# Video: "Is your MTB too heavy?"



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

In this video, Seth demonstrates that it's not so much about weight, but more about the type of rider and skill level.

IMO, I agree. I own a 35 lbs fat bike, does not bother me at all and has only made my legs stronger and now I even last longer. Whenever I ride my 29er, it feels like I'm pedaling air since there is less rolling resistance. However, if you are a racer, then yes weight matters a hell of a lot. But for most of us "normal" MTBers, weight shouldn't hold us back too much... although anything over 40-45 lbs is too heavy IMO:thumbsup:

Let's say you?


----------



## ljsmith (Oct 26, 2007)

I would agree that fitness and skill (and the riders weight) are more important than bike weight. However in this video he is just riding flat roads and bunny hopping. Most people ride mountain bikes off-road. Bike weight (especially wheels and tires) can make a huge difference going up large technical hills. The stuff this guy is doing is more suited for a bmx bike or DJ bike.


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

ljsmith said:


> Bike weight (especially wheels and tires) can make a huge difference going up large technical hills.


To me, the knob pattern and contact patch are very important going up technical hills. I've noticed that I have an easier time going uphill on my fattie with its Maxxis Minions and my wife's FS with Maxxis Ardents than my HT Specialized Ground Controls. The Ground Controls I have on my 29er slip way too much under heavy torque going uphill even at 20 psi.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

When a guy says, "My bike is too heavy" it should be interpreted as, "I feel like buying some new toy(s)."


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

Nat said:


> When a guy says, "My bike is too heavy" it should be interpreted as, "I feel like buying some new toy(s)."


LMAO that's so true. My buddy spent $1500 on his bike on new components... he was only able to shed 1.5 lbs off his bike.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

How does a heavier bike make your legs stronger?

Answer: It doesn't. 

Your body is only capable of producing a certain amount of power. It doesn't change whether you're on a 15lb bike or a 40lb bike.

If you're slipping a Ground Control, you have poor pedaling technique, bad position on the bike, or both.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Le Duke said:


> How does a heavier bike make your legs stronger?
> 
> Answer: It doesn't.
> 
> ...


Aren't they talking about training effect when they say "heavier makes you stronger?"


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

A light(er) bike feels more alive and is therefore more fun, that's all that matters to me.

I agree that heavier doesn't make you stronger, just slower.


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

Le Duke said:


> How does a heavier bike make your legs stronger?
> 
> Answer: It doesn't.
> 
> Your body is only capable of producing a certain amount of power. It doesn't change whether you're on a 15lb bike or a 40lb bike.


I have a question for you; are you me? Nope. So don't make assumptions about my body and ability. I feel stronger and can last longer, I'm actually doing better this season than last season. I am a different person than you, we're not the same.

Let me also ask you this: If higher weight doesn't make you stronger, then why do body builders have big muscles? Oh that's right, they lift HEAVY weights. the heavier your go, the stronger you'll get.



Le Duke said:


> If you're slipping a Ground Control, you have poor pedaling technique, bad position on the bike, or both.


^ Could be possible.


----------



## splitendz (Nov 13, 2015)

Anything around the 28lb mark or lower is my sweet spot. Above 30lbs starts to feel heavy on the steeps to me


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

splitendz said:


> Anything around the 28lb mark or lower is my sweet spot. Above 30lbs starts to feel heavy on the steeps to me


I agree, with this. Although, I've never ridden a 28 lbs bike. But, my HT weights in about 30.5 lbs... feels great especially since I've been riding my 35 lbs fattie. Easier for me to pedal. Hmmm, maybe a carbon frame would be nice in the future.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Engineer90 said:


> I
> Let me also ask you this: If higher weight doesn't make you stronger, then why do body builders have big muscles? Oh that's right, they lift HEAVY weights. the heavier your go, the stronger you'll get.


Bike strong and weight lifting strong are two different things. Gears are your weights on the bike, shift into a bigger one and you increase your "weight" and also your speed.

It's cool that a heavier bike is working for you and I'm not discouraging it but if more weight made people stronger on a bike racers would train with added weight, and they don't.


----------



## muddytire (Aug 27, 2009)

Engineer90 said:


> although anything over 40-45 lbs is too heavy IMO:thumbsup:
> 
> Let's say you?


If you put 29 inch tires on it, it'll feel like 20 lbs. Simple physics.


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> Bike strong and weight lifting strong are two different things. Gears are your weights on the bike, shift into a bigger one and you increase your "weight" and also your speed.
> 
> It's cool that a heavier bike is working for you and I'm not discouraging it but if more weight made people stronger on a bike racers would train with added weight, and they don't.


That's why I said that I feel stronger and last longer. Did I ever say I was faster? Nope. I'm at the same speed, but I am able to ride longer now. That's why I also said that for racers, then weight is extremely important, I would never do an XC race with a fattie.

Also, they do not train with heavier bikes because their whole purpose is to go fast and do really long distances. Just like marathon runners, they tend to be very light and lean.


----------



## WRB (Apr 30, 2016)

I've been following his videos on the "wallgoose", I would really like to take one on the trails I ride one time. Seth really only rode it on the street and hit the trail like one time...


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

WRB said:


> I've been following his videos on the "wallgoose", I would really like to take one on the trails I ride one time. Seth really only rode it on the street and hit the trail like one time...


I had the same Walgoose in 2014. I rode it on a few flat dirt trails and I did MTB once on it... my derailleur broke and bent my front rim lol, worst bike ever.


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

Harder gearing will make you stronger regardless of bike weight. 

The weight of the bike will effect the gearing you can efficiently use on various terrain.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

I think you misunderstand me. I'm not downing your methods at all, like you said they work for you and that's what counts.



Engineer90 said:


> Also, they do not train with heavier bikes because their whole purpose is to go fast and do really long distances. Just like marathon runners, they tend to be very light and lean.


Track racers are quite bulky and though they lift weights they train on light bikes. Bike weight will only change the speed obtained, not the wattage produced.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

J.B. Weld said:


> I think you misunderstand me. I'm not downing your methods at all, like you said they work for you and that's what counts.
> 
> Track racers are quite bulky and though they lift weights they train on light bikes. Bike weight will only change the speed obtained, not the wattage produced.


This.

As an "engineer", you'd think he'd understand that wattage will be a constant and velocity variable.

Pretty simple concept.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

Le Duke said:


> This.
> 
> As an "engineer", you'd think he'd understand that wattage will be a constant and velocity variable.
> 
> Pretty simple concept.


I never mentioned my power output was higher. I was talking about my leg strength to go uphill (AKA torque). This is what you said:



Le Duke said:


> How does a heavier bike make your legs stronger?
> 
> Answer: It doesn't.


^^^ I was responding to that. Not the wattage. If anything you equated strength = power which is completely wrong. Power depends on your cadance and gearing.

My main point before was that my legs put out more torque now to go uphill. Get it? Good.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

WRB said:


> I would really like to take one on the trails I ride one time.


Why???


----------



## Fleas (Jan 19, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> Bike strong and weight lifting strong are two different things. Gears are your weights on the bike, shift into a bigger one and you increase your "weight" and also your speed.
> 
> It's cool that a heavier bike is working for you and I'm not discouraging it but if more weight made people stronger on a bike racers would train with added weight, and they don't.


I kinda see your point of using gears, but that seems more akin to trainer riding than riding against gravity.
For ~5 years I hauled my daughter around on a trail-a-bike. I did some really hard climbs towing 60# through the forest. It definitely made my legs stronger (increased wattage, too) than just hauling myself up the hills. People wondered how I could ride with them even though I hardly rode at all. Well, it's because my "training" was harder. My endurance kinda sucked, though.
I sometimes ride tandem with my wife. On hard climbs, she pedals to get her own self up the hill while I pedal hard enough to get me and the bike up the hill. It definitely made my legs stronger (increased wattage, too) than just hauling myself up the hill.
One of my buddies trained for 2 seasons with heavy wrenches and stuff rolled up in a backpack since we don't have steep, sustained climbs here. I can tell you that he was making more power than he would normally.
Yes, you can "just shift up" to decrease your mechanical advantage through the drivetrain, but that is not the same as moving more weight against gravity. I think your peak strength and sustained power will be less. Take a clyde for instance. Lots of weight and lots of power. Why pros don't do it? IDK. Maybe it just accelerates the training results for us mere mortals.

For me, I started out on a 32# steel RockHopper. Anything lighter than that feels pretty light, so the 35# fatty is not bad. My durably-built 27# steel 29er feels light. My old 24# StumpJumper felt like a feather. And so far they have all broken so I'm not going any lighter.

-F


----------



## bakerjw (Oct 8, 2014)

Fleas said:


> I kinda see your point of using gears, but that seems more akin to trainer riding than riding against gravity.
> For ~5 years I hauled my daughter around on a trail-a-bike. I did some really hard climbs towing 60# through the forest. It definitely made my legs stronger (increased wattage, too) than just hauling myself up the hills. People wondered how I could ride with them even though I hardly rode at all. Well, it's because my "training" was harder. My endurance kinda sucked, though.
> I sometimes ride tandem with my wife. On hard climbs, she pedals to get her own self up the hill while I pedal hard enough to get me and the bike up the hill. It definitely made my legs stronger (increased wattage, too) than just hauling myself up the hill.
> One of my buddies trained for 2 seasons with heavy wrenches and stuff rolled up in a backpack since we don't have steep, sustained climbs here. I can tell you that he was making more power than he would normally.
> ...


I have to agree with this. My wife is visually impaired so riding by herself can be difficult, so we spend a lot of time on the tandem. Usually it is a 70-30 difference in our power output. If I ride the same hills on a route on my road bike that we ride with our tandem, I make it up them rather quickly. On the tandem? Not so quickly. The required effort is drastically increased regardless of gearing.

Last year was kind of a washout on riding, but the year before we did 1800 miles on the tandem. At the end of the year I couldn't believe how well I was climbing. It didn't have anything to do with miles as I've had many 3,000+ mile years. It was because I had so many miles of brutal climbing pulling extra weight up hills.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

This thread made me think about how Hall-of-Famer Tinker Juarez used to train with a backpack full of rocks. It looks as if he's still racing:

Tinker Juarez soldiers on after 40 years of mountain bike racing

My father-in-law, who rides mostly for fitness and commuting rather than fun, doesn't mind it when his rim brakes rub. "You just get more exercise that way." Screw that.


----------



## idividebyzero (Sep 25, 2014)

Heavy bikes just make everything harder, which when youre a beginner make more difficult things seem hopeless since the difficulty wall is too high to get over. I'd like to see a comparison of a noob on a light high end bike and a heavy piece of crap, I'd bet they are much better and learn how to do stuff much faster on the lighter bike.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

bakerjw said:


> I have to agree with this. My wife is visually impaired so riding by herself can be difficult, so we spend a lot of time on the tandem. Usually it is a 70-30 difference in our power output. If I ride the same hills on a route on my road bike that we ride with our tandem, I make it up them rather quickly. On the tandem? Not so quickly. The required effort is drastically increased regardless of gearing.


Regardless of gearing and speed? You don't have a gear/pace combo on your bike that can leave you gasping and drooling helplessly? I sure do.

I agree that hauling weight is different than hauling ass but if it was actually more effective for developing cycling strength than traditional training methods then top pros would do it and coaches would utilize it for developing aspiring young riders.


----------



## ryguy79 (Apr 12, 2007)

The video just made me glad I don't live in Florida.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

ryguy79 said:


> The video just made me glad I don't live in Florida.


Ha! Yeah, then you'd find all kinds of weird ways to pass the time (like filling your inner tubes with water).


----------



## ElwoodT (Mar 13, 2011)

I like to carry extra weight in my pack....keeps me from going too fast uphill, which can be scary, and scary is not fun.


----------



## tigris99 (Aug 26, 2012)

Le Duke said:


> How does a heavier bike make your legs stronger?
> 
> Answer: It doesn't.
> 
> ...


Sorry but these responses to heavier bike are about as wrong as it gets.

Op isn't saying heavier makes you faster automatically. It's that riding a heavier bike makes you physically stronger over time. Just like any other exercise, as you do it over time, parts of your body that it effects become stronger. MEANS YOUR BODY PRODUCES MORE POWER. Which is your body, due to exercise, produces more Watts.

The uneducated posts saying this isn't the case shows a full lack of understanding of the human body, physics or anything else.

And then depending on the activity, that translates to speed. In cycling, that translates to faster climbing or making the same climbs with less effort. This leaves more energy to push faster through the rest of the trails. Regardless, the rider becomes faster.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

One thing I think was poorly emphasized in the video, and hasn't really been addressed here, is that a heavier bike makes it more difficult to learn skills. The guy that produces those vids is obviously a pretty skilled rider. He's shown that he can do things on a real junker that a lot of people can't do on anything. His assessments need to be taken with a grain of salt.

He does at least point out the "bike weight as a ratio of body weight" concept, which is a good idea. But it goes a little deeper than that. That's part of it, but it doesn't come close to telling the whole story.

I hear the "my bike is too heavy" story mostly from new riders. And especially new riders who lack a level of fitness and strength, and certainly technique. My wife was one of those riders. Her first bike was a pretty typical entry level hardtail mtb. About $500 purchase price. No junker, but nothing fancy. My wife is small, and had very little working in her favor when it came to prior fitness. Her starter bike was about 1/4 of her body weight, which is mentioned in the video as being still functional. Sure, she rode it for years. But her skills were stagnant. It was difficult and frustrating for her to work on skills because her strength to maneuver the bike just wasn't there.

Fast forward a number of years, when she decided to commit to riding and getting better. She wanted a new bike, and getting the weight down was a priority for her. Her current FS is now about 1/5 of her body weight. Better still is the distribution of weight on the bike compared to the old one (wheels and suspension are WAY lighter). Her riding skills (and fitness) progressed faster with the new bike than they did on the old one. 

My argument here is simply an emphasis of points that have sorta been danced around so far. For smaller, weaker, beginner riders, bike weight is a MAJOR factor. For stronger, larger, and more skilled riders, it's less of one. But it's still a factor. Some things are just simpler to learn on a lighter bike. Going faster is simpler on a lighter bike.


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

tigris99 said:


> Sorry but these responses to heavier bike are about as wrong as it gets.
> 
> Op isn't saying heavier makes you faster automatically. It's that riding a heavier bike makes you physically stronger over time.


Boom! You hit the nail on the head.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

ElwoodT said:


> I like to carry extra weight in my pack....keeps me from going too fast uphill, which can be scary, and scary is not fun.


So do you dump the weight before descents and fill up with rocks at the bottom? If I do the opposite will I go faster?





tigris99 said:


> Sorry but these responses to heavier bike are about as wrong as it gets.................. Regardless, the rider becomes faster.


Speaking of wrong, you could haul rocks day in and day out and still be slower than snot on a bike. Or you could ride a 15 pound bike while following a structured (grueling) training plan and become a world champion. While one could probably get strong and fast either way it just seems that all else being equal a lighter bike is just more fun, at least for me anyway, to each his own of course.

Have fun with them rocks Elwood!


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

not even drinking...


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

Thought I cared....


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

1234


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

posting from phone not working


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

I love it when slow people tell me I'm wrong, and that their training methods are better.

I know quite a few pro MTB racers. To include myself. None of them "train" using the methods described by the people in this thread. I'm guessing their coaches are slightly more informed than the average overweight American that putters around for a few hours each week.

I'm guessing that the "heavy bike" subscribers have never seen a power meter in the flesh, let alone used one.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## edubfromktown (Sep 7, 2010)

Not too expensive is more my speed...

I am just happy that on a 28+ lb. FS bike that cost me $2,300 (1 year used), I successfully make it up climbs that people on the latest and greatest $8-12 K carbon FS bikes that are 7-9+ lbs lighter can't negotiate 

This is due to a number of reasons: riding single speeds ~1/3rd of the time (definitely improved my endurance and climbing abilities), riding experience/picking better lines, mutant frog legs that mashing up climbs better than many and not enough sense to stop pedaling when it gets really hard and there is a chance I'll lose at near track standing up gnarly hills.


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

Le Duke said:


> I love it when slow people tell me I'm wrong, and that their training methods are better.
> 
> I know quite a few pro MTB racers. To include myself. None of them "train" using the methods described by the people in this thread. I'm guessing their coaches are slightly more informed than the average overweight American that putters around for a few hours each week.
> 
> I'm guessing that the "heavy bike" subscribers have never seen a power meter in the flesh, let alone used one.


We're not even discussing training methods for MTB racers...

NVM you missed the whole point...


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Engineer90 said:


> We're not even discussing training methods for MTB racers...
> 
> NVM you missed the whole point...


Ok.

How are we defining "stronger" then?

You're the one who tossed it out there, so let's define it and measure it objectively.

1RM leg press?

20min max wattage?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

Le Duke said:


> Ok.
> 
> How are we defining "stronger" then?
> 
> ...


My whole point was that I have more torque going uphill now that I have a fattie that's a little heavier and has tons of rolling resistance. Hence why my legs and body adapted to that and that is why my 29er feels like riding a feather.

My point was about *TORQUE*, not power.

I never said my body puts put x amount of wattage. Why the hell do I care about wattage? I'm not a racer, nor do I wanna be. When I do MTB, I enjoy it the whole day without caring about power output. What am I, a racecar that needs to have power in mind?


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Engineer90 said:


> My whole point was that I have more torque going uphill now that I have a fattie that's a little heavier and has tons of rolling resistance. Hence why my legs and body adapted to that and that is why my 29er feels like riding a feather.
> 
> My point was about *TORQUE*, not power.
> 
> I never said my body puts put x amount of wattage. Why the hell do I care about wattage? I'm not a racer, nor do I wanna be. When I do MTB, I enjoy it the whole day without caring about power output. What am I a car that needs to have power in mind?


How do you know?

Have you measured it?

Torque is a component of power; are you producing more torque at the same cadence? You can't isolate these things. They go hand in hand.

How do you know you couldn't have achieved the same without a heavy bike?

Do you think your legs would get "weaker" if you rode a road bike at the same intensity?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Unless your trails have some sort of speed limit that's forcibly enforced through hazards, or you're forced to ride a slow pace due to matching your riding companions, heavier bikes don't result in any better training than a lighter bike. To be a skilled fast rider, you actually have to get experience of riding at higher speeds to know what challenges you're faced with, and gain mastery at dealing with them. As far as physical fitness goes, how much physical effort you put in, no matter what bike you're on, determines how much you get out of your training; easier to put out more effort, if you're not also facing technical challenges, but you become a better mtn biker if you can overcome all those technical challenges and still put out high effort.

This youtube video doesn't show him *learning* how to use skills on a heavy bike; it shows him adapting skills that he learned on a lighter bike, to one that's heavier, to essentially say that people making excuses don't have any reason to, which I disagree with.

While someone with sufficient willpower and perseverance may overcome a challenge of trying to *learn* on a heavy clunker, I doubt there are many out there that can confidently say their self-initiative is that strong. I don't doubt there's many out there that would gain such willpower through a bet, or some other outside source of incentive. Not hard to see that trying something new on a heavy clunker is higher risk, and most casual types try to minimize unnecessary risk.

I'm a believer that top-of-the-line bikes, with emphasis on performance (ex. AM bike with best suspension, tires, and other trail taming tech), are more ideal in the hands of someone lacking experience and skill, and the dumbed down bikes, with emphasis on simplicity and being lightweight (ex. carbon rigid singlespeed), are more ideal for those with lots of experience and skill, each group seeing more positive benefit than if it were the other way around. As unintuitive as it sounds, as rigid bikes are generally recommended as starter bikes, assuming some spartan form of training is best, a lot of things in mtn biking is unintuitive, such as things becoming easier as you go faster. It's not problematic at all to transfer skills to a less capable bike, while it's extremely problematic to transfer fear, trauma, and mental blocks from a less capable bike to a more capable one; hard to fix being intimidated by sections that should be easy on such a bike, just because it gave so much trouble on a crappier bike. I don't find it surprising that experienced riders on average bikes can pass "part-time/short-cutting" riders on $10k super bikes; in fact, I feel that beginners that invest a lot on their first bike have made a wise decision. I ride with someone once a week who just started riding this Jan, who got a '16 Remedy 9, who keeps up with veteran riders just fine, though he does have road riding experience.


----------



## natrat (Mar 20, 2008)

edubfromktown said:


> Not too expensive is more my speed...
> 
> I am just happy that on a 28+ lb. FS bike that cost me $2,300 (1 year used), I successfully make it up climbs that people on the latest and greatest $8-12 K carbon FS bikes that are 7-9+ lbs lighter can't negotiate
> 
> This is due to a number of reasons: riding single speeds ~1/3rd of the time (definitely improved my endurance and climbing abilities), riding experience/picking better lines, mutant frog legs that mashing up climbs better than many and not enough sense to stop pedaling when it gets really hard and there is a chance I'll lose at near track standing up gnarly hills.


you are just awesome


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Engineer90 said:


> My point was about *TORQUE*, not power.


If you don't care about watts or power why bother with torque, they're all interrelated.

I agree with your contention that a few pounds either way on a bike aren't a big deal for most people but if you don't want to discuss the merits & myths of riding a heavy bike to make you stronger why bring it up? Some of us are hopelessly bored procrastinators with nothing better to do.


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

Le Duke said:


> How do you know?
> 
> Have you measured it?
> 
> Torque is a component of power; are you producing more torque at the same cadence? You can't isolate these things. They go hand in hand.


I do produce more torque at the same cadence. Like I said, my legs adapted to the huge contact patch my 4.8 tire has and the rolling resistance that comes with it. I am actually using much higher gears on my fattie and 29er when I ride them, even on climbs. I'm riding some steeper climbs better, I used to walk up some steep climbs last season.


----------



## *OneSpeed* (Oct 18, 2013)

it sounds like your becoming a stronger rider, your probably in better shape and making more power. this comes from riding more and not necessarily from riding a heavier bike. if your seeing results then great, keep it up. likely a lot of the perceived increased speed between the two bikes comes from the lighter 29er wheels/tires vs the fat wheels/tires. 

that said, 

one: training while carrying rocks probably won't make you slower (once you put them down).

two: rarely, if ever, will you hear someone say they have more fun or are more capable on a heavy bike, all things being equal. (the exception might be if a rider went too far with the weight weenie stuff and ended up with components that are too weak for them) this does not include fat tires giving more grip for climbs and such. 

taking math, physics, and science out of the equation, if riding a fat bike was the best way to train, get stronger, get faster, make more power, etc., then all pro's would train on fat bikes filled with lead. 

bottom line, you can become a stronger, more fit, faster rider on anything from a road bike to a fat bike. more miles, more elevation, more volume, more practice, more experience, more power, more speed. 

- I'm going to ride my bike


----------



## tigris99 (Aug 26, 2012)

Le Duke said:


> I love it when slow people tell me I'm wrong, and that their training methods are better.
> 
> I know quite a few pro MTB racers. To include myself. None of them "train" using the methods described by the people in this thread. I'm guessing their coaches are slightly more informed than the average overweight American that putters around for a few hours each week.
> 
> ...


Never said your training methods are wrong by any stretch (get butt hurt much? chill out man your missing the entire point of this discussion)

There is a lot of factors involved but riding a heavier bike is just like lifting weights, over time the effected muscles become stronger. Which means able to produce more power.

That translates to many different options depending on the rider. Faster climbing, or more energy for the flats, longer rides.

We're not discussing training plans for racing or bike skills.

We are discussing a simple rule of science and the human body. Exercise with increased weight yields increased strength over time.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Yes. The "weight" is that you are applying to the pedals in the form of torque.

Which is independent of the weight of the bike.


Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## tigris99 (Aug 26, 2012)

Yes but a heavier bike, poor rolling resistance, etc requires more to move. So by riding a fat bike as in the OPs case (I literally do the same and have been experiencing same thing) strengthens the body. So when going to a 10lb lighter bike with much lower rolling resistance, you notice gains in many aspects.

Is it a substitute for a thought training program for racing, no. However there is gains to be had for the rest of us that don't do the fancy training programs.

Denying that fact is like saying a fat person gains nothing from exercise. Always gains to be had by increasing effort.

If bike weight and rolling resistance didn't matter, then people wouldn't be worried about lighter bikes. Which is exactly what your saying. Can't deny or argue the laws of physics.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

tigris99 said:


> That translates to many different options depending on the rider. Faster climbing, or more energy for the flats, longer rides.
> 
> We're not discussing training plans for racing or bike skills.


How is faster climbing, more energy for flats, and longer rides not related to racing or bike skills?

I think the heavy bike thing is similar to single speed bikes in the same way that a lot of riders notice a big improvement in their riding in short time after going ss, especially climbing. And as with the heavy bike a single speeders improvements aren't due to the bike but because they were forced to adapt their riding style and push gears that they were uncomfortable with.


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

Le Duke said:


> Yes. The "weight" is that you are applying to the pedals in the form of torque.
> 
> Which is independent of the weight of the bike.


Not too much because if you are going uphill, a heavier bike will wanna pull you back downhill more.


----------



## AthleticAL (Feb 9, 2015)

Cool vid. 

But as someone else already mentioned, it's one thing to transfer skills already learned. Not that impressive.

A whole 'nother thing to master those skills on a bike that is a hindrance, but it's possible. And more impressive IMO.

Me personally, I train with a generator on the back wheel. The system stores the charge in a monster battery built onto the rear cargo rack. Get home after a hard ride, charge the family cell phones and drop the leftovers back onto the grid and reduce my energy bill!

No I don't. Wouldn't that be cool though??

Kickstarter, anyone? Let's do this!


----------



## 411898 (Nov 5, 2008)

IMO, a heavier bike is more stable at speed going downhill and landing from jumps/drops.

IME, a lighter bike gets you up the mountain faster if you are pedaling up.


----------



## TheGweed (Jan 30, 2010)

Nothing in this thread is more thought-provoking to me than why a guy lists his wife's bike in his signature.


----------



## 411898 (Nov 5, 2008)

thegweed said:


> Nothing in this thread is more thought-provoking to me than why a guy lists his wife's bike in his signature.


Maybe he loves his wife?


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

J.B. Weld said:


> Bike strong and weight lifting strong are two different things. Gears are your weights on the bike, shift into a bigger one and you increase your "weight" and also your speed.
> 
> It's cool that a heavier bike is working for you and I'm not discouraging it but if more weight made people stronger on a bike racers would train with added weight, and they don't.


Pushing a heavier bike up a hill with a similar gear will make you stronger. It makes a big difference with a singlespeed or 1x where you run out of low gears once in a while.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

mountainbiker24 said:


> Pushing a heavier bike up a hill with a similar gear *(at the same speed)* will make you stronger. It makes a big difference with a singlespeed or 1x where you run out of low gears once in a while.


Aside from the part I added (in parenthesis) I totally agree, and nothing I posted contradicts that.


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

Hawg said:


> Maybe he loves his wife?


Makes sense. Now if he posted someone else's wife's bike in his sig, that would be weird.

How to tell if your bike is too heavy:

Non-pro racer method: Apply a magnet to the frame. If it doesn't stick, your bike is not too heavy. If it sticks, your bike is too heavy, but just ride it anyway.

Pro Racer method: Your bike is too heavy. If you are one of the very very few people that are able to generate an income from riding a bike, money is no object. Besides, your sponsors are paying for it anyway.


----------



## banditpowdercoat (Aug 13, 2015)

Ever notice baseball players with weights on their bats? Ya. Training with a heavier bat so when they swing the official one they swing it much faster. Appearing that they have more power 


Sent from my iPhone while my Heli plays with the gophers


----------



## David R (Dec 21, 2007)

Hawg said:


> IMO, a heavier bike is more stable at speed going downhill and landing from jumps/drops.


I'd like to see some sort of experimentation on that, because I kinda feel the same but can't be sure if the difference in stability is because of weight alone or other variables. It would be great to take a sub-12kg Santa Cruz 5010 (first light AM bike that popped into my head) and do back to back runs descending the same trail with none, then 1-2-3kg of ballast.

With regards to training, I agree with LeDuke on this one; heavy bikes and slow tyres could be seen as "resistance training" and might force you to push yourself harder, but you're not going to get any fitter than someone who pushes themselves just as hard on a lighter bike. I get just as puffed pushing myself on a climb on a road bike as I do on my Warden, the only difference is how fast I'm moving.


----------



## *OneSpeed* (Oct 18, 2013)

JACKL said:


> How to tell if your bike is too heavy:
> 
> Non-pro racer method: Apply a magnet to the frame. If it doesn't stick, your bike is not too heavy. If it sticks, your bike is too heavy, but just ride it anyway.


most people put stickers on their bikes, i have magnets on all of mine. guess I'm screwed.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

Looking for some reassurance OP?

For me, I'll always like the way a lighter bike feels compared to a heavier one. It's just plain more fun to ride no matter where I go.


----------



## 411898 (Nov 5, 2008)

I can't seem to get a magnet to stick to my alloy tank-weight enduro/AM bike frame??? So does that mean it's not heavy?


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

Have you tried tape???


----------



## 411898 (Nov 5, 2008)

RS VR6 said:


> Have you tried tape???


To see if it sticks to my frame or to attach the magnet to my frame with?

I Simonize my bike frames. I doubt if anything will stick to them.


----------



## banditpowdercoat (Aug 13, 2015)

I got some tape for ya. 


Sent from my iPhone while my Heli plays with the gophers


----------



## 411898 (Nov 5, 2008)

banditpowdercoat said:


> I got some tape for ya.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone while my Heli plays with the gophers


a tape worm?


----------



## banditpowdercoat (Aug 13, 2015)

No. That was removed by a snake charmer a few months ago


Sent from my iPhone while my Heli plays with the gophers


----------



## Terp (Jul 25, 2013)

banditpowdercoat said:


> Ever notice baseball players with weights on their bats? Ya. Training with a heavier bat so when they swing the official one they swing it much faster.


Baseball bats don't have gears. The bottom line is, the more effort you put in to your training, the stronger you will become. You can increase your effort on a given hill by changing to a heavy bike with rocks in your pack and trying to keep the same speed OR shifting your light bike into a higher gear and riding faster.

Both will make you a stronger rider but given the choice I personally would rather go faster and get a longer ride in with the lighter bike. However the heavy bike will make your arms stronger by having to steer all that extra inertia around. Either way, enjoy!


----------



## banditpowdercoat (Aug 13, 2015)

But a higher gear will make the load tougher, but if one wants to keep same cadence, then you must go faster. And one can not always go faster.


----------



## tigris99 (Aug 26, 2012)

There's a lot of ways to improve physical performance, some do the "fancy" training. Those of us with fat bikes, you get way more of a workout because as said, fight with turning that thing at speed, the extra efforts needed in all things turning and climbing. My 29er the only fatigue I feel is from my right arm that is getting back into full riding shape after elbow surgery last year.... my fat bime after the first real trail ride, felt like they both wanted to fall off by the time I got back to the trail head after a loop. Trying to ride at the same speed(only slower in climbs) took way more effort outta me than pushing my 29er as fast as I felt confident riding said trail.

When I want an ass wupin' I take the fatty, if I wanna go to be my personal best lap time or a group ride (sober group ride, drunken rides I can hang on the fatty cause I don't get drunk till after) its the 29er.

But that's me. Training routines to me are just tedious and boring. Im in manufacturing these days, get enough of that at work. So if I want to feel the pain, my fatty does it with full smiles start to finish.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk


----------



## LiquidSpin (Mar 26, 2012)

I don't care what anyone says, I want my bike as light as possible. I'll get my core and leg strength at the gym haha


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

thegweed said:


> Nothing in this thread is more thought-provoking to me than why a guy lists his wife's bike in his signature.


lol why is it "thought-provoking"?


----------



## 411898 (Nov 5, 2008)

Just ride, that's all. Just ride.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I've never 'trained' on a bike and am no physics or workout guru by any means, but I'll tell ya, bitd I used to do a fair around of bikepacking with a trailer, pulling maybe 40lbs of gear and beer around for a few days at a time on a pretty regular basis. I'm pretty sure it made me a stronger rider at the time, quite a bit actually.


----------



## knutso (Oct 8, 2008)

A heavier bike _can _make you stonger because:
Group rides become more challenging.
The need for speed, left unfulfilled moreso on a heavier bike, will push the rider harder.
The gearing negates weight arguement only holds true if there are infinite gearing possibilities, otherwise the spectrum of gearing available shifts proportionally with weight. So at the extreme, where there are not more gears to click, the heavier bike requires more torque.

Pros train a certain way, recreational riders ride far differently. The thing that is constant as the driving force behind progress is motivation. For some people the above reasons are motivators, for others they make them want to give up. I think a heavy bike is a weeding out process, it makes you choose how badly you want to ride. Anyone can enjoy a spin on a light finely tuned bike, but the kid slogging a POS around has to really want it.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

knutso said:


> A heavier bike _can _make you stonger because:
> Group rides become more challenging.


Exactly, it *can* make a person stronger.

As far as group rides go a heavy bike will only make them more challenging if you're already routinely spanking everyone on the climbs and launching successful attacks off the front. I never got there with a light bike.


----------



## Bakudan (May 19, 2011)

I don't think a heavier geared bike will make you stronger. Riding in a higher gear than normal or an SS will though. If you ride a heavier bike I bet you'll just end up spinning a lower gear if given the choice. Someone mashing a higher gear even on a way lighter bike will get stronger faster.


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

Harry Mackenzie said:


> Someone mashing a higher gear even on a way lighter bike will get stronger faster.


I do the mashing of the higher gear on my fat bike on even ground and uphill. That's why I got stronger. My fattie has a 10 speed, I'm usually on 7th gear on even ground and 5-6th gear going uphill.

Last season on my 29er I used to do 2nd gear going uphill.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

Hawg said:


> Just ride, that's all. Just ride.


Thank you!

I've never cared, and all of my bikes (3) have been heavy and I'm probably the skinniest dude in this entire forum.


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

If you gain body weight, like this recent picture of Le Duke, then you will indeed get stronger. I recommend this approach:


----------



## AthleticAL (Feb 9, 2015)

Generator on the wheel, people! 

Increased resistance going up. And down! (And it's Eco-Friendly). Think about it!


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Gotta combine those ideas with an elevation mask to reduce oxygen intake to get really buff


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

banditpowdercoat said:


> Ever notice baseball players with weights on their bats? Ya. Training with a heavier bat so when they swing the official one they swing it much faster. Appearing that they have more power
> 
> Sent from my iPhone while my Heli plays with the gophers


After-effects of using a weighted bat on subsequent swing velocity and batters' perceptions of swing velocity and heaviness. - PubMed - NCBI

"... significant decrease of 3.3% in the measured linear velocity of the bat prior to impact with the ball..."

Seems more like a muscle training exercise intended to improve grip strength. Don't want big league pitchers overpowering you with a heavy fastball, due to poor grip (wrist/forearm) strength. Better to get timing down, and accuracy for good contact. Real sluggers have more strength behind their swing. They don't really practice hitting pitches with that weight on it, do they? That said, I will admit that going from a heavier wooden bat to a lighter weight alloy or composite bat would improve swing speed definitely. I wonder why the big leaguers don't use them.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

My training regimen consists of decreasing weight throughout the ride as I consume the beer in my pack.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

Varaxis said:


> After-effects of using a weighted bat on subsequent swing velocity and batters' perceptions of swing velocity and heaviness. - PubMed - NCBI
> 
> "... significant decrease of 3.3% in the measured linear velocity of the bat prior to impact with the ball..."
> 
> Seems more like a muscle training exercise intended to improve grip strength. Don't want big league pitchers overpowering you with a heavy fastball, due to poor grip (wrist/forearm) strength. Better to get timing down, and accuracy for good contact. Real sluggers have more strength behind their swing. They don't really practice hitting pitches with that weight on it, do they? That said, I will admit that going from a heavier wooden bat to a lighter weight alloy or composite bat would improve swing speed definitely. I wonder why the big leaguers don't use them.


Rules of the MLB. Wood bats only.


----------



## BmanInTheD (Sep 19, 2014)

The only way you're gonna get stronger on a heavier bike is if you go the same speed as you do on a lighter bike. But wouldn't it be more fun to go faster on the lighter bike and get the same benefit of gaining strength? Your legs don't know or care what your bike weighs, only the effort that they're putting out. Riding faster with a lighter bike at the same cadence as riding a heavier bike will yield the same physiological results. Not that hard to understand.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

I read that motorized bats (e-bats) are becoming "a thing" in baseball.


----------



## GeePhroh (Jan 13, 2004)

Curveball said:


> My training regimen consists of decreasing weight throughout the ride as I consume the beer in my pack.


The drunker I get, the faster I ride. Until I pass out.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

BmanInTheD said:


> The only way you're gonna get stronger on a heavier bike is if you go the same speed as you do on a lighter bike. But wouldn't it be more fun to go faster on the lighter bike and get the same benefit of gaining strength? Your legs don't know or care what your bike weighs, only the effort that they're putting out. Riding faster with a lighter bike at the same cadence as riding a heavier bike will yield the same physiological results. Not that hard to understand.


If you're out of low gears, and you're pushing more mass against gravity, your legs will know it.


----------



## BmanInTheD (Sep 19, 2014)

mountainbiker24 said:


> If you're out of low gears, and you're pushing more mass against gravity, your legs will know it.


That's why I threw in the "same cadence" caveat. Unless you ride trails with long stretches of super steep grades, this would be a non-issue. Judging from the gears the OP said he uses, doesn't seem to apply here.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

mountainbiker24 said:


> If you're out of low gears, and you're pushing more mass against gravity, your legs will know it.


And if you shift a light bike into a high gear and keep up the cadence you're pushing mass against gravity faster, and your legs will know it.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Curveball said:


> My training regimen consists of decreasing weight throughout the ride as I consume the beer in my pack.


Unless you're making a lot of pit stops I don't think you're actually decreasing your weight, just rearranging it.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> Unless you're making a lot of pit stops I don't think you're actually decreasing your weight, just rearranging it.


I thought the pit stops were a given. How else are you going to get hero dirt from dry soil?


----------



## Miker J (Nov 4, 2003)

Yeah, back in the day, when we had like only eight gears out back, biking was way harder - and so we were a lot faster.


This thread got real silly, real fast.


----------



## scottzg (Sep 27, 2006)

As a rather large human, i've noticed that bike weight doesn't really affect me much. I'm heavy, i make a ton of power, and bike weight is a small % of the package. Smaller riders seem to be much more affected by weight, but they don't break parts like i do. Me, i set my bikes up to be sturdy (for their application) and ride well; i have no idea what they weigh.


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

BmanInTheD said:


> That's why I threw in the "same cadence" caveat. Unless you ride trails with long stretches of super steep grades, this would be a non-issue. Judging from the gears the OP said he uses, doesn't seem to apply here.


Yeah my cadence isn't high when I go uphill because I focus on the torque my legs put out at higher gears.

One thing about me, I'm better at using high strength than high cardio exercises... I cannot run for long, but can definitely hike steep grades all day long. Same goes for biking, I don't do high cadence at low gears because I don't last. I'd rather put out a lot of torque and pedal force at higher gears.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

Nat said:


> I read that motorized bats (e-bats) are becoming "a thing" in baseball.


They've been banned by MLB and there's reported evidence of cheating by Nelson Cruz. They found suspicious wires coming out of his bat.


----------



## scottzg (Sep 27, 2006)

Engineer90 said:


> Yeah my cadence isn't high when I go uphill because I focus on the torque my legs put out at higher gears.
> 
> One thing about me, I'm better at using high strength than high cardio exercises... I cannot run for long, but can definitely hike steep grades all day long. Same goes for biking, I don't do high cadence at low gears because I don't last. I'd rather put out a lot of torque and pedal force at higher gears.


Sounds like you're just out of shape and have poor pedaling technique.


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

scottzg said:


> Sounds like you're just out of shape and have poor pedaling technique.


I am out of shape! Never said I was a fit athletic model!


----------



## Wooly Worm (Mar 15, 2015)

Le Duke said:


> I love it when slow people tell me I'm wrong, and that their training methods are better.
> 
> I know quite a few pro MTB racers. To include myself. None of them "train" using the methods described by the people in this thread. I'm guessing their coaches are slightly more informed than the average overweight American that putters around for a few hours each week.
> 
> ...


I love it when someone refers to others as "slow people" and when people in the UK called Americans "overweight". And I guess you're a chav with rotten teeth? See how that works? What's your name? I race, a lot of people I know race, since you're so fast, surely we've heard of you. Name or license # so we can look you up and marvel at your prowess.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Wooly Worm said:


> I love it when someone refers to others as "slow people" and when people in the UK called Americans "overweight". And I guess you're a chav with rotten teeth? See how that works? What's your name? I race, a lot of people I know race, since you're so fast, surely we've heard of you. Name or license # so we can look you up and marvel at your prowess.


Is Le Duke British? I thought he was in North Carolina or someplace like that. His profile says he's from Oregon.


----------



## Wooly Worm (Mar 15, 2015)

Very well could be. For some reason I thought he was in the UK. Even better....what's his name or license # let's look him up on USA Cycling.


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

Engineer90 said:


> In this video, Seth demonstrates that it's not so much about weight, but more about the type of rider and skill level.
> 
> IMO, I agree. I own a 35 lbs fat bike, does not bother me at all and has only made my legs stronger and now I even last longer. Whenever I ride my 29er, it feels like I'm pedaling air since there is less rolling resistance. However, if you are a racer, then yes weight matters a hell of a lot. But for most of us "normal" MTBers, weight shouldn't hold us back too much... although anything over 40-45 lbs is too heavy IMO:thumbsup:
> 
> Let's say you?


Not sure if this has been said yet but contrary to popular belief, riding a heavier bike, all things being equal, doesn't make you stronger, it just means you go slower. If this was the case, racers would train on DH bikes from the 90's with 3" tires and blown shocks to be on the least efficient/heaviest/slowest bike, get stronger, then switch back. But it doesn't work that way.

Now if you say "I'm going to push harder when I train in order to go the same speed as I would on the lighter bike", then THAT will make you stronger.

Source--power meter owner. The speed you go is a function of your power and environmental factors (bike weight, wind, tires, your weight, aerodynamics, temperature, etc). If I ride my heavier bike for a while and go back to my lighter bike, I'll FEEL faster and I am going faster due to being on a more efficient machine, but my power levels won't have changed.


----------

