Then what are you doing on Weight Weenies?

To be fair, it seems this forum has evolved into a broader purpose and discussing high-end bike equipment in general.

Also, not caring about a little weight on some parts doesn't necessarily mean not caring about weight on other parts. Most people make some compromises instead of focusing on just minimizing weight.




This argument is faulty since weight saved is weight saved. Both riders can go to the toilet, and the guy with the lighter bike all else equal will have the advantage of lower weight, no matter how tiny it might be.

_________________
Flickr
2012 Cannondale CAAD10

I bet they also weren't too concerned because of the UCI weight limit, these bikes are for the pros after all. I bet a dogma2 can be built to 15lb right? So Pinarello dedicated to constructing a nicely riding frame instead since they didn't see a point in pushing the weight.


I could be full of shit.

The pro bikes come in bang on 6.8kg with the Srm's on, so they must be using lighter bits and bobs IMO.

_________________
Follow me on twitter:- MrAliBongo

this scenario only happens when racing bicycles on the internet.

A little over 300 years ago Sir Isaac Newton came up with a brilliant idea that changed the course of cycling history. He figured out that the energy required to climb a hill is directly related to the weight of the bike and rider.

Newton changed cycling forever. Before Newton, many riders would go around saying crap like “once the bike weight is down to 14 lbs making it even lighter has no effect”.

Now thanks to Newton we can easily tell who was listening in physics class and who was sleeping.

The more you carry up a hill, the harder you have to pedal.