Gaddmeister
Retrobike Rider
Re:
Yummy! :-D
Yummy! :-D
Lightest factory MTB?
- Thread starter jonnymcenroe
- Start date
barrysfunk
Dirt Disciple
Ant chance of a look?Had a look at the build thread , nice!
I have a di2 Cannondale road bike that I barely use. I know it's not an MTB but it is pretty stock aside from FSA k force light cranks over the si ones it came with. It is very, very light, but I assumed nothing out of the ordinary. I took it to my lbs as the di2 kept losing charge quickly and wanted it sorted. They weren't equipped to do anything, but they did comment that it was so light I wouldn't be able to race it in some categories. I had no idea what this meant and have no intention of racing it ever, but just another example of a very light Cannondale (alloy frame, caad 10 black Inc).
I've no other light stock bikes but my dynatech tours is very light for an MTB, even with steel forks (though triple butted).
I've no other light stock bikes but my dynatech tours is very light for an MTB, even with steel forks (though triple butted).
Lhatch4
Fat Chance Fan
My Team Marin (Columbus Steel) is right at 25 lbs as built in the picture. That's with a RS suspension seatpost and tubes inside the tires. Large frame. I'm 6'1" The titanium bike is about 23 lbs with that fork. The wheels are 27.5" again it's a large frame. Neither bike came from the bike shop the way they are built but it's definitely possible to build a cross country bike very light. But not every sacrifice is worth the weightloss.
Attachments
Prodigal Son
Senior Retro Guru
Anything w/ Easton ultralight tubing frame, a sid fork and 1.9 tires.
My 91 Xizang is around 23.5lbs that’s a 18” frame, with a U brake no suspension, steel quill stem, steel bars and a steel bottom bracket, the SPD are standard also so steel axle’s.
It has titanium chainrings they are 125g lighter than the m900 XTR ones.
Granted this would have come as a frame/fork set up but the Xizang Le was offered as a full bike in 1994
It has titanium chainrings they are 125g lighter than the m900 XTR ones.
Granted this would have come as a frame/fork set up but the Xizang Le was offered as a full bike in 1994
Last edited:
Lightest factory mtb, up to '97 I would have thought maybe one of the Trek OCLV frames or something like that would be up there? Giant mcm etc. I've had a few 'Dales and they are definately light straight out of the box, as were the aluminium Kona's eg Kula with Easton tubing.
My steel Orange Prestige was/is 24/25lbs and that's with a lot of lighter aftermarket parts fitted.... Lightweight really does begin with the frameset.
My steel Orange Prestige was/is 24/25lbs and that's with a lot of lighter aftermarket parts fitted.... Lightweight really does begin with the frameset.
I was amused by the earlier poster’s comments around the bb as a source of weight.
I recently picked up a Hei Hei, and I have to say I was a bit disappointed with the weight of the frame. Took the Impact headset out.. and then the bb. The latter was like a brick and explained my initial reaction to the chunky frame weight.
Only issue these days is finding a nice, light square taper bb in the right size. Not as easy as it once was..
I recently picked up a Hei Hei, and I have to say I was a bit disappointed with the weight of the frame. Took the Impact headset out.. and then the bb. The latter was like a brick and explained my initial reaction to the chunky frame weight.
Only issue these days is finding a nice, light square taper bb in the right size. Not as easy as it once was..
Chopper the ex Copper
Alpinestars Fan
It's easy for us to whack our own bikes on the scales and weigh them. We have the benefit of an entire bike in front of us, as is, ready to ride. No ambiguity whatsoever.
But manufacturers claims re weight should be taken with a large pinch of salt.
Its normal for manufacturers to quote a weight without pedals, but did you know that some also quote weight without tyres and tubes as well? Chuck in the fact that there is also no universal sizing system among manufacturers and it becomes impossible to use claimed weights as any kind of meaningful comparison. The weight weenie fools dribble over the figures without realising how meaningless and incomparable they are.
It's such an utter crock that Giant, the worlds largest cycle manufacturer, refuse to even publish bike weights and instead invite the prospective purchaser to visit a store and assess the weight first hand, which is the only sensible course of action for a new bike buyer unduly concerned with suvh matters.
But manufacturers claims re weight should be taken with a large pinch of salt.
Its normal for manufacturers to quote a weight without pedals, but did you know that some also quote weight without tyres and tubes as well? Chuck in the fact that there is also no universal sizing system among manufacturers and it becomes impossible to use claimed weights as any kind of meaningful comparison. The weight weenie fools dribble over the figures without realising how meaningless and incomparable they are.
It's such an utter crock that Giant, the worlds largest cycle manufacturer, refuse to even publish bike weights and instead invite the prospective purchaser to visit a store and assess the weight first hand, which is the only sensible course of action for a new bike buyer unduly concerned with suvh matters.
