Weight of mountainbike - manufacturers don't think it's important?

[michel]

As I am looking for a new mountain bike, I am very suprised that it is
hard to find information on the weight of the bikes.

Scott USA gives weights, Giant for some of the models, but Marin and
Cannondale for example do not seem to bother.

Is there some silly (legal) reason for this, or are people not
interested in this info, or ... am I starting to be a grumpy old man
;-)

Cheers!
Michel

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>, michel
('[email protected]') wrote:

> As I am looking for a new mountain bike, I am very suprised that it is
> hard to find information on the weight of the bikes.
>
> Scott USA gives weights, Giant for some of the models, but Marin and
> Cannondale for example do not seem to bother.
>
> Is there some silly (legal) reason for this, or are people not
> interested in this info, or ... am I starting to be a grumpy old man
> ;-)

Manufacturers say they don't because (obviously) weights vary across
different sizes of the same model. Some retailers (e.g. Edinburgh
Bicycle Co-op) quote weights for quite a lot of models. Manufacturers
will often quote a weight if you phone up and ask them (I've done this)
even if it isn't in their literature.

I think the main reason they don't is that if they do and some punter
buys a bike which weighs a few ounces more than the quoted weight it
causes bother. But frankly, for me at any rate, low weight is one of the
key things I'm prepared to spend money on, and I /want/ to know the
weight of the bikes I'm thinking of buying.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
Iraq war: it's time for regime change...
... go now, Tony, while you can still go with dignity.
[update 18 months after this .sig was written: it's still relevant]

 

[Lander]

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 08:37:43 -0700, michel wrote:

> As I am looking for a new mountain bike, I am very suprised that it is
> hard to find information on the weight of the bikes.
>
> Scott USA gives weights, Giant for some of the models, but Marin and
> Cannondale for example do not seem to bother.
>
> Is there some silly (legal) reason for this, or are people not
> interested in this info, or ... am I starting to be a grumpy old man
> ;-)
>
> Cheers!
> Michel

being a cynic, I reckon there is a dirth of information that would help
the customer make the decision, instead they seem to rely on pictures of
the bike in question in attractive places being ridden by nubiles... do
you get my drift?

 

[Arthur Clune]

michel <[email protected]> wrote:

: Is there some silly (legal) reason for this, or are people not
: interested in this info, or ... am I starting to be a grumpy old man
: ;-)

I think that until you get into the real money area (1500+ say)
it doesn't actually matter that much.

weightweenies.starbike.com

may help though.

--
Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt
The struggle of people against power is the struggle
of memory against forgetting - Milan Kundera

 

[michel]

Do you mean that below 1500 most of the bikes are about the same
weight, or below 1500 other things are much more important??

Cheers,
Michel

Arthur Clune wrote:
>
> I think that until you get into the real money area (1500+ say)
> it doesn't actually matter that much.
>

 

[Arthur Clune]

michel <[email protected]> wrote:
: Do you mean that below 1500 most of the bikes are about the same
: weight, or below 1500 other things are much more important??

A bit of both, but mainly the second. I'd worry more about
other stuff than weight in that price range.

Obviously you have to give it some concern, but that's about
type of bike as much as anything. Don't buy a 40lb DH bike for
XC.

But basically I'd require some convincing that a difference of
1-2lb matter that much, which is going to be about all you are
looking at between similar style bikes of a similar price.

Arthur


--
Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt
The struggle of people against power is the struggle
of memory against forgetting - Milan Kundera

 

[TooSore]

The heaviest bit of the bike is always going to be the rider. On modern bikes the difference in weights from the Heaviest to the lighest in any category or price bracket will be tiny in proportion to the weight of the rider.

If you want to get the weight of your bike down lay off Guiness for the couple of weeks...

As Peter Kay says "I sh*t a pound"

 

[Arthur Clune]

TooSore <[email protected]> wrote:

: The heaviest bit of the bike is always going to be the rider. On modern
: bikes the difference in weights from the Heaviest to the lighest in any
: category or price bracket will be tiny in proportion to the weight of
: the rider.

By that logic, one would never worry about bike weight at all, and yet
anyone who rides knows that it does make a difference

: If you want to get the weight of your bike down lay off Guiness for the
: couple of weeks...

Some of us don't have any weight to lose.


--
Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt
The struggle of people against power is the struggle
of memory against forgetting - Milan Kundera

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>, Arthur Clune
('[email protected]') wrote:

> michel <[email protected]> wrote:
> : Do you mean that below 1500 most of the bikes are about the same
> : weight, or below 1500 other things are much more important??
>
> A bit of both, but mainly the second. I'd worry more about
> other stuff than weight in that price range.

Nononononono. Among £400-£500 XC-style hardtails, the best are 5Kg
lighter than the worst. That's a difference which /makes/ a difference.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; my other religion is Emacs

 

[TooSore]

By that logic, one would never worry about bike weight at all, and yet
anyone who rides knows that it does make a difference

: If you want to get the weight of your bike down lay off Guiness for the
: couple of weeks...

Some of us don't have any weight to lose.

Arthur,

I hear your words and at a certain level when the body fat ratio is down to the optimum limit and you have your power to weight bang on then the only thing you can do is to drop the weight of the bike to improve your stats and hence road speed.

That having been said unless you are a fairly well put together athlete in the competition phase of your training this will not be the case. Yes a light bike will help but by far the greatest dead weight will be found on the saddle and not below it.

I'll stick to my guns and say that you should recycle the 100 quid you were going to spend on a titanium widget set and invest in a set of body fat scales.....

Let the abuse begin.

 

[Tony Raven]

TooSore wrote:
>
>
> I hear your words and at a certain level when the body fat ratio is
> down to the optimum limit and you have your power to weight bang on
> then the only thing you can do is to drop the weight of the bike to
> improve your stats and hence road speed.
>

But the subject line is about mountain bikes, not road bikes. The bike
weight makes quite a difference in mountain biking where you are moving
the bike around to cope with the terrain. Big heavy bikes ride very
differently from lightweight bikes IME. YMMV


--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

 

[michel]

Simon Brooke wrote:
> [...] Manufacturers
> will often quote a weight if you phone up and ask them (I've done this)
> even if it isn't in their literature.
> [...]

Actually, I did get an email back from Cannondale today. I asked for
the weight of the 2005 Jekyll, but they said they did not have the
weight, and sent me a list with 2004 bikes. Now I am still wondering if
they really do not know the weights themselves, or just do not want to
give it...

Thanks for the replies... I will now start a thread asking advice on a
lightweight XC full suspension bike for about £1000.

Cheers!
Michel

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>,
michel ('[email protected]') wrote:

> Simon Brooke wrote:
>> [...] Manufacturers
>> will often quote a weight if you phone up and ask them (I've done
>> this) even if it isn't in their literature.
>> [...]
>
> Actually, I did get an email back from Cannondale today. I asked for
> the weight of the 2005 Jekyll, but they said they did not have the
> weight, and sent me a list with 2004 bikes. Now I am still wondering if
> they really do not know the weights themselves, or just do not want to
> give it...

FWIW my (large) Jekyll now weighs 30lbs, but with the original seatpost,
saddle and tyres it weighed 27lbs. It's going to get lighter again, but
it probably won't get back down to 27.

My partner's (large) Santa Cruz Juliana weighs 26lbs, and could be got
down to 24 by swapping the disks for V brakes and some other fairly
minor changes.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; I'll have a proper rant later, when I get the time.

 

[Arthur Clune]

Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:

: Nononononono. Among £400-£500 XC-style hardtails, the best are 5Kg
: lighter than the worst. That's a difference which /makes/ a difference.

Really? That's scary.

--
Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt
The struggle of people against power is the struggle
of memory against forgetting - Milan Kundera

 

[Helen Deborah Vecht]

TooSore <[email protected]>typed


> I'll stick to my guns and say that you should recycle the 100 quid you
> were going to spend on a titanium widget set and invest in a set of
> body fat scales.....

> Let the abuse begin.

Have you *met* Arthur? He's built like a kite. I suspect his body fat is
in the 5-10% range; any loss could impair his performance.

I am at least 30% fat. A hefty bike still had an intensely 'dead' feel
compared to something lighter. Even a heavy rider will move their body
to optimise bike handling and their weight distribution. This is
generally not possible with the weight of the bicycle (some of which
will rotate...)

Bike & bits weight *do* matter, but it's still better to take a 750g
water bottle than to dry up.

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email protected]
Edgware.

 

[Ambrose Nankivell]

Arthur Clune wrote:
> Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Nononononono. Among £400-£500 XC-style hardtails, the best are 5Kg
>> lighter than the worst. That's a difference which /makes/ a
>> difference.
>
> Really? That's scary.

Are they really all XC-style? For example, if they don't have a saddle, then
they're probably jump bikes

--
Ambrose

 

[TooSore]

Nononononono. Among £400-£500 XC-style hardtails, the best are 5Kg lighter than the worst. That's a difference which makes a difference

OK then even I concede the 5KG on the bike is a bit steep and yes am talking from the perspective of a roadie where most bikes are within a couple of Kg of each other.

There is still merit in the argument however with the majority of riders are carrying a "handicap" that would exceed any weight they might save on their bikes.

I'll buy that a lighter bike has handling characteristics superior to heavy bikes but you do hit the law of diminishing returns relatively quickly and that's when looking at the motor comes in.

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>, Ambrose Nankivell
('[email protected]') wrote:

> Arthur Clune wrote:
>> Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Nononononono. Among £400-£500 XC-style hardtails, the best are 5Kg
>>> lighter than the worst. That's a difference which /makes/ a
>>> difference.
>>
>> Really? That's scary.
>
> Are they really all XC-style? For example, if they don't have a saddle,
> then they're probably jump bikes

No, alleged XC bikes. We weighed a number; the lightest that we weighed
was a Giant XTC SE at 26lbs (medium frame), which, surprisingly, has
disk brakes. The heaviest was 38lbs - no, I am _not_ joking!

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Morning had broken, and there was nothing left for us to do
but pick up the pieces.