The Gray Fisher XO weight loss Program
In May 1998, my significant other upgraded her 1994, Trek 930-SHX to a 1997, Gray Fisher, Joshua XO. The Trek was my original ride. I got the bike in April of 1995 and it weighted 32 pounds, which is a lot of bike and, like a Timex, it took a beating and kept on going. Sometimes the riders didn't always make it, but the bike did. I rode the Trek for two years, then in 1997 I bought a Cannondale Super V 2000 and passed the Trek to my significant other.
Before I get into what the Gray Fisher weighed when it came out of the box and what it dropped to after the diet. I think a discussion about the philosophy of making a bike weigh less is in order. Whenever the discussion of a bike's weight comes up, there is always a couple of people who don't see what the big deal is with the weight of the bike. Still others feel it something only racers have to think about.
Well, the weight of the bike can be a big deal, depending on the type of riding you do. It can help or hinder your riding pleasure. If going fast through tight and twisty switchbacks is what puts a big grin on your face, then you want a light, responsive bike. If you do almost all downhilling, the type where the ski lift is only thing you climb, then a heavy bike equals speed. You'll notice that the serious downhiller is using disk brakes in spite of the extra weight because weight is not an issue, stopping is! Why? The laws of physics for the most part. An object in motion tends to stay in motion, until another force acts on it. The greater the mass, the more energy required to change the direction of the mass. Whether that direction is left, right, up a hill, over an obstacle, or just stopping. Remember that big grin on your face? In the tight, twisty switchback, the heavier bike must take it slower, unless the rider likes kissing trees and Mother earth. Anyone who has pushed too hard in a turn and lost it will tell you about how he or she turned but the bike went straight. The forward inertial forces overcome the downward force of gravity. Anytime you go too fast through a turn and lose traction, you've overcome the downward force of gravity with forward inertial forces. The mass or the weight of the object, in this case, your bike, is the multiplier for inertial force. Another issue with a heavy bike is brought to light when you're trying to climb a hill. Just like the Space Shuttle, the more cargo or weight that's on board at liftoff, the more energy that will be required to escape the forces of gravity. In many cases, we would be happy just to escape the need to go up the hill, but if the issue weren't a hill, it would be a log, or the need to stop, or the need to hike the remains of that same hill. Some may think that a three-pound difference on a bike is not noticeable. This would be true if the human body could produce just 1 horsepower of output, but we can't, so every pound counts. To give you a better idea of just how little power the human body produces as a factor of horsepower, check this quote out from Bill at Encarta, "One Horse Power; Its electrical equivalent is 746 watts, and the heat equivalent is 2545 British thermal units per hour. One horsepower was originally defined as the amount of power required to lift 33,000 pounds 1 foot in 1 minute, or 550 foot-pounds per second. "Horsepower," Microsoft® Encarta® 98 Encyclopedia. © 1993-1997 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved." Thank you, Bill. I think I've said more than enough, if not too much about the philosophy behind making the bike lighter
Go To Page: 1 2
