Is rolling weight important?

[Shebeen]

 

 

or something like that.

 "Strong. Light. Cheap. Pick Two." 

 

http://www.bontrager.com/history/a-brief-history

The Bontrager story is the stuff of legends. Keith Bontrager, an engineer, designer, physicist, mechanic, rider, and natural-born do-it-yourselfer, emerged on the nascent mountain bike scene in the late 70s with a scientific approach to frame design, materials understanding, and craftsmanship. Spending a good part of the 1980s "dumpster diving" for broken bike parts, Keith analyzed why they failed and then dedicated himself to coming up with better, more durable designs. All this reverse engineering led Keith to his famous aphorism: "Strong. Light. Cheap. Pick Two." Bontrager unabashedly opted for the first two, building a reputation on offering some of the strongest and lightest components available. Never faddish, openly skeptical about "conventional wisdom," and always grounded in the often harsh scientific realities of the universe, Keith demanded parts that are strong first, as light as possible second, and often not cheap. It's a no-compromise approach that rests on the proposition that discerning customers understand value is much more than price alone.

 

Bontrager's come a long way since the early days when Keith was holed-up in his garage, pouring over broken parts. Today there are more Bontrager parts in more categories than ever before. And Keith himself spends much less time dumpster diving and a whole lot more time field-testing products and ideas as he travels the world doing 24-hour (or longer) endurance events. With all that's changed, one thing hasn't: the B-dot logo remains your assurance that every Bontrager component, regardless of price or weight, is designed and tested to meet Keith's stringent standards for fatigue and impact strength and firmly grounded in a no-nonsense design philosophy.

[HOEKVLAG]

Oh, absolutely. The difference that comes from a stiffer and more responsive frameset is massive in terms of feel, acceleration and handling. But that's separate to weight, at least weight on you vs weight on bike. 

 

I remember when I got my old Schwinn carbon road machine, coming from an old alu Fuji. The difference in snappiness through extra stiffness alone was amazing.

I agree 100%. I think what I was trying to say in addition to what has been said is that spending more on a bike does not only affect the weight, because everything on it is better, but that would mean replacing rather that upgrading the bike.

[andydude]

 

 

Is saving 2kg's on your bike (by spending a ton of cash) worth it for people who can lose 2kg's on themselves much easier? I've been wondering for a while why some riders become weightweenies when they have lots to lose on themselves.

Anybody who could explain WHY/IF it is worth it would be much appreciated. Thanks

Before I can try to answer, what do you mean by "is it worth it"? Do you mean more absolute power, and per kg, looking more cool, just because you can?

[popcorn_skollie]

Personally, I wouldn't spend a dime on an upgrade for the purpose of saving weight alone.

Not that I don't care about it...

But what ever money I spend on my bikes is justified by how much more fun I'm going to have...

[Hairy]

forgot to add ... I usually do not own a bike long enough to get to the "upgrade" part 

[Josh111]

Thanks for all the replies guys, and yes I read every single one. I just went through upgrading my bike front to back with the best of the best, stood back and looked at it and wondered why I just did that. yeah it looks awesome but I'm not convinced it was worth it, so I'm going to go back to a heavier bike (maybe add 1kg) that still has decent components

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

Thanks for all the replies guys, and yes I read every single one. I just went through upgrading my bike front to back with the best of the best, stood back and looked at it and wondered why I just did that. yeah it looks awesome but I'm not convinced it was worth it, so I'm going to go back to a heavier bike (maybe add 1kg) that still has decent components

No man. Now that you've done it, keep it that way. You'll lose 30% on the price of the goods you just bought anyway. Plus you'll have a pimping bike. Who cares what anyone "thinks" about it. Do you like it the way it is now? If yes, problem solved

[andydude]

 

 

Thanks for all the replies guys, and yes I read every single one. I just went through upgrading my bike front to back with the best of the best, stood back and looked at it and wondered why I just did that. yeah it looks awesome but I'm not convinced it was worth it, so I'm going to go back to a heavier bike (maybe add 1kg) that still has decent components

I'll ask again, what do you mean by "worth it"? In terms of what?

[Josh111]

I'll ask again, what do you mean by "worth it"? In terms of what?

Worth becoming a weightweenie when I could cut it easily on myself. hence the question on rolling weight vs. total weight.

[andydude]

Worth becoming a weightweenie when I could cut it easily on myself. hence the question on rolling weight vs. total weight.

It can get very technical, for example, saving the same weight on wheels are slightly better than on the frame, but that is mostly for acceleration and not if you are at a reasonable speed already.

 

So don't worry too much about where it's best to lose weight, BUT rather concentrate on losing weight where ever.

 

Obviously it's much cheaper and healthier to shed some weight yourself and then when lean and mean go for lightweight bike and parts. But if you have money and don't care to spend it then go for both.

 

From your second last post you said you didn't like the look which means you also consider the look to be important?

 

Personally for me it doesn't really make sense to be a weightweenie when you're weighing 100kg, but each to his own.