# Some real weights of the new XTR.



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

http://www.bikerumor.com/2010/08/08...-weights-for-full-component-group/#more-20685


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

Nothing really impressive. Brakes are the same weight. Wonder why they ditched the radial cylinder. The race pedals dropped 20g per pair.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

No, weight wise it's not impressive at all. I was expecting a lot more weight to be taken off. I'm sure everything works great. Hopefully it's durable too.


----------



## bad mechanic (Jun 21, 2006)

I don't understand why they're moving away from radial master cylinders.


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

I was expecting the brakes to be lighter than ~20g less.

The shifters are a bit heavier than the XX shifters, but if they work similar/better than current xtr shifters, I'll take the weight penalty.

The cranks are nice! Looks like the 175mm 42/30t crank is 2g lighter than the 170mm 39t/26t XX crank, Not bad! not quite as light as something like the lightning cranks, but these sure do look much nicer, and I bet are more durable.

Overall I am impressed! I want it!


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Well when I weighted everything it came in at 60 grams lighter then the old stuff. 

(That is for the triple, no pedals, and no wheels)

The biggest weight loss was actually in the chain.


----------



## bad mechanic (Jun 21, 2006)

LMN said:


> The biggest weight loss was actually in the chain.


Really? Could you give me details?


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

bad mechanic said:


> Really? Could you give me details?


I don't remember off hand. But I want to say 20 to 25 grams.

Wear life looks good so far. Catharine has about 1500km on hers and there is very little stretch.


----------



## ozonepro (Feb 23, 2004)

What about the 160mm centrelock rotor at 106g? I think that's fairly impressive. The aluminum sandwich has helped lower the weight by 20g over the previous model. They are quickly closing the gap with 6bolt rotors.


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

ozonepro said:


> What about the 160mm centrelock rotor at 106g? I think that's fairly impressive. The aluminum sandwich has helped lower the weight by 20g over the previous model. They are quickly closing the gap with 6bolt rotors.


Exactly, still 20g heavier than cheaper 6 bolts rotors. All for what, quicker install/removal?

I'm guessing the chain is still heavier than the KMC X10SL? My X9SL works great so I'll probably stop using Srams. Never liked Shimano chains.


----------



## Rivet (Sep 3, 2004)

bad mechanic said:


> I don't understand why they're moving away from radial master cylinders.


Radial master cylinders put the lever pivot too far from the bar and create a weird arc for the lever through it's travel. The lever actually moves in and away from your hand which feels funky.


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

COLINx86 said:


> The cranks are nice! Looks like the 175mm 42/30t crank is 2g lighter than the 170mm 39t/26t XX crank, Not bad! not quite as light as something like the lightning cranks, but these sure do look much nicer, and I bet are more durable.
> 
> Overall I am impressed! I want it!


 So you put higher looking and durability not weight ? .... alo weightweenie ?


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

xcatax said:


> So you put higher looking and durability not weight ? .... alo weightweenie ?


Yes I do put durability above weight, And yes it does need to look good or I'm not going to put it on my bike unless it gives me some huge performance advantage (or maybe if it's really light for cheap, I might put something a tad bit ugly on there). I also race my bike, if it's not durable, then it doesn't do me any good.

Another big deciding factor for me is cost. And if it is true that they aren't going to raise prices on the XTR than it will be cheaper than lightning.


----------



## cale399 (Oct 18, 2008)

COLINx86 said:


> Yes I do put durability above weight, And yes it does need to look good or I'm not going to put it on my bike unless it gives me some huge performance advantage (or maybe if it's really light for cheap, I might put something a tad bit ugly on there). I also race my bike, if it's not durable, then it doesn't do me any good.
> 
> Another big deciding factor for me is cost. And if it is true that they aren't going to raise prices on the XTR than it will be cheaper than lightning.


+1,000
the lightest is GREAT, but (I race too) if the lightest breaks b/c it was not meant to race under any condition (some of us are pure XC, some Endurance, some live east coast sme west etc) so I need something that is light and durable and will last a certain amount of time...how many XTR cranks have we haerd of breaking ...


----------



## pernfilman (May 24, 2007)

I will give the brakes a shot when they come out.


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

Someone told me that main reason to buy xtr cranks was he could 
sell for 200e after one year use .... 
So my next question should be ¿why selling a good durable cranks for 
buying....? again same?
I think you are blind with xtr or xx words , i dont need to sell 
my lightning cranks to feel myself did great buying them .
I agree you the cost is a big factor , i bought my last cranks 
the best so i will no have to spend more money on xtr 700g 
crankset


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

...... and i will not speak about cassette , brakes , chains , pedals etc pfffffffff you fanboys


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

I would rather have the XTR cranks and probably the new pedals even though Lighting and Eggs are much lighter. I have the 4Ti. pedals but just can't get used to the ankle twist release point and I really don't want a carbon crank. I see people constantly hitting their cranks on rocks on our local trails. I like the new XTR crank.


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

No offense meant by this, but i don't understand what you wrote in your first post.


xcatax said:


> ...... and i will not speak about cassette , brakes , chains , pedals etc pfffffffff you fanboys


 The cassette, is pretty light. Not as light as the XX cassette, but still should be a good, sort of reasonably priced DURABLE cassette.

But you are right, the brakes aren't the lightest but they do feel nice (yes I have seen them/sqeezed them, but no haven't ridden them).

Chain is heavy, but if it works like the say it does, I might be willing to take a weight penalty there.

I never want to use shimano pedals again, so I don't care what they weigh.

And I'm in the same boat as limba, I don't want carbon cranks. I'd love to have some on a maybe a show bike or something, but not on my training/racing/abusing bike. My XT cranks have way to many dings in them for me to feel comfortable with carbon cranks (on my mtb).


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

Some real weights .............


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

If you would take the plastic wrap and label off the Aerozine cranks they'd be almost the same weight.  634gms is pretty darn light. The XTR BB is only 89gms and the BB-92 version is only 73gms.


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

Durability!








:nono:


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

For the same weight, I would take XTR's hands down.


----------



## culturesponge (Aug 15, 2007)

anyone know what the new XTR M980 11-36 weighs?

it seems to be tuff to find a verified weight for that on the interweb


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

rockyuphill said:


> If you would take the plastic wrap and label off the Aerozine cranks they'd be almost the same weight.  634gms is pretty darn light. The XTR BB is only 89gms and the BB-92 version is only 73gms.


 Did you noticed 3 chainrings ?  ... Cmon guys , xtr 2007 cranks without chainrings .......


























.............the weight reduction is a joke compared to previous model , supossed that this was a weightweenie forum


----------



## checky (Jan 13, 2006)

Cmon ice cream parlor biker.

Serious riding needs at the high stressed parts some gramms more, otherwise the rider get stress:


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

checky said:


> *Cmon ice cream parlor biker*.
> Serious riding needs at the high stressed parts some gramms more, otherwise the rider get stress:


 Hahaha , now am i guilty for all lightweight broken parts ?.... You will not ride a weightweenie bike with xtr 2011 group , thats a fact be real . You are going to pay lots for just 3 words :skep:


----------



## checky (Jan 13, 2006)

< 9,91Kg is possible ... with chain stay protection.
No, for finish races. But I know that's something a "real" WW will never (be able to) do in a serious way.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

3 *letters* and those letters are the standard by which all others are judged.


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

limba said:


> 3 *letters* and those letters are the standard by which all others are judged.


I let you the standard  , i like lightweight stuff and bargains ....... weight scale dont lie :thumbsup:


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

xcatax said:


> Hahaha , now am i guilty for all lightweight broken parts ?.... You will not ride a weightweenie bike with xtr 2011 group , thats a fact be real . You are going to pay lots for just 3 words :skep:


Are you sure about that?

Because my wife's bike in race trim with full 2011 XTR is 8.6kgs and that is with 2.2 tires with side wall protection.

For everyday riding it is still 9.2kgs.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

culturesponge said:


> anyone know what the new XTR M980 11-36 weighs?
> 
> it seems to be tuff to find a verified weight for that on the interweb


273 grams by my scale.


----------



## culturesponge (Aug 15, 2007)

LMN said:


> 273 grams by my scale.


brilliant thanks

had speculated it might be around 265-270g - so my 9 speed XTR/FRM 12-36 is 2g lighter - score!


----------



## pernfilman (May 24, 2007)

When is the release date on these pieces ?


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

Was told October for the pedals.


----------



## iscarrr (Oct 28, 2006)

Lelandjt said:


> Was told October for the pedals.


Yep, I was told "We'll have all of the 2011 XTR gear, including the new pedals, late in October. " from the guys at Competitive Cyclist.


----------



## Broccoli (Jun 11, 2008)

xcatax said:


> Some real weights .............


Right - but Aerozine cranks are crap, and XTR are bombproof.



xcatax said:


> .............the weight reduction is a joke compared to previous model , supossed that this was a weightweenie forum


First and foremost this is a forum for mountain bikers. Fragile crap does not belong on the trails, no matter what the weight.

XTR is the lightest offering from Shimano. It has proven performance. Of course it is a weight sensitive and highly relevant.


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

Curmy said:


> Right - but Aerozine cranks are *crap*, and *XTR are bombproof*.
> 
> First and foremost this is a forum for mountain bikers. Fragile *crap* does not belong on the trails, no matter what the weight.
> 
> *XTR is the lightest* offering from Shimano. It has proven performance. Of course it is a weight sensitive and highly relevant.


 This is weightweenie section of a mountain bikers forum and i can say XTR 2011 , not only crankset is a fake lightweight stuff nowhere improved over XTR 2007 .
XTR weight range was :
Rotor agilis 
Sram xx
*Aerozine x12 fx *










*and you can find these cranks for 119e complete 3 chainrings 775g <----- xtr 2007 weights*
Rotor , shimano and sram working together offering a similar range of weight-price-quality but they can compete each other at 600g range for same prices if people disagree on their new not-improved products .
I have got Aerozine x12 sl a3 3x9 , 2x9 and now 1x9 since +1 year and me plus many many other people that bougth it knows Aerozine crankset runs as smooth or stiff as XTR over the time .
You should be talking about XTR sub-200g disc brakes with 60g disc but YOU CANT true?
You should be talking about XTR 1200g wheels or 170g cassettes but ..............
I care about a true open market that competes to offer i demand "lightweight stuff"
Salu2
Juan


----------



## bad mechanic (Jun 21, 2006)

xcatax said:


> This is weightweenie section of a mountain bikers forum and i can say XTR 2011 , not only crankset is a fake lightweight stuff nowhere improved over XTR 2007.


Hmm, I disagree. First, the new 2011 XTR crankset goes back to the much better pinch bolt left crank arm system, which is an improvement over the 2007. Second, it may not be lightweight compared to the lightest of the light, but if you're looking for a completely bombproof crankset which you can just forget about, XTR is the lightest you'll get. Therefore, it belongs in the weight weenie forum.


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

> Hmm, I disagree. First, the new 2011 XTR crankset goes back to the much better pinch bolt left crank arm system


 *are we talking about weight improvements or not? ... it should be around 600g like cannondale sl or spezialized sworks*



> which is an improvement over the 2007


 *Grats , one improvement over themselves tech .*



> Second, it may not be lightweight compared to the lightest of the light, but if you're looking for a completely bombproof crankset which you can just forget about, XTR is the lightest you'll get. Therefore, it belongs in the weight weenie forum


*Did you read my old post here this thread ? .... by repeating same lies again and again and again xtr crankset 2007 weights same xtr 2011 ( 2 chainrings ) . 
Theres no weight improvement for being discussed here , this is just cheap publicity .*


----------



## bad mechanic (Jun 21, 2006)

Did you not read my post, it's a XTR crankset without the single drawback of the 2007 XTR crankset. Weight improvements aren't the only improvements; if a light weight part's usability/reliability/performance is improved, it still has a place here, and I still want to hear about it.


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

bad mechanic said:



> Did you not read my post, it's a XTR crankset without the single drawback of the 2007 XTR crankset. Weight improvements aren't the only improvements; if a light weight part's usability/reliability/performance is improved, it still has a place here, and I still want to hear about it.


 Did you noticed the title of this thread?


----------



## bad mechanic (Jun 21, 2006)

...yes, and? I'm happy to find out the real weight of the new crankset.

Now, if the title had been "New XTR lighter than ANYTHING else!!!!", then you might have point.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

I made the thread title. It makes sense to me. Everyone wants to know what the new stuff is going to weigh so here it is. I'm a bit disappointed too but at least we have some accurate weights now.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

xcatax said:


> *
> Did you read my old post here this thread ? .... by repeating same lies again and again and again xtr crankset 2007 weights same xtr 2011 ( 2 chainrings ) .
> Theres no weight improvement for being discussed here , this is just cheap publicity .*


What did you expect a big improvement? Shimano has taken the XTR crank to limit of their construction techniques. Unless they make a radical change it isn't go get lighter. I know they certainly didn't made any claim about significant weight loss in the cranks.

They are still the best cranks and chain rings on the market by a huge margine. Every other crank/chain ring set has either inferior shifting or chain ring life or in most cases both.


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

limba said:


> I made the thread title. It makes sense to me. Everyone wants to know what the new stuff is going to weigh so here it is. I'm a bit disappointed too but at least we have some accurate weights now.


Yeah disappointed coz you wanted xtr crankset in 600g range that would have been great for we users but now you will have to pay the same without improvement .


----------



## Broccoli (Jun 11, 2008)

xcatax said:


> You should be talking about XTR sub-200g disc brakes with 60g disc but YOU CANT true?
> You should be talking about XTR 1200g wheels or 170g cassettes but ..............
> I care about a true open market that competes to offer i demand "lightweight stuff"
> Salu2
> Juan


You can demand all you want - but if one wants to run fragile crap on his bike for the sole purpose of a minimal show-off weight loss - he is not a real mountain biker. Shimano engineers know how to make reliable products that are still very lightweight. You do not.

P.S. And yes - Aerozine is crap compared to XTR. You are welcome to it.


----------



## Baulz (Sep 16, 2005)

xcatax said:


> Yeah disappointed coz you wanted xtr crankset in 600g range that would have been great for we users but now you will have to pay the same without improvement .


Internet trolls are funny. :thumbsup:


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

Curmy said:


> You can demand all you want - but if one wants to run fragile crap on his bike for the sole purpose of a minimal show-off weight loss - he is not a real mountain biker. Shimano engineers know how to make reliable products that are still very lightweight. You do not.
> 
> P.S. And yes - Aerozine is crap compared to XTR. You are welcome to it.


Now you says fragile crap is formula r1 brakes? Im surprised :skep: 
You are a real mountainbiker riding xtr of the year everywhere .... oh¡¡¡ funny  and you comes here thinking your 106g disc are light coz are named XTR  
Please stop it rofl


----------



## Broccoli (Jun 11, 2008)

xcatax said:


> Now you says fragile crap is formula r1 brakes? Im surprised :skep:
> You are a real mountainbiker riding xtr of the year everywhere .... oh¡¡¡ funny  and you comes here thinking your 106g disc are light coz are named XTR
> Please stop it rofl


Formula's are OK - but nowhere near as easy to adjust or maintain as Shimano's with servo, like on current XT. Now they have added that feature to XTR trim - which is great news. But I am not sure where you got that from that I was talking about them.

Lower height on new SPD pedals are more important then reduced weight. Wonderful pedals - go for years without any issues. Unlike CB. And unlike Time and Look - not need to screw around with shims to fit certain shoes.

Nobody requires one to run Shimano brakes with centerlock - I run them with 6-bolt rotors. But saying that centerlock design has no merit and that a new 106g centerlock rotor is not a good weight is asinine.

If weight is your only concern - that only means that you do not ride real trails or that you are a 97 pound weakling - or have a death wish.

I probably should just ignore your idiotic incoherent rambling. And I will do just that from now on.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

xcatax said:


> Now you says fragile crap is formula r1 brakes? Im surprised :skep:
> You are a real mountainbiker riding xtr of the year everywhere .... oh¡¡¡ funny  and you comes here thinking your 106g disc are light coz are named XTR
> Please stop it rofl


Let us see how you like your light weight rotors when they over heat and your brakes go on a long descent.

I took a look at your bike builds. I am sorry but your build would last less then a week under my 130lb frame. There is riders and then those are who like light weight bikes with studpidly light parts that are not ridable. Which camp are you in?


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

Ok lets trade info LMN
First post pictures of your lightweight bike , i ride the 7,33kg and i know isnt a downhill bike thanks  . Im close 40y old and my weight is 66kg . I like to ride near my home coz i live in a town closer big forest and mountains . I eventually ride routes with my brother (2nd nosaint) like this one Arguis .




















































My build works and is cheap for the weight , lightweight parts is only 50% the other part is you . Someone said lightweight parts are for chicken legs , i agree .


----------



## bad mechanic (Jun 21, 2006)

Out of curiousity, do you have any pictures of your trails?


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

bad mechanic said:


> Out of curiousity, do you have any pictures of your trails?


 do you want more?  
Theres a link in my signature that says *Catas public gallery* with lots pics .


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

I don't have many pic's of me on my bike. I get the bike after my wife has used it for a season. Here is couple of pics of her:

https://www.dirtragmag.com/forums//attachment.php?attachmentid=31835&d=1252986104
https://cyclephotos.co.uk/2010/07/v...-cup-2010-valdisole-003-catherine-pendrel.jpg

Weight is 9kg depending upon tire choice. The bikes are light enough to win a world cup (and for her to be the current world cup leader) and strong enough for her to train and race on them for a season and me to train and race on them for another 2 season. My current hardtail has raced in six world cups (won one) and then has been ridden and abused by me for another two years.

Hard to match that durability and perforance.


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

whats your weight ?.... mines ok for a 7kg bike and 9kg is far from lightweight imho .


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

xcatax said:


> whats your weight ?.... mines ok for a 7kg bike and 9kg is far from lightweight imho .


I am 130lbs. But 9kg is with durable tires, I can drop the bike to 8kg but I would be running 450 gram tires and fixing flats all the time. Which BTW the heavier durable tires are ones used for racing, IMHO lightweight tires are not worth it.

Chances are your riding is not the same as mine. The riding in BC is fairly unique and much harder on bikes then most places. Plus I ride a lot and when I say I ride a lot I mean I ride a lot. My typical riding week is 10-14hrs of single track and rugged single track.

Are you confident that your 7kg bike could handle 1500hrs of BC single track? The stupid light weight bikes that some people bring to BC bike race ccouldt handle 20hrs of BC single track. (As seen by the large pile of broken parts at the end of the race)


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

uhmm 130lbs-59kg ..... lightweight body with not as lightweight bike ... strange



> IMHO lightweight tires are not worth it


 Give it to me , i like lightweight stuff thats the reason i post here .


> I would be running 450 gram tires and fixing flats all the time


 I use all these lightweight tires without flat problems :
Rron , Rralph , flyweight490 , larsen 1,9 , Nnic1,80 ............ Kenda bg 2.0



> Chances are your riding is not the same as mine. The riding in BC is fairly unique and much harder on bikes then most places. Plus I ride a lot and when I say I ride a lot I mean I ride a lot. My typical riding week is 10-14hrs of single track and rugged single track.


 Im on vacants and can ride everyday all i want only depends on weather .



> Are you confident that your 7kg bike could handle 1500hrs of BC single track? The stupid light weight bikes that some people bring to BC bike race ccouldt handle 20hrs of BC single track. (As seen by the large pile of broken parts at the end of the race)


 Im confident with all the components in my bike and i know the purpose of my bike , it can handle my routes no problems .
Im sorry but i only ride 100km routes , 1500-2000m acumulated uphill over all terrain types in a 16,16lb bike ..............
Forget to say you can build my bike for 3500-4000e


----------



## bad mechanic (Jun 21, 2006)

xcatax said:


> do you want more?
> Theres a link in my signature that says *Catas public gallery* with lots pics .


From the pictures and video I've seen, you're riding a combination of paved roads and gravel/dirt roads. Am I wrong?


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

bad mechanic said:


> From the pictures and video I've seen, you're riding a combination of paved roads and gravel/dirt roads. Am I wrong?


No , that link was for the gpx track of the route that you can download from there as many others .

track


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

xcatax said:


> Rron , Rralph , flyweight490 , larsen 1,9 , Nnic1,80 ............ Kenda bg 2.0


The fact that you can ride those tire without problems tell me that we have different riding environments. Where I live no one and I mean no one runs those tires; too light and too fragile. My 110lb wife can't even get away with stuff that light.

Here is a video of one of my favorite XC trails. The guys in the video are on trail bike, but this XC mountain biking in BC.


----------



## culturesponge (Aug 15, 2007)

it isn't worth the effort to try and converse with him - he's just a troll

do what i do and add him to your ignore list


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

LMN said:


> The fact that you can ride those tire without problems tell me that we have different riding environments. Where I live no one and I mean no one runs those tires; too light and too fragile. My 110lb wife can't even get away with stuff that light.


I use no tubes with stan notubes liquild .


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

xcatax said:


> I use no tubes with stan notubes liquild .


Who doesn't?

I can't believe you have any sucess with Stans with tires that thin. My experience with tires that thin and Stans is it takes about two rides until they have a slice so bad that the Stans will not work.

If you can run Stans in tires that thin you are either riding really smooth trails or you are riding really slow.

BTW I like your Orbea I have the same frame.


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

...... and i cant bealive you 130&110lbs needs 1kg more in tires to get safe travels . The vimeo video is all mountain biking for full suspension bikes with heavy tires and i see people climbing 3-4km/h and nowhere i see speed ( my lowest speed is 9-10kmh 11-30 with 32t ring ). 
I never had a slice only had problems with kenda blue groove 2.0 as rear , i told seller must be a reaction with ammonia of stan notubes .


----------



## Mattias_Hellöre (Oct 2, 2005)

I use a steel hardtail andusing a old front fork but up to date drivetrain and other stuff just because I like the vintage look of a GT Psyclone.

All of us have different preferences of riding trails, some like dry stony trails, some like muddy and dark trails.

Use right bike for right trail.

Id you can´t use a cyclocross in a trail without shaking your head off or flattening all them time, use a XC bike.

If your XC bike is getting bottoms outs or you are keeping the speed down, use a Trail bike, and so on.


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

LMN said:


> Who doesn't?
> 
> I can't believe you have any sucess with Stans with tires that thin. My experience with tires that thin and Stans is it takes about two rides until they have a slice so bad that the Stans will not work.
> 
> ...


Just out of curiosity, LMN. Do you or your wife ever run exception series Maxxis tires? Maybe at world cups?

Any kind of hint of what the Aspen's with the evo sidewalls will weigh?


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

xcatax said:


> ...... and i cant bealive you 130&110lbs needs 1kg more in tires to get safe travels. The vimeo video is all mountain biking for full suspension bikes with heavy tires and i see people climbing 3-4km/h and nowhere i see speed ( my lowest speed is 9-10kmh 11-30 with 32t ring ).
> I never had a slice only had problems with kenda blue groove 2.0 as rear , i told seller must be a reaction with ammonia of stan notubes .





> and i cant bealive you 130&110lbs needs 1kg more in tires to get safe travels.


Well believe it. I have a lot of experience riding and my wife is the best XC racer in the world right now. Last year she won a world cup on 650 gram tires.



> The vimeo video is all mountain biking for full suspension bikes with heavy tires and i see people climbing 3-4km/h and nowhere i see speed


The video was of one of my favorite XC trails not of myself riding it. I don't know who the guys were riding it. It is a slow trail, a couple of years ago a good world cup racer did it at full speed and it took them 2hrs for 23km.

When I ride my road bike my slowest speeds are 15km/hr. Generally the easier the terrain the higher the speed.



> ( my lowest speed is 9-10kmh 11-30 with 32t ring ).


Well if you were here you would be walking with that gear combination. Today do a climb in my 22-34 I had average 360 watts for 5 minutes. That is 6 watts/kg.

Take your light weight bike to BC, Quebec, Colorado or the East Coast of the US. After you have replaced your tires and parts come back here and complain about heavy XTR is.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

COLINx86 said:


> Just out of curiosity, LMN. Do you or your wife ever run exception series Maxxis tires? Maybe at world cups?
> 
> Any kind of hint of what the Aspen's with the evo sidewalls will weigh?


The last two season nothing but UST tires. This year she used exception series Aspens at Dalby and exception series Ignitors at Champery. At Offenburg and Champery she used a protytpe tire with Evo sidewalls.

Evo sidewalls don't add much weight. Definately worth it IMHO.

Catharine and Kabush used a new pro-type tire for BCBR with EVO protection. 500km of racing and not a single flat between the two of them. Impressive.


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

LMN said:


> The last two season nothing but UST tires. This year she used exception series Aspens at Dalby and exception series Ignitors at Champery. At Offenburg and Champery she used a protytpe tire with Evo sidewalls.
> 
> Evo sidewalls don't add much weight. Definately worth it IMHO.
> 
> Catharine and Kabush used a new pro-type tire for BCBR with EVO protection. 500km of racing and not a single flat between the two of them. Impressive.


Hmm... Interesting, pretty heavy tires. But I guess if you ride trails like in the video posted, all the time, then it'd be pretty necessary.

Just looked on the maxxis site, looks like for the crossmark the evo sidewalls add 15g per tire. Will definitely get the Aspens with evo sidewalls when they come out!


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

back to the thread theme


> Take your light weight bike to BC, Quebec, Colorado or the East Coast of the US. After you have replaced your tires and parts come back here and complain about heavy XTR is.


Tires are not from this xtr group what should i complain ?
Lightning crankset?
ztr wheelset?
formula r1 brakes?
xpedo pedals ?
Maybe you are just selling ur provider , i dont use shimano components and only sram rear der + right gripshift .


----------



## Broccoli (Jun 11, 2008)

culturesponge said:


> it isn't worth the effort to try and converse with him - he's just a troll
> 
> do what i do and add him to your ignore list


..and.. done.

Kind of bizarre how one can be so dense and narrowminded. Arguing with a world cup racer that her tires are too heavy...


----------



## Mattias_Hellöre (Oct 2, 2005)

If I attend to a world cup race, I would not take chances to use thin sidewall tires and lose a podium finish.

But there´s a fine balance between fragile and good lightweight stuff.

Look at any race where pros attend.


----------



## Puxa! (Apr 10, 2008)

LMN said:


> I don't have many pic's of me on my bike. I get the bike after my wife has used it for a season. Here is couple of pics of her:
> 
> https://www.dirtragmag.com/forums//attachment.php?attachmentid=31835&d=1252986104
> https://cyclephotos.co.uk/2010/07/v...-cup-2010-valdisole-003-catherine-pendrel.jpg
> ...


So Catharine is your wife?
Wow,she's nailing it this season.She's riding so great,you must be proud,sure.
Wish her luck for the Worlds and the final races.
Cheers!


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

xcatax said:


> Maybe you are just selling ur provider , i dont use shimano components and only sram rear der + right gripshift .


Maybe I am, maybe I am not believe what you like.

I use to run SRAM stuff. They were an excellent sponsor, good performace, light weight but poor durability. Fortunately they gave you a lot of parts.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

xcatax said:


> back to the thread theme
> 
> Tires are not from this xtr group what should i complain ?
> Lightning crankset?
> ...


Definately it would have been nice if the cranks were lighter. But you have to reconize there is a point where light weight starts to comprimise performance. As I said Shimano has probably reached this with their current construction techniques. There is lighter cranks out their but I wouldn't run them.

ZTR wheelset: Stans wheels are a wicked race wheels (I have a set myself). But you have to admit they flex a lot and your better be handy with a spoke wrench.

Formula r1 brakes: The new XTR brakes are wicked. I haven't used a brake that compares to them in performance. If they were 200 grams heavier I would still run them.

Pedals: The SPD system has the best foot retention system out their. Lighter pedals exist but they are with a performance comprimise. For instance I can not use Crank Brothers pedals. I twist on the bike too much and am always blowing out of them.

IMHO XTR has the best balance of light weight, perforance and durability. As someone who rides hard and a lot it is perfect for myself.


----------



## Circlip (Mar 29, 2004)

Curmy said:


> Kind of bizarre how one can be so dense and narrowminded. Arguing with a world cup racer that her tires are too heavy...


Someone has to make sure the _*weenie*_ of weight weenie is well represented. 

I've always appreciated that the general tone of this particular weight weenie forum on MTBR is usually slanted toward functional bikes and parts, that are fit for a given real world riding purpose (which varies from rider to rider). There are other forums out there elsewhere to better service urban paved path show bikes and fireroad freds.


----------



## Epic-o (Feb 24, 2007)

A 650gr is too heavy for XC riding is heavy by any standard....if you are enforced to use Maxxis tires and the lightest option that you have is too weak you have to look for something more durable. But for the rest of us that can choose any tire that we want there is the Schwalbe Racing Ralph 2.25 with SnakeSkin protection that weighs only 550gr...

Maxxis doesn`t offer nothing comparable...you can't compare sponsored riders to who are not

Sauser have used 300gr Renegade prototypes during this year World Cup, Nino Schurter is winning everything on a 7.7kg bike, Sabine Spitz won an Olympic Gold medal on a 7.2kg bike, Cancellara have won Flandes and Roubaix putting 1000+W on "Lighting" cranks....

WW stuff work for proffesional riders too if you have the right sponsors. Mavic, Orbea, Shimano and Maxxis are not WW-first choice at all...


----------



## cddaraa (Oct 19, 2009)

I couldnt find the xtr availability thread
so...
CRC has listed all the parts with prices but no availability.
Bike24 has everything available in 1-2 days time(except the double crankset)
bikediscount.com has everything available in one weeks time(except the double crankset)

Wierd thing is that CRC is much more cheaper than the germans
I believe shimano s aggressive pricing policy will cut many sales from the XX


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

> A 650gr is too heavy for XC riding is heavy by any standard....if you are enforced to use Maxxis tires and the lightest option that you have is too weak you have to look for something more durable. But for the rest of us that can choose any tire that we want there is the Schwalbe Racing Ralph 2.25 with SnakeSkin protection that weighs only 550gr...


Actually Maxxis does have some very comparible tires coming out. And to be fair as I saw on yesterdays ride Racing Ralph with SnakeSkin is quite prone to slices (one guy did in both his front and rear). That being said is it is wet at world this year the 2.1 UST at 650 grams will be the tires of choice.



> Sauser have used 300gr Renegade prototypes during this year World Cup, Nino Schurter is winning everything on a 7.7kg bike, Sabine Spitz won an Olympic Gold medal on a 7.2kg bike, Cancellara have won Flandes and Roubaix putting 1000+W on "Lighting" cranks....


You know the bikes that people race and the bikes that they say they race are not always the same.

There is also a difference between race parts and training parts. In race trim Catharine's bike is 1lbs lighter than in training. Race wheels are quite a bit lighter but they are race wheels not everyday riding wheels.

Go check out the bikes that Sabin, Sauser, and Nino train on.


----------



## Epic-o (Feb 24, 2007)

You will know better than no one what are the needs of your wife for every WC race but once again there's no need to use tires that heavy for racing...maybe for everyday hard riding yes but not for tires that you will use just for 1-2 races



LMN said:


> You know the bikes that people race and the bikes that they say they race are not always the same.


And about this, I have seen with my own eyes Sabine being 2nd in 08 World Champs, maybe the most rocky Worlds circuit of the last 10 years, with a 280gr slick tire and going very fast in maybe the most technical race of the WC, Offenburg, riding a 1050gr clincher wheelset with 260gr caustic soda-shaved NoTubes rims...

Kabush also have used the 285gr Maxxlite for very rocky races...


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

I remember Sabine's bike. There was a article about it on Velonews or something. I think everyone was stunned it survived the race.


----------



## Broccoli (Jun 11, 2008)

LMN said:


> ZTR wheelset: Stans wheels are a wicked race wheels (I have a set myself). But you have to admit they flex a lot and your better be handy with a spoke wrench.
> 
> Formula r1 brakes: The new XTR brakes are wicked. I haven't used a brake that compares to them in performance. If they were 200 grams heavier I would still run them.
> 
> ...


Exactly. Servo wave in XTR, lower profile for the proven SPD system, wider range on cassette for the same weight (so that 1x10 is more feasible), assymetrical chain - all sound like great upgrades - whether they are much lighter or not. I would not hesitate to put XTR cranks on an AM rig that sees a lot of downhill in California - I would not do that with some Lightning cranks, as good and light as they are.

AM bikes also deserve to have weenie parts.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

There's a XTR Race and Trail group.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

Epic-o said:


> Kabush also have used the 285gr Maxxlite for very rocky races...


and he sure gets a lot of flats.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Epic-o said:


> You will know better than no one what are the needs of your wife for every WC race but once again there's no need to use tires that heavy for racing...maybe for everyday hard riding yes but not for tires that you will use just for 1-2 races
> 
> And about this, I have seen with my own eyes Sabine being 2nd in 08 World Champs, maybe the most rocky Worlds circuit of the last 10 years, with a 280gr slick tire and going very fast in maybe the most technical race of the WC, Offenburg, riding a 1050gr clincher wheelset with 260gr caustic soda-shaved NoTubes rims...
> 
> Kabush also have used the 285gr Maxxlite for very rocky races...


Tire weight is an interesting thing. We debated how important it was for it for a while. Heavy weight tire definately have their perforances advantages and performance disadvantages. I have compared light weight tires and heavier tires with a power meter and can tell you that light weight tires definately have a measurable advantage.

For 95% of the courses out there a UST tire is overkill, I would also say that 280 grams tires are the right choice for very few courses. For racing tires in the 500-550 gram range are about right. IMHO going lighter then that is a big risk.


----------



## snowdrifter (Aug 2, 2006)

LMN said:


> Pedals: The SPD system has the best foot retention system out their. Lighter pedals exist but they are with a performance comprimise. For instance I can not use Crank Brothers pedals. I twist on the bike too much and am always blowing out of them.


*Have you tried Time Atac? I rode XTR, 737 to 970s for ages, switched to Time a couple years ago, much IMHO.*


----------



## Mattias_Hellöre (Oct 2, 2005)

Shimano SPD is a league above all others.

Always used SPD and in some weak moments I tried others, horrible.


----------



## Broccoli (Jun 11, 2008)

Mattias_Hellöre said:


> Shimano SPD is a league above all others.
> 
> Always used SPD and in some weak moments I tried others, horrible.


This. But only for the recent generation of SPD mechanism (starting from 959s - still go strong after 5 years on my training bike with zero maintenance). Before that - not so good in mud.

With an exception to my platform pedals.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

The new XTR pedals are a must for me. I love the 4ti's weight but can't get used to twisting my foot that far to release. Shimano and Ritchey's release angle is perfect for me.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

snowdrifter said:


> *Have you tried Time Atac? I rode XTR, 737 to 970s for ages, switched to Time a couple years ago, much IMHO.*


I haven't used them. Heard good things about them though.


----------



## MessagefromTate (Jul 12, 2007)

limba said:


> The new XTR pedals are a must for me. I love the 4ti's weight but can't get used to twisting my foot that far to release. Shimano and Ritchey's release angle is perfect for me.


If only they would offer different spindle lengths, Crank Brothers pedals are not that great (wings fatigue and break in a season of riding) but there are plenty of fit options that Shimano doesn't offer. Their approach is typical Japanese in that they refine and copy rather than innovate. Shimano has made shorter crank arm spindles for 2X9 available to their pros for years, yet it isn't until SRAM releases XX that they finally offer a true 2X crank with the narrower q. That having been said Shimano still shifts the best. After bending my XTR cassette, I tossed on the XG999 SRAM cassette. It doesn't shift anywhere near as smooth, quick, etc. Not by a long shot.


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

More real xtr stuff










Produktname: Shimano XTR FC-M980 Kurbelgarnitur 3x10-fach

Hersteller: Shimano

Artikelnummer: SHI117123

Saison: 2011

Material: Aluminium, mittleres Kettenblatt aus Titan/Carbon Composite

Gewicht: ca. *790 Gramm* (bei 175mm inkl. Innenlager (42-32-24))

Kettenblatt Zähnezahl: 42-32-24 Zähne

Achsprofil Innenlager: Hollowtech II

Kettentyp: Super Narrow HG-X 10-fach

Lieferumfang: inkl. Lagerschalen BSA

429,90e <-------------------------- :yikes: ------------------------------> 790g

and more xtr stuff 264g--199e


----------



## evil zlayo (Apr 22, 2007)

well, you can always lighten it up with another 400 euro


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

evil zlayo said:


> well, you can always lighten it up with another 400 euro


 Thats insane


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

xcatax said:


> More real xtr stuff
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Or you could get it from chain reaction cycles for 380.80e
And the cassette for 163.20e


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

I was seriously considering a 2x10 setup but just saw that my 11-28 8spd cassette is lighter than XTR 10spd.


----------



## TigWorld (Feb 8, 2010)

Lelandjt said:


> I was seriously considering a 2x10 setup but just saw that my 11-28 8spd cassette is lighter than XTR 10spd.


...and around a 1/10th of the cost


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

Lelandjt said:


> I was seriously considering a 2x10 setup but just saw that my 11-28 8spd cassette is lighter than XTR 10spd.


Compare your 11-28 8 speed to a 11-28 Dura-Ace 10 speed not the 12-36 XTR. You have to compare weights of the complete setup not just the cassette. The crank, shifters, chain and derailleurs are *probably* lighter than what you're using now AND their are performance gains besides the weight.

but if your setup is working for you I wouldn't bother. I wouldn't upgrade my 8 speed setup. I would want the new XTR if I build up a frame or buy a new 2011 complete bike.


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

Yeah, I was looking at it as a complete upgrade. I'd get the 11-34 cassette, 42/30 crank, shifters, derailleurs, and chain. Lots of money for sub 100g drop (I have really light stuff now). The Sram cassette would drop another 80g but isn't available in 11-34 and costs even more. I can get another XT 8spd cassette for $20.


----------

