Road Cycling · Public discussion

Shoe weight

Started by Resind · · Last activity · 15 posts · 2,555 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Road Cycling
Published
23 January 2003
Last activity
23 January 2003
Original author
Resind
Posts
15
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
2,555
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–15 of 15
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line Carnacs
    are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...

    I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

  2. resind wrote in message <[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line Carnacs
    are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...

    I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

    Have you been riding indoors a lot lately?

    Wade

  3. "resind" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line Carnacs
    are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...

    I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

    It's not important at all, unless you are a contender for the mailliot jaune. Until then, put down
    the twinkie until you make the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team presented by (dingle)Berry Floor.

    Thanks, Ronde Champ

  4. in article [email hidden], resind at [email hidden] wrote on
    01/06/2003 11:09 PM:

    Quoted message said:

    Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line Carnacs
    are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...

    I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

    Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.

    --

    Steven L. Sheffield stevens at veloworks dot com veloworks at worldnet dot ay tea tee dot net bellum
    pax est libertas servitus est ignoratio vis est ess ay ell tea ell ay kay ee sea aye tee why you ti
    ay aitch aitch tee tea pea colon [for word] slash [four ward] slash double-you double-yew double-ewe
    dot veloworks dot com [four word] slash

  5. In a road race with constant pedaling it seems that shoe weight difference wouldn't be too big of a
    deal, but then again.. you should also be concerned with the combined weight of the shoe and pedals
    maybe? If you are getting new pedals, consider weight for those too. I would lean towards an
    emphasis on fit, since I have first hand experience of riding in uncomfortable shoes, that are way
    lighter than my Sidi's. If they dont fit well, the ride just sucks. Kinda like skiing with
    uncomfortable boots... ack! Thats worse because your toes freeze.

    On a mtn bike though, on a course with high rates of starting and stopping of the pedaling motion I
    have seen where shoe weights do make a difference. I have noticed added fatigue with my water logged
    Sidi's, I feel like I have lead weights on. They fit just as well as when dry, and the added weight
    was extremely noticable.

    Go ride in your waterlogged Sidi's ... with heavy wet socks, then you'll be able to tell the
    difference.

    JCT

    resind said:

    Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line Carnacs
    are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...

    I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

  6. "Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    in article [email hidden], resind at [email hidden] wrote on 01/06/2003
    11:09 PM:

    Quoted message said:

    Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line
    Carnacs are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...

    I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

    Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.

    How can that be? Not that fit isn't important but that weight in the shoe isn't. Pedals are made to
    be light. Why wouldn't the same be true for shoes. 450 gram difference seems to be an awful lot
    compared to other components. DA and Ultegra pedals for instance.

    --
    Replace the dots to reply

    Perre

  7. "Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    in article [email hidden], resind at [email hidden] wrote on 01/06/2003
    11:09 PM:

    Quoted message said:

    Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line
    Carnacs are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...

    I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

    Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.


    A local track racer claims that his Rocket7 custom superlight shoes shaved over a second off his
    pursuit and bumped his sprint top speed higher as well (he used to wear heavy Carnacs). Now – I'm
    not rushing out to drop $400 on a pair, but I do opt for lighter production shoes if possible.

    But – Steven is right – fit is king, first and foremost. -a

  8. I'd agree that fit is way more important than weight. Also, I'm not so sure the weights given, 300
    for the Nike and 750 for the Carnacs are accurate. Perhaps one is for the pair and one is just a
    single shoe. I can certainly imagine the scenario where a company sees that all of its competitors
    list the pair weights so they opt to list the single shoe weight.

    Get a pair of shoes that fit.

    Wade

    Per Elmsäter wrote in message ...

    Quoted message said:

    "Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    in article [email hidden], resind at [email hidden] wrote on 01/06/2003
    11:09 PM:

    Quoted message said:

    Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line
    Carnacs are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...

    I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

    Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.

    How can that be? Not that fit isn't important but that weight in the shoe isn't. Pedals are made to
    be light. Why wouldn't the same be true for


    shoes.

    Quoted message said:

    450 gram difference seems to be an awful lot compared to other components. DA and Ultegra pedals
    for instance.

    --
    Replace the dots to reply

    Perre

  9. In article <[email hidden]>, Per Elmsäter

    Quoted message said:

    "Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    in article [email hidden], resind at [email hidden] wrote on 01/06/2003
    11:09 PM:

    Quoted message said:

    Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line
    Carnacs are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...

    I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

    Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.

    How can that be? Not that fit isn't important but that weight in the shoe isn't. Pedals are made to
    be light. Why wouldn't the same be true for shoes. 450 gram difference seems to be an awful lot
    compared to other components. DA and Ultegra pedals for instance.

    I have EEE width feet. I don't care if I could have weightless shoes, if they hurt my feet, I will
    be in hell.

    Scott
    --
    -*- Scott Patton -*- Colorado Springs, CO -*- fixedgearfever.comfixedgearfever.com -*- Track Racing
    Web Services

  10. The Sidis with Velcro straps (Genius, G2 and G3) are about 600g per pair. The Energy and Shadow (and
    I assume the Ergo 1) are slightly heavier. DMT Ultimax are also quoted at 600 grams. 750 seems
    heavy, but those 4 straps relatively heavy straps and the CF sole add weight.

    "Per Elmsäter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    "Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    in article [email hidden], resind at [email hidden] wrote on 01/06/2003
    11:09 PM:

    Quoted message said:

    Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line
    Carnacs are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...

    I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

    Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.

    How can that be? Not that fit isn't important but that weight in the shoe isn't. Pedals are made
    to be light. Why wouldn't the same be true for


    shoes.

    Quoted message said:

    450 gram difference seems to be an awful lot compared to other components. DA and Ultegra pedals
    for instance.

    --
    Replace the dots to reply

    Perre

  11. Check out the following link to an Ed Burke article on the CTS site:

    trainright.comenergycost.htm

    To summarise, Burke says adding 250 grams to the shoe/pedal combo per leg (500 grams total), will
    increase the power required by 1.5 to 1.7 percent.

    As for the shoe weights the original poster lists - I'm pretty sure the weight of the Nike shoe is
    Nike's claimed weight for ONE shoe, while the Carnac weight is Carnac's weight for BOTH shoes. Like
    every other component maker, shoe companies are nortorious for providing less than accurate weights.

    Thanks,

    Eric (who uses Carnac Quartz shoe and Time Equipe pedals!)

    Wade Summers said:


    I'd agree that fit is way more important than weight. Also, I'm not so sure the weights given, 300
    for the Nike and 750 for the Carnacs are accurate. Perhaps one is for the pair and one is just a
    single shoe. I can certainly imagine the scenario where a company sees that all of its competitors
    list the pair weights so they opt to list the single shoe weight.

    Get a pair of shoes that fit.

    Wade

    Per Elmsäter wrote in message ...

    Quoted message said:

    "Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    in article [email hidden], resind at [email hidden] wrote on 01/06/2003
    11:09 PM:

    > Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line
    > Carnacs are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...
    >
    > I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

    Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.

    How can that be? Not that fit isn't important but that weight in the shoe isn't. Pedals are made
    to be light. Why wouldn't the same be true for


    shoes.

    Quoted message said:

    450 gram difference seems to be an awful lot compared to other components. DA and Ultegra pedals
    for instance.

    --
    Replace the dots to reply

    Perre

  12. Nike indeed quotes per single shoe. Most shoe manufacturers don't even tell yo "Wade Summers"
    <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    I'd agree that fit is way more important than weight. Also, I'm not so


    sure

    Quoted message said:

    the weights given, 300 for the Nike and 750 for the Carnacs are accurate. Perhaps one is for the
    pair and one is just a single shoe. I can


    certainly

    Quoted message said:

    imagine the scenario where a company sees that all of its competitors list the pair weights so
    they opt to list the single shoe weight.

    Get a pair of shoes that fit.

    Wade

    Per Elmsäter wrote in message ...

    Quoted message said:

    "Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    in article [email hidden], resind at


    [email hidden]

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    wrote on 01/06/2003 11:09 PM:

    > Anyone have any insight as to the relative importance of shoe weight? The top of the line
    > Carnacs are about 750g and some of the Nike shoes are around 300g...
    >
    > I've only had Sidi, so all info appreciated...

    Weight matters a whole lot less than fit.

    How can that be? Not that fit isn't important but that weight in the shoe isn't. Pedals are made
    to be light. Why wouldn't the same be true for


    shoes.

    Quoted message said:

    450 gram difference seems to be an awful lot compared to other


    components.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    DA and Ultegra pedals for instance.

    --
    Replace the dots to reply

    Perre


  13. "Sharon Peters" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Subject: Re: Shoe weight From: "ronde champ" [email hidden]

    Quoted message said:

    US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team presented by (dingle)Berry Floor

    That's [censored] funny. At least to me.............

    Sounds to me like you need to wipe at least three times.

    Thanks, Ronde Champ

  14. I have a pair of rocket 7's top end shoe. They are very light. Have they made me faster? Maybe, but
    only because the fit better and don't give me foot pain.

    If I could find a pair that fit my weird feet (narrow ankle, wide mid foot, flatish), I'd much
    rather buy off the shelf. Frankly I'm not at all impressed with the build quality of the Rocket 7's.
    They are gangy looking (not like the web site picture that shows a tiny pair) at size roughly 44.5,
    and are coming apart after 1 year of riding.

  15. In article said:

    I have a pair of rocket 7's top end shoe. They are very light. Have they made me faster? Maybe, but
    only because the fit better and don't give me foot pain.

    If I could find a pair that fit my weird feet (narrow ankle, wide mid foot, flatish), I'd much
    rather buy off the shelf. Frankly I'm not at all impressed with the build quality of the Rocket
    7's. They are gangy looking (not like the web site picture that shows a tiny pair) at size roughly
    44.5, and are coming apart after 1 year of riding.

    Sad to say, but I agree on the quality thing.

    Scott
    --
    -*- Scott Patton -*- Colorado Springs, CO -*- fixedgearfever.comfixedgearfever.com -*- Track Racing
    Web Services

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.