Carbon or weight watchers

toomuchdetail

I am sure this has been asked before but here goes :
Currently on an Lapierre R-Lite 400 which is currently fit for purpose .
Want to go upgrade and spend about 2-2.5k on a reasonable entry level carbon frame bike (Felt/Ridley/Planet x etc) .I generally use the bike for Triathlons and the spins of about 60-90k but hope to move to to Half IM next year so milage will increase.
Problem lies in that I currently weight in about 107kg , every bike shop I go to shows me a lot of nice carbon bikes and push the sale (as they would) but some of the more experienced cyclists I talk to tell me that as I am of a larger build I should either stick with what I have and buy deeper rims or upgrade the bike but stick wiht Alu frame and go for better group set and deeper rims as carbon will be of no advantage
Some times for me as a gauge are 36m for 20k ,1:12 for 40k so some improvement can be gained -(not all by a new bike I know)
Alternatively I can go to weight watchers , lose 30k kg and then splace out on a P4 but this is unlikely.
Any thoughts from the more exp guys or even guys of similar weight would be appreciated.

Blowfish

An entry level carbon bike will weigh about 8kg and will come in at about €1-1.2k. Personally I don't see the point in spending twice the amount on the bike to save 1-2kg if you are carrying more than that extra 1-2kg on yourself.

TinyExplosions

Your weight won't be an issue on all but the most weight-weenie of bikes (and even then it's mostly wheels that have a rider weight limit).

Blowfish gives good advice, get a P-X (1300 ish), and go to weight watchers if you wish, and have fun!

Chips Lovell

Why are people advising you against buying carbon? Do they think you're weight will put too much stress on the frame? If that's the case, it's BS. Carbon is not as fragile as some people believe it to be and heavier guys than you are riding it.

Aside from the (minor) weight saving, carbon is a much nicer ride and if I was working with that kind of budget, I'd definitely be picking it.

If you're buying the bike with the main purpose of dropping weight, then yes, it won't make much of a difference. If it's because you just want a nicer bike, then you'll get that from carbon.

DirkVoodoo

From your post it sounds like you are big but most of that might be muscle? Are you a former rugby player maybe? I mean your times are pretty fast.

In which case yeah buy the bike, maybe drop a bit of weight without dropping power but it just sound like you are a big guy rather than being overweight.

Might be totally off the mark now.

mloc123

From a tri point of view... Lose weight. It'll help your run and save you more time. What height are you?

dave2pvd

Also, if you're overweight, slimming down will result in less frontal area. For just about any bike section in a tri, this will yield more time savings than having a lighter bike would.

toomuchdetail

Some good replies , appreciate it .
not strongly built but I have a large soft middle section but fitness is ok , 22/23m 5k run time, 32m 1500m swim time .Not looking to break any records , just want to improve my times on the bike .
Height 6:2" ish
Bike is not for weight loss as thats a lifestyle change(bike will help thou)

Can see how been 107kg on a 8kg bike is a bit pointless.

I had the view (possibly wrongly) that the idea of carbon was that it is lighter to push so it would lead to greater speed,thats where I thought the added advantage might .
Not concerned on the strenght of the carbon just want to get more out of every push.

Lumen

toomuchdetail wrote: »

I had the view (possibly wrongly) that the idea of carbon was that it is lighter to push so it would lead to greater speed

No, you're attached to the bike so it's the combined mass that matters. There is a very slight pendulum effect with a heavier bike in certain conditions (like sprinting or climbing out the saddle) but it's really very small.

Nice run times btw. If you can drop some weight you'll be flying!

dave2pvd

I agree with Lumen. I'll wager that if you drop 20Kgs, you'll be running sub-20s. Somewhat counter-intuitively, it's long bike rides (>3hrs) that will shed the weight and make you run faster.

Rider/bike weight is only a significant factor when you go up long, steep hills*. So, unless a tri has a bike section that goes from Bray to the top of Kippure, you've little to gain by spending 1,000s on a bike.



* ok, standing-start sprints would be an exception to that.

DualFrontDiscs

Check out this sub-forum on Bike Forums.

DFD.

Ryaner

I would look at your bike when you cycle. For me, moving to carbon gave more benefits that just the drop in weight. My carbon bike is much stiffer than my alu one meaning less power is lost into the frame (as confirmed by my powertap too). The wheels are always the hard part and what I always had issues with when I started cycling at 105kg.

If you are looking at upgrading, some Mavic Cosmic Carbones would probably do the trick. They are rock solid and should be able to support your weight too.

blorg

Do both. Carbon is generally better, lighter and more comfortable while just as strong, but you could probably lose some weight as well. The latter would make a lot more difference than the bike to your times.

toomuchdetail

Cool lads , tractor lawnmower it is and and some discipline on the diet - some great advice , really appreciate it .

BTW whats a "sportive" compared to a race ? see it in all the bike porn mags.

Blowfish

toomuchdetail wrote: »

Cool lads , tractor lawnmower it is and and some discipline on the diet - some great advice , really appreciate it .

BTW whats a "sportive" compared to a race ? see it in all the bike porn mags.

They are pretty much just non-competitive medium distance events. The Wicklow 200 and Ring of Kerry would probably be the two most well known ones in Ireland.

blorg

toomuchdetail wrote: »

BTW whats a "sportive" compared to a race ? see it in all the bike porn mags.

Standard road races are shorter than most sportives and far more intense.

Eircom_Sucks

if you can't take it off your belly take it off your bike

kennyb3

Like others have said:

1. if you have the money buy a nice bike it will encourage you to cycle more

2. long spins on saturday and sundays with short sharp session during the week will see weight fly off if you can have a half decent diet. I like hill intervals myself and have seen weight fly off.

3. if you drop 15-20kg you ll definitely be running sub 20 mins and going up hills on your bike a lot easier.

Dont expect a huge difference just by buying a fancy bike, if you lost even 5kg you d prob be better off. but of course a nice bike is great to have and ride around on.

mloc123

To add another option here, if I had 2-3k to spend first thing on my list would be a power meter. You will see much better returns.

peterjmaxwell

I'm in a similar boat so to speak. 3 months ago i was 105kg and doing 20km in 39 mins and 40min 5k run, 3 months of better diet, training and cycling and i'm down to 95kg, 35min for 20km cycle and 29mins for 5km run.

I considered when i started getting a carbon bike but i settled on a mixture of both, work on getting my weight down (long term target is 80kg) and getting a carbon bike when i thought i could get more out of it so i've settled on a trek madone 6.5, hoping to pick it up in a couple of months and hopefully i'll be down to 90kg by then!

toomuchdetail

mloc123 wrote: »

To add another option here, if I had 2-3k to spend first thing on my list would be a power meter. You will see much better returns.

Power meter would be nice but I have a Garmin to tell me I am crap on bike !! If I was even top 20% in any of the races I do I might consider it , all of the better guys I know swear by them.
Hope to trade the lapierre and have a combined budget of about 2k ish incl the bike to work voucher.
Started to extend the spins today with 90km around a wet and windy Westport/Leenane/Sheffry so with a bit of discipine on the diet I hope to see improvment .
St