Weight Weenies

Madcow, many thanks for adding Ultegra 6700 - much appreciated.

aaric wrote:

Permon wrote:Hm, I thought that NEW Sram RED 2012/2013 was supposed to be 200g under SR! Are we really talking about the NEW stuff 2012/2013 or 2011/2012 model year before overhaul?
Thanx for clearing it to me.

Pretty sure that these SRAM weights aren't the BB30 cranksets. From what I recall, the bb30 cranks are supposed to be significantly (50g+) lighter, but aren't really available yet (or maybe they just are becoming available?). Also, they are probably not comparing to the high end SR crank that is listed. So, not really apples to apples in this, or SRAM's marketing: I'd expect a comparison of the lightest offering, or the common offering to be consistent.

Sorry, but BB30 to BSA is not apples to apples! I think that comparing BSA to BSA version is correct. SR has titanium spindle, SRAM does not....so what? Is Campagnolo supposed to quit manufacturing it to make You happy? Maybe next time you will ask Campagnolo to stop using carbon fiber?

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com

Permon wrote:Sorry, but BB30 to BSA is not apples to apples! I think that comparing BSA to BSA version is correct. SR has titanium spindle, SRAM does not....so what? Is Campagnolo supposed to quit manufacturing it to make You happy? Maybe next time you will ask Campagnolo to stop using carbon fiber?

Fair enough, depends on what you are trying to compare. Lightest configuration of the groupset, lightest groupset in a bb30 frame or BSA, or lightest at a price point.

To me, these numbers appear intended to be a lightest to lightest comparison. A lightest BSA comparison is just fine. As would a lightest BB30 configuration. But that's the problem with comparisons, and why the manufacturers can get away with crazy numbers: They pick the niche comparison that they look best in, grab their lightest parts, and then compare them to another manufacturers off the shelf parts.

great contribution

thanks

Permon wrote:

aaric wrote:

Permon wrote:Hm, I thought that NEW Sram RED 2012/2013 was supposed to be 200g under SR! Are we really talking about the NEW stuff 2012/2013 or 2011/2012 model year before overhaul?
Thanx for clearing it to me.

Pretty sure that these SRAM weights aren't the BB30 cranksets. From what I recall, the bb30 cranks are supposed to be significantly (50g+) lighter, but aren't really available yet (or maybe they just are becoming available?). Also, they are probably not comparing to the high end SR crank that is listed. So, not really apples to apples in this, or SRAM's marketing: I'd expect a comparison of the lightest offering, or the common offering to be consistent.

Sorry, but BB30 to BSA is not apples to apples! I think that comparing BSA to BSA version is correct. SR has titanium spindle, SRAM does not....so what? Is Campagnolo supposed to quit manufacturing it to make You happy? Maybe next time you will ask Campagnolo to stop using carbon fiber?

Well what if you have a BB30 frame? SRAM loses 104g according to Zigmeister. I'm not sure how the Campy BB compares to BB30 bearings + adapters to fit the cranks, but I'm guessing it gains some weight.

notsoswift wrote:I happen to have a complete 2012 Chorus group here, just about to go on to my new bike
I will weigh it on the Weekend, though my scales don't do decimals it should give you a good place to start

Not really relevant because the list has been edited but my weights are in Blue to compare:


2012 Individual weights.

Shifters.
Campag Chorus: 340.6340

Rear Derailleurs
Campag Chorus: 186.6184

Front Derailleur
Campag Chorus: 73.176

Brake set:
Campag Chorus: 309.5316, but that includes the rubber packing stops and adjusters

Cassette, (11-23 including lockring)
Campag Chorus: 230.211-25 inc lock ring 244

Chain
Campag Chorus: 251.8258 including packaging (and instructions) as I didn't want to open the bag!

Crank w/bb and all mounting hardware
Campag Chorus: 714Crank (175mm 53/39) and bolts 696, record BB 44

Cables and electronics. (this includes cables, housing, wires, batteries, mounts and anything needed to make the brake and shifters works.)
Campag Chorus: 246.2didn't do because didn't want to unpack and I may use Alligator iLink

durkonion wrote:Well what if you have a BB30 frame? SRAM loses 104g according to Zigmeister. I'm not sure how the Campy BB compares to BB30 bearings + adapters to fit the cranks, but I'm guessing it gains some weight.

It loses a bit of weight. The BB30 convertor cups are lighter than the BSA cups. Sorry, don't know the exact weight difference. The BB86 are approx 16g lighter.

Great effort and many thanks.

However, you may want to double check the SRAM Force numbers.
The number given for the total weight (2435.6 grams) doesn't equal the sum of the listed components (which is 2458.6 grams).

All the other mechanical groupsets add up correctly to your listed total.

YOU BEAUTY !
thanks madcow, lovin it, its nice to see you not only weighted to top groupsets !

madcow wrote:Complete group weights from lightest to heaviest:
8. Sram Force, 2435.60 grams

Now being that this is WW most of the variables will be replaced with others, so lets look at just the key pieces. (removing cranks, bb, chain, brakes and cassette.) Replacing cables with an averaged light setup such as Alligator. (100 grams for brake and 60 grams for shift.)

6. Sram Force, 771.5 grams

Just adding up components from SRAM's site shows the complete force group at 1968g (albeit, without cables/housing/etc). That's not even close!? Did I miss something here or did they really overshoot their weight by over 200g?

For the core only it's 729 after adding 160g for cables but that's still 40g off.

Maybe it's just a surprise to me because I'm new to counting grams but that seems more inaccurate than I was expecting. I also used the Force example because that's what I'm building up my new bike with.

This should be a sticky. Drop the repairing tubulars thread if needed.

Many thanks Madcow
most helpful

Barrie

jordo99 wrote:

madcow wrote:Complete group weights from lightest to heaviest:
8. Sram Force, 2435.60 grams

Now being that this is WW most of the variables will be replaced with others, so lets look at just the key pieces. (removing cranks, bb, chain, brakes and cassette.) Replacing cables with an averaged light setup such as Alligator. (100 grams for brake and 60 grams for shift.)

6. Sram Force, 771.5 grams

Just adding up components from SRAM's site shows the complete force group at 1968g (albeit, without cables/housing/etc). That's not even close!? Did I miss something here or did they really overshoot their weight by over 200g?

For the core only it's 729 after adding 160g for cables but that's still 40g off.

Maybe it's just a surprise to me because I'm new to counting grams but that seems more inaccurate than I was expecting. I also used the Force example because that's what I'm building up my new bike with.

I think that the weights listed for SRAM Force on this thread are a bit off as well, for the shifters at least. I Just installed 2012 Force on my bike, and weighed the parts:
- Shifters 351g with shifter cables, I suppose set of uncut shifter cables are at least around 30g, so the shifters without cables should be around 320g or less?
- Brakes 288g
- GXP compact crankset 175mm 676g (I suppose the standard is 30g heavier?)
- GXP BB 109g
- RD 173g

The FD was Sram Red 2012 (85g with chain catcher) and with Ultegra cassette (11-23 207g) and DA chain (114 links 262g) the groupset was around 2100g without cables with the chain cut to correct lenght. But still, I don't see how you can get the GXP groupset under 2100g with SRAM cassette and chain as claimed.

I'm actually surprised the 7900 was "relatively" close. The new 9000 should eat a good portion of the lead from the others in terms of weight.

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com

Well this is good reading. Did not SRAM claim that the new Red was something like 1770g? Obviously that was lie.
I wonder how mucch Veloce and Centaur really weigh?