Advice: Building a 20 lb. Hardtail XC Mountain Bike

[Hans W. Gruenig]

Howdy,

Someone stole my trusty (heavily modified) Trek 930 last month that
I'd been riding since 1992. I've been out of the 'gear' loop for
years now. I'd like to build a 20 lb. Hardtail XC Mountain Bike
that's rigid, smooth, and durable (possibly with two wheel sets: one
mountain and one road -- kind of like the Cannondale Bad Boy Ultra,
but lighter).

I'd appreciate any input based on experience.

(1) Suggestions on reasonably priced lightweight frames?

(1a) How is Cannondale's current "Optimo Mountain" frame?

(1b) What about Cannondale's 2001 "CAAD5" frame? (Is there a problem
with fitting new brakes on this frame -- say, the Avid Ball Bearing
Disc Brake? I ask because I've read: "The 4 bolt rotors suck big time
if you want to get new wheels, or brakes." and "Cannondale's use of
only 4 rotor screw to secure the Hayes Discs to their hubs are not
good nor secure as the standard 6 rotor screw set-up.")

(2) Suggestions on light, durable, quality component sets?

(2a) I like a bike that doesn't require constant fiddling. Are disc
brakes worth the trouble?

Many thanks,
-Hans.

--
rec.bicycles.off-road is moderated by volunteers. To find help solving
posting problems, or contact the moderators, please see http://rbor.org/
Please read the charter before posting: http://rbor.org/rbor_charter.txt

 

[mark_kendrick]

I'm pretty fond of my new discs and crosslands. They are not as light as v-brakes though and give no more stopping power. They are better under light braking. Modulation of braking force is much more precise. They are resistant to wheel tweaking.. if you warp a wheel a bit the brakes won't drag. They also aren't easily fouled by mud.

My '98/99 CAAD3 is topping about 26lb on a 22" frame. I don't try to save weight on the crank and bottom bracket (i top the scales at 256#). I also run a dual crown fork.

With a good light fork (-1-2lb), a 19" frame(.5lb) it would be easy to build a 22-24lb bike without any reliability issues.

throw in a Ti bottom bracket and a carbon or XTR crankset (the new ones come with their own bracket) and you could save a bit more.

gotta run.
Mark

 

[TJ]

"Hans W. Gruenig" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Howdy,
>
> Someone stole my trusty (heavily modified) Trek 930 last month that
> I'd been riding since 1992. I've been out of the 'gear' loop for
> years now. I'd like to build a 20 lb. Hardtail XC Mountain Bike
> that's rigid, smooth, and durable (possibly with two wheel sets: one
> mountain and one road -- kind of like the Cannondale Bad Boy Ultra,
> but lighter).
>
> I'd appreciate any input based on experience.
>
> (1) Suggestions on reasonably priced lightweight frames?
>
> (1a) How is Cannondale's current "Optimo Mountain" frame?
>
> (1b) What about Cannondale's 2001 "CAAD5" frame? (Is there a problem
> with fitting new brakes on this frame -- say, the Avid Ball Bearing
> Disc Brake? I ask because I've read: "The 4 bolt rotors suck big time
> if you want to get new wheels, or brakes." and "Cannondale's use of
> only 4 rotor screw to secure the Hayes Discs to their hubs are not
> good nor secure as the standard 6 rotor screw set-up.")
>
> (2) Suggestions on light, durable, quality component sets?
>
> (2a) I like a bike that doesn't require constant fiddling. Are disc
> brakes worth the trouble?
>
> Many thanks,
> -Hans.
>
> --
> rec.bicycles.off-road is moderated by volunteers. To find help solving
> posting problems, or contact the moderators, please see http://rbor.org/
> Please read the charter before posting: http://rbor.org/rbor_charter.txt
>
I guess you have been out of the gear loop. I think if you shoot for low
weight you will be sacrificing durability. There are a lot of good products
to spec a fully rigid bike. But you may be spending a lot o cash to get a
sub 20 pound bike. But hey...spend that money. Your LBS could use it.

TJ
www.fatboy.s5.com
www.gvii.net/hundtoft



--
rec.bicycles.off-road is moderated by volunteers. To find help solving
posting problems, or contact the moderators, please see http://rbor.org/
Please read the charter before posting: http://rbor.org/rbor_charter.txt

 

[Ozman Trad]

"mark_kendrick" <[email protected]> wrote
in message

> With a good light fork (-1-2lb), a 19" frame(.5lb) it would be easy to
> build a 22-24lb bike without any reliability issues.

he's right - my headshok C'dale (http://www.ozmantrad.com/mi_bika.jpg)
weighs in at 21lbs - its all XTR

My bike is light AND strong

to go a pound lighter I could only see that happening with a carbon fibre
frameset

 

[Charles Beristain]

On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 07:24:15 CST, [email protected] (Hans W. Gruenig)
wrote:


>(1a) How is Cannondale's current "Optimo Mountain" frame?

it is an excellent frame... and it is rugged as well.
>
>(1b) What about Cannondale's 2001 "CAAD5" frame? (Is there a problem
>with fitting new brakes on this frame -- say, the Avid Ball Bearing
>Disc Brake? I ask because I've read: "The 4 bolt rotors suck big time
>if you want to get new wheels, or brakes." and "Cannondale's use of
>only 4 rotor screw to secure the Hayes Discs to their hubs are not
>good nor secure as the standard 6 rotor screw set-up.")

caad4 and caad 5 are excellent frames... my caad 4 has magura
hydraulic disc brakes ... the newer cannondales don't use the 4 bolt
design, and use any of the standard brakes like hayes, magura, etc.

>
>(2) Suggestions on light, durable, quality component sets?
mid to top of the line from any of the component mfgrs will be both
light weight and durable. I like SRAM rocket twist shifters as they
are light weight and seem less likely to get bent/broken when
crashing.

>(2a) I like a bike that doesn't require constant fiddling. Are disc
>brakes worth the trouble?
definitely worth it... expecially if you ride in wet/muddy conditions.
no more fiddling than with V brakes.
>
charlie

 

[Monique Y. Mudama]

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.mountain-bike.] On 2004-08-03, Charles
Beristain penned:
> On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 07:24:15 CST, [email protected] (Hans W. Gruenig)
> wrote:
>
>>(2a) I like a bike that doesn't require constant fiddling. Are disc
>>brakes worth the trouble?
> definitely worth it... expecially if you ride in wet/muddy conditions.
> no more fiddling than with V brakes.

And unlike v-brakes, you can't forget to re-attach your front brake
after putting on your front wheel!

I recently (1-2 months ago) got a new bike with disc, and I definitely
appreciate it. My hands get less tired and it's easier to brake "just a
little bit" (brake modulation). I've had to fiddle with the caliper
adjustments a bit to get their distance set just right, but it's
extremely easy to do (two big knobs; no tools required).

--
monique

"Get a bicycle. You will not regret it, if you live."
-- Mark Twain

--
rec.bicycles.off-road is moderated by volunteers. To find help solving
posting problems, or contact the moderators, please see http://rbor.org/
Please read the charter before posting: http://rbor.org/rbor_charter.txt

 

[Hans W. Gruenig]

(I'm reposting this since my original response seems to have failed.)

Thanks to everyone for feedback. It sounds like 22 lbs or so would be
more realistic.

> caad4 and caad 5 are excellent frames... my caad 4 has magura
> hydraulic disc brakes ... the newer cannondales don't use the 4 bolt
> design, and use any of the standard brakes like hayes, magura, etc.

Are Avid Mechanical Disc Brake rotors available for cannondale CODA 4
bolt hub? Will the Avid Mechanical Disc Brakes mount ok on a 2001
CAAD 5 frame?

I ask because I spotted a 2001 Cannondale F2000si with 2 wheel sets
(road and mountain) for sale in an auction. The owner states that
the bike has only been used for training and leisure riding, that it's
never been raced or crashed, and that it's in excellent condition save two
or three tiny scratches. (Specs below.)

Any advice? What's a reasonable price to pay for it? Roughly how
much would it cost to upgrade to Avid Mechanical Disc Brakes from the
(apparently reviled) Magura Louise brakes?

Many thanks,
-Hans G.

frame: caad5 extra large
shock: fatty ultra
brakes: magura louise
derallieurs: xt front xtr rear
crankset: cannondale expert 2x9
chain: shimano 9spd
rear cassette: shimano xt, with alloy carrier and lx cassette on
mountain set.
bottom bracket: shimano dura ace, i think
wheelset mountain: sunrims disk, dt spokes coda four bolt disk hubs.
wheelset road: alex rims dt butted spokes, shimano deore and xt 6 bolt
disk hubs built at my local performance bike shop. by ted
headset: cannondale system integration
stem: profile stiffy
handlebars: easton ea70 lightweight
shifters: shimano xt
brake levers: magura louise
computer: specialized
barends: specialized
seatpost: cannondale expert, similar to thompson, similar weight.
seat: awesome trico sports split rail seat. adjustable width for all
day comfort. it really does work!!!
road tires: maxxis detonator. almost brand new.
mountain tires:  brand new hutchinson alligator gold. never even
ridden on them.
pump: cannondale

 

[JD]

mark_kendrick <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> My '98/99 CAAD3 is topping about 26lb on a 22" frame. I don't try to
> save weight on the crank and bottom bracket (i top the scales at 256#).
> I also run a dual crown fork.
>
> With a good light fork (-1-2lb), a 19" frame(.5lb) it would be easy to
> build a 22-24lb bike without any reliability issues.

At your weight that's a joke, especially on a crapandfail. I'd give
it six months max under regular use until it breaks. Now if you are
just into posing at trailheads, I'm sure it'll last a long time.

JD

 

[R.White]

[email protected] (JD) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> mark_kendrick <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > My '98/99 CAAD3 is topping about 26lb on a 22" frame. I don't try to
> > save weight on the crank and bottom bracket (i top the scales at 256#).
> > I also run a dual crown fork.
> >
> > With a good light fork (-1-2lb), a 19" frame(.5lb) it would be easy to
> > build a 22-24lb bike without any reliability issues.
>
> At your weight that's a joke, especially on a crapandfail. I'd give
> it six months max under regular use until it breaks. Now if you are
> just into posing at trailheads, I'm sure it'll last a long time.

Mark,

Don't listen to someone who has never owned one.

I weighed 248 when I had a CAAD3 and never had any problems.
Remember C-Dale has a lifetime warranty while others only carry
a 5 year warranty. The Cannondale shop where I worked
only had one C-dale frame that broke in the 10 years they were a
dealer.

For some reason the people who preach that a person shouldn't
fall for the positive hype concerning a particular bike are the same
people who believe and preach the negative hype of the same product.

 

[Ozman Trad]

"R.White" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] (JD) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > mark_kendrick <[email protected]>
wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > > My '98/99 CAAD3 is topping about 26lb on a 22" frame. I don't try to
> > > save weight on the crank and bottom bracket (i top the scales at
256#).
> > > I also run a dual crown fork.
> > >
> > > With a good light fork (-1-2lb), a 19" frame(.5lb) it would be easy to
> > > build a 22-24lb bike without any reliability issues.
> >
> > At your weight that's a joke, especially on a crapandfail. I'd give
> > it six months max under regular use until it breaks. Now if you are
> > just into posing at trailheads, I'm sure it'll last a long time.
>
> Mark,
>
> Don't listen to someone who has never owned one.

> For some reason the people who preach that a person shouldn't
> fall for the positive hype concerning a particular bike are the same
> people who believe and preach the negative hype of the same product.

exactly - wut he said

 

[pauly]

On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 16:15:37 -0700, R.White wrote
(in article <[email protected]>):

> [email protected] (JD) wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>> mark_kendrick <[email protected]> wrote
>> in message news:<[email protected]>...
>>> My '98/99 CAAD3 is topping about 26lb on a 22" frame. I don't try to
>>> save weight on the crank and bottom bracket (i top the scales at 256#).
>>> I also run a dual crown fork.
>>>
>>> With a good light fork (-1-2lb), a 19" frame(.5lb) it would be easy to
>>> build a 22-24lb bike without any reliability issues.
>>
>> At your weight that's a joke, especially on a crapandfail. I'd give
>> it six months max under regular use until it breaks. Now if you are
>> just into posing at trailheads, I'm sure it'll last a long time.
>
> Mark,
>
> Don't listen to someone who has never owned one.
>
> I weighed 248 when I had a CAAD3 and never had any problems.
> Remember C-Dale has a lifetime warranty while others only carry
> a 5 year warranty. The Cannondale shop where I worked
> only had one C-dale frame that broke in the 10 years they were a
> dealer.
>
> For some reason the people who preach that a person shouldn't
> fall for the positive hype concerning a particular bike are the same
> people who believe and preach the negative hype of the same product.

fwiw I've been riding a '99 caad 3 for the last 4+ years without a problem
with the frame, I had the head shock replaced under warranty last year. I'm
well into the clyde zone. I do agree with JD that getting it down to 22 lb
would mean a unacceptable compromise in component durability.

Paul

 

[Charles Beristain]

On 6 Aug 2004 14:01:59 -0700, [email protected] (Hans W. Gruenig)
wrote:

>from the
>(apparently reviled) Magura Louise brakes?

"apparently reviled" is the operative phrase.... Louise are great
brakes... i think you would be trading down to go with avids.

charlie

 

[Chalo]

[email protected] (JD) wrote:

> At your weight that's a joke, especially on a crapandfail. I'd give
> it six months max under regular use until it breaks. Now if you are
> just into posing at trailheads, I'm sure it'll last a long time.

I have ridden tens of thousands of miles on several Cannondales at
weights from 230 lbs. to 400 lbs., and I only ever had one fail
without extenuating circumstances (e.g. crashes or previous repairs).
In my experience, the reliability of Cannondale bikes surpasses any
other kind of bike I have ridden. They cope with heavy riders
especially well IMO.

Chalo Colina

 

[supabonbon]

mark_kendrick <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> I'm pretty fond of my new discs and crosslands. They are not as light as
> v-brakes though and give no more stopping power. They are better under
> light braking. Modulation of braking force is much more precise. They
> are resistant to wheel tweaking.. if you warp a wheel a bit the brakes
> won't drag. They also aren't easily fouled by mud.
>
> My '98/99 CAAD3 is topping about 26lb on a 22" frame. I don't try to
> save weight on the crank and bottom bracket (i top the scales at 256#).
> I also run a dual crown fork.
>
> With a good light fork (-1-2lb), a 19" frame(.5lb) it would be easy to
> build a 22-24lb bike without any reliability issues.
>
> throw in a Ti bottom bracket and a carbon or XTR crankset (the new ones
> come with their own bracket) and you could save a bit more.
>
> gotta run.
> Mark

You're absolutely correct my big buddy!

I'm only 210lbs, but my 22lb'er works great. And it was a lot cheaper
to do that many idiots in this group would have you think.
First, I removed every third spoke from those overbuilt Rolfs.
Then, I sawed off 1.5" of the 2" of seatpost that were inserted into
the frame. A lot of people must do that, because there was a small
ring etched into the bottom couple inches of the post. It's obviously
a saw guide. Those manufacturers think of everything.
Finally, I busted out the the ol' drill. You'd be suprised how much
weight you can save, especially at the stem and handlebars. I drilled
the hell out of the sides of the head tube, although be careful with
your bit -- there's something in there that slides around when you
move the handlebars. Not that there's much chance of snapping a 1/2"
bit...
I haven't ridden it yet because I don't want to ride around the
neighborhood with it and get it dirty. I'm going to wait until my new
bike friends bring me to a trail. They said there's a great rock
garden to totally bomb through. It sounds awesome. Wait until they see
me take it on with my bike. I'm going to destroy all!
That reminds me -- I gotta go scoop out my helmet.

/s

 

[mark_kendrick]

mark_kendrick <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> My '98/99 CAAD3 is topping about 26lb on a 22" frame. I don't try to
> save weight on the crank and bottom bracket (i top the scales at 256#).
> I also run a dual crown fork.
>
> With a good light fork (-1-2lb), a 19" frame(.5lb) it would be easy to
> build a 22-24lb bike without any reliability issues.

At your weight that's a joke, especially on a crapandfail. I'd give
it six months max under regular use until it breaks. Now if you are
just into posing at trailheads, I'm sure it'll last a long time.

JD

I've owned 3 CAAD3 frames. Never weighed less than 225#. Like most everyone here has agreed.... They are very durable. I have a few dents from crashes but no cracks or failures.

I ride very hard uphill and down. I'm getting back into shape right now and the bike is taking a beating. I keep falling in places I would normally ride. Funny, at 30 I don't bounce very well .

 

[mark_kendrick]

You're absolutely correct my big buddy!

I'm only 210lbs, but my 22lb'er works great. And it was a lot cheaper
to do that many idiots in this group would have you think.
First, I removed every third spoke from those overbuilt Rolfs.
Then, I sawed off 1.5" of the 2" of seatpost that were inserted into
the frame. A lot of people must do that, because there was a small
ring etched into the bottom couple inches of the post. It's obviously
a saw guide. Those manufacturers think of everything.
Finally, I busted out the the ol' drill. You'd be suprised how much
weight you can save, especially at the stem and handlebars. I drilled
the hell out of the sides of the head tube, although be careful with
your bit -- there's something in there that slides around when you
move the handlebars. Not that there's much chance of snapping a 1/2"
bit...
I haven't ridden it yet because I don't want to ride around the
neighborhood with it and get it dirty. I'm going to wait until my new
bike friends bring me to a trail. They said there's a great rock
garden to totally bomb through. It sounds awesome. Wait until they see
me take it on with my bike. I'm going to destroy all!
That reminds me -- I gotta go scoop out my helmet.

/s

ROFLMFAO .....................

 

[JD]

[email protected] (Chalo) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> [email protected] (JD) wrote:
>
> > At your weight that's a joke, especially on a crapandfail. I'd give
> > it six months max under regular use until it breaks. Now if you are
> > just into posing at trailheads, I'm sure it'll last a long time.
>
> I have ridden tens of thousands of miles on several Cannondales at
> weights from 230 lbs. to 400 lbs., and I only ever had one fail
> without extenuating circumstances (e.g. crashes or previous repairs).
> In my experience, the reliability of Cannondale bikes surpasses any
> other kind of bike I have ridden. They cope with heavy riders
> especially well IMO.

Funny, the one I owned broke rather quickly, even more quickly than
the trek garbage I owned. You say that crapandfail reliability
surpasses any other kind of bike you have ridden, what have you
ridden? Also what does "tens of thousands of miles on several" equal?
Those are pretty vague numbers, especially when we don't know where
those miles were ridden or how often you changed bikes. For all we
know you were riding smooth railroad grades like the Virginia Creeper
and changed bikes once a year, not allowing them to fail as miserably
as my crapandflail did. Blind brand loyalty is a funny thing.

JD