Any opinions expressed in this article belong to the author alone, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Singletracks.com.
Recently I got into a small quibble with a commenter over one of our cartoons. The cartoon illustrated a mountain biker talking about how light his new ride was. The caveat though, was that it included thin tires and weak brakes. The reader said something like “any decent full-suspension mountain bike over 28-pounds belongs on a Wal-Mart shelf.”
“Oof,” I though. This person is highly misinformed about modern mountain bikes. I replied to his comment, letting him know that World Cup athletes would disagree. His response: something like, “Well duh, more weight means more gravity.” They missed the point, and I could have had a better argument, but my focus was already bouncing around emails and twenty different tabs, and arguing with people in comments sections is highly unproductive, generally speaking. Following this, I am inclined to believe that the quibble inspired this survey.
My initial reaction to their comment, because I had weighed my bike the other day was “well, my bike weighs 32lbs and it friggin’ rips. What’s he trying to say?” It’s almost like hearing someone in the halls on the way to biology class say something superficial about your girlfriend to someone else, and you get this urge to stick your neck out and defend her. In our world of mountain bikes, arguments about weight and geometry and such are pretty trivial, but it’s our world, and I love nuance, and that’s why I chose the word quibble in the beginning of this argument.
Moreso, I have heard similar statements from friends lately. “I’d buy that bike, but it’s too heavy.” “I don’t want anything over 30lbs.” In other words, “this could be an absolutely sick bike for me, but one pound over my self-imposed limit and it’s a hard no.”
The truth of the matter is, and after spending more time this year on a lot of different bikes, the last thing I usually notice, and that anyone would likely notice, is a bike’s weight. Okay, a lot of this isn’t going to apply to competitive XC racers. Yes, weight still matters for you. And yeah, bikepackers too. But, I imagine the reasoning behind caring about weight when shopping for a new bike though is that brands usually list the weight for builds in their specs online. For consumers, with search engine tabs of their own pulled up, each one with a different bike, weight becomes an easy way to eliminate one of the many choices out there.
I had a similar experience car shopping over this summer and the MPG of one vehicle over another is why I chose the model that I bought, although the V8 I drove was way more fun. Yes, weight can make a difference, but when it comes to efficiency of movement, there are several other factors that make an even bigger difference, just like in a car.
Within the past two years, geometry has changed across brands just as much as it changed the two years before that. Except that the general consensus of thinking, seems to be “steeper, longer, slacker” instead of “lower, longer, slacker.” Those seat tubes are on the up and up and so are our climbing positions. Weight is generally considered a negative attribute because it takes away from climbing capability, but I for one will probably never buy a trail bike with a seat tube angle slacker than 75°, because hanging off the back end of a bike and putting more weight and energy into the rear suspension is just an awful feeling. That is of course to say that XC bikes still have pretty slack STAs, because their HTAs are steeper than most trail bikes. But, remember, we’re not talking about XC bikes!
Suspension kinematics have continued to make incredible strides over the past few years as well. Horst links, DW-links, CBFs, single-pivots, and anything in between. The range of acceptable pedal bob has shrunken tremendously, wasting less and less energy in the rear shock, while maximizing the traction that could be sacrificed for efficiency. There’s a lot that buyers can do about weight after they’ve bought a bike. There’s less that they can do to make the suspension more efficient.
This brings us into the discussion of build kits and how they affect the weight of the bike. It’s not a secret that product managers often pick thin-walled tires with light casings to bring the production weight of a complete bike down. If you’re a lighter rider who isn’t tangling with rock gardens and casing square edges, this might not be an issue. But, it is an issue for a lot of riders who need something thicker to stand up to what their bike is capable of. Don’t ask Gerow about this, unless you’re ready for an earful, but it is relevant to the conversation.
A proper, dual-ply tire can easily weigh 200g more than a thinner version. For a set, that’s 400g, or 14oz, which is just shy of a pound. A pound can make a hell of a difference in saying yes or no to a bike if you’re just comparing them on paper, but for anyone who really enjoys pushing the limits of their bike, it’s a weight penalty they’ll gladly accept. Having to sweat a little more on the way to the top beats hunching over your bike on the side of the trail to put a tube in.
Ask a handful of Enduro World Series riders what their bikes weigh, and there’s a good chance that number will be in the mid-30s. Dual-ply tires, coil shocks, tire inserts, and frames made to withstand serious abuse add up. But, I’d say that enduro racing and the development that’s since come is why we have more efficient suspension and steeper seat tube angles.
On top of that, it’s normal to see EWS athletes running 34t chainrings because they have no problem pedaling 35lb bikes up massive grades all weekend long with gearing most of us wouldn’t entertain. Could they climb better with lighter tires, or by using air suspension over coil? Sure, but I’d also bet that none of them would say that their bikes are bad at climbing because they’re heavy. They spend enough time training to compensate for that, and they need to because there are still plenty of enduro courses with rogue ascents smack dab in the middle. The advances in suspension technology and geometry have greatly compensated for a bike’s weight these days.
We don’t all have time to train like an EWS athlete to overcome a heavy bike, but we don’t all have time to train like an XC athlete either, where a pound or two does make a difference, and since most of us aren’t pro-enduro-ers, we don’t all need coil shocks and 12-pound wheelsets and there are lighter, more durable components than ever.
By all means, if weight is still a sticking point for you, go with the ultra-thin rubbers, and lightest carbon wheels available. Those definitely aren’t sold at Wal-Mart — yet. But, everything has its tradeoffs and I’d prefer holding my riding partners back because I’m the slow one on the heavier bike over having them wait for me in the middle of an epic downhill because I needed to remedy a cracked component or punctured tire.
I have been a serious mountain biker for 26 years. I have raced XC, Enduro (called downhill in the day) and lived in areas where I only needed a hardtail or a shot travel suspension (East Coast of USA). I have also lived in areas where a longer travel bike was better (West Coast of USA and, Costa Rica, Chile).
And I can say with certainty that there is no one size fits all in mountain biking. But in regard to weight I have learned that the lighter the better if there is any degree of climbing involved. Even with my enduro bikes I have always leaned toward the 27-28 lbs weight range (Pivot Mach 5 and Santa Cruz Hightower ). When it comes to shorter travel bikes (Niner JET RDO, or my Ibis Ripley) the lighter the better. Again, if you want to be able to climb as efficiently as possible and just have more fun to get up the hills quicker and with killing yourself.
But, there is another factor that needs to be considered. The lighter a particular model, the more expensive it is.
I have been a serious mountain biker for 26 years. I have raced XC, Enduro (called downhill in the day) and lived in areas where I only needed a hardtail or a shot travel suspension (East Coast of USA). I have also lived in areas where a longer travel bike was better (West Coast of USA and, Costa Rica, Chile).
And I can say with certainty that there is no one size fits all in mountain biking. But in regard to weight I have learned that the lighter the better if there is any degree of climbing involved. Even with my enduro bikes I have always leaned toward the 27-28 lbs weight range (Pivot Mach 5 and Santa Cruz Hightower ). When it comes to shorter travel bikes (Niner JET RDO, or my Ibis Ripley) the lighter the better. Again, if you want to be able to climb as efficiently as possible and just have more fun to get up the hills quicker and with killing yourself.
But, there is another factor that needs to be considered. The lighter a particular model, the more expensive it is.
So, my council is to get the lightest bike you can afford in the said category you are exploring. Is this the only important consideration, of course not, but don’t write off the weight of the bike as “not important to me” if you want to climb with less pain, faster and just plain more fun. If you don’t care at all about “getting up” then sure, ignore the weight and the extra exercise in lugging the extra weight of the climbs.
Oh gosh…sorry guys, I just double pasted my response and there is not way to edit. So, maybe I know mounting biking but making posts…not so much!
Weight is definitely a consideration when it comes to MTBs today, though I agree it shouldn’t be the primary consideration for most riders.
Historically it seems mountain bikes have been on sort of a yo-yo diet, gaining features (like suspension, or dropper posts) and consequently, added weight; then, the engineers start looking for ways to reduce weight while keeping the new features everyone has come to love. Over the past few years it seems we’ve been in the feature phase with dropper posts and meatier tires, so gaining weight is acceptable. I suspect once we’re out of ideas for stuff to add, or we’re happy with how capable our bikes have become, we’ll start chasing the next improvement which may very well be lighter weights.
One of the things that makes bikes fascinating to me is the constraints that shape their design. As human-powered machines, they will always need to be “light enough” to remain efficient yet capable enough to take us to all the crazy places we want to go. Balancing the two will always remain a challenge.
Solid points, Jeff!
A 200+ pound “Big Boy” probably isn’t going to mind riding a 35 pound bike (and they might need all that bike just so they don’t break it). A 120 pound petite is going to mind 35 pounds quite a lot. I’m no fan of the “Mini-Enduro” trend where even the shortest travel Trailbikes are built like stout Enduro bikes. The Santa Cruz Tallboy being a good example. The affordable 3000$-4000$ builds weigh about 33 pounds. I think the recent crop of Downcountry bikes like the Transition Spur and Specialized Epic Evo (with affordable builds that weight ~26 pounds) are breathing some fresh air into a bike industry that has gotten complacent about weight. I think we can have capable bikes that can also be lightweight.
I think you’re right too. I have heavier friends who need the durability of heavier components, otherwise they break too much stuff. Much depends on riding style and terrain too…I’m not that heavy of a rider, but find myself slashing tires, or wanting an insert every now and then because of a lot of square edge rocks on my trails.
If elapsed time matters, all things equal, I’ve never found a way to make up more time than less weight on climbs. You’ll not make the the same time with extra 5lbs in preferable suspension/geometry/tire. At least I was never able to, not for most courses. Did it feel squirrelly? Hell yes. Are you losing gobs of time? Not always as much you’d think. If fun is the only goal, not time, then do what makes you happiest. Some people find being a weight weenie fun, others find it expensive and ridiculous. Neither is wrong if you love your ride!
Great points Matt. My current bike is the heaviest mountain bike I have owned, weighing close to 30lbs, and I have set more PRs with it than any of my other bikes. The modern geometry, along with a high quality front fork, have made all the difference for me, giving me the confidence I need to go faster. Also, I like the extra weight because it makes the bike feel more stable on technical terrain than the XC bikes I rode in the past. Weight should not be a rider’s primary focus in purchasing a bike.
Good point on how a little more weight can make for a stable feeling descender too, Richard. Nothing quite like being ping-ponged around on a bike that is a little too light.
So I’m labelled a “big-boy”. Just great. I’m not fat, I’m just big boned.
I started riding in the early ’80s. I was a professional bike mechanic from 1990 to 2000. That was the era of the weight-weenie. Lots of broken frames, flat tires and tweaked rims. Through the years each of my new bikes has been heavier but had better handling and better reliability. I can feel the change from my previous 26 lb Norco Sight 27 but it seems to be worth it. I still own my 24 lb S-Works FS 26 inch and ride it every now and then. Scary ride. Weight is still important to me because my bike has to do the occasional XC race (for fun) and go to the park and survive (me and the bike). Weight is always a compromise. There are ways to get a reliable bike light but better bring lots of $$. The cheapest way to lose weight, especially with a 29er, is light tires, but now you are carrying 2 spare tubes and a sidewall repair kit. Folks that want to go back to the 26 lb FS bike are going to find that difficult. Manufactures just do not want to do the warranty work for all those broken frames from doing drops and road gaps.
Yes, …and no. Sure gross generalizations on the pros and cons of weight focused gear selection mean less if you are XXX. This is a subject that has been beat up and down the hill since the inception of biking. I am responding because it absolutely hurts me, that my wife’s girlfriend, at 105lb, was sold a bike with a Fox 36 up front, and she barely gets 2″ of travel out of it. The bike weighs more than my ride, …okay, I’m only 152lb., but she could be enjoying her sport significantly more, if the bike industry wasn’t so quick to dismiss the benefits of reasonable ‘scaling’. She can’t afford a $11K bike to knock off the extra 4 pound, and shouldn’t be stuck with a bike tough enough for her 200lb husband to toss down black diamond trails.
I had my dealer swap out the 36 for a 34 before I bought the bike. A deal for him and the right fork for me.
Everyone has their own opinion, but given the choice of a 28 lb trail bike or a 35 lb trail bike, I’ll take the 28 lb bike all day long. It will be much faster climbing, and a lighter bike is easier to control and flick around the trails.
Additionally, there is a huge difference between rolling weight and static weight, which I don’t believe was addressed in this article. Light weight wheels and stiffer wheels (which normally goes hand-in-hand) will certainly make a rider faster. Again, especially uphill.
Speed is a function of power to weight. More power with the same weight = faster. Or same power with less weight = faster. Again, everyone has their own thing, but I like going faster. Without a major increase in ones power, a lighter bike is faster plain and simple and might be as big a determining factor as anything. Of course, a lighter rider can make an even bigger difference. Taking a couple pounds off a bike is expensive, taking a couple pounds off a rider just requires some work and discipline.
But, my point – weight matters if you want to go fast!
I’m 140lbs, 70 years old, and I can kick the ass of probably half the MTB riders ass in my hometown of Bend OR. Weight matters. I ride an S-Works Camber that sits right at 20lbs, my race bike is an S-Works Epic hardtail at 17lbs. I do ultra distance MTB and oh what a difference (the lack of) weight makes. Until you’ve been on one of these lightweight gems you might not understand.
Well put Matt and Jeff! I tend to think, as in so many disciplines, that weight is an easily-measured “discriminator”. Said another way, it’s an easy marketing differentiator that appeals to buyers, but may not be super relevant to performance. I see this approach used often in running shoes, cars, bikes, etc. Often what is easily-measured doesn’t have the performance relevancy that other more-hard-to-measure factors do. E.g. tire grip, trail conditions, riding style/discipline, suspension setup, etc. So…….while weight is a factor, I’d place it near the bottom in choosing between different MTBs.
Great points Matt! Well argued.
Well written article and I agree 110% on. Unless your just trying to win that next XC race and lighter for you is faster, forget it. Lightweight bikes also could mean your going to get tossed around a lot in the chunk. I’d rather have a stronger bike with the best suspension and components and over time just build up strength and stamina to ride the bike properly.
Viathon ( wallmart), probably could crush some trails on one. I myself weigh 170ish and on a fresh kona tank and couldn’t be happier with how it climbs. I tend to work my bikes over pretty good and wanted a beefy build. Want your bike to feel lite, climb steeper hills more often in higher gears.
There is always the sweet spot and a tool for the job. My 4wd pickup truck will do 100+, but don’t expect me to make the turn. That is why we have quivers. There are up bikes and down bikes and all-around bikes. If you only have one bike, consider a race wheelset. Even if you don’t race. Think of it as the, ‘I’d rather not get my butt handed to me on a silver plate today wheelset’. MOAB sandstone is different. The main thing is that we don’t reject science and engineering and good design based on a bad experience or bad review. Our sport is diverse, as are abilities and riding styles. It isn’t the cheapest sport, but scrappiness goes a long way. I just can’t come up with anything else that makes me smile as consistently, and part of that is the gear challenge.
The only time I hate how much my bike weighs (~34 lbs) is when I have to load it on the tailgate pad. Otherwise I’ll take a slower climb with a heavier bike in exchange for something that feels more planted on the descents.
I cannot laugh hard or loud enough at the weight weenie that spends 10k on a, shall we say one season wonder! When I laced up the wheels for my Wildcat V1, I chose Onyx hubs since they are of the rare zero lash engagement type and are available in colors. A friend said they are heavier than brand x, y and z hubs, none of which are zero lash and one was available in colors. I said, there is a difference between an F350 Superduty and a Hyundai, my bike is in the earlier mentioned class…
Do I worry about weight? Not so much since I am looking at long term ownership with the performance that will allow the bike to keep its job. I do look at places where I can save a little weight without compromise on overall longevity or performance.
While I don’t really care about weight, I have no interest in a bike made of rebar either.
At the same time, I pass on the bike that is anorexic since it might survive a season of trialsy Rocky Mountain riding, might being the key modifier.
Totally agree
I ride a $10 k “weight weenie anorexic” bike. First of all, it’s definitely not a one season wonder. I’m on my third Sworks Epic full suspension. The only reason it’s my third is because I keep selling the last model and upgrading every three years. Sell the frames for a ton of money, to friends, that keep riding them. Likewise just got the new Roval Control Team LTD wheels. Again they’re replacing a three year old pair of Roval wheels. Old ones were about 1380 grams. New ones are 1240 grams. And again the old ones were given to a friend. I have carbon wheels on a gravel bike that are six years old. Good expensive stuff doesn’t break, and as a matter of fact the pros that get paid to ride bikes ride the weight weenie stuff. And it’s not replaced every year. The full carbon $10,000 XC bikes last as long as anything. And with the new XC geo are more capable than ever.
As for you passing someone on one of these bikes, if ridden by the right person, no one is passing a XC rider on a super light XC rig, unless you’re just doing downhill trails. Then yeah a downhill bike is needed.
Weight matters – IF you want to go fast. And that’s up or down, again the caveat if you’re only looking for a downhill ride.
You can buy light – durable – cheap – but not all three at once. Pick two. Light durable is never cheap, but it does exist and it is crazy fast. Light cheap isn’t durable. And durable cheap is going to be heavier.
But the main thing is we all have fun. Weight IS a key consideration for me, and I’m not wrong for making it so.
Which is why I think the article headline is a bit off.
I’ll opt to say, my Wildcat and Middlechild have earned tenure. They earned that through their Performance and fit.
Too many have been a one season wonder however, that doesn’t say all are. Such a deal!
As for looking for a ride. I live in the Rocky Mountains at 7,000′ of elevation… Show me a ascent without a descent! Either way, I haven’t opted to renew the Keystone season pass lately.
Now back to the plastic bike, at that budget, I require that it shall be executed with the lengths and angles I and only i specify, plain as that.
In general I absolutely agree. If given the choice between two equally durable bikes, one bike that’s light but has geometry I don’t like (such as a slack seat tube angle) and a heavy bike with geometry I do like I’ll take the heavy bike every day of the week. That said if I can afford an equally durable lighter version of the bike I like the geometry of I’ll take that. It also depends on what I’m using the bike for as well. I care a lot more about weight on a pedally trail bike than my enduro bike. In general I also don’t really care about weight below about 32 lbs, and it’s still not a big factor even above that (for reference I weigh 130)