 10Kg (23lbs), so I've almost halved the weight of the bike. The extra 8 gears also make a lot of difference too.
Bike speed and human perception of speed and bike handling is so so fascinating. Thanks for another reality check :) I won't get stressed when I pack my cannon 6D, a few lenses, and my tripod. :) It is about fun and relaxation.
Soooo.. are you now going to be thinking about bike weight in minutes per 100km, like me? 😂⚡️🤘🏼
Well I'm touring with a 20kg Batavus city-bike so...
Only on certain items, because if I’m bikepacking it’s not about going fast. For me it’s more about reducing my fatigue due to increased weight.
@@alikabok-es4sx Unless, a person is already a healthy weight and it’s unnecessary to loose body weight. 🤔
My daily commute is 7-10km each way, so I'll continue to worry more about the stationary time at lights vs anything else. On longer rides, I'm only concerned with the scenery. Wouldn't want to miss a good view while staring at the clock!
@איתי מהדב It doesn't matter much except for very short efforts. The energy isn't lost, it's returned through inertia. In the same way, a lighter system requires more "regular" input, as it decelerates quicker too.
Biked across America on the Trans Am, the bike shop before leaving said, "You'll never make it with flats." I often feel the bike industry has forgotten that to move forward all you need to do is keep pedaling. Old Tour De France photos is always my motivation to care less about gear.
Not sure what you mean... If you get a flat tire, keep pedaling?
@@MrJonas2255 flat bars
my friend is biking across usa with flats as we speak.
@@johnpark8637 flat pedals ?
@@dukekaboom4105 of course.
I went shopping for camping stuff. I told the sales person it was going to get used while bike packing, and he starting listing them all by weight. I was like, "sure sure, but which one takes less VOLUME?" I think that's a more limiting factor on what you can take with you on a bike assuming you don't get new bags.
Anaconda stores got rid of all their bike parts.
Kmart got rid of all their bike parts.
Business goes out of business this way.
The world champion didn't answer a question. And He was the store owner And salesman.
Makers And designers aren't approachable.
The city culture mine has removed all culture ingredients.
You are right - Volume is a huge factor. Most "ultralight" items also tend to be smaller in volume than heavier options (applies to sleeping bags, tents, clothing, etc).
@@dreyn7780 what in the world are you talking about?
@@SnootchieBootchies27 🐍s, duh 😁
That’s why I like my REI in my town. I was asking about blankets, and I was shown a gorgeous down quit that was super light but it packed pretty thick. I mentioned I was bike packing and I was instantly shifted over to the hammock under quilt or top quilt as a possibly better solution as while they slept a little cooler, they packed much smaller.
all of my information has come from racing, and I am not nor have ever been a racer. I tour. you do a great series of productions on relevant and useful points. thank you. great service.
Glad to hear it!
Well I asked the world champion a simple basic question and he walked away not answering the question.
So I stopped buying from his shop.
Racing is just an ego display.
Look at motocross, the bike suspension fails 100 times during a race. They fail to take turns at most corners, the suspensions forms a solid link from the rider to the track.
The next thing to fail is the riders bones.
And they break and break often.
Racers don't know the features.
The pide pipper leads everyone off the cliff.
My information just comes from maintenance and MTB. So weight isn't really all that important for me but it is a nice QOL improvement as long it's not that expensive
cheaper way is after 1 week of bikepacking I lost 8kg..... :D making the last 3 weeks a bit easyer
Good one mate! :-D
Happy travels!
Average bikes 18-25lbs, carbon frames usually hit 12lbs or so... basically about every 10lbs is worth anywhere from $500-$1000 on a bike, lose 5lbs and instantly upgrade your cycling value by $250-500. That's a nice upgrade. Do another 5lbs... That's a whole new bike on another planetary level....lose 20lbs, you're riding le tour de France alongside athletes.... your endurance will lengthen due to lighter weight ,more focus on building muscle and increase your top speeds.
My life was ruined cause I've bought multiple bikes.
People gave me free bikes.
Brake lever tension is adjustable!
The rock has made a career out of putting on more weight.
He's obviously the best bike sprinter in the world.
He just doesn't care about writing his name in books.
Great! Now widh good luck to the people trying to loose that weight on their bikes (like actually shaving 8kg from de bike itself).
But here is one thing to consider. Get a heavy bike to start if you are fat. Use it for 1-3 months and sell it to buy a mid tier lighter but not so light bike. Use it for 9-12months and sell it for a new featherweight bike as light as you can afford. Then, gains will be inmense!
Having a really light bike is one of lifes nicest pleasures. Just loading it on/off the bike rack, carrying it up/down steps, seeing friends lift it to feel the weight, not to mention riding it... a light bike is always a joy.
I am a professional wheel builder who has been building since 1973. The weight of the individual components in a wheel are my very last concern. There are so many more important things to consider than the finished weight of a pair of wheels. My clients often obsess about weight and it's madness.
Hi Corey! What's the most important things in your opinion? Thanks a lot!
@@vladimirzrada4195 Hi Artem. This is a gigantic subject that could result in a small book to answer your question properly, so I will give you a very condensed version. Hub weight is immaterial. Make sure they have high quality bearings and worry not about their weight. If you are racing in a serious way the only things that really matter are rim, tire and tube weight. Having said that, your rim choice should still be determined by your actual weight. Meaning if you are a heavy rider you will need rims that will support your weight or else your wheels will be too soft and the sponginess will result in too much flex and therefore waisted watts. Same goes for spoke count. If you weigh 135 pounds you can get away with a very low spoke count. If you weigh 180 then you should move up in spoke count to support your weight or you experience too much flex and then waisted watts. A professional wheel builder should be able to walk you through the exact weight of each component if you are racing and require the lightest wheels that will work for you. If you are not racing then don't concern yourself with weighing anything. Just buy well designed components that will last you a long time and are repairable. Forget about buying proprietary wheel designs. A waste of money and often difficult to repair. I hope that helps!
@@coreymihailiuk5189 👍👍👍
@@coreymihailiuk5189 Make sure you get good strong spokes. I had my day ended a few times with broken spokes.
luckily us mtb'ers only care if our rims are stiff and our hub go brrrrrrr.
As long as I’m pedaling down the road or trail I’m happy. I don’t understand people’s obsession over speed unless that’s your career. I get a great work out on my heavy bikes and lots of smiles.
I ride solo since I bought my bike and every ride, I usually have a speaker with me on my fatbike. Even when I go home from my dormitory near school (40km every weekend), with a crate at the back containing numerous cargo like food, my raincoat or even 1.5liter soda and snacks, and most of the time groceries asked by mother to buy, I never had time to put on proper speed higher than my usual 20kph. Riding solo from school to home takes 1hr 30minutes and it's this time that I take my time to relieve some stress from school. It makes me happy.
@@icouldntthinkofagoodname7216 Sure, speed is not my job, and I am by no means small. But there is a very beautiful feeling in cruising at high speed for an extended period of time. It just hums, the breathing, the cadence, everything just falls into place.
It's fun to go fast. It just feels good.
Speed is fun, and for many people it's also fun to beat their previous results
I take your point. I just watched a GCN video where they did a blind comparison between 10s dura-ace and 105 groups, both mechanical, on a trainer. The presenters were at a loss to tell the difference based on shifting performance. In a video sponsored by Shimano. Oops! They went to great pains to highlight the marginal weight differences, and just how *sexy* those dura-ace components look.
On the inverse, though, I think weight should at least be something to keep in mind especially when loading up a traditional touring bike, because things can get out of control quickly otherwise. At that point overpacking can start to affect handling, and I find it begins to affect your enjoyment of a longer trip. Hikers face the same challenge, and it's as much about reducing weight as it is just learning to say no to things you don't truly need. That kind of windom applies to all things in life.
Bikepacking is less of an issue since you're so contrained on volume, but if you're crossing technical terrain, a bit less weight can make things a lot more fun.
I own both groupsets. The difference can be told when you're pushing them performance-wise. Dura-Ace will undeniably shift more reliably under the most extreme heavy load of power, BUT...how many of us do that often enough to justify the difference?
For the record, I could tell the difference between them shifting. It's like .02% or something like that (#sarcasm), but that's on a bike stand. On the road? I'd have to look down to see what I'm riding if you asked me what's the difference. Sure, Dura-Ace is 1lb lighter, but not only does 105 last longer and requires less tuning (actually, almost no tuning), it's WAY cheaper to replace when the time comes.
All my bikes are going to be 105 from now on. In fact, my bikepacking ride is happily 105/Ultegra. I don't need Tour De France performance on a multiuse trail. I just need it to take me out there and bring me back home.
@@solitaryrefinement6787 Even if you can feel or measure the difference, there's still the question if it's worth the higher price.
@@jochenkraus7016 dura ace is something for professionals who count tenths of a second, in this segment the price don't really matter.
Hobby cyclists however won't really have advantages, but they have to pay the extra money for it
Not being able to tell the difference between 105 and dura ace in a video like that is called good marketing. Most people can't buy Dura Ace just based on sheer quantity produced alone. A video like that actually helps convince the average buyer to raise their bike budget up to 105 level where bikes start to get more profitable. Higher cost consumables once they are hooked too.
@@pratikpramanik7782 You're spot on. No average consumer is going to be swayed to buy Dura-Ace by a GCN video. If you buy DA it's because you already know you want DA. An average consumer might however be swayed to spring for 105 instead of Tiagra if "GCN says it performs as well as DA".
So sad I can't use my heavy bike as an excuse for being slow anymore.
Unless you're carrying it!!!
I can confirm with my own real world experience how much more important reducing rolling resistance is vs anything else.
Tyres are easily the cheapest way to improve the speed, puncture resistance, grip and handling characteristics of a bike! 🤘🏼
I set a Strava PR this week on an uphill segment, whilst pulling my single wheel bike trailer while out running errands. Bike weight is not the limiting factor most of the time.
YES. And thats why i recently upgraded to LATEX inner tubes. Which are ironically a bit lighter than butyl as on top of the RR gains, smoother rider, more resistant to deforming. I see these guys obsessed with shaving grams whats the point man? everyone wants to be a racer? Funny if people treated cars the same way like everyday theyre competing in a massive race.
@@Cyclingabout A 190g ultralight tire turns into a 7kg tire when you have to push the bike it's mounted on home because it catastrophically failed on the road. Give me the extra 15 or 20g of a better built tire any day of the week.
If you're not riding your bike becuase it keeps breaking down, it's not ultralight, it's weightless because it's not being used.
Why do people always seem to think its a choice? Like I can either reduce rolling resistance or reduce weight? Or I can reduce my body weight or reduce my bike weight? Why am I not allowed to maximise everything?
I really noticed how little the weight made when I put a child seat on the back of the bike and was riding around with my young son on the back. Maybe added 17kg all in but it only felt slightly harder when accelerating and barely noticed at all once up to speed. So glad I am subscribed to this channel, always put out really informative and relevant content 👏
You don't have hills in your city, right?
@@cristibaluta I do but Bosch helps me get up them 😉
Try going up a10% hill you may change your mind, oh just noticed you are on an e bike🙄
I rode for 7 years in Florida and learned real quick that weight didn't make a difference unless you were doing hills. And even then, being just a tiny bit more in shape was way more effective than reducing a few kg's.
Unless you're racing at world tour level or have a lot of money to spend, it's not really worth worrying about. A better way to gain speed would be to lose weight on your person. If you get super excited about trying to shave every gram off your bike, well have at it 😄 To each his/her own. There's no right or wrong way to approach cycling. Personally I like to train with a heavier bike.
Well put!
Me too training with heavier bikes bigger tires and spending more time on the bike overall. Another way is when using a different bike a lower speed cassette ( 7 speed) with less you have to do more because ever gear is the right gear works for me. It's improved my power output especially when I switch to a 9 speed Sorry for the long post
Part of the weight loss analogy is how great you feel psychologically: you are mentally high on life in general. 🙂🙂🚲🚲
The hardest part is losing weight while retaining as much muscle as possible.
My experience was that the handling part mattered the most. It's just incredible how good the gravelbike still handled with bags directly mounted to the frame with the center of mass below the handlebar.
I've been trying to convince my doctor that weight isn't all that important for years now. Hasn't gotten me anywhere. But maybe that's why I had to buy a touring bike just to hold up to my my fat ass.
🤣🤣🤣 I guess that's what I need to do!
Losing 25 lbs is way more effective than buying a bike that weighs 10lbs less than your old bike to improve cycling speed
Weight isn't all that important. Since muscle can weigh more than fat. Too many people when they're dieting focus on weight when they should focus on getting in shape.
in Germany we say "Friss die Hälfte", which is a really good weightloss tip. It translates to "Eat half" of whatever you are eating, implying on reducing your calorie intake
The rock has out lived king henry the 8th.
Appreciate your analysis here regarding how little weight matters while touring. One additional analysis to note here is the inertial component to get the bike up to a speed. Especially during touring when you might be stopping a fair number of times. I read an article that hinted that this inertial component could account for as much as half of the total energy spent during touring.
Would love to see that added to your analysis.
yeah me too. I dont mind heavy bags on the road but in the city it's horrible with all the traffic lights
Show us the link to the article which you are referring to. You say the article "hinted" on something - doesn't really sound like proper science.
@@pkelly20091 On the contrary science almost never affirms, but rather observes. Here, "hinted" may not be the most scientifically accurate term, but it does reflect scientific temperament.
@@adityapathak5761 good point - but the idea that up to half the energy spent during touring is due to inertia bringing the bike up to speed does sound rather implausible - would love to see the article.
@@pkelly20091 Did a quick calculation and found it to be around 20% (assuming 100km ride, 120kg weight, 25 km/hr, and stopping every 200 meters).
more details here: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HkyM2pFpH6AACbbMhNUikzbf1k9ZtaIBf20zw48InlA/edit?usp=sharing
This calculation totally ignores slowing down (eg. corners, obstacles) which can lead to larger energy expenditure. Also, your estimate of how often someone stops depends on the person (I find myself stopping very frequently to take pics)
Again, would love if Alee does a more rigorous study. I wouldn't be surprised to see good fraction of time to overcome inertial component)
Yep, this weight thing is ridiculous for us weekend amateurs.
You ever ride a 35 pound enduro bike after riding a 25 pound XC bike? Its like piloting a monster truck after getting out of a go kart.
Weight matters when its accelerating, AND decelerating, AND turning, AND getting bumped around 100 times a minute.
@@marcalvarez4890 oh shut it, show off. And yes, I have ridden long distances, cause I'm Dutch. And therefore by birthright a super Sayan in the cycling world.
@@yashchirka4060Ummm...not sure if you meant to respond to me.
I wasn't showing off and i didn't mention long distances.
Put 15kg on your bike and tell me complaining about the difference is ridiculous... Riding my bike in its normal 7kg spec vs its touring 20kg spec is night and day. Its not aero either, riding my bike with the packs on but empty is significantly different from when they are heavy but the same shape.
@@marcalvarez4890 Exactly. I hate all these channels that do tests on long open roads. I live in the real world, a huge city like most of the population. A long ride for me is 80km or so of coming to a complete stop every minute or so, sometimes every 100m. Do that and see how much weight matters to you.
At my age (61) and weight (142lbs) a lighter bike is much easier on my knees pushing up hills. I used to wear a backpack for hydration but switched to a fanny pack to get the weight lower on the bike. Another aspect is light, carbon wheels, which you've talked about before. Getting low rotational mass with fast rolling hubs and tires can completely offset bike weight. Thanks and be safe out there!
Weight for non-racing bikes to me means energy expended and how I feel at the end of the ride. Comfort won that debate since lighter weight cost at least double.
My steel Surly LHT weighs well over 30 pounds with racks, fenders and 36 spoke rims. I have no problem at all with that. When I'm riding fully loaded I want a good sturdy bike. Light bikes have a place, but probably not so much in the touring realm. Good video.
I have found focusing on weight to be very important over the years; having a loaded steel bike means that whenever I ride unloaded, I notice how much the bike's engine has improved!
Sitting here waiting for ‘Rides of Japan’ to enter the discussion
🤔😏😏
Eh, RoJ knows and jokes about whether what he does is worth it. He likes what he likes but knows it's not really about any truly tangible result.
LOL
Was going to write this exact comment 😀
$400 for a carbon stem that saves 30g compares to a $40 aluminium one.
@@spektrumB ye thats mad
I like my semi-lightweight road bike, but when I go touring I carry so much gear that weight of the bike is irrelevant. I just want my bike to be comfortable and sturdy enough so it can handle the carried equipment and the tough "road" conditions.
I'm coming from the hiking world, so every freaking gram I can get off my back is well worth it to me. A kilogram of saved backpack weight is a complete game changer. But I agree, with bikes it is totally different and there really is no need to chase weight in the same manner!
Backpacking and Mountain Biking share a LOT in common.
The boot weight is tire weight.
The pack weight is total bike weight.
The poles weight is suspension weight.
The pad and tent weight are the water bottles and tubes.
Weight DEFINITELY matters off road, where every step or pedal can go up, down, sideways, or even twist. I won't carry more than 25 pounds no matter what...same goes for my XC mountain bike.
On road?...yeah, aero and rolling resistance are everything.
For me, using an internal frame backpack vs an ultralight backpack that has no frame, I prefer internal frame (aka heavier) packs. Besides the extra padding contributing to the comfort, the frame distributing the weight more across my hips than wherever the loadout decides in a frameless pack is worth the extra 2lbs. Ultralighters claim they can go farther with less weight (whatever that math is), but for me, I go farther when I'm more comfortable.
For thru-hikers who have the options of staying at hotels and in towns or even trail shelters, they can afford to get away with ultralight packs I think.
@@solitaryrefinement6787 I think you just described having a full suspension XC bike, versus a hardtail XC bike.
2 pounds more but worth the increased capability.
Having an 8-10% average gradient for 1000-15000m straight is way more interesting though. The steeper the more you‘ll feel it.
@@marcalvarez4890 losing bodyweight is way more important than getting the lightest sports equipment.
Great content as always! But as a bikepacker who leans towards more offroad routes where hike a bike can easily make up 10 - 20% of a route, I'd love to see time tests done with this in mind. Heavy bikes when you're pushing it with your arms are crushing! I know you mention it briefly in the video, but I feel it's downplayed a bit for more aggressive routes perhaps? Just my two cents :)
Agreed. On rugged terrain a rider on an unloaded bike is already not far off from redlining just to make it up the hill. Yes lower gearing is a good idea. When talking about steep technical climbs unless your speed is at least a certain amount it's a struggle to not fall over. Momentum is good. Speed and momentum up a series of steep climbs all day long, day after day is too much. You can only spend so much time being redlined per day or multiple days in a row before you're cooked. Thus weight of one's bike and equipment is a legit concern. Also with rugged terrain you're likely having to regularly lift your bike over obstacles such as fallen trees and rocks or carrying it across rivers.
@@mikekrasovec6390 agreed , I think the margin of gain for a lighter bike weight is much greater over real world terrain .I often walk up hills to save me going into the red and conserving my knee and back joints . Ofcourse I know personally I can lose about 10kg of body weight which also makes a difference
If you're talking touring with camp gear I'd rather shave weight off the gear not the bike. Light camp gear works for hiking as well.
2-5 lbs difference in an Enduro mountain bike (something in the 30-38 lb range) for me wouldn't be a big deal for "hike a bike" stuff through rough terrain if I was just riding. If I was going touring on that same bike I'd much rather skinny my gear up before changing anything on the bike.
80%+ around me ride Enduros or aggressive trail bikes due to the terrain. It can involve a decent amount of lifting the bike or pushing.
This video which contradicts the notion that a lighter bike is so much better than a heavier bike also reminds me of when I saw a study that showed that clipping in your foot to the pedal didn't add any power. And yet every weekend warrior I see still clips in. But I love this weight video. thanks again Alee
You're right, for most riders in most situations, there is no difference in power output if you use clip-in pedals. There are still other advantages though, which I list on my website: www.cyclingabout.com/clipless-pedals-advantages-disadvantages/
yes but clipping in makes climbing significantly less tiring because the pedaling motion is so much more circular. Without clips, all the power basically comes from the quads and glutes. With clips, you can involve your hamstrings and calfes as well
I've got a lot of weight to lose on my body before I even begin thinking about this issue lol
That "weight" just became fuel.
I would say a heavier bike would benefit you. By the time you slim down you would look like Chun Li from Street Fighter.
@@MiGujack3 Yeah man I been riding on heavy 2.6 tires with tubes in them intentionally, I feel it has helped a bit. I also sometimes like to put small hand egg weights (the kind for boxing) in my saddle bag, that also provided a bit of resistance training. I seem to be currently in a bit of a plateau after losing some weight initially. I may need to analyze my diet, or go on longer rides maybe.
A rare, intelligent analysis of the weight issue. Another great clip. Thanks.
Thank you kindly!
Thank you for this video! It came at just the right time as I've been struggling and obsessing over my total bikepacking weight
Great vid! I had a physics professor who was asked about weight vs aerodynamics (on cars, but the principles here work for bikes). He replied, "A parachute is very light, but sure slows you down!" When it comes to speed and/or efficiency: aerodynamics > weight
That feel when you recognise the tyre tread when he says "slowest rolling tyre" 😐
www.bicyclerollingresistance.com
You are welcome friend! This site is how i chose my MTB tires. I chose the ones he rides. They also happen to be the lightest, which in MTB actually matters quite a bit.
Is that Vittoria Randonneur? Because I also have these tires :D good thing about them is that they are super puncture resistant
Always great content. I'm still lugging my Salsa Fargo around and taking grief from all my titanium/carbon riding pals. I love my old bike and I do actually carry a better sleeping pad. Because some things are just not negotiable, like a good night's sleep. Travel safe!
Good analysis that quantifies and supports what I already know from decades of bicycle commuting, bikepacking and long distance touring. I often use a single wheel Bob Trailer, and when I do so the bike itself carries a lot less (smaller panniers or no panniers) than it otherwise would. I'm absolutely sure that the trailer configuration confers a noticeable advantage in terms of wind resistance because the trailer is low to the ground and tucked tightly behind the bike that in many circumstances overcomes the added weight of the trailer itself.
Agreed! When I worked at a bicycle store I couldn't believe how much money cyclists would spend to shave a few grams off their bikes while they are walking around with beer bellies. So much cheaper to just lose the weight from your body.
LOL In cali it's all dad-gut riders with carbon bikes. I am new to the scene, but the biking scene is more mad than other sports I am in.
😂😂😂😂 too funny
The entire cycling community benefits from content like this. Thanks for sharing.
Great point at the end about getting a good night’s sleep 😴
Especially when you're getting on like some of us are :-)
Love how you are breaking so many perceptions so beautifully. Great work!
I just completed the 633km 4 rivers ride in South Korea. My bike and gear weight was 40kgs and I weigh 124Kg, add these two together for a total of 164kg. I rode with a number of different people from a 19 year old on a 14kg bike to club riders all riding ultra lite mountain and road bikes. I found that I had no issues maintaining a 20-23km/h average speed which match their riding speeds. This really amazed me as I'm 62 years old and by no means as fit as 19 to 30 year old riders. My daily riding speeds averaged out at 17.6 km/h. This proves your video and thanks for all the great content. This was one of the things that inspired me to do this trip. Regards Daryl
A calculation I learned was that every 12lbs of weight equals a loss of 1mph. Which while is meaningless on a short ride, can add up on a all day ride.
Interesting video that didn't match my experiences and expectation.
I could swear adding 4 liters of water on my bike had a distinct effect over 180-200 km á day over 6 days. All weight combined was 87-91kg. Every extra kilogram felt like a slog. Possibly because it's hilly here in Norway. The feel wasn't like gradual sapping, but felt exponential. By the end of those long days with extra water, I didn't need much convincing to sleep. 😁 I'm probably missing something here.
Thank you for the contrary information, it's food for thought.
This analysis doesn't cover the calories burned to carry extra weight. The only thing really affecting cycling speed is your bikes gearing and wind resistance. With same gearing, you can ride the same velocity on 75mm tires as you would on 25mm. What's different is the vastly increased amount of force you must apply to do so, and the tax on your body to do it. That being said, his analysis rightly points out that these changes are miniscule in terms of total system weight. And, we tend to perceive slight changes in weight distribution pretty dramatically at first. I always feel sluggish running in winter sweats vs summer clothes. Proprioception is funny that way.
If you already had the perception that weight slows you down a lot, the mind will be especially good at convincing you of things that don't match the physical properties of the universe! 😉
@@Cyclingabout and this is why data is good. My only critique is you didn't do a 3rd set of trials so we could run an ANOVA 😄
Hi @@cjohnson3836 There's possibly something to the calories. I don't know. When I go at that high tempo, it's an all out eating contest of chugging carbs to keep the furnace going for 10-12 hours. If I have to depend on fat or protein, then the engine goes tits up after 3 hours. 🤪 I'm pushing my own envelope. The facts says one thing, but my heart tells me those 4 kilos will kill my legs. Ha ha. 😁
Thank you. I appreciate the input.
THANK YOU for this video. The obsession on weight is so frustrating. There are so many other factors that are more important that it rarely even comes down to weight as a tie-breaker.
Should have waited to comment: Good point on the ride feel and 'snappy' response to unexpected conditions such as off-roading. I'm an amateur and even I notice that!
I started my biketouring when I bought a 25 kg e-bike. It made me ride more often and further and made me loose 15 kg bodyweight.
Last weekend I did a trip of 50 km with an older friend on his 8 kg racing bike. He asked me if I had place for his cable-lock.....
I had no problem keeping up with him, was faster on the climbs due to the electric motor, faster on the downs due to more weight and grip and in the end I only use like 75 wH from the battery........
If the above is confusing, it is because it is not all about weight ;-)
WOW! The depth of analysis here is fantastic - as usual! Easily the best channel on here to compare REAL WORLD bike stats info and theory. Love it!
Excellent bike channel buildt on a sound basis of engineering knowledge. Respect!
I carry 26 lbs and need everything I carry.be safe enjoyed video 🚴
So you're telling me, if I lose all of my overweight (30kg to spare) I'd be 30min quicker on the same 100km ride compared to now?
Right now, despite bringing 115kg to the scale, I had an epic 110k ride with 27km/h (4h 5min - 140w roughly)
That would mean, shaving of these 30kg without getting any fitter would result in 3h 35min = 30,7km/h
Or on my other ride yesterday: 60km in 2h 05min = 29km/h
-30kg = 60km / (125 min - (30min * 0,6) * 60 = 33,6 km/h
Holy shit! That would be awesome! :)
That's a good motivation!!!
you will lose some strength in your legs when going down 30kg but in essence you're right
@@michaelquickels6655 maybe, but also he will be more aero 😎
It might take a little longer than just removing a bag ;)
Actually, no. This was for a profile with a lot of climbing. The time difference for a flat course where the extra weight just adds some additional friction is minuscule. Weight only matters when you are racing.
I never understood the obsession with bike weight for non-pros. Even tiny differences are essential when you are riding the Tour de France because everyone else is trying to shave off every gram. But for everyone else the difference is insignificant.
Wrong!
You like cycling, less wheigt, less time on the bicycle.
That means when I open a pack chips now, not only I will have instant gratification, in the future I will be longer on the bicycle. 👍👍👍
I usually go for fast 2-3 hours ride on hilly forest roads. And I can tell you, riding my under 7.9kg CX bike is pure joy. When I take my brother's 12kg bike on the same path it is a torture.
I need to tell that my weight is 75kg, I am not any racer, just regular guy (just to take into account total mass). Uphill I am almost alway faster than many MTB bikers.
I cycled across Australia on a light weight carbon bike with very little gear then did the same across Canada but this time on a steel bike with 4 panniers and loads of gear. I was much more comfortable on my second touring trip. I had most of the necessary and comfort gear I needed. It was no longer a race against myself but rather I got to enjoy the time cycling, resting, and camping.
My tips to touring heads: the quality of the gear is vital. Good steel frame, thin tires, rohloff hub. I also would recommend against getting the new Ortlieb panniers, they used to be the best, new models are rubbish.
Did you experience many flats/mechanical failures in general?
@@tappajaav not really.
Such a useful video. We've spent forever trying to explain this to friends who would not admit the facts. Also, when touring in some parts of the world, a steel frame can be fixed in any workshop that can weld metal. Try that with Aluminium!
Lighter gear also means mostly less bulky goods which reduces your weight and aerodynamic disadvantage.
Aero bikes are heavier, aero wheels are heavier.. so not really.
@@jaro6985 we're talking about touring or bike packing. That's not done with an aero racebike. I don't really get your point. Besides, my aero racebike is 7.8 kg and noticably faster at high speed than my regular race bike. Both high end bikes.
@@Karel.C So you can't put aero wheels on a touring bike? Didn't realize.
@@jaro6985 If you want trouble, go ahead and put lightweight aero wheels into your touring bike. Hope the road surface will be in excellent condition and you're gear is next to nothing.
I have a Cannondale Caad9 triple (about 19-20lbs) and a Masi Giramondo (about 27-28lbs, has Panaracer slicks) that I use regularly. Over my usual 14 mile route the Cannondale is about 10 minutes faster, which I put down to slightly faster climbing speeds and faster descending speeds. The Cannondale has higher gearing, but less weight, and is a bit less tough on longer hill grinds. But, I enjoy them both and I'm not racing. I tend to take the Cannondale in very hot weather/humidity as the overall effort is a bit less, but the difference is not all that extreme at the end of the day.
Test how extra weight affects biking times when commuting with a lot of stopping and going. Not fun to push a heavy bike from start. I think there we will see a bigger difference.
Unless your commute is exceptionally long it’ll still be negligible. Now it might be worth it to get something that feels better to ride, whether that is down to the right geometry and fit or weight or rolling resistance is probably down to preference.
Again though - your body weight and the base bike weight itself dwarfs the 1kg you might save. That’s the weight you need to start up each time. Saving 1% there is just not a huge factor.
You have become such an important source of information for me over the last month. I really appreciate your work mat! Thank you.
Also: Planning to use your bike planner to buy myself a travel bike (mountainbiking currently) towards the start of 2022. Really excited for it!
Yeah basically. I stop caring about weight around when 1oz = $100. 1lb tent system for $600 or my 2 lbs for $130? Going with the extra lb. The only time I ever concern myself with weight is when it comes to mountain biking because, as you say, it's about achieving a certain ride quality. Bikepacking and hiking? Nope. Ultra lighters should see the stuff we had to haul around in the military. My old government issued 4 season sleeping bag would take up a whole pannier.
Yes militairy pack weight is off the scale . From personal experience with backpacking , I make effort to go light as a bit older and better for the body ..soldiers mostly young ! So can endure loads better. And the other thing is soldiers are just so much fitter ten times over . Most of us backpackers including me are just not at optimum fitness 😅👍
@@Foxtrottangoabc lightening is fine. I switched out my old 6lbs cheap tent for a "cheap" $130lbs tent at 2lbs. 30% of the weight and volume. Is a good upgrade I think. But going any smaller means exponential increase in cost. Same with the sleeping bag. I don't need a 4 season bag that takes up a house. Got a store returned/refurbished down bag for $115. Now my entire sleep and shelter fits into my sweet roll bag. It's not the lightest, but it's all less than 12lbs (tent+fly+footprint, bag+air pad, pillow) but all told was less than $300. "Proper" ultralight would be $1k. Point is, there's a massive diminishing return on cost per gram. I just don't see the point, particularly after what I used to carry. There's a happy medium between the extremes.
Mind blowing! The difference between a bit more weight vs rolling resistance is shocking!!
You missed one point, where bike weight actually matters: Rough terrain. When you really need to push and pull on the bars, brake and accelerate very often or shift weight from the front to the rear and back, a heavier setup gets you exhausted much, much faster.
Yes good point , , all these small differences do make a big difference after one day . Did a bike pack recently over constantly undulating terrain sometimes only a metre or two then upto 5o and 100m difference in height over grooved dry mud and the constant changing in gearing to adapt was noticeable as for brief moments I was often in the wrong gear taking the weight strain when pedalling . I was cooked though was out of shape as well 🙂
No, he did not. Just watch 5:16 again.
@@leonawroth2516 Yeah, I know what you mean. Dunno, I might have misunderstood that part. To me, he didn't show, that this also can be extremely exhausting. I got this part as more skill is needed.
Hi! I can relate to this now that I have to haul my 20kg toddler son. It's very difficult to brake and accelerate.
I wish to do bike touring in my life and you are the only and great video maker for that! I really like your technical backing, gives me a reason to do it and not just blindly follow. Thanks!
as pretty much light person with humble in average 62 kilos, lightness is the key in cycling. I think its all about proportion your weigh to equipment ure using. still my gbike is around 10kilos and im using it also as a road bike for training
Im also 62 kilos🤘🏻
Excellent video. I found that training on a heavy touring bicycle actually made me faster on a lighter weight road bicycle.
It's probably cheaper to buy lighter tent/tools/bags, than a lighter bike. And if you are anything like me, loosing a couple kilos is as cheap as cutting back on the junk food and riding more.
To a point but honestly there's really quickly approaching diminishing returns on any of this stuff wrt $$$ and weight. Generally, I think the better approach is to just consider ride requirements and object necessities. Do I need this tool or thing? If not, don't take it. I prefer this over trying to spend $$$ on a lighter version of it. But everyone has their own preferences.
True. One big trade off with lighter equipment is the price goes up fast, and it can get harder if not impossible to repair. So if you plan on going remote almost anywhere you could get a steel frame fixed
1:32 As I found out, that ultra light tent may not be for everyone - 15D/20D fabric used in many ultralights is a lot more transparent than the heavier 210T fabric so the heavier tent gives you a much more "fortress" feel and doesn't wake you up as early when the sun comes up.
And the lightest of all, Dyneema, is a big glass window at night! 😅
comfort>aero>weight
Funny thing. My Dad and I were just talking about frame and overall bike weight vs my weight. Now we’re both working on getting back in shape. I dropped out of cycling for a few years, family and work carved up my riding time to zero. Dad had a hip replacement and then dealings with cancer. Now he’s in his 80s and I just turned 60. We’re both a good 30 - 40 pounds over weight. And I started looking into getting a new gravel bike. Looking into bike weight verses cost, aluminum vs carbon fiber, or getting a bike for around $1600 vs $5200. Never mind the guy on the bike is 30 pounds over weight. I’m going with an aluminum frame. If can get my body mass index down to 4% instead of nearly 40% I’ll consider a carbon fiber frame. Beside the slightly heavier bike will make me burn more calories. 😎
Aluminum is the sweet spot in frame materials cost and performance wise, lightweight durable metal and it does not rust. I'm a pretty big guy at 240lbs and I ride some fast bumpy trails and even jump my KHS Alite 2000 hard tail from time to time on some down hill trails. I ride it 3/4 of the year nearly daily since 2012 when I bought it. I've got a lot of miles and have changed almost every drive train part on the bike and some parts like the cassette, chain rings, chain, rims and tires have been replaced a few times after a lot of wear but the frame has always been fine. I have a small rack and frame bag to with about 10 lbs of food, water, tools and gear that I strap on for longer rides to. I'm sticking with aluminum also!
Sharing this to my weight chasing mates :) hahahahahaha. And, bringing the kitchen sink on our next bike pack trip too.
Another outstanding piece Alee - thanks for doing the homework!
Thank you! This video is great ammunition for my weight obsessed friends.
I had trained for road racing and then got away from riding altogether for a couple years. Now I'm building my cross bike up to be my daily commuter and having to remind myself that I don't need to worry about the bike weight when I buy gear for it. I'd rather have something that lasts than paying more for something that's a few grams lighter. Your tire resistance article is really quite fascinating. Great video!
Rides of Japan is not gonna like this lol
it s not about the time penalty it s about the energy required to accomplish the task , which translate into recuperation differences
Appreciate the work! It's so easy to get swallowed up into the hype and start rationalizing excessive expenses!
Rationalising excessive expense is a real thing especially in biking circles.
Switched from commuting on a 14kg surly to sub 8kg carbon bike. Makes a big difference in the peak district where I live. I don't save any time, I just don't feel fatigued when I get to work. Which is good when your facing a 12 hour night shift. I built up my carbon bike relatively cheaply, picking up deals over time, and buying top end 9 speed gears 2nd hand.
And while we are at it, let’s ditch the obsession about speed and fancy equipment.
Like the uncle at 8:34 the spirit we share is more important than money
All this stuff is mostly about hobbyism rather than practical performance, just like buying nice cars, nice PCs, nice phones, nice clothes, etc.
@@cipher.u.justice Yes and no...I believe, that there is something about a simple bicycle, where the journey itself is in focus and the bicycle is just there as a tool.
@@fnjfrancis That's not mutually exclusive. You can enjoy working on your bike and building it with nice parts while also fundamentally love riding under your own power. There is no one exclusive way to love cycling that is better than all others, it's all under the same umbrella.
@@cipher.u.justice Perhaps you are right...but I seem to prefer the more romantic approach :-)
Never gave a rat's ass about my bike's weight or whatever technology it was fitted with as long as i felt that it worked for my needs, it's a bicycle, keep it simple and have fun cycling.
I never worried about just hop on your bike and enjoy it!Never understood people that measure weight of every part or accessory!
My mantra is "UltraRIGHT over UltraLIGHT". I'm all for not carrying unnecessary weight, but I prioritize durability & reliability over grams. I built up an ultralight bike that kept breaking parts and I got fed up with it. It turned out that I barely added 1/2 a pound more to my final build with much burlier bits and I never had any problems after that which lead to my coming up with "the right weight is the lowest weight you can go with where your bike doesn't break down" theory and I've been totally happy with my arriving to that point.
Now, I still have a light carbon bike at 15.47lbs, but it's built with solid parts and I don't have to worry about it leaving me on the side of a road. My aluminum version (same geo, similar build) was barely 1.5lbs more, but holding the bike, I couldn't tell that much of a difference. They both felt light-light.
My latest build is a stainless steel all-road rig that's 18.67lbs, but is far smoother and more comfortable and of course, is built up with burlier parts for taking on off-road paths & trails. At the end of the day, I'm far less beat up riding the heavier steel bike and end up wanting to ride more.
I can understand how those who race bikes (especially climbers) benefit from an uber-light plastic bike, but for the overwhelming majority of us mortals, a pound or two more isn't going to take away from the smiles per miles and might even yield a more comfortable experience.
Weight only affects climbs turns and acceleration, basic physics
...Laughs in mountain bike....
You've done the cycling community a great service by quantifying the effects of weight savings. To echo some of the comments, I've been counseling cyclists as follows:
1. Static weight (in the bike, in the rider, in the luggage) means much less than rotational weight. And even rotational weight is less impactful if a steady pace is maintained.
2. If additional money is to be spent, it should be in lighter wheels. But it must not be done at the expense of reliability, safety and comfort. An adventure/mountain bike's tires need to be fat enough to be aired down when the terrain demands it. Pick just the right rim size, and you may be able to have your cake and eat it too -- consider swapping out your slower, grippier tires when your long trek gets to a long stretch of pavement. Remember, when the other pair of tires is folded up, it's just some extra static weight. Reduced rolling friction will more than compensate for the weight.
3. Wind resistance more than weight should dictate the type of bags used. Put wide panniers on just the wrong rack and you will quickly appreciate that wind is your enemy. That said, those who rarely ride faster than 20 mph may not perceive the difference between a traditional touring and a backpacking configuration.
4. Saving your life is more important than saving some weight. Never leave behind items that are truly essential to sustain life.
Importance of rotating weight is a myth
www.reddit.com/r/Velo/comments/29oedw/the_case_against_rotating_weight/
The worse case scenario for rotating weight would be a F1 (with its gigantic tire) on a twisty track like Monaco. And even so, F1 engineer explain that the stress on rotating weight comes from a confusion about unsuspented weight.
OK.... maybe top-fuel dragster is the worse scenario... But F1 engineers actually say that rotating weight doesn't matter much
When a bicycle accelerates, the human's power is used to spin up the wheels, and of course other, more significant things, such as building up the translational energy of all masses involved. It is physically impossible *not* to contribute to the angular momentum of the the two wheels. That said, if you (and the F1 engineers) maintain that wheel spin-up energy is an insignificant contributor to the total, I can concede that.
This video is surely for those who are obsessed with lightweight despite being broke af. Lightweight is a rich men's game. They can afford the technology. After all, lighter bikes are not slower than heavier bikes.
Yesterday I was on a trip with my scott unitrack bike, i had about 5-10kg in my backpack, and was lightly raining when I left the city,. Went about 40km, and I can say, the backpack played a small role in my trip, like the wind and the weather conditions are more important, the food also, rest time, considering in my backpack was useful stuff that you need in adventures like this.
I remember in the 2000s a friend of mine and I went to the bike store. He wanted to buy a super light weight carbon MT bike. He ended up in a heated discussion other the price with the store owner. It ended with the store owner yelling at my obviously obese looking friend "why don't you just loose 15kg and a normal aluminum bike practically becomes weightless for you". Well, he didn't make this sale and I laughed so hard that I had to walk home. :D
Harsh but fair, perhaps you would have been the better person to reveal this truth to your friend lol
Excellent summary. Couldn’t agree more. All the fuss about saving a few grams here and paying a fortune for it is over the top.. Carbon fibre being made lighter than dust only to fall about later on. A bit of weight makes you a fitter rider. A sensible balance is what one needs and as you say choosing the right tyre for less rolling resistance is the key.
Rolling resistance and aero gains are imp. But u missed one crucial thing about effect of incresed weight and that is rider fatigue.
Great video! I use my roadbike in the city and weight is a huge factor there as well - you constantly need to break and accelerate for traffic
lights, pedestrians and so on
I agree for a big part. But if you consider a distance where you have lot of stops and so accelerations weight because als more crucial. You have to push harder to accelerate or longer in both cases you have more fatigue. But overall you are quiet right, and if you want a lighter setup start with you self is in 80% of the riders the best option.
Another great video. Love the mathematical stats backed up with your experience and real world tests. Good stuff.
I love how we've been discussing weight all these years, especially from an athletic focus in cycling, yet the bikes and their space-age materials aren't really significantly lighter than those of yesteryear. Sure, your frame might be stiffer or more aerodynamic, but the marketing teams trying to convince me it's "so much lighter" just gets under my skin and annoys me. If a bike is 14kg or less, I'm happy.
Tyre pressure, chain lubrication, seating position, wind resistance and rolling resistance make a bigger difference than the weight of bike frame. On the other hand larger wheels provide better rolling momentum. Lighter and slightly smaller wheels provide more snappy acceleration which is good for racing and attacking corners. Larger wheels are more suited for touring bikes.
If it's not a race, weight is not that important, unless the weight is on your shoulders.
I would have said I agree with you a wholeheartedly but in actuality it's been long past due that we stop obsessing about weight on bicycles.
Anytime I think about spending money to reduce the weight on my bicycle, I take a grab of the skin around my middle, and declare as soon as I loose the excess weight on my "frame" I'll consider spending money to reduce the weight on my bicycle! Taking the weight off my own frame is the least expensive upgrade I can do.
I try to go quite lightweight when bikepacking but not really to save time as I'm not usually in a hurry. I just enjoy a light and agile bike, and ride feel is one of the most important things for me when bikepacking. Still I wouldn't pay 500+ bucks for a tent or sleeping bag and most of my equipment is either second hand or self-made.
I ride an entry-level gravel bike that's not very light and about 5-6 kg / 11-13 lbs of luggage including full camping gear.
I also cycled in remote areas, carrying 8 liters of water in bags, thus an extra 8 kg. Obviously you feel it but get used to it very quickly.
Definitely gorgeous, absolutely agree! Thanks for your inspiring analysis.
Its all about what your comfortable with. I suggest ride with ride with a load you want to tour with. Go for a day ride. This gives you a chance to move stuff around. How weight are distributed. Before the tour. Great stuff!🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗
Thank you yet again for reminding us what matters and what doesn’t. Excellent!
It's not speed on the bike that is the best reason for keeping thing's light, it's just ease of general travel. My fully loaded (ie tent, sleeping bag, cooking stove, clothes, etc) gear fits in a saddlebag and a handlebar bag and weighs 18lbs and I put it on a 19lb bike which means I can easily pick the whole thing up to lift over fences or up stairs in motels. The volume of my set up is also small so I can travel easily on buses, trains and planes because my two bags are hand luggage. Keeping things simple and light by carefully choosing equipment and not carrying those little extras makes for efficient camp set up and packing too. There is the added advantage of making climbing a bit easier too. Many people use 4x panniers weighing 40lbs or more and have a great time, it's just not for me anymore.
Great video! I was always very skeptical about this obsession with weight, especially if it's coming from someone who is personally obviously overweight. Saving grams, while eating kg before the tour.
Now I have the facts to back up an argument. I'm enjoying my cargo bike anyway :D
I've been commuting for years on a cheap steel frame chain store bike weighing 18Kg (39lbs), I went to a local cycling charity and picked up a 1995 Trek ZX8000 alloy bike for £30 ($36 US) and it's made my ride to work so much easier because it weighs just over 10Kg (23lbs), so I've almost halved the weight of the bike. The extra 8 gears also make a lot of difference too.
Bike speed and human perception of speed and bike handling is so so fascinating. Thanks for another reality check :)
I won't get stressed when I pack my cannon 6D, a few lenses, and my tripod. :) It is about fun and relaxation.