FCH Posted December 10, 2014 Share I very much doubt a pro would choose to ride a 5.5kg bike if it wasnt stiff and responsive enough for their needs. Honestly these rules are written for the pro's; not us slogging sloths.The author puts enough evidence forward that this is a completely random number, with no relevance to reality today. These guys and a fair amount of serious amateurs already ride bikes well below the limit, added with balast- this in it self makes a mockery of the "for safety sake" argument. As the added weight in no way contribute to saftey, stability or integrity.Great if the top guys can build bikes that is feather weight- 1: 99.9% of us cant ever compete against them even if they were on a delivery bike 2: as for machine failure, pros have a fleet of bikes, checked and maintained, so they dont ride a bike to death like most of us 3: their handling skills and light weight (rider not bike) put way less stress on the bike than most of us.That 5.5 kg bike is not going to get me anywhere faster than the 6.8kg; for pros it will matter, for most its bragging rights and trying to outdo the Jones's. Long and short I cant be fussed it they are allowed to ride 3 kg bikes, I will never be able to afford it, secondly my 100Kg physique will destroy it in minutes! I will shed 10kg first, way cheaper to achieve! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Marshall Posted December 10, 2014 Share I saw a number of sailing classes die when opened up and guys with older boats and a lot of skill could not compete cash wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudi-h Posted December 10, 2014 Share yip, the UCI are being knobs about this. stops the tech development and WE end up biting on the short end with 5 year old technology being sold to us at 2015 prices. same thing with disc brakes for road bikes. disk brakes are better, so why can't we have them on road bikes. fortunately I do understand that disc brake road bikes will be trialed in the Paris Roubaix this coming year, so hopefully in a year or two down the line it will become the standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinnekop Posted December 10, 2014 Share Honestly these rules are written for the pro's; not us slogging sloths.And yet I got my bike weight by the local law enforcement guys and girls and as a funrider it was a bit of a skarrel to get the bike up to weight. Eventually found a VW tow hitch that got strapped on.......so to speak. The rule was implemented to force bike manufacturers to look at quality rather than having the lightest bike but technology has moved forward where one can achieve both quality lasting save bikes and keep the weight down. I know Cannondale makes their BB axel from solid steal just to get the bike to weight.I wonder what Trek is going to do with their "Stock standard" bike of 5.4kg! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwissVan Posted December 10, 2014 Share How light can frames / bikes go before it becomes a safety factor?The more you push the envolope (make things lighter), the less reliable they tend to be, fact of life. Lets say one day we have a 5kg weight limit.... this might be ok under normal circumstances but what happens when riders do something thats not so normal i.e. hit a pot hole or something while riding at speed... snap crackle pop...oooh look ma no teeth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinnekop Posted December 10, 2014 Share How light can frames / bikes go before it becomes a safety factor?The more you push the envolope (make things lighter), the less reliable they tend to be, fact of life. Lets say one day we have a 5kg weight limit.... this might be ok under normal circumstances but what happens when riders do something thats not so normal i.e. hit a pot hole or something while riding at speed... snap crackle pop...oooh look ma no teeth You are going to sien your gat on a light bike or a heavy bike. Either way. The pothole is the problem....not the light bike. When a standard guy goes into a standard bike shop and buys a normal road bike (Avg) and have to spend money to get the weight UP......then surely the 6.8kg rule is outdated? Or something to that matter...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JA-Q001 Posted December 10, 2014 Share yip, the UCI are being knobs about this. stops the tech development and WE end up biting on the short end with 5 year old technology being sold to us at 2015 prices. same thing with disc brakes for road bikes. disk brakes are better, so why can't we have them on road bikes. fortunately I do understand that disc brake road bikes will be trialed in the Paris Roubaix this coming year, so hopefully in a year or two down the line it will become the standard. Well, actually everyone is still pushing the envelope on getting their own product lighter, because your bike does not come complete from one manufacturer, so its your choice what you want lighter and what you want to be heavier. Just think, powermeters became all more used when riders could race with them and have their bikes on weight limit, so the weight limit helped the powermeter market to grow. Same with aero bikes and gear, after the manufacturers found that it does not matter to get it lighter than it is, they started making it more aero, now you have aero and light bikes. So the weight limit has its uses as well, it made that manufacturers stop thinking only about weight and start to develop a better allround product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plentipotential Posted December 10, 2014 Share The cost of entry into Formula 1 is starting to eat that game alive. Few teams did not make some of last seasons races because of cost and at least one team are in liquidation. In cycling you could up the weight limit to allow less affluent riders/teams to compete but that would just mean that the better financed teams would spend the cash on stiffer bikes and what ever else would give them the edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwissVan Posted December 10, 2014 Share At the moment on my 10 year old carbon spaz i can ride through a pothole without fear of my frame failing...if they continue with the weight reduction in line with technology theme....then the time will come when you wont even be able to bunny hop over a pothole without cracking your frame.... I'm sure the weight can be lowered safely slightly still but the point is when will it stop and will the manufacturers ever be able to agree on what is a safe limit...i doubt it You are going to sien your gat on a light bike or a heavy bike. Either way. The pothole is the problem....not the light bike. When a standard guy goes into a standard bike shop and buys a normal road bike (Avg) and have to spend money to get the weight UP......then surely the 6.8kg rule is outdated? Or something to that matter...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatek Posted December 10, 2014 Share If you really want to complain about the weight limit, rather make the weight limit about the rider and the bike combined. That would be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwissVan Posted December 10, 2014 Share LOL, I recall (sometime last century) when they had the same issue with canoes...the guys doing duzi were building boats so light that the thing flexed when the guys ran with them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FCH Posted December 10, 2014 Share you just confirmed my point about how absurd the rule is- its there for "safety" yet you had to load your bike with an random object and then it becomes safe all of a sudden. The UCI probaly didnt foresee technology getting to the point where anything other than a factory racing / sponsored buke could reach these specs. Yes the rule is enforced on everyone, but they were written to dictates the terms for the sharp end of the bunch. Outdated. As for saftey, you are more likely to have a complete mealtdown on your 16 kg steel bike from Makro than these machines. I agree with another comment saying the same weight rule applies to a 110kg rider as to a 50kg wippet!! Makes no sense at all. quote name="Spinnekop" post="2500283" timestamp="1418209976"]And yet I got my bike weight by the local law enforcement guys and girls and as a funrider it was a bit of a skarrel to get the bike up to weight. Eventually found a VW tow hitch that got strapped on.......so to speak. The rule was implemented to force bike manufacturers to look at quality rather than having the lightest bike but technology has moved forward where one can achieve both quality lasting save bikes and keep the weight down. I know Cannondale makes their BB axel from solid steal just to get the bike to weight.I wonder what Trek is going to do with their "Stock standard" bike of 5.4kg! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wez-O Posted December 10, 2014 Share I very much doubt a pro would choose to ride a 5.5kg bike if it wasnt stiff and responsive enough for their needs. Honestly these rules are written for the pro's; not us slogging sloths.The author puts enough evidence forward that this is a completely random number, with no relevance to reality today. These guys and a fair amount of serious amateurs already ride bikes well below the limit, added with balast- this in it self makes a mockery of the "for safety sake" argument. As the added weight in no way contribute to saftey, stability or integrity.Great if the top guys can build bikes that is feather weight- 1: 99.9% of us cant ever compete against them even if they were on a delivery bike 2: as for machine failure, pros have a fleet of bikes, checked and maintained, so they dont ride a bike to death like most of us 3: their handling skills and light weight (rider not bike) put way less stress on the bike than most of us.That 5.5 kg bike is not going to get me anywhere faster than the 6.8kg; for pros it will matter, for most its bragging rights and trying to outdo the Jones's. Long and short I cant be fussed it they are allowed to ride 3 kg bikes, I will never be able to afford it, secondly my 100Kg physique will destroy it in minutes!I will shed 10kg first, way cheaper to achieve!This posts sums up my issue with the rule... Just because the UCI are still living in 1999, I've got to add wheel weights to my super stiff and (presumably) strong bike for the SA Championships. And for the same reason, most manufacturers can't showcase their best frames in the worlds biggest races due to an outdated rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patchelicious Posted December 10, 2014 Share Consciously preventing technological advancement is the most counter productive ideology ever! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcza Posted December 10, 2014 Share And yet I got my bike weight by the local law enforcement guys and girls and as a funrider it was a bit of a skarrel to get the bike up to weight. Eventually found a VW tow hitch that got strapped on.......so to speak. The rule was implemented to force bike manufacturers to look at quality rather than having the lightest bike but technology has moved forward where one can achieve both quality lasting save bikes and keep the weight down. I know Cannondale makes their BB axel from solid steal just to get the bike to weight.I wonder what Trek is going to do with their "Stock standard" bike of 5.4kg! Which wheels are those?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Zone Posted December 10, 2014 Share since when is formula one considered a sport? "There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games." - Ernest Hemingway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.