Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

The *New* Official Weight Weenies F.A.Q

Jump to Latest
73K views 82 replies 20 participants last post by  Turd  
#1 · (Edited)
First, thanks to Trevor! for creating the original Weight Weenie FAQ, however it has been over ten years since it was created, so I figured it was time for a new one.

Note: I reference various manufacturers and sites that I feel are relevant to the discussion. This is not meant as a promotion of any given brand or property. I am simply referring to things that I'm aware of personally.

If I've omitted a resource, please contact me.
If you have other tips, please share them.
If I'm made an error, please let me know. :)

I'll start with some common questions that get asked in the Weight Weenies subforum:


What is a Weight Weenie (WW)?

A WW is someone who is concerned with the overall weight of their bike. Practitioners range from folks who just want to drop a bit of weight from their bike, to people who obsess over every part.
Typically the goal is to retain performance, but shed weight. This is not always possible though, or may only be possible at a significant price.

My personal philosophy is to ensure my updated bike is still fully "rideable" (apparently that's not a word), the way I want to ride it, on its intended terrain.
​
 
#2 · (Edited)
Is my bike heavy? Do you have examples of some light bikes?

First off, it's all relative. In general, a 26" bike will be lighter than a 650b, which in turn is typically lighter than a 29er. Also the discipline, or intended use of the bike makes a huge difference: an XC Race bike will be on the light end, through to a pure downhill bike that can weigh far more. Frame size (small to XL) and suspension (fully rigid to full suspension) also have a big influence on the total weight.

I can offer some recent examples from this subforum though of several types:

Acko has built a crazy-light fully rigid SS bike:
http://forums.mtbr.com/weight-weeni...ht-weenies/99-9%-complete-7kg-15-4lb-one9-rdo-marathon-race-machine-939111.html

Andrepsz has a light Scott Spark (full-suspension 69er - mixed wheels):
http://forums.mtbr.com/weight-weenies/69er-scott-spark-21lbs-849097.html

Yellowr6 has built a light 26" hardtail Stumpjumper :
http://forums.mtbr.com/weight-weenies/my-2009-sworks-stumpjumper-ht-build-947181.html

I'm working on a 29er hardtail XC bike:
http://forums.mtbr.com/weight-weenies/new-build-2013-s-works-stumpjumper-ht-935429.html

...and people continue to post to this thread to share light bikes of various types:
http://forums.mtbr.com/weight-weenies/post-your-light-weight-bikes-426557.html
​
 
#3 · (Edited)
What's the best way to lose weight on a bike?

This question comes up a lot. "Best" could mean losing the most weight, or it could mean losing weight without spending too much money. Below are some common ideas, along with the typical cost:
$ = Inexpensive per gram of weight lost
$$ = Moderately Expensive per gram of weight lost
$$$ = Expensive per gram of weight lost

Move to 1X Gearing ($)

"1X" simply means a single chainring up front, instead of the 2 or 3 your bike came with. By moving to this setup, you can remove the front shifter, front derailleur, and at least one chainring from your bike for significant weight savings. A lot of bikes come in this flavour from the factory if they include SRAM's XX1 system, or Shimano's new M9000 platform.

To modify an existing 2X or 3X setup, you'll want to find a single chainring solution. The often have higher or "tall" teeth to help keep the chain on, as there's no longer a front derailleur in play. Firms like Raceface, Wolftooth, Absolutely Black and others offer single chainring solutions. Some bolt to your spider, while others are "spiderless" to shed even more weight.

Some manufacturers will recommend a clutched rear derailleur with their 1X rings. The idea here is that the clutch makes for better chain retention - again because there is no longer a front derailleur to keep the chain on. Shimano calls their clutch system "Shadow Plus", while SRAM's clutched rear derailleurs are called "Type 2". I solicited feedback from this forum to see if folks have been fine with a regular, or non-clutched rear derailleur and results were mixed:
http://forums.mtbr.com/drivetrain-s...s-derailleurs-cranks/1x-chainring-have-you-been-fine-without-clutch-949711.html
Here's an example of a spiderless 1X chainring, from Wolftooth. This particular one has 34 teeth (as indicated by 34T in the photo).

In terms of actual gearing, you'll want to carefully choose an appropriate number of teeth for the single chainring. Simple rule: more teeth mean higher top end speed, but tougher climbing. On the low end, you can find 28T rings which will give you more of the "granny side", but you may spin out (run out of gears) in higher speed situations, like big downhills. On the other side you can go for 34T or more, but you had better have strong, strong legs. As a tradeoff, 32T is probably doable for most people in most conditions.

Here's a link to Sheldon Brown's gear calculator which is very helpful in determining what to choose for your front chainring. Start by calculating the gear ratios you have now (with 2X or 3X), and then consider which gears you are in most when on the trail. Then figure which range makes the most sense for you:
Sheldon Brown's Bicycle Gear Calculator


Change Your Grips ($)

A nice, inexpensive way to shed weight can be with grips, specifically foam-based ones. Currently the lightest I'm aware of are LIzardskins DSPs @ 12.5g each. Also light are ESI's silocon grips. While you won't be saving a ton of net weight, this change won't cost you much, and is among the best $ per gram things to implement.
A comparison of the 2 lightest grips available currently: ESI's Racer's Edge top, Lizardskins DSP bottom. Thanks to RS VR6 for the pic.


Upgrade Your Wheelset ($$ - $$$)

This can be pricey, but it is one of the most noticeable things you can do in terms of savings weight. You are constantly spinning your wheels, and less rotational mass is something you'll feel right away. Too many brands to give specifics, but carbon rims are generally going to be the lightest available. However, some wheelsets have a rider weight limitation, so be certain to check that before purchasing.

An alternative that may be cheaper, or at least give you exactly what you want, is to build up a wheelset from a selection of rims, spokes, nipples and hubs. MTBR has a subforum specific to Wheels that is a great resource: Wheels and Tires - Mtbr.com

While we're on it, here's an ultra-lite custom-built wheelset by Ole:
[Thread suggested by lRalphl]

http://forums.mtbr.com/weight-weenies/1062g-29-xc-race-wheels-947446.html

​
 
#4 · (Edited)
Tires ($$)

Some of the lighter tires can get very pricey, but $/gram is in the midrange for this type of upgrade. However, while most WW parts can give you identical performance at lighter weight, there's typically a tradeoff with tires.
To shed weight in this area, you are typically trading away puncture resistance and/or grip (and width) - there's no free ride here. However, there are cases where you can find lighter tires than your existing ones, with virtually no negatives. I'd say most people can save 100-200g in this area without having to give up grip & puncture resistance.
The lightest 29er tires I'm aware of are Schwalbe's Furious Freds, claimed at ~360g each. (My weights of these are typically in the 380g region). Make no mistake though that you are throwing away puncture resistance, and the tread is certainly not for even moist conditions.


The Schwalbe Furious Fred tire. I'm warning you now - it is not for everyone, and only for limited conditions.

As another resource, there's a great thread on 29er Tire Weights that is contributed to frequently. It's a great way to see actual weights of a given tire:
[Thanks to muntos for the thread suggestion.]

http://forums.mtbr.com/wheels-tires/29er-tire-weight-list-532607.html

Go Tubeless ($)

This is cheap to do, but probably not the massive weight loss some people assume. The gist is that you no longer use inner tubes (which can weigh as much as 150-200g each), but instead use rim tape, tubeless valves, and fluid to seal the tire and rim.
Stan's yellow tape will be about 7g for one layer on a 29er wheel, so at 14g this isn't a concern. However it would not be uncommon to add 100g worth of sealing fluid (there are several out there, Stan's, Orange Seal, etc). So when the valve weight is added, you'll likely save a bit here, but not a ton.
While often considered a weight weenie thing, it is really about preventing pinch flats, as you can run far lower tire pressures when tubeless.

Tip: Some people have used Scotch's 8898 "strapping tape" as a less expensive alternative to Stan's tape. It is apparently thinner, so may need 2 wraps around the rim as opposed to 1. Gorilla tape is also popular, and used often in "ghetto tubeless" situations:


What about UST wheels and tires?

"UST" is the Mavic brand for a true tubeless system. UST rims, such as the popular Mavic SLR (and newest SL) have sealed rims by default, so no tape is required. Also, when matched with a true UST tire, technically no fluid is required to make the seal.
However, UST rims and especially tires are heavier than non-UST equivalents, and thus the fluid and rim tape savings are more than offset. Besides, using fluid has the added advantage of saving you from smaller punctures - at least until you can limp home. So often UST users will still have fluid in their tires.

In the end, UST doesn't amount to weight savings.

Bars, Seatpost, Stem ($$$)

With this category, we get into what I call "death by a thousand cuts". Everything can be lighter, but it starts to cost you quite a bit.

You will surely be able to lose weight with upgraded carbon bars, seatposts, and even carbon stems (although alloy stems are still more common), but the $/gram for this area is high. All the big manufactures like Easton, Enve, Ritchey offer light components here, however for really light it seems to be dominated by European boutique manufacturers. Brands like Schmolke, MCFK, AX Lightness, Extralite and others have quality products but with astounding prices.
An example of a super-lightweight handlebar, in this case from Schmolke.


Seatpost Collar/Binder/Clamp ($$ -$$$)
[Topic Suggested by CuddlyToast]

This can be an expensive one with moderate savings, but yet another area that adds up. On the extreme end of the scale, in both price and low-weight is this carbon strap offering from MCFK at an incredible 5g - although I haven't used this myself (yet):
MCFK seatpost clamp in UD carbon.



​
 
#5 · (Edited)
Fork ($$-$$$)

This is similar to the tire scenario, in that weight loss in this area typically comes at a cost, which amounts to stiffness and suspension. You can certainly go lighter by changing from a 120mm to a 90mm suspension fork, but that will have quite the effect on your ride and may counteract the bike's intended terrain.

Things that will help in the weight department will be a carbon steerer, which while it shouldn't give a ride penalty (might arguably be stiffer) it will cost more. QR (quick release) front dropouts will typically be a bit lighter, but certainly less stiff than a 15mm thru axle, which is also more common.

A "Lefty" fork (from Cannondale) is a popular choice for WWs. It has a single leg design that looks a bit funky, but certainly sheds a good bit of weight over the traditional double-stanchion fork design. Just be aware that you'll require a special front hub for your wheel.

As with tires above, it's all about tradeoffs here.
The Cannondale Lefty fork.



Pedals ($$-$$$)

This is often a personal preference issue as much as anything. If clippped in, do you like the Shimano SPD cleats, are will you try something else? Maybe you don't like being clippped in at all, and want to use flat platforms. The lightest pedals I'm aware of are the Crank Bros Eggbeater 11s, which are claimed at 174g for the pair. Some people hate them. Some people have found them unreliable. I have had a pair for several seasons without issue, but know that you will be using a different cleat style if you opt for them.

In any event, stick with pedals you like, and that are appropriate for the type of riding you do, and cleat that you find convenient.
Crank Bros Eggbeater 11 pedals. Very light, but perhaps not for everybody. (Not a fan of the gold accents myself.)



Shifting & Brakes ($$$)

Not that many options in this area, and to get really light you'll need to spend a lot of money unfortunately. For shifting, you pretty much have SRAM and Shimano to choose from. Both have lightweight offerings (XX1 and XTR respectively), so pick whatever you prefer. In many cases though, dropping down a component level, such as XT in the case of Shimano, can give you pretty much the same performance for just a bit heavier.

Likewise with brakes, you have the usual players of SRAM and Shimano. However you might also consider Magura and Formula who offer very light weight packages, but at extreme cost. I'm not familiar first-hand with Hope brakes, but have heard good things.

alexdi has created a handy list of brake weights:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

Shifting & Brakes: Hoses & Cables ($$)
[Topic suggested by CuddlyToast]

There are some savings to be had by changing your brake hoses (if hydraulic), and your shifter casing. These aren't crazy expensive in absolute terms, but also not the most savings you can obtain with a single change, thus putting these mods into the "moderate" cost camp.

Jagwire and Nokon are providers here. In terms of their "lower end" casing, there's is just a small amount of weight to be saved. As an example below, see a comparison between more or less equal segments (~163cm) of both:
Stock (for XTR) Shimano shifter housing @ 54g.
Jagwire "Pro" shifter housing @ 50g.

They also offer a funky-looking Elite version made up of segmented links which can offer decent weight savings over the solid tube versions above:
Jagwire "Elite" in black.


Finally - although I haven't used it myself - there is a firm called PowerCordz that offers an alternative to the typical metal shifter cables we use. These are a synthetic fibre that is claimed to be lighter than typical shifter cables:
Powercordz shifter cable.


Brake Rotors ($-$$$)

First off, I see a lot of bikes that are "overbraked". I'm 180 lbs kitted up, and for my XC trails, I have more than enough braking power with a 140mm brake on the rear, and a 160mm brake on the front. I'm just adding needless weight if I used 160 and 180mm combination. I suspect a fair amount of people are in the overbraked category.

The other thing to consider are brake adapters. For example, on my current frame, the brake will fit a 140mm rotor on the rear without an adapter - that is the "native" size. If I move to a 160mm rotor in the rear, not only am I adding rotor weight, but I have to add the adapter. So consider the double-whammy that can happen in this case.

In terms of brake rotor styles, this category is unique because you can get light rotors for cheap, right up to ridiculous carbon ones:
​


  • [*=left]On the inexpensive side, both Ashima and KCNC offer light steel rotors. They have a ton of cutouts, so may not be appropriate for all riding types, especially downhill.
    [*=left] On the midrange side and higher you can opt for Titanium rotors that are yet again lighter, but may be noisy - I bought a pair from Carver myself, but haven't tested them yet. Absolute Black may also offer some soon.
    [*=left]On the crazy expensive end of the scale, you have Magnesium Matrix rotors, and Carbon rotors. These are about as light as you can get, but at least in terms of Kettle's Carbon rotors which I've used for 1.5 seasons, they aren't quite ready for prime time in my opinion.


The Ashima Ai2 rotor - one of the lighter, and relatively inexpensive options out there.

Here's another reference on rotors, which is a bit dated, but it nicely lists some alternatives out there and at least you get a sense of the relative weights:
FAQLoad - Lightweight disc brake rotors


​
 
#6 · (Edited)
Frames ($$$)

We get people posting in this WW subforum all the time that want to lighten a bike with a heavy frame. Regardless of other changes you make, a heavy frame will kill you in terms of weight. Before you opt for an expensive new frame though, it is probably worth making a few other changes first. You may find you are pleased with the weight after a wheelset upgrade. In addition, any lighter bars, wheels, etc can easily be moved to a new frame later, if you ultimately decide to go that route.
If you do opt for a new frame, the simple rule is that carbon will be lighter than aluminum. (Titanium frames are out there, but far less common, and not inexpensive either.) However the most important thing of course is to (1) ensure the sizing/geometry fits you, and (2) you buy a frame appropriate for the type of riding you do.

Bottom line though, it is an expensive proposition.


Bolts ($$$)
This is easy to do, not crazy expensive in absolute terms, but probably the most expensive in $/gram. The idea is to swap out your existing bolts and hardware with lighter equivalents.

Here's a quick rundown:
​


  • [*=left]Titanium (Ti) bolts are lighter than steel, and can be used anywhere. A common application is to use them to attach your brake rotors, as it requires 6 bolts. They are expensive.
    [*=left]Aluminum is even lighter than Ti, but far softer, and thus aren't suggested for high-stress areas. You can also easily strip the heads of these bolts. I'd relegate them to derailleur adjustment and bottle cage bolts, but I think some people have used them elsewhere.
    [*=left]Nylon bolts are super cheap. Perfect replacement for bottle cage bolts as well, but can't be used anywhere else that I'm aware of.

Here are some great scale shots from XC71 that show M5 x 20mm bolt weights across various material types:
Steel: 4.2g
Titanium: 2.1g
Aluminum: 1.4g
Carbon Fibre: 0.7g
Nylon: 0.5g

I have found Ti bolts from Toronto Cycles in the past, and a firm called ProTi also offers complete kits. I use something called Silicone "Tidds" which are just fillers for unused cage bolts, which total 1g for 4 of them.

Here's another viewpoint on bolt tuning in general:
FAQLoad - Bolt Tuning - replacing heavy steel bolts with titanium, aluminum and carbon fiber


QRs, Thru Bolts, Thru Axles ($$$)

Quite a wide range of cost on these, but like bars, stems & seatposts, to get super-light you have to spend a lot of money.
Tune makes several types of these, some surprisingly light, but surprisingly expensive. Extralite has some light axle solutions as well that I know of.
Simply put, there is a bit of weight to be saved here, but the $/gram is very high.

Here's some examples for the 15mm thru-axle, specifically Rockshox in this case. The first photo is the stock solution, followed by Tune's DC15, then an Extralite hex-only:
The stock 15mm solution from Rockshox @ 70g. Sorry for the blurry pic.

Tune's offering @ 43g, and it retains the quick release function.
Extralite's Blacklock @ a claimed 26.7g, but requires a hex wrench to remove.

Saddles ($-$$$)

There's a very wide range of cost for saddles, but more than any other component, this is about personal preference. If a saddle shape isn't comfortable for you, nothing else matters.
A common, inexpensive, and very light solution is to grab a fully-carbon saddle from eBay. These weigh around 110g, and cost only about $40. That's among the best $/gram deals in WW world.
While the lack of padding may scare you, I'd point out that even expensive padded saddles don't offer much cushioning, and as mentioned the shape is the most important thing. In addition, fully carbon saddles incorporate some flex naturally, which helps greatly with comfort.
On the high end, you can spend hundreds on other full carbon saddles, such as one from MCFK that is a measly 70g. In addition, there are countless saddle options out there, but truly light ones will typically cost quite a bit.

Michael8V8 has written a great post ccomparing several inexpensive carbon saddles here.

Tips:
​


  • [*=left]Beware of carbon rails on light saddles. They are often oval shaped (instead of round) and thus your seatpost clamping mechanism may not work with them. Double-check before buying.
    [*=left]If you find a saddle that you absolutely love, buy a second one as a spare in case the manufacturer discontinues them.


A typical all-carbon saddle sold on eBay.

​
 
#7 · (Edited)
Cassette ($$-$$$)

The lightest, practical cassette that I'm aware of is SRAM's XX, at 208g. It is a 10-speed, but 11-speed equivalents are obviously heavier. Certainly if you want 11 gears, this doesn't apply to you.This cassette has a massive drawback though, in that the largest cog is made from aluminum, and will wear far earlier than the rest of the cassette. Although SRAM initially claimed otherwise, you cannot just replace that cog. A firm called ARI does sell a replacement cog, but it is expensive:
Upgrade your XX Cassette with ARI's replacement 36, 38, and 39t cogs

The only redeeming thing about this cassette is that the price has come down quite a bit since SRAMs XX1 system came out.

Shimano's 10-speed XTR cassette is light, but I believe 60-70g heavier, and their latest 11-speed is heavier again. As mentioned though, XX1 and the new M9000 are both great, light solutions for 11-speed riders.

All-aluminum cassettes, such as from Recon are super-light, but simply not practical - I'd suggest avoiding them.

Cost per gram of savings in this area is pretty high.



Chain ($$)

Lightest chain I'm aware of is from KMC, specifically their SL line. People tend to forget the chain is well over 250g in most cases. The aforementioned KMC is 237g for the 10-speed adjusted to the required length, so not a ton of savings, and a relatively high $/gram. I've used several of these in the past without issue - I am pleased with the wear.


Shot of the KMC 11-speed chain (X11SL DLC), in a variety of colours.



Cranks ($$$)
Same old story here. Carbon will be lightest, and most expensive. I'm partial (and probably biased) to Specialized cranks, but there are many options out there. I would strongly recommend crank boots if you go this route, and Raceface's offering only adds about 17g, but may save you from some nasty dings and rock hits.

Chainstay Protection ($)
This is a nice inexpensive one. Some bikes come with clamp on chainstay protection that is pretty heavy, and often overkill. One nice idea that people do is use an old tube, and ziptie it on, but that's also fairly heavy. A superlight option can be to use "helicopter tape" (from 3M) and wrap that around. It's just a few grams, and you can buy a big roll of it pretty cheaply. Might not always look great though.

From the pics below you can see a fairly big difference in weights:
Stock, plastic protector from a 2011 S-Works Epic 29er @ 43g.
A sheet of 3M "helicopter" tape @ 2g - you'll probably use a few sheets but that's still a lot of weight savings.
Here's a shot of 3M tape used as a chainstay protector. Light, and inexpensive, but a bit ugly IMO.

Misc - The Backpack ($$)
[Topic suggested by Yellowr6]

I realized I was carrying around a lot of extra, mostly useless stuff in my pack, so thought I'd review and revamp all of it. There's no perfect solution here, and by definition the varying types of bolt heads on your bike will dictate which tools you want. Here's a thread that offers some ideas to shed weight off of your back:

My Heavy Pack (Alternate Title: I'm Stupid)

Tip: Even though you may be running a tubeless setup with puncture-filling fluid (like Stan's, Orange Seal, etc), you should still pack a tube with you. The fluid won't help you on a large puncture, or a sidewall cut.

​
 
Y
#14 ·
phlegm said:


My personal philosophy is to ensure my updated bike is still fully "rideable", the way I want to ride it, on its intended terrain.
[/FONT]​
Click to expand...
Totally agreed. I got my 09 SW HT down to 16.4#. Maybe i could get it under 16 but it is fully rideable, the way i want to ride it. My answer is no. I had to change out the saddle, disc, pedals and tires. Now it is at 17.4#. Time to have some fun! :cool:
 
C
#18 ·
One thing worth noting, (maybe?) is cables and housing? nokon/jagwire elite are typically 15-20% lighter than their alternatives... you can get crazy with some Ti cables too.

Also, on all of my Santa Cruz bikes, you can save about 40-50gs on the seat post collar. Not the most savings, but still, death by a 1000x paper cuts and such.
 
#39 ·
I'm with the idea of 'raw'ing frames, also for carbon. People tend to be afraid of doing that and damage the carbon or weather exposure, I'd say its a myth! If done right we can get a lot of benefits on the process. I have watched a video of a high end company manufacture of carbon wheels for racing cars and all they do is to polish with a compound with UV protection...and that's it! I've stripped the paint off my carbon frame to find a gorgeous carbon texture underneath, virtually scratch free and can easily be buffed out and re-polished at any time.
I have used the blade technique, got some heavy duty blades at Home Depot. Its a looooong process; I basically needed about 2-3h everyday for about 4days to finish the work, but I'd say the blade technique is the safer way to do. Its easy to feel the difference between digging the paint and reaching the carbon layer. Once the blade touches the carbon its a echoey sound.
here is what I've used to polish:

....forgot to mention of course, I saved about 80-90g in the process.

 
T
#67 ·
80-90g savings???

light-bicycle claims 7-8g per wheel for clear coat. Have better things to do with my time than waxing raw carbon rims ... plus coming from a race car background I don't consider it a myth ...

andrepsz said:
I'm with the idea of 'raw'ing frames, also for carbon. People tend to be afraid of doing that and damage the carbon or weather exposure, I'd say its a myth! If done right we can get a lot of benefits on the process. I have watched a video of a high end company manufacture of carbon wheels for racing cars and all they do is to polish with a compound with UV protection...and that's it! I've stripped the paint off my carbon frame to find a gorgeous carbon texture underneath, virtually scratch free and can easily be buffed out and re-polished at any time.
I have used the blade technique, got some heavy duty blades at Home Depot. Its a looooong process; I basically needed about 2-3h everyday for about 4days to finish the work, but I'd say the blade technique is the safer way to do. Its easy to feel the difference between digging the paint and reaching the carbon layer. Once the blade touches the carbon its a echoey sound.
here is what I've used to polish:

....forgot to mention of course, I saved about 80-90g in the process.

Click to expand...
 
Mountain Bike Reviews Forum
posts
16M
members
535K
Since
1990
A forum community dedicated to Mountain Bike owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about bike parts, components, deals, performance, modifications, classifieds, trails, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
General Discussion Downhill - Freeride California - Norcal Shocks and Suspension Passion