The bike weight thread

[ljamesbee]

Well I think it is OK to weigh your bike and mention how it is equipped when you do that. Not everyone takes their bike half to bits on a sunny day when they are not carrying luggage you know! I think describing a naked mountain bike as 'my touring bike' is a little disingenuous unless you mention how it is equipped in the same breath.

Ah, I see what you mean! I did write that. Should have made it clear what it had on it.

Awesome, that's a really nice bike . Would love to see a pic if you have one. I really like mid 90's Marin MTB's. The frame geometry works well (for me) for a touring bike (they have quite long top tubes). Plus they are one of the few manufacturers which actually published the weights of their different bikes . Although not totally accurate, the marin catalogues can be a good guide. Only downside of the 'team' bikes is that many of them don't have eyelets for racks (on the upper seatstays), but that's not surprising since they are racing MTB's. I went for a '94 one because I like quill stems.

[tatanab]

A bike rack is not a necessary part of the bike in order to be able to ride it and nor are mudguards.Things like handlebars, derailleurs, brakes, wheels, tyres etc. are though.

Of course derailleurs are not necessary. Look at the people on single gears (fixed or free). My lightest machine is a fixed wheel bicycle which weighs in at 20lbs, probably weighed down by those unnecessary mudguards.

I think the title of the thread should have been "how heavy is your daily ride". That would remove any doubt about touring baggage, sunny Sunday special ridden once a year etc. That is the spirit in which I replied by adding my daily baggage.

[beardy]

I think the title of the thread should have been "how heavy is your daily ride".

No harm in giving both, it would be quite interesting to see the "mark up" in real life.

2kg frame becomes 10Kg bare minimum bike becomes 16Kg when you actually ride it, as an example of how it could easily go. Which helps explain why a carbon or titanium frame doesnt make that much difference in the end, unless you ride a stripped racer.

[Brucey]

Awesome, that's a really nice bike . Would love to see a pic if you have one. I really like mid 90's Marin MTB's. The frame geometry works well (for me) for a touring bike (they have quite long top tubes).... Only downside of the 'team' bikes is that many of them don't have eyelets for racks (on the upper seatstays), but that's not surprising since they are racing MTB's..

I'll see if I have a pic anywhere. The Team Ti frame I have is a full-on racing machine and is therefore sparsely equipped; there are five cable stops, bottle bosses (two sets), brake braze ons (including a bridge if you want to run cantis) and, er, that is it, more or less. There are no eyes or any kind in the rear dropouts, so if you want to fit full mudguards you need to use P clips. There are no carrier braze-ons of course. I had to look to be sure but both the chainstay bridge and the seatstay bridge are drilled radially and have an M5 threaded boss in them, which is a little anomalous given the rest of the frame.

cheers

[easyroller]

I built this from a frameset earlier this year. Alloy frame with full carbon fork, mostly budget "roadie" parts bought on sale.

Frame weighed 1145 grams on my digital kitchen scales.

The finished build as pictured was bang on 8.0kg or 17.6lbs in old money.