Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
hey guys,

I'm getting ready to upgrade my aluminum Blur lt2 to a Ltc but I can't seem to pinpoint the exact real weight of a Medium Blur Ltc. Hoping i can get some answers here!

I noticed on the SC website it shows the LTc frame at 6.06 pounds and the aluminum at 6.60. I've seen some sites claiming the weight of the LTc frame at 5.6 pounds, 5.7 pounds etc.

Bottom line question is: how much does the LTc frame weigh (medium) and what's the weight difference to be expected between the carbon and the Aluminum LT2 frame? Thanks in advance for the help!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
if you use the bike builder to compare (on the santa cruz site) the LTC and LT builds with sampe forks and kit spec then it seems to come out at more than .6 pounds difference between the 2 builds, although not sure how accurate their build weights are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
thanks for the feedback guys. I think the posted weights on both the aluminum and carbon frames are a bit higher on the SC site for some strange reason. I guess half a pound difference would be the best guess so far.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,171 Posts
Meh, buying the BLTc for weight would disappoint you. Ignore the weight and get it for its ride quality, and you can thank me later :thumbsup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
Agreed. Just because it's carbon doesn't mean that it should be lighter. I've seen mine tumble off into the distance down a few hills now only to make my way down to it and find nary a scratch on it.

This frame is so strong it will outlast you. The stiffness with a decent set of wheels is insane. Every pedal stroke is put into forward motion. No energy wastage here.

Frame weight would be the least of my concerns when building up a ride. Rotating mass is the problem which affects the equation more. A nice set of strong light wheels doesn't cost the earth any more unless your heading for carbon rims. The Easton Haven is great value for money as would be a set of Stans Arch with some decent hubs and a good build. The new Crank Bros Iodine's are great too. The free hub has been fixed up and they run at a decent weight being only marginally heavier than the Havens.

Given my choices again. I would do the same thing. Buy the carbon frame. Everything else can be upgraded as it breaks or wears out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
thanks for the suggestions Pau11y and Damien. I have to admit, I was distracted by caring too much about the weight because my brother has a 24.2 pound ibis mojo SL.

beyond the weight though, i felt the ibis SL was more stiffer on the rear with less bob. My 2011 aluminum lt2 still has a bit of pedal bob when going uphill. Wondering if the LTc will make a difference in stiffness between the aluminum 2011 and carbon.

About to spill another 2k plus on a frame and sell my 1 year old frame, so just wanted to make sure i make the right choice for myself this time around :)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,171 Posts
thanks for the suggestions Pau11y and Damien. I have to admit, I was distracted by caring too much about the weight because my brother has a 24.2 pound ibis mojo SL.

beyond the weight though, i felt the ibis SL was more stiffer on the rear with less bob. My 2011 aluminum lt2 still has a bit of pedal bob when going uphill. Wondering if the LTc will make a difference in stiffness between the aluminum 2011 and carbon.

About to spill another 2k plus on a frame and sell my 1 year old frame, so just wanted to make sure i make the right choice for myself this time around :)
Mojo SL(R) to the LT2 isn't a fair comparison...maybe to the Blur XC or TR
You know, I have a Nomad MK1 and that thing supposedly has a TON of pedal feedback. I'm not sure by what metric ppl are using to measure (a HT maybe?), but I've only noticed it rarely.
So, what are your goals, to climb like a billy goat (Blur XC or TR) or down it like a ragin' torrent (Nomad or V10), or both (yeah good luck on this one but the LT seems to be the only one left)?
I've said this about the LT before...90% of a Nomad on the downs...and you'd have to REALLY get after it to hit that mark!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Hey Pau11y. I always work for my downhills, so i'd say both the climbs and the decents are equally as important. i dont do any crazy jumps etc. just trail to slightly technical stuff. That's why I initially ran with the blur LT2 aluminum. The trc is looking nice though.

i'll probably get the LTc. Thanks for helping me get over the whole weight weenie syndrome :thumbsup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
265 Posts
If it helps

When I built my BLTc I weighed the frame (size L) with the seatpost collar and headset cups, and it came in at 2700 g (just a shade under 6 lb).

I agree with what Pau11y said - buy it for the performance not for the weight.

Since it was one of the first SC carbon bikes, I think they were extra careful about strength. As a result the BLTc is a little overbuilt - not necessarily a bad thing, but if your focus is on weight I'd say you should be looking at the TRc, which is more "weight-optimized". The TRc sounds like it fits your current riding style. If you go with the LTc, I'll bet you step things up in the aggressive-riding department. ;)
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top