True Weight Weenieism...

[tabl10s]

starts at what poundage?

[DamonRinard]

...less than before!

[DamonRinard]

"It's not so much where you are, as where you're headed."
-anonymous

[Marin]

It used to be 5kg, but with disc and aero it's more like sub-7 is truly awesome now

[donald]

My 3.2 kg bike has an aero stem, fork, saddle and wheels. One can have aero and light weight.

[tabl10s]

???

[dgasmd]

It used to be 5kg, but with disc and aero it's more like sub-7 is truly awesome now

That’s not an understatement!! All 3 of my bikes are under 14.0 lb (6.36 kg), but I’ve always thought of WW bike’s under 13 lb!!

[themidge]

IMO it isn't about the weight, it's how you go about achieving whatever weight you end up with. It could be a 4kg tuned-to-the-last special, or a touring tandem that is as light as possible using the same ideas as the 4kg road bike, but still only makes it down to 14kg or whatever because of durability and reliability etc. I wouldn't call something where someone's just thrown 20 grand at it and ended up with a superlight, but completely 'stock' build a true WW build.

[ms6073]

"It's not so much where you are, as where you're headed."
-anonymous

Alternately:
"No matter where you go, there you are."
Buckaroo Banzai

[knakkie]

A true weightweenie never stops shedding weight of the bike/parts

[Thomson]

A weight saving is a weight saving right?

I think it's when even the small gains feel like a big gain.

[LouisN]

IMO it isn't about the weight, it's how you go about achieving whatever weight you end up with. It could be a 4kg tuned-to-the-last special, or a touring tandem that is as light as possible using the same ideas as the 4kg road bike, but still only makes it down to 14kg or whatever because of durability and reliability etc. I wouldn't call something where someone's just thrown 20 grand at it and ended up with a superlight, but completely 'stock' build a true WW build.

Amen.

Louis

[tabl10s]

IMO it isn't about the weight, it's how you go about achieving whatever weight you end up with. It could be a 4kg tuned-to-the-last special, or a touring tandem that is as light as possible using the same ideas as the 4kg road bike, but still only makes it down to 14kg or whatever because of durability and reliability etc. I wouldn't call something where someone's just thrown 20 grand at it and ended up with a superlight, but completely 'stock' build a true WW build.

Can't be stock with money thrown at it.

[themidge]

Can't be stock with money thrown at it.

It can if you threw money at it in the first place

But really what I meant by 'stock' is 'not modified in any way'. I think a true WW bike has parts that have been modified to make them lighter and/or better. It gets a bit subjective around the 'choice parts' area, but in general I think it takes actual modification or choosing every part specially to be a true WW bike.
For example:

^ true WW


^ not true WW

FWIW, of all my bikes I consider only my Cannondale to be a WW bike, and even then it's somewhere in the grey area between 'true WW' and 'built up a frame with parts of my choice'

[Nikoras]

If you're looking at a threshold 6.8kg seems like as good a place as any. Passing it means you've temporarily closed the door on any UCI races in favor of weenieing