Road bike weight

[Iwan Kemp]

No weight does not matter more than aero but I will leave you to it.

 

Must be why we see so many aero mountain bikes.

 

Just so you know, just because I have a different view on a topic and am putting it forward does not necessarily mean I'm arguing.

[rouxtjie]

I love the weight argument. Have a good mate who is obsessed about weight on his MTB, but still doesn't win.

 

Look to the pros.

 

Mountain stage? Same frames, lightweight wheelset.

 

Flat stage? Aero frame, deep as a springs prossie wheels.

 

Yes, we say that, in a race, you're in a bunch so aero doesn't matter. But consider your last race. How often were you in the bunch? And when you get dropped, do you want aero or lightweight??

 

Also consider the average SA race profile. We have comparatively flat races vs Europe. We don't have alp d huez, so why worry about weight that much??

 

I'm heavy, and my bike is built with both cost ad reliability in mind. When I train consistently, I keep up with anyone on the hills, yet the flats I can dominate.

 

You decide, but I think super light bikes are only really worth it in the mountains, and even then, unless you're a 60kg pro, you're not going to use the advantage to its full potential.

Spoken like a pure roadie....I am with you

[jcza]

It matters more up until the point that aero becomes the primary concern. Thereafter, aero matters more. But not to the point that weight can be ignored completely. At low speeds, weight matters mostly. Aero has little to no effect. At higher speeds, aero matters more, yes. But weight still needs to remain comparable and respectable. Thus, it matters more.

You go get those superlight carbon wheels, I'll stick with my heavy aeros.

[The_black_stig]

Ah but the faster you go, the more wind resistance affects you....AERO!!!!!

 

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7141/4025/400/wheel%20sucking%20pig%20web%20site.jpg

 

Do this from the start till the last 500m to the finish, is always a option

[jcza]

Must be why we see so many aero mountain bikes.

 

Just so you know, just because I have a different view on a topic and am putting it forward does not necessarily mean I'm arguing.

Not sure where mountain bikes fit in here, the question was asked about roadbike weight.

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

Okay - above a certain speed, increases in aero capabilities are more important than decreases in weight. Especially when all the people around you are riding bikes int he same weight class as you. That is obvious.

 

But that's only testing for one variable. Difference in aero considering a UCI hard limit on weight.

 

The proper test would be to take an normal frame, and an aero frame that weigh the same amount, and determine how much weight would need to be added to the aero frame in order to overcome the aerodynamic efficiencies in that aero frame. I'm guessing not much.

 

Then take those 2 frames, and determine the benefits that come from tweaking both aero and weight. Less aero on the aero bike (affecting the drag coefficient and the resultant necessary change in power output to maintain that speed) and comparing that against the removal of weight from the frame / wheels / wherever and its effect on the necessary change in power output to retain that speed.

 

At the end, you'll have a result equating weight loss to increase in efficiency. That is the only way to determine at what point, and what speed, both weight and aero make a difference.

Edited July 24, 2014 by cpt armpies mayhem

[ChUkKy]

Friday is in the air.......

[rouxtjie]

Friday is in the air.......

Jou ma!

[Vetseun]

Friday is in the air.......

Jou Ma se Ma

['Dale]

Decrease your rotational mass (wiele) will be a major gain - like sub 1500 or less.

 

Of course, easy on those Nuggets

[jcza]

Friday is in the air.......

Cant wait!

[Underachiever]

Oh koot nooooo, as in never....ever. That simply wont fly

 

Ha, ha

 

Just imagine....

[Iwan Kemp]

Not sure where mountain bikes fit in here, the question was asked about roadbike weight.

Sure, but aero is aero and weight is weight. The law stays the same. So if aero is that much better than weight it would have transferred by now.

 

Let me say again: Up to a point weight matters, beyond the tipping point (xkm/h) aero becomes more important if all other factors stay the same.

 

Case in point: a slow, unfit rider will benefit more from a lighter bike than from an aero one.

[jcza]

Decrease your rotational mass (wiele) will be a major gain - like sub 1500 or less.

 

Of course, easy on those Nuggets

Another rumour that wont go away

 

Wheels account for almost 10% of the total power required to race your bike and the dominant factor in wheel performance is aerodynamics.

Wheel mass is a second order effect (nearly 10 times less significant) and wheel inertia is a third order effect (nearly 100 times less significant).

 

The best wheels in terms of performance are the ones that are lightweight, aerodynamic, don’t rub brake pads and are strong enough to get you to the finish line.

 

The problem with these high performance wheels, though, is that they sacrifice on the other two key variables important in wheel selection: durability and price.

 

High performance wheels are neither durable nor cheap. Nothing is ever easy, is it?

[jcza]

Sure, but aero is aero and weight is weight. The law stays the same. So if aero is that much better than weight it would have transferred by now.

 

Let me say again: Up to a point weight matters, beyond the tipping point (xkm/h) aero becomes more important if all other factors stay the same.

 

Case in point: a slow, unfit rider will benefit more from a lighter bike than from an aero one.

A slow unfit rider will benefit more from a proper diet than a lighter bike. Can't recall at what speed aero becomes more important but its quite low.

[jcza]

http://www.biketechreview.com/archive/images/imgF.gif