Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Anyone has actuall weight of either 07, 08, better yet 09? Yeti's site claimed at 4.7 for medium which is kind of hard to believe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
ASR alloy 2008
size - large
Turq/black painted
with shock, hanger, seatclamp etc
2350g - 5.18lbs

Without the seatclamp it would be 5.1lbs, I'd expect the anodised (black) version to be lighter, too (maybe 5lbs?)

So, a medium ano black would probably come in at 4.8lbs

Luke
www.LukeWebber.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
WAZCO said:
Anyone has actuall weight of either 07, 08, better yet 09? Yeti's site claimed at 4.7 for medium which is kind of hard to believe.
I posted this earlier this year on an '08.

The frame is 4.97lbs. That is with Fox shock, Salsa normal seatclamp (supplied which was nice), Yeti neoprene stay protector (supplied, nice again). I do think Yeti should asterisk their specs to say the weights are without the Fox shock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
stratmosphere said:
I posted this earlier this year on an '08 (which is for sale).

The frame is 4.97lbs. That is with Fox shock, Salsa normal seatclamp (supplied which was nice), Yeti neoprene stay protector (supplied, nice again). I do think Yeti should asterisk their specs to say the weights are without the Fox shock.
Thanks both Singletrack Mind and Stratmosphere! This helps alot!
 

·
mutaullyassuredsuffering
Joined
·
2,053 Posts
weights

I've owned and weighed more than about anyone.

The 3 painted asr-slc's I have owned have been between 4.81 and 4.90. The ano was 4.75. I weighed without the 35g seatclamp.
 

·
mutaullyassuredsuffering
Joined
·
2,053 Posts
grrr

used2Bhard said:
I've owned and weighed more than about anyone.

The 3 painted asr-slc's I have owned have been between 4.81 and 4.90. The ano was 4.75. I weighed without the 35g seatclamp.
I entered the post quickly and didn't specify the years. The ASR-SLc's were 07's and 08's. The '06 Asr-sl was about 150g heavier. All were size mediums.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
used2Bhard said:
I entered the post quickly and didn't specify the years. The ASR-SLc's were 07's and 08's. The '06 Asr-sl was about 150g heavier. All were size mediums.
thanks! now it's matter choosing either ASR-carbon or alloy.
 

·
mutaullyassuredsuffering
Joined
·
2,053 Posts
for

WAZCO said:
thanks! now it's matter choosing either ASR-carbon or alloy.
What will you be using her for? Having owned both I can at least compare the for you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
used2Bhard said:
What will you be using her for? Having owned both I can at least compare the for you.
i'll be using her for xc but my strength is downhilling and my climbing is my weekness. My buddies always kill me on the climb. I understand that the alloy is 74 degree seat angle which would help me on the climb, which is why im leaning toward the alloy. If i remember correctly, from all the posts, it seem like the alloy is only ±.1/4 lbs heavier after factoring the bearings, seatmast, etc.., If i can reduce the 1/4 pound, that too will help my climbing. Also, i need to factor the price difference. At 5'7" I would fit the small on the carbon. I can go either small or medium w/ alloy since 74 degree seat angle will reduce my reach. To many factors to make decsions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
WAZCO said:
I understand that the alloy is 74 degree seat angle which would help me on the climb, which is why im leaning toward the alloy. QUOTE]

I think both carbon and alloy from small to large have identical geometry 69/73. The x-small alloy is 74 degree seat angle.
 

·
mutaullyassuredsuffering
Joined
·
2,053 Posts
Both

WAZCO said:
i'll be using her for xc but my strength is downhilling and my climbing is my weekness. My buddies always kill me on the climb. I understand that the alloy is 74 degree seat angle which would help me on the climb, which is why im leaning toward the alloy. If i remember correctly, from all the posts, it seem like the alloy is only ±.1/4 lbs heavier after factoring the bearings, seatmast, etc.., If i can reduce the 1/4 pound, that too will help my climbing. Also, i need to factor the price difference. At 5'7" I would fit the small on the carbon. I can go either small or medium w/ alloy since 74 degree seat angle will reduce my reach. To many factors to make decsions.
I found both bikes to fit the exact same. I am 5'8/5'8.5 and like the medium with a 100mm stem. Every one on our team that was shorter than me ended up on a small. On the carbon, you don't want to have to whack off too much mast.

IMO if you are mainly XC racing the bike, the ASR-C is the way to go. If you are doing endurance events or not racing the bike, The alloy is a bit more forgiving and much more affordable. Honeslty, I don't think the carbon is any faster at a normal pace. It's stiffness equals speed once you are full-out hammering, sprinting for the line.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top