UCI ready to change the 6.8 kg weight limit?

Back by popular demand, the general all-things Road forum!

Moderator: robbosmans

sawyer
Posts: 4485
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:45 pm
Location: Natovi Landing

by sawyer

mattr wrote:Weight limits are easy.
Safety standards are hard, and potentially open you up to prosecution in the event of failure.


Exactly.

I recall making the same point years ago on WW to a similarly purist crowd ;-)

I strongly favour a weight minimum. It will generally help on safety, but also allows amateurs and those with far less resources to ride what the pros ride. FWIW it also helps comparability of performance, for example uphill climbs etc, accepting all the other variables as a fact of life ...

TBH I'm not convinced of the need to lower it, though clearly there is no necessary compromise in safety certainly down to 6kg

If the UCI went down to 6kg then given the desire to ride powermeters etc it probably would stimulate a bit more development of WW equipment ... and that's a good thing

BTW, for mountain stages where it matters most of the pro bikes I've seen are at or just over 6.8kg, so certainly is important, particularly for GC guys who are actually likely to attack uphill where weight matters
----------------------------------------
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!! :thumbup:

by Weenie


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

www.starbike.com



AJS914
Posts: 5397
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:52 pm

by AJS914

Can pros still resort to "drillium" or parts tuning like in the old days? Is that UCI legal?

It seems like they should just lower the weight limit a little every year. They could go with no weight limit but require commercially available off-the-shelf parts rather and specifically not allow one-off stuff and tuning.

mattr
Posts: 4671
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 6:43 pm
Location: The Grim North.

by mattr

xena wrote:Did you see all those broken Movie bikes this year?
Not all, I've been busy. ;)

eric
Posts: 2196
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:47 pm
Location: Santa Cruz, California, USA
Contact:

by eric

AJS914 wrote:Can pros still resort to "drillium" or parts tuning like in the old days? Is that UCI legal?


Yes, except frames and wheels have to have UCI approval stickers on them.

AJS914 wrote:It seems like they should just lower the weight limit a little every year. They could go with no weight limit but require commercially available off-the-shelf parts rather and specifically not allow one-off stuff and tuning.


That would require race officials to inspect each bike, to know what's off the shelf and search for mods. That's too difficult.

AJS914
Posts: 5397
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:52 pm

by AJS914

There are already a ton of bike specific rules including weight. I'm sure they are not checking every bike at every race against every rule. Another loosely enforced rule wouldn't hurt.

Some riders have had their bikes checked for motors!

eric
Posts: 2196
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:47 pm
Location: Santa Cruz, California, USA
Contact:

by eric

Interesting interview with the UCI technical manager: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/q-and-a ... ght-limit/

sounds promising.

andrewfelix
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 7:43 am

by andrewfelix

xena wrote:There should be no weight limit. Simple. Long as safety regs are meet who cares.
The desperation of companies/media banging on about disc brakes in order to sell a shed load of new products. Its all a bunch of K%k
Lets be honest disc's are not needed just like electronic is not needed. Its all just a media driven gimmick to make more money. I laugh at posters who say they are going to hang on from buying a bike in case disc becomes "the norm"
Let all those rich fat weekend warriors spend all their money on another gimmick.
I doubt we will ever see a pro rider on a 9/10 lb bike now.


The bike industry as we know it wouldn't exist without a market of rich fat guys and gimmicks. Take the good with the bad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

xena
Banned
Posts: 1149
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:49 pm

by xena

andrewfelix wrote:
xena wrote:There should be no weight limit. Simple. Long as safety regs are meet who cares.
The desperation of companies/media banging on about disc brakes in order to sell a shed load of new products. Its all a bunch of K%k
Lets be honest disc's are not needed just like electronic is not needed. Its all just a media driven gimmick to make more money. I laugh at posters who say they are going to hang on from buying a bike in case disc becomes "the norm"
Let all those rich fat weekend warriors spend all their money on another gimmick.
I doubt we will ever see a pro rider on a 9/10 lb bike now.


The bike industry as we know it wouldn't exist without a market of rich fat guys and gimmicks. Take the good with the bad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Don't forget there was a industry before Armstrong, just not as big.
If Sky used disposable bike helmets made of Chris Froome's ear wax, some people [cash idiots] would buy them and hark on about the aerodynamic advantage of ear wax while taking 10 hours to finish a 100 mile sportive.
Xena a demi god among the digital demimonde that is WW community

http://i.imgur.com/hL5v3ai.jpg

https://www.flickr.com/photos/131970499@N02/

User avatar
mythical
Posts: 1515
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:49 am
Location: Europe
Contact:

by mythical

The UCI already dictates that material used in events falling under their jurisdiction should comply with CEN-EN safety standards. If they adopt the new ISO-FDIS and then drop the weight limit altogether, this would ensure rider safety and eliminate the emphasis on the weight association. If equipment is tested and certified as safe, why wouldn't a rider be allowed to race a, say, sub-4kg bike?
“I always find it amazing that a material can actually sell a product when it’s really the engineering that creates and dictates how well that material will behave or perform.” — Chuck Teixeira

BmanX
Posts: 3841
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 5:31 pm

by BmanX

I agree with others that they should be enforcing safety standards and no weight limits. If a manufacturer can prove their products meet the safety standards set out by the UCI then I say no limits at all.
BIG DADDY B FLOW
AERO & LIGHT is RIGHT for 2 decades

thprice
Posts: 252
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 6:34 am

by thprice

Suggest also that the ICU should not be in the business of certifying bikes or bike parts.
Bikes and bike parts should be approved by the manufacturer in accordance to a recognized safety standard (ISO, CEN or similar) only.

BmanX
Posts: 3841
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 5:31 pm

by BmanX

I totally agree and that is what I was meaning to say that they should have regulations for safety and if bikes and bike parts meet those specifications then it is free game on the weight.
BIG DADDY B FLOW
AERO & LIGHT is RIGHT for 2 decades


sawyer
Posts: 4485
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:45 pm
Location: Natovi Landing

by sawyer

With no weight limit, pro bikes would disappear out of sight for most amateurs. A 6.8kg bike is not exactly cheap as it stands, but it's affordable for many.
----------------------------------------
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!! :thumbup:

Delorre
Posts: 967
Joined: Sat May 24, 2014 12:09 pm

by Delorre

sawyer wrote:With no weight limit, pro bikes would disappear out of sight for most amateurs. A 6.8kg bike is not exactly cheap as it stands, but it's affordable for many.


This has nothing to do with weight. The Sky bikes are around 12.000€ f.ex, while the Canyon ones are more like 7000€, all on the 7kg frontier... Do you really think the Sky bikes (or other already >10.000) would become even more expensive by a lot? Don't think so, and, speaking for myself, the are already for out of budget!

by Weenie


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

www.starbike.com



Post Reply