We've had this dicussion before, but it goes far beyond the wheels part in determining total bike weight. The rims and tires have a large moment arm about the axis of rotation (the hub axle), while everything else, including the frame, has essentially zero moment arm, so when it comes to accelerating and braking, rim weight counts for everything, while frame weight counts for nothing. So a bike with light wheels will feel lively, while a lighter bike with heavier wheels will feel more sluggish. This is the fundamental reason why I don't believe modern bikes are better, or maybe even as good, as those from the 70's. As the rear cluster has gone from 5 to 6 to 8 to 10 cogs, dish has had to increase, leading to higher drive side spoke tension, which led to heavier rims to withstand it. And acceleration and braking have suffered, although the latter has been offset by better brakes. An early 70's bike with Fiamme Ergals will usually feel more lively than a $5000 modern carbon fibre wonder.
Jerry Moos Big Spring, TX
Fred Rafael Rednor <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> My favorite Lüders quote is (loosely translated):
> "Frames do not make light bikes, wheels make
> light bikes." Kim, In a very real sense, that's true. I have 2 track racing bicycles, an ancient LeJeune and a newer Waterford. The Waterford's frame is as light as a steel frame can be made. But when you lift up, it feels very heavy because the "aero" style Campagnolo rims (and Phil Wood hubs) weigh so much. On the other hand, the LeJeune feels like a feather, even though it's made from a mixture of Reynolds 531 and plain gauge Vitus tubing. It's due to the wheels which use Campagnolo Record hubs with some of the lightest tubular rims available during the mid-1970s. Fred Rednor Arlington, Virginia (USA)
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com