Results 1 to 25 of 55
08-17-2006, 03:43 PM #1
thinking of lightening up the ride...
i'm not a weight-weenie, but i do pedal my bike up everything rather than shuttle any runs. my current ride weighs in @ 39 lbs (+/- 1), for rough &" front travel and 6-6.5" rear travel.
i'm thinking of lightening that up. realistically, i probably don't have the $$ to do this over the summer, but maybe i can score some off-season deals and rebuild/swap some parts over the winter.
could i get down to 32-ish pounds and still have a bike i can take anywhere that's a little faster/more fun on the way up? (my bike climbs well as-is, albeit slowly...e.g., a ride i like to do starts out w/ 3k climbing in 6 miles that i try to do (slowly) w/o stopping. something lighter, though, would be more fun.)
here's the current spec, aside from the frame (pretty heavy, overbuilt stays):
- XT front derailleur
- XT rear
- XT cassette
- SRAM PC59 chain
- 1 SRAM grip shift (front) + 1 XTR trigger (rear)
- FSA V-drive "Xtreme" (ugh) cranks
- Truvativ Gigapine Team DH BB
- 2 RF front rings: 22T & 36T
- E.13 DRS
- Sherman breaktout plus (170mm) 1.5 steerer
- Swinger 4-way coil
- michelin DH comp 16 2.5" UST w/ Stan's (big opportunity for weight savings)
- mavic xm819 UST
- 14 gauge spokes
- hadley rear hub 12mm thru
- 'zocchi 20mm front hub
- FSA 1.5 Bg fat pig headset
- Diabolus stem
- Azonic 1.5" riser bars
- ODI lock-on grips
- Mono M4 brakes w/ 180mm rotors
- Thomson layback post
- Azonic hot seat
any ideas for opportunities to ditch weight? which would be good bang for the buck?
thanks! just thinking...
08-17-2006, 03:52 PM #2
ps if this is a stupid idea, too, i'm open to hearing that.
08-17-2006, 03:53 PM #3User
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
every ounce saved on wheels and tires equals 47 lbs. of frame weight.
or something like that. hope this helps.
08-17-2006, 04:02 PM #4Originally Posted by flykdog
08-17-2006, 04:02 PM #5
Ditch those dh tires. That will make the biggest difference.
Saddle, BB, cranks, and shock (go air) could all be swapped for something lighter.
Those headsets are heavy but not that much heavier than any other 1.5 headset.STRAVA: Enabling dorks everywhere to get trails shut down........ all for the sake of a race on the internet.
08-17-2006, 04:06 PM #6Originally Posted by kidwoo
i've been outta the shock game for a little bit...have air shocks improved a ton in the past 2 years?
do you think it's unrealistic to shoot for a 32-pound build?
08-17-2006, 04:10 PM #7
go in the order of wheels/tires and then cranks.
then ditch the whole bike for a singlespeed ....
j/k. my SS is prolly around 22 lbs. a custom Independant Fab that i built up 6-7 years ago.... my mostest favorite bike
08-17-2006, 04:12 PM #8Originally Posted by onehotchili
08-17-2006, 04:20 PM #9Originally Posted by upallnight
I've always had 2.1 - 2.3 tubeless tires on my xc bikes. Your bike is burlier than mine and you may beat on it harder than I do. If I know I'm going to be knocking the crap out of things, I get the big bike.
More important than size though is just the wieght of those dh casings. You've got a lot more rotational mass to accelerate than a same size tire in a single ply casing. Stay with the big volume/width if you want but just get lighter. I know jackson is pretty similar to here (dusty and rough) so it just depends on how hard you want to push it.
Something else to consider which is huge is that the michy dh tires use something like a 50d compound (most tires are around 60d) and they're freakin slow. The point of a light bike is uphill efficiency and acceleration.....those tires are fighting it......especially in the rear where you're putting a lot of effort into deforming those knobs before the power gets to the ground.STRAVA: Enabling dorks everywhere to get trails shut down........ all for the sake of a race on the internet.
08-17-2006, 05:20 PM #10Originally Posted by upallnight
08-17-2006, 07:41 PM #11Originally Posted by kidwoo
Originally Posted by kidwoo
Originally Posted by kidwoo
thanks for sharing the insight. tires are something i might could replace this season and start getting some benefits.
08-17-2006, 07:43 PM #12Originally Posted by onehotchili
even if i could do the non-gear-thang up the old pass road, it would not be so much fun on the trails i ride down. :S
08-17-2006, 08:35 PM #13Registered User
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
if you still want big tires tires continental diesels don't seem too bad:
780gPreserving farness, nearness presences nearness in nearing that farness
08-17-2006, 09:45 PM #14
I have been pretty happy with my high rollers for the application your talking. I must say my chameleon build is suiting me very well as my do-everything bike. don't much miss the back end neither. I might need to upgrade to a stronger rear rim , but for now my 819 is holding in there. I run a 50mm stem and no pads and that helps me keep it somewhat reasonable on the downs... relatively speaking of course.
08-17-2006, 09:46 PM #15Originally Posted by nick > jesus
i'm not wed to the 2.5s... but it seems like a tire swap saves around 2.5 lbs (i think the DH comp 16s weighed in at around 1300g or so in a 2.5")...plus the added benefits of a less rolling resistance with a different compound rubber.
have you tried those?
any rec's in the 2.2 (+/1 0.1") range? i'm imagining that will lighten things up further and not take too big a hit on the ride down.
08-17-2006, 09:49 PM #16
kenda 2.35's single ply
08-17-2006, 09:59 PM #17Originally Posted by upallnight
You could also get lighter bars and a lighter stem. A longer stem will also make it climb better and feel more XC-ish.
Beyond that, you're talking real money, and you're better off buying a second bike. Wheelsets and forks/shocks cost so much more by themselves than the bike companies get them for. You can buy solid hardtails all day under $1000, and you'll easily spend that much trying to get your beast down to 32#.
08-17-2006, 10:16 PM #18Originally Posted by Spats
08-17-2006, 10:18 PM #19Originally Posted by upallnight
08-17-2006, 10:36 PM #20Originally Posted by onehotchili
I don't like those things. They work pretty well as a rear for climbing but they make too much of a round profile to allow any of the knobs to work well in a lot of dust. It's like every knob has a sibling in the way preventing it from doing its job.
But then again I'm one of those freaks who puts up with climbing only for the sole purpose of descending so take that for what it's worth.STRAVA: Enabling dorks everywhere to get trails shut down........ all for the sake of a race on the internet.
08-17-2006, 10:54 PM #21yelgatgab
- Join Date
- Oct 2002
- Shadynasty's Jazz Club
I've never met a Conti that didn't fall apart at the first signs of anything remotely resembling hard riding.
08-17-2006, 11:11 PM #22Originally Posted by bagtagley
Yeah and then there's that. First time I ever saw the threads underneath tire rubber.
08-18-2006, 12:25 AM #23Originally Posted by hev
i haven't pulled the pads out at all this year...
08-18-2006, 02:13 AM #24Originally Posted by bagtagley
kidwoo: I haven't found anything better than a Vert Pro for loose gravel over hardpack, which is the Bay Area all summer. What works best in dust without gravel? (We don't seem to get that here.)
08-18-2006, 07:13 AM #25