[Closed] Fact - lighter bike does not make you faster

I read that in the Times.
What it really said was 'overweight comuter isn't any faster on a lighter bike.'

My own tests on a 35Lbs big bike and 20Lbs XC race bike indicate his research may be flawed.

Participants One consultant in anaesthesia and intensive care.

one self important arsehole leaving out lots of relevant facts.

Anyway if it's flat the apart from acceleration it will make no odds (other things being equal)

Yep, bit of a generalization when you've trained yourself to the top a lighter bike will help.
Point in case. I have a XTC, world cups XTR etc, but I'm riding my sons bike at the moment and it's much faster downhill and through the tight stuff. So I'm taking a few pointers from it to add to mine.
I know when I was recovering from my recent accident I lost a lot of weight, and for a moment I was much quicker, the weight came back though and I slowed down.

I think 'commuting' was the operative word. And as someone with a flattish, shortish commute I can see their point because the biggest single determinant in London is red lights and junctions. Racing whether short Gorrick stuff or enduros or spotives then a lighter bike is definitely faster in my experience. Really flimsy or twitchy mtbs may slow you down on descents but that is only at the extreme.

You're missing the background to this. It's a tradition and not intended as a serious scientific test.

I read that as: ... "makes you fatter".

and then I wondered, If I was riding the same amount of miles on a 45lb lump of girders, I would be burning loads more calories to shift it the same distance. So, Yes, lighter bikes make you fatter. It may not be true but it is a Scientific fact.

poor - christmas bmj efforts are generally far more entertaining than that

I lost a couple of stone in weight this year and become a lot faster. So fast that my skills couldnt keep up. 🙁 That hurt a lot.

The point that some posters have missed - as clubber says - [i]especially[/i] the needlessly offensively chippy [b]cynic-al [/b] is that the xmas edition of the BMJ is traditionally filled with parodies of proper scientific papers, historic stuff etc etc, and this was not meant to be taken seriously...

Or do some of you analyse april 1st stories seriously too? 🙄

the response from one of the doctors made me LOL

This study is flawed and should not have been published.

The last thing I want is for my wife to find out that there is no difference in performance in my "winter trainer" (i.e. old aluminium bike) and my posh carbon fibre beauty.

Competing interests: Owner of 5 bikes with various compositions of steel, carbon fibre and aluminium.

light bikes are faster, thats's why i take my time 😆
Smiles per mile.

one self important arsehole leaving out lots of relevant facts

Lighten up for heaven's sake. 🙄

Uh wrong end of the stick eh?

Sorry, I'm not in the BMJ clique, I didn't know it was a joke.

Looking purely at consultant anaesthetists (the only group included in the study), he has achieved a weight reduction of 4 kg by spending an extra £950 on a bicycle. To achieve the same weight loss through fat loss by exercise would require the expenditure of 28,000 kCal. At a rate of expenditure of 700 kCal per hour and an hourly rate of £36 per hour (the base point on consultant anaesthetists' salary scales), this would take 40 hours of exercise at a cost of £1440, considerably more than the cost of a carbon framed bicycle.

😆 I've never thought of it that way!

I have two bikes, a 2004 Enduro which weighs in at circa 28lbs and a Marin Wolf Ridge, which tips the scales at a lardy 33lb.

There isn't much between the two, but I'd err toward the Marin being slightly faster (depending on the terrain of course), part of the reason being that the Marin seems to exhibit less pedal bob than the Enduro and accelerates better, probably due to the suspension design which stiffens under pedalling.

The Enduro is very "flickable", it has minimal mass (in comparison) and feels more sprightly, but the pedal squat really saps my energy on a long ride.

Make of it what you will.

My Superlight (approx 25.5lbs) is significantly faster overall than my Yeti 575 (tad over 28lbs). The difference in acceleration is massive. Even if they were the same weight, or even if it were a bit heavier, I am certain the Superlight would still be a faster singletrack/trail bike due to the geometry and relatively firm pedalling platform, although the Yeti is always going to to faster through really rough sections and gnarly descents.

A lighter bike, particularly a smaller wheeled one, will be quicker if you stop for red lights. A Boris bike thus encourages red light jumping!

The Enduro is very "flickable", it has minimal mass (in comparison) and feels more sprightly, but the pedal squat really saps my energy on a long ride.

What shock are you running on your '04 Enduro? I've got an RP2 on mine and with the pro-pedal on it pedals very well.

Even BMJ have a sense of humour? I'm genuinely surprised! Sounds plausible though for non-elite cyclists...oops, forgot the pich of salt!

Who gives a **** about 'being faster' anyway....

Grow up FFS.

Me. I am a winner.

[i]The difference in acceleration is massive.[/i]

Could you put some numbers on this 'massive' figure, or is it not really that big after all?