's Forum Archives - General

Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )

Stupid "Lightweight" bike projects.(4 posts)

Stupid "Lightweight" bike projects.alansutton
Jun 30, 2003 1:05 PM
Seems like every year people start these "lightweight" bike projects. This weekend I saw a few of these "projects". The bike is built with a hodge-podge of parts, alloy bolts, drilled out everything and because nothing but a one-ride death trap. Anyone one else notice the same? What's the point in spending so much time and money into a project that will get out on maybe one ride?
the trick is bothDougSloan
Jun 30, 2003 1:15 PM
The trick is to get light and reliable, which means major bucks.

I think people who are seriously into light stuff have the bucks and do it more for the hobby and bragging rights than serious performance gains.

I like light, but would not sacrafice reliability too much.

Some after market parts are just as reliable as stock, like some SRP ti bolts. Just follow appropriate installation procedures.

Can be fun. . .Mike P
Jul 1, 2003 5:50 AM
Last year I built up a new bike. I wanted to see if it was possible to build a light-weight bike without spending a fortune. Not including a cost for the time I spent looking for parts, I was able to put together a sub 16 pound bike for under 1600.00. No trick stuff, no drilling, just good parts and a bit of time. Altec 2+ frame, Look HSC3 fork, Deda stem and bars, Dura Ace components, Alien seatpost, and Am. Classics wheelset. I'd say I have around 8,000 miles on it so far with no problems (I know, I most likely jinxed myself with that one).

Why a light bike? I don't know. Most poeple can't tell a bikes weight by looking at it. There have been many posts on this site related to the pros and cons of weight reduction, which I have followed with interest. It seems, in the end, there is a general "proof" lighter does not give you any noticable advantage. I disagree. We can go to websites and see the wattage requirements to make it up X hill in Y amount of time with a 20lb bike is not that different than would be required on a 16lb bike. The four additional pounds may not make much difference if power output is constant but the power I can put out decreases as the elevation gains start adding up. I don't have any numbers but I would say after 10,000 feet of elevation gain I feel, in some cases, to only have 50 percent the power I did at the start of the hill. In my own little brain, four pounds makes a difference; and it's just my perception.

Is this to say weight reduction is better than going aero? No! Do you have to spend a furtune to decrease the weight of your bike? Certainly not. Will it make your bike less safe to ride? No. My next project will be an attempt to build a bike concentrating on aerodynamics with a bit of light-weight thrown in. And of course I will see how little I can spend doing it.

re: Stupid "Lightweight" bike projects.Akirasho
Jul 1, 2003 6:24 AM

Be the bike.