Retro Bob said:Rider weight vs. bike weight ?
OK... I'm sure this has been hacked around here quite a bit already,
but I'm new here. Let me start with what I know: In automobile
suspension design, you attempt to limit the "unsprung" weight
because it's uncontrollable. The sprung weight you can control
and tune.But, I'm having trouble applying this concept to biking. It seems
to me like the entire bike/rider on a road bike is unsprung.
I'll argue that the rider is "sprung" from the ankles up
Quoted message said:Therefore, it does not matter if the weight is on the rider or
the bike. Therefore, with the exception of those of use in perfect
condition (me, of course) you are just as wise to cut your own
weight by a pound as you are to spend $500+ cutting the bike's
weight by the same amount. Of course, the rider is movable, so in
a sense it's "sprung" weight".
The sprung/unsprung weight ratio (as others point out) affects handling and most
especially on bad surfaces. Maybe this is what we see in the pro ranks where the
little guys dread cobbles in a way the larger riders don't.
Quoted message said:But, practical experience seems to challenge this. I know that getting
on a light bike makes me go much faster... and if doesn't seem to be
the 5 lbs difference... or is it ? Is it just an illusion ? If I
hung a 5lb weight on me and then got on a light bike would I feel
the same as the heavy bike (mechanical smoothness of the more
expensive bike aside) ?
I think weight distribution makes a difference in feel if not actual
performance. If you added the weight to yourself it'd make a minimal difference.
Put it on the bottom bracket and you still might not feel it. Add it to the rims
and ouch. Stick it to the stem and again the feel of the bike is messed up.
Ron