Shoe weight

[Resind]

Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line Carnacs
are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...

I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

 

[Wade Summers]

resind wrote in message <060120032211076383%[email protected]>...
>Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line Carnacs
>are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...
>
>I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

Have you been riding indoors a lot lately?

Wade

 

[Ronde Champ]

"resind" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:060120032211076383%[email protected]...
> Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line Carnacs
> are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...
>
> I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

It's not important at all, unless you are a contender for the mailliot jaune. Until then, put down
the twinkie until you make the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team presented by (dingle)Berry Floor.

Thanks, Ronde Champ

 

[Steven L. Sheff]

in article 060120032211076383%[email protected], resind at [email protected] wrote on
01/06/2003 11:09 PM:

> Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line Carnacs
> are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...
>
> I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.

--

Steven L. Sheffield stevens at veloworks dot com veloworks at worldnet dot ay tea tee dot net bellum
pax est libertas servitus est ignoratio vis est ess ay ell tea ell ay kay ee sea aye tee why you ti
ay aitch aitch tee tea pea colon [for word] slash [four ward] slash double-you double-yew double-ewe
dot veloworks dot com [four word] slash

 

[Cycling Joe]

In a road race with constant pedaling it seems that shoe weight difference wouldn't be too big of a
deal, but then again.. you should also be concerned with the combined weight of the shoe and pedals
maybe? If you are getting new pedals, consider weight for those too. I would lean towards an
emphasis on fit, since I have first hand experience of riding in uncomfortable shoes, that are way
lighter than my Sidi's. If they dont fit well, the ride just sucks. Kinda like skiing with
uncomfortable boots... ack! Thats worse because your toes freeze.

On a mtn bike though, on a course with high rates of starting and stopping of the pedaling motion I
have seen where shoe weights do make a difference. I have noticed added fatigue with my water logged
Sidi's, I feel like I have lead weights on. They fit just as well as when dry, and the added weight
was extremely noticable.

Go ride in your waterlogged Sidi's ... with heavy wet socks, then you'll be able to tell the
difference.

JCT

resind wrote:

>Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line Carnacs
>are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...
>
>I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

 

[Per ElmsäTer]

"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:BA40252A.1E33A%[email protected]...
> in article 060120032211076383%[email protected], resind at [email protected] wrote on 01/06/2003
> 11:09 PM:
>
> > Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line
> > Carnacs are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...
> >
> > I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...
>
>
> Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.
>

How can that be? Not that fit isn't important but that weight in the shoe isn't. Pedals are made to
be light. Why wouldn't the same be true for shoes. 450 gram difference seems to be an awful lot
compared to other components. DA and Ultegra pedals for instance.

--
Replace the dots to reply

Perre

 

[Andrew Martin]

"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<BA40252A.1E33A%[email protected]>...
> in article 060120032211076383%[email protected], resind at [email protected] wrote on 01/06/2003
> 11:09 PM:
>
> > Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line
> > Carnacs are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...
> >
> > I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...
>
>
> Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.
>
A local track racer claims that his Rocket7 custom superlight shoes shaved over a second off his
pursuit and bumped his sprint top speed higher as well (he used to wear heavy Carnacs). Now – I'm
not rushing out to drop $400 on a pair, but I do opt for lighter production shoes if possible.

But – Steven is right – fit is king, first and foremost. -a

 

[Wade Summers]

I'd agree that fit is way more important than weight. Also, I'm not so sure the weights given, 300
for the Nike and 750 for the Carnacs are accurate. Perhaps one is for the pair and one is just a
single shoe. I can certainly imagine the scenario where a company sees that all of its competitors
list the pair weights so they opt to list the single shoe weight.

Get a pair of shoes that fit.

Wade

Per Elmsäter wrote in message ...
>"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:BA40252A.1E33A%[email protected]...
>> in article 060120032211076383%[email protected], resind at [email protected] wrote on 01/06/2003
>> 11:09 PM:
>>
>> > Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line
>> > Carnacs are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...
>> >
>> > I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...
>>
>>
>> Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.
>>
>
>How can that be? Not that fit isn't important but that weight in the shoe isn't. Pedals are made to
>be light. Why wouldn't the same be true for
shoes.
>450 gram difference seems to be an awful lot compared to other components. DA and Ultegra pedals
>for instance.
>
>--
>Replace the dots to reply
>
>Perre

 

[Scott Patton]

In article <[email protected]>, Per Elmsäter
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:BA40252A.1E33A%[email protected]...
>> in article 060120032211076383%[email protected], resind at [email protected] wrote on 01/06/2003
>> 11:09 PM:
>>
>> > Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line
>> > Carnacs are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...
>> >
>> > I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...
>>
>>
>> Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.
>>
>
>How can that be? Not that fit isn't important but that weight in the shoe isn't. Pedals are made to
>be light. Why wouldn't the same be true for shoes. 450 gram difference seems to be an awful lot
>compared to other components. DA and Ultegra pedals for instance.

I have EEE width feet. I don't care if I could have weightless shoes, if they hurt my feet, I will
be in hell.

Scott
--
-*- Scott Patton -*- Colorado Springs, CO -*- http://www.FixedGearFever.com -*- Track Racing
Web Services

 

[Chris M]

The Sidis with Velcro straps (Genius, G2 and G3) are about 600g per pair. The Energy and Shadow (and
I assume the Ergo 1) are slightly heavier. DMT Ultimax are also quoted at 600 grams. 750 seems
heavy, but those 4 straps relatively heavy straps and the CF sole add weight.

"Per Elmsäter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Steven L. Sheffield" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:BA40252A.1E33A%[email protected]...
> > in article 060120032211076383%[email protected], resind at [email protected] wrote on 01/06/2003
> > 11:09 PM:
> >
> > > Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line
> > > Carnacs are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...
> > >
> > > I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...
> >
> >
> > Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.
> >
>
> How can that be? Not that fit isn't important but that weight in the shoe isn't. Pedals are made
> to be light. Why wouldn't the same be true for
shoes.
> 450 gram difference seems to be an awful lot compared to other components. DA and Ultegra pedals
> for instance.
>
> --
> Replace the dots to reply
>
> Perre

 

[Eric Harvey]

Check out the following link to an Ed Burke article on the CTS site:

http://www.trainright.com/ctscafe/articles/edburke/energycost.htm

To summarise, Burke says adding 250 grams to the shoe/pedal combo per leg (500 grams total), will
increase the power required by 1.5 to 1.7 percent.

As for the shoe weights the original poster lists - I'm pretty sure the weight of the Nike shoe is
Nike's claimed weight for ONE shoe, while the Carnac weight is Carnac's weight for BOTH shoes. Like
every other component maker, shoe companies are nortorious for providing less than accurate weights.

Thanks,

Eric (who uses Carnac Quartz shoe and Time Equipe pedals!)

Wade Summers wrote:
>
> I'd agree that fit is way more important than weight. Also, I'm not so sure the weights given, 300
> for the Nike and 750 for the Carnacs are accurate. Perhaps one is for the pair and one is just a
> single shoe. I can certainly imagine the scenario where a company sees that all of its competitors
> list the pair weights so they opt to list the single shoe weight.
>
> Get a pair of shoes that fit.
>
> Wade
>
> Per Elmsäter wrote in message ...
> >"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:BA40252A.1E33A%[email protected]...
> >> in article 060120032211076383%[email protected], resind at [email protected] wrote on 01/06/2003
> >> 11:09 PM:
> >>
> >> > Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line
> >> > Carnacs are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...
> >> >
> >> > I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...
> >>
> >>
> >> Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.
> >>
> >
> >How can that be? Not that fit isn't important but that weight in the shoe isn't. Pedals are made
> >to be light. Why wouldn't the same be true for
> shoes.
> >450 gram difference seems to be an awful lot compared to other components. DA and Ultegra pedals
> >for instance.
> >
> >--
> >Replace the dots to reply
> >
> >Perre
> >
> >

 

[Chris M]

Nike indeed quotes per single shoe. Most shoe manufacturers don't even tell yo "Wade Summers"
<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> I'd agree that fit is way more important than weight. Also, I'm not so
sure
> the weights given, 300 for the Nike and 750 for the Carnacs are accurate. Perhaps one is for the
> pair and one is just a single shoe. I can
certainly
> imagine the scenario where a company sees that all of its competitors list the pair weights so
> they opt to list the single shoe weight.
>
> Get a pair of shoes that fit.
>
> Wade
>
>
>
> Per Elmsäter wrote in message ...
> >"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:BA40252A.1E33A%[email protected]...
> >> in article 060120032211076383%[email protected], resind at
[email protected]
> >> wrote on 01/06/2003 11:09 PM:
> >>
> >> > Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line
> >> > Carnacs are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...
> >> >
> >> > I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...
> >>
> >>
> >> Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.
> >>
> >
> >How can that be? Not that fit isn't important but that weight in the shoe isn't. Pedals are made
> >to be light. Why wouldn't the same be true for
> shoes.
> >450 gram difference seems to be an awful lot compared to other
components.
> >DA and Ultegra pedals for instance.
> >
> >--
> >Replace the dots to reply
> >
> >Perre
> >
> >
>

 

[Ronde Champ]

"Sharon Peters" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >Subject: Re: Shoe weight From: "ronde champ" [email protected]
>
> > US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team presented by (dingle)Berry Floor
>
> That's ****ing funny. At least to me.............

Sounds to me like you need to wipe at least three times.

Thanks, Ronde Champ

 

[Kevin]

I have a pair of rocket 7's top end shoe. They are very light. Have they made me faster? Maybe, but
only because the fit better and don't give me foot pain.

If I could find a pair that fit my weird feet (narrow ankle, wide mid foot, flatish), I'd much
rather buy off the shelf. Frankly I'm not at all impressed with the build quality of the Rocket 7's.
They are gangy looking (not like the web site picture that shows a tiny pair) at size roughly 44.5,
and are coming apart after 1 year of riding.

 

[Scott Patton]

In article <[email protected]>, Kevin <[email protected]> wrote:
>I have a pair of rocket 7's top end shoe. They are very light. Have they made me faster? Maybe, but
>only because the fit better and don't give me foot pain.
>
>If I could find a pair that fit my weird feet (narrow ankle, wide mid foot, flatish), I'd much
>rather buy off the shelf. Frankly I'm not at all impressed with the build quality of the Rocket
>7's. They are gangy looking (not like the web site picture that shows a tiny pair) at size roughly
>44.5, and are coming apart after 1 year of riding.

Sad to say, but I agree on the quality thing.

Scott
--
-*- Scott Patton -*- Colorado Springs, CO -*- http://www.FixedGearFever.com -*- Track Racing
Web Services