Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Blog NEW Galleries NEW FAQ Contact About
It is currently Thu Aug 25, 2016 12:33 am
Recently the board software has been updated and there are some known bugs/failures:
- Avatars are currently not being displayed ✔ FIXED
- Tapatalk connection is currently broken ✔ FIXED
- Avatars cannot be uploaded ✔ FIXED

Please note that we will soon do some changes in WW board template design in case to get a fully mobile/desktop responsiveness board!
If you find more errors please post it here: http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=139062


All times are UTC+01:00





Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 5:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 11:32 pm
Posts: 224
Location: san francisco ca. usa
Comfort. Stability. Lightness. Strength. Reliability. I like bikes, I like to ride them but I especially like very light weight weenie bikes. Comfort: the bike just feels comfortable to ride and has to do with feeling relaxed on the bike, not having to worry about something breaking. Stability: The bike feels steady and firm, especially on decents and through tight turns. Lightness: The bike is light and feels light. But what is light for me may not be the same for a heavier rider or a bike ridden on very rough roads etc. Strength: Just the quality of being strong, the ability to last or resist breaking. Reliable: Is similar to strength but also has to do with shifting, brakeing etc. If my parts are so light that they don't work very well then its not enjoyable to ride anymore. Can one really have all these qualities in a very light bike, because cycling is to enjoy, or is the bike to light?


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 10:58 am 
Offline
Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2004 11:08 am
Posts: 6759
Location: Urbana, Illinois
The reliability and functionality are definitely important. Both have caused my bike to go heavier or lighter at times.

So has companies going out of business and concern about replacement parts or companies discontinuing a component such as the Zipp VumaQuads. Once again the concern is about availability of parts in the future. Availability needs to be there too.

_________________
RESIDENT GRUMPY OLD MAN.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 1:45 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:38 am
Posts: 1946
Location: Dutchess County, NY
I've had my bike down to almost 5 kg and it now sits at about 5.4, 5.5 kg. In the past 2-3 years I haven't had any reliability issues w/ the parts on my bike, but I have moved to some slightly heavier components because I've hit the point where I'd much rather spend the time riding instead of working on it. The biggest change was having a set of carbon clincher wheels built-- at about 1175g they are lighter than most/many tubular sets but it's a lot more convenient to go out on long rides w/ a spare tube than to have to carry pitstop and/or a spare tubular. Since I had those wheels built my tubular set (990g) has sat dormant.

I've also switched out a few parts for comfort and fit, the bike is still superlight, now I can just spend more time on it!

_________________
Speedplay is the devil!


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 2:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 11:32 pm
Posts: 224
Location: san francisco ca. usa
I agree with both of you. For those of us who like light bikes, of course availability of parts is important and yes we want to ride and enjoy our weight weenie bikes and so reliability is a very important quality. Each of us, as we go on with our very light bikes, make some changes, or maybe we don't always use our lightest wheels, but still have a bike we can enjoy and is safe.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 3:18 pm 
Offline
Shop Owner

Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:58 am
Posts: 700
One quality is can I work on it? Can it be disassembled/repaired? Can I get parts? Nothing worst than paying someone to do a crappy job. I can do a crappy job for free with a beer in hand. Obviously, I have to feel safe about what I am riding when approaching higher speeds.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 5:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 4:43 pm
Posts: 5350
Location: Wherever there's a mountain beckoning to be climbed
The one essential quality of a weight weenie bike is ... light weight.

The other mentioned attributes might be important to various riders, but light weight is the one essential quantity which defines a weight weenie bike. The others might be nice to haves, and to some people, more important than, or to be balanced with, weight, but if so, such people may be optimum life-cycle design balance weenies*, not necessarily weight weenies.

* OLCDBW's


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 11:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 11:32 pm
Posts: 224
Location: san francisco ca. usa
I agree Hammer Time, what we are talking about is a weight weenie bike and weight is most important to me. If the UCI did not have a weight limit I'm sure many pro's would be on a lighter bike, some on weight weenie bikes. What if they made the weight rule according to one's body weight, I don't remember the main reason for 6.8. Maybe someone who weighs 120 to 130 lbs. could have a 5.3 k bike, someone 130 to 140 a 5.9 k bike, someone 140 to 150 a 6.1 k bike, etc. or some kind of percentage rule. Should a small rider have to drag a heavy bike up a long climb if their power output is not the same as a bigger rider, or does the extra weight of a bigger rider cancel that out, I don't know but at 138 lbs. I feel that I can ride a lighter bike than if I weighed 150 lbs. Just a thought.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 11:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 4:43 pm
Posts: 5350
Location: Wherever there's a mountain beckoning to be climbed
I agree donald. Have you been peeking at my first ever post on Weight Weenies, almost 8 years ago?
On May 4, 2006 in When does the 6.8kg rule apply?, HammerTime2 wrote:
I think the 6.8 kg limit is unfair to light and/or short riders. If a heavier and/or taller rider can get his bike down to 6.8 kg while still being safe, reliable, and functioning well, then the light/short riders are suffering a performance penalty for not being able to get their bike weight below 6.8 kg. For the same safety, reliability, and functionality, lighter/smaller riders would/should have a lighter bike, and even then may have a higher bike weight to rider weight ratio than heavier/taller riders.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 12:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:56 pm
Posts: 736
I agree with Hammer. The primary quality of a WW bike is light weight, nothing else. Everything else is secondary. If that isn't the main focus of the bike build, then it's not a weight weenie bike in my opinion. Yes, you want it to be as functional and as durable as possible. I weight 210lbs and I'm building a CAAD10 that's going to weight under 6.2kg, and all the parts can handle my weight. Strength is not compromised.

_________________
6.24kg CAAD10


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 2:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 11:32 pm
Posts: 224
Location: san francisco ca. usa
Hammer Time, I didn't remember your post, I'm sure I saw it back then and I know it had been talked about, you said it better than I could. In past years I have talked to and shown my weight weenie bike to many pro racers. All said my bike would be to light for them but many said they would like to race on a lighter bike. Drainyoo, I feel your CAAD 10 will be a weight weenie bike. I look forward to seeing it. Also I think many of us remember a time when pro's didn't have to wear a helmet when racing. That was just dangerous.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Mar 25, 2014 6:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Posts: 5480
Location: Athens, Greece
For me it's all about liveliness

_________________
My 6696gr Cipollini Bond
My 8618gr Colnago Master X-light


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Mar 25, 2014 10:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:04 am
Posts: 2690
Location: Mississippi
Obviously weight is the main factor, but I think it should be relative to the build. By that I mean that a steel build that is approaching 7kg is pretty impressive. It would be just as much of a feat to get a steel frame bike to 6.8 as it would be to get an ultralight carbon frame to 5kg......ya know what I mean?

_________________
Mosaic RS-1
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=138478

Cielo by Chris King Cross Racer
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=134376


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 11:32 pm
Posts: 224
Location: san francisco ca. usa
I agree btompkins, I feel weight is the main factor. A 6.8 lb., or maybe even a little less than that, would be light for steel. I feel the five qualities are about our experience on the bike, and in general, whatever roads or conditions we encounter, a weight weenie bike should perform very, very well. It should provide us with a very enjoyable experience.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Mar 26, 2014 8:31 am 
Offline
in the industry
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 11:14 am
Posts: 1429
Location: SYD
A usable light bike is my mission. I like descending and am
Around 85kgs. @ 5.3kgs my bike is usable as a daily ride machine. If I was 20kgs less I could use some lighter stuff with out breaking stuff but for me the present spec is usable with out any dramas at my weight

_________________
Skunkworks Bikes


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Mar 26, 2014 11:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:56 pm
Posts: 736
btompkins0112 wrote:
Obviously weight is the main factor, but I think it should be relative to the build. By that I mean that a steel build that is approaching 7kg is pretty impressive. It would be just as much of a feat to get a steel frame bike to 6.8 as it would be to get an ultralight carbon frame to 5kg......ya know what I mean?


I would also say rider weight and height is a factor as well. I'm 95kg and 6ft, and my CAAD10 build is going to be around 6.15kg. If I were weighed less and were shorter, I could have easily gotten the bike under 6kg. I had to consider parts that would stand up to my weight, and also considering my height, frames for my size also weigh more.

_________________
6.24kg CAAD10


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. Weight weenie C40 Colnago

[ Go to page: 1 2 ]

in Road

Beancouter

16

808

Thu Apr 14, 2016 10:50 pm

Mockenrue View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. With which accessories do you measure your bike weight?

in Road

Epic5253

8

604

Wed Jan 06, 2016 6:38 am

Epic5253 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. how much does the bike weight matter at the elite level?

[ Go to page: 1 2 ]

in Road

spectastic

22

1670

Mon Apr 04, 2016 2:41 pm

wheelsONfire View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Need to lower bike weight, collecting thoughts, advice.....

in Road

eyedrop

3

465

Thu Apr 14, 2016 8:07 am

AJS914 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. My weenie project

in Introduce Yourself / Gallery - Please use metric weights.

Nimit

2

729

Sun Jun 12, 2016 3:29 am

Nimit View the latest post


All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited