|anyone use a scale to weigh components?||rufus|
Oct 15, 2003 6:46 PM
|and if so, what scale do you use?|
Oct 15, 2003 7:50 PM
|MyWeigh 6001T. The best scale for bike use.|
|re: anyone use a scale to weigh components?||scorpionking|
Oct 15, 2003 7:56 PM
|Unless you are racing in the TDF or the Giro what's the point? Is the few grams you save or spend time measuring on a bike gonna make you suddenly a much better racer? Nope.|
|correct but hopeless...||C-40|
Oct 16, 2003 5:06 AM
|Weight weenies seem to think that a few ounces off their bike is somehow more important than reducing a few pounds from their body.
I've dropped my weight this year from a normal 135-138 to 131-132, a reduction that's greater than a good frame and fork combined. Hasn't worked any miracles on my mountain climbing abilities. To think that a few ounces would make a measureable improvement is silly.
I guess weighing parts gives folks something to occupy their time and complain about when the parts weigh more than advertised.
|It's a form of competition.||dzrider|
Oct 16, 2003 5:57 AM
|Buying the lightest parts is kind of like the contests to see who has the loudest sound system in their trunk. Few of us can compete and win races. More of us can compete and win shopping. Ever catch a guy and have him tell you how light his bike is? It's made me wonder each time it's happened because I'd be reluctant to admit being caught by an old guy while I'm riding my ultra-light bike.|
Oct 16, 2003 6:32 AM
|It's sort of a hobby, too. I've been there. It's fun to see how light you can get.
Also, http://www.analyticcycling.com is partially to blame. If you plug in weight numbers racing up a hill, it will tell you objectively how much faster you'll be with less weight. The physics are real, even if not outcome determinative. With less weight, you *will* be faster up a hill. That being the case, it's hard to imagine why anyone would want to carry extra weight up a hill (in a race).
|Not just competition||asgelle|
Oct 16, 2003 9:03 AM
|Component, especially wheel, weights can be useful for choosing equipment for races. My example: race is coming up, 26 miles 5,000 ft. climbing. First 13 miles rolling last 13 steady 3500 ft. climb. Should I use lightweight Mavic Gel 330 wheels with AC hubs or deep Zipp 440's for the aero benefit.
Got your answer.
I weighed the two sets and found the Zipp's were only 10 gms heavier. Knowing that made the choice obvious. Without the scale, I would have guessed the difference was much more making the choice harder.
|The point is||pedalAZ|
Oct 16, 2003 7:51 AM
|that if you enjoy the sport enough to care about the quality of your equipment, it means you are eventually going to drop some serious money on the frame and components. So, if you are choosing between 2 or 3 candidates for a stem replacement, crankset, wheelset, etc., why not take the lightest of the three, all else being equal (or in the ballpark)? With a scale, you can weed out the liars among the manufacturers. Keeping track of what your bike really weighs is part of the knowledge about your equipment that keeps you interested and educated in the sport.|
|Yes, and why nor?||glia|
Oct 16, 2003 6:41 AM
|Just let everyone have their individual pleasures without bashing! If swapping components and making your bike lighter makes you happy and you can still have food on the table why not? You don't have to become faster because your bike is lighter. How many of you spend hundereds of $ on those good looking jerseys and bib shorts? And why shouldn't you? I believe that those of you (us) who get enjoyment out of the equipment will most likely ride even more often and will infact improve even at the amateur level. So my theory is that if that new 100g stem makes you wanna ride more, the enhanced training will pay off. One aspect that drew me away from running into biking is the added element of technology. And yes, I do weigh my components with my wife's grocery scale and yes, I am appauled by the dishonesty in the bike industry. They all advertise weights that are lower than actual weights. Be aware of the Italians in particular. How about that Stella Azzurra Alloy stem that should weigh 125g and comes out to be 190g without shim? Just one example. Have fun!|
|i ask because||rufus|
Oct 16, 2003 9:06 AM
|I just ordered a scale myself, the my weigh i5000. not that i'm a weight weenie, cause i know that i can stand to lose a ton of weight myself. just that when building up the new bike, i'd like to see exactly how much it weighs, not just have a general idea. similarly, i know that component weights are based on the lightest available configuration, like say, an 11-21 cassette or 170mm cranks. i'd like to see what the 13-29 cassette i've got weighs.
should i stick with this model, or try to change it for the 6000 that you have?
Oct 16, 2003 12:45 PM
|The 5000 holds 5 KG, and the 6001 holds up to 6KG. So that decision is kind of up to you, depending on how much you need to weigh. Neither will support a full, built up bike. The "T" suffix adds that "tare" function, allowing you to place a holding container on the scale, measure it, and then reset the scale to zero so you can place objects in the container and get their net weight (works for liquids, for example).
The 6001 is $40 at oldwillknott.com; the 6001T is $5 more. The 5000, at $50, has twice the sensitivity (.05 oz), but the 6001 is already accurate to 1 gram. The 5000 also has a counting feature, if you want to count a bowl of plastic caps or something (weigh a sample set of 20, then add by the handfull until you get the display up to the "count" you want). Overkill for bike use, IMHO, but useful in the kitchen???
|actually, i think the "t" stands for transparent||rufus|
Oct 16, 2003 4:12 PM
|for the plastic platform that makes it look like a george foreman grill. ;)
anyway, i ordered from saveonscales.com and they already shipped the i5000. after seeing your post, it looked like the 6001 might be better for bike stuff because of the bigger platform, but it's not that much bigger. either one should do fine i guess. i emailed them about possibly changing my order, but they told me it had already shipped. if i can send it back cheap and get the 6001 i may do so, as the rubberized platform would be good for keping small parts from rolling away. if not i'll keep the i5000. and like you say, maybe if i get serious about dieting, the bowl and ability to count may come in handy in the kitchen.
|What else would you use to weigh things? (nm)||Kerry Irons|
Oct 16, 2003 4:25 PM
|Well...For those who want to make things difficult||Atombomber|
Oct 17, 2003 9:25 PM
|To find the mass, one could measure the volume of a certain object and then multipy that to the density of that same object. D=m/v therefore m=D*v. It is a heck of a lot easier to plop something onto a scale though.|
|Any good digital postal scale from Staples (nm)||AJS|
Oct 19, 2003 8:10 AM