|   The guy claiming a sub-23 superlight was right !!! Read on. | Santa Cruz
Mar 12, 2002 7:22 AM | | In the string "Paging superlight owners" Paulesk177 gave the specs of his bike. He stated it was "sub 23lbs". Everyone was quick to jump on him claiming his scales were kaput!!
Last night I picked up the April copy of Mountainbike Action and they have a four page write up on the superlight. In summary, they state Santa Cruz tried to talk them out of testing the superlight hoping they would try the V10 or the Blur. The author uses the headline "Underrated, unappreciated and unbelievable". He also stated "Santa Cruz may beel that their other models deserve the spotlight, but the Superlight is a total standout."
Oh yeah, my point on weight. They state the bike that was tested was 24.5 pounds, with a mix of LX and XT. They reference the bike they tested in last year that was all XTR with V-brakes instead of disk came in (2) pounds lighter. Doing some simple math that would be "Sub - 23!" |
| re: The guy claiming a sub-23 superlight was right !!! Read on. | Mr Tiles
Mar 12, 2002 8:51 AM | | I've got a new Superlight that's spec'd out pretty good and I can assure you it's nowhere near 23 lbs unless(like I alluded to earlier) my scales are broken or need to be recalibrated. I'm going out here in a minute to pic up that magazine and see what all they had to say about it. |
| re: The guy claiming a sub-23 superlight was right !!! Read on. | FM
Mar 12, 2002 9:15 AM | | Everybody knows MBA is full of S***. If the manufacturers lie about their weights, should mba be responsible for calling bs on them?
I have a superlight, (see previous post)currently 26.5 lbs with atom-80 fork, xt disc+9spd drivetrain, king hubs&headset.
before discs I had the same bike w/ xt v-brakes and king hubs, it was 26 lbs flat.
Throw a sid and gripshift on, you could get down to 25lbs...I don't see how you can get any lighter than that. |
| re: The guy claiming a sub-23 superlight was right !!! Read on. | Yeti_Rider
Mar 12, 2002 9:56 AM | | Wheels, tires, and tubes.
You can lose at least a pound by upgrading to quality lightweight wheels and tires.
And let's not forget the bigger factor involved in bike weights. The "claimed" weight by the manufacturer is often times the weight for the smallest frame they make so the bigge the frame, the heavier it gets.
Michael |
| The guy claiming a sub-23 superlight was at the equator | fm
Mar 12, 2002 12:39 PM | | king hubs, x317 rims, alloy nips, 1.8 3x spokes, kev irc mythos tires w/ no tubes... doesn't get too much lighter...
medium frame...
I'm not sayin my bike is light, I'm just sayin that getting a 22 lb bike out of a 5.5lb frame is not really doable without getting lots of ti bits,ti bb, 1.5 tires, 28 spoke 1.5-1.8 spokes, speedplay frogs, and other girly parts...
Or, maybe ALL the scales in my area are wrong? could be?
perhaps...yes, I see, weight fluctuation due to corealis effect! I'll go weigh my bike at the equator!!!! |
| Entirely believable........... | KMan
Mar 12, 2002 10:06 AM | | Read under the Saving Weight forum, 23lb FS bike happens all the time. Heck My Titus Racer X is under 25 lbs with disc, and the majoriety of the components are not realy considered "Light Weight"
KMan |
| 23 lb not all that hard, if you use semi-silly equipment | sparkymarky
Mar 12, 2002 10:29 AM | | my superlight (size xl) was pretty much right at 23 lbs (maybe 23.1 on a damp day). it had some xtr, and pretty light wheels, and a sid xc, but it still had bar ends and full-width tires and and old-school (non-splined) bb and time pedals, and it's a freakin' xl!
i wouldn't personally believe anything written in a magazine, but i weighed my bike on a variety of scales, and always got the same results.
now it's closer to 24 or 24.5-ish, cuz i use cheaper tires and thicker tubes and a cushier seat since i don't race these days.
-mark weaver |
| Sub-23 should be do-able. . . | Halfnuts
Mar 12, 2002 10:31 AM | | My SCSL weighs in between 25 and 25.5 w/ pedals. Built up w/ a Mars fork, Avid 7 brake, LX kit except XT rDer and cassette, 517/14/15/lx hubs, Ti Airborne seatpost (uncut) and skewers, Fox Float R/C, Large Ano Grey frame. The pedals were cheap heavy wellgo spds when I weighed it (got Eggbeaters on now) and a cheap/heavy seat. Don't seem to have a picture handy. . .
Sub-23 should be doable w/ going to extreme weight weenie measures. However, I wouldn't want to ride that bike unless I was fairly light and then only strict xc use. |
| re: The guy claiming a sub-23 superlight was right !!! Read on. | Pete_12
Mar 12, 2002 11:00 AM | | Santa Cruz weights their bikes without the pedals, so their claimed weights are approx. 1 pound lower than 'real'. So when MBA says 23lbs
they mean 24 lbs.... |
| Did not want to start a war on weights, overall great review ! | Santa Cruz
Mar 12, 2002 11:59 AM | | For the bashing it takes as being an old design, they seemed to like the ride overall !!! |
| Did not want to start a war on weights, overall great review ! | Pete_12
Mar 13, 2002 10:25 AM | | Btw. what color was the SL MBA tested ? |
| MBA is full of you-know-what | TomFL
Mar 12, 2002 12:16 PM | | I recently purchased a Titus Switchblade that MBA said weighed "in the 22 pound range" with a SID fork. Well I put a SID carbon on mine, hand-picked parts (including TI and AL bolts everywhere) based on weights from the tires to the seat so my build would be significantly lighter than the tester the magazine had, with the exception of Marta disks, which I more than compensated for compared to their build kit. While I don't have a certified scale, I weighed it on 2 scales, one was 23.3, the other was 24.0, so take your pick. Not bad, mind you, but I dumped a lot of $$$ into something I was expecting to be much lighter.
I am thankful, however, that the bike is SOOOOO sweet, that after riding it, I forgot all about the extra weight :)
So kids, DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ IN MAGAZINES!!!
Roll on,
-Tom |
| Considering there are regulars on this website with Sub 19... | DeeEight
Mar 12, 2002 1:40 PM | | pound hardtails, doing a sub 23 pound FS isn't that hard. Hell, i've seen Sub 20 pound FS bikes built using 5 pound frames. |
| guy in the other thread was not using lightweight parts | mtnbkaz
Mar 12, 2002 2:49 PM | | He was running a Fox Float RLC fork. Awesome looking fork but weighs about 1 lb. more than my Mars. It might be possible to get a SL down to 23 lbs. but the one in the previous thread was likely not 23 lbs. |
| re: The guy claiming a sub-23 superlight was right !!! Read on. | SLR
Mar 12, 2002 3:37 PM | | I have honestly had my SL down to 22.0 with V's and 23.0 w/disc. It is possible but it takes lots of light weight parts and money. I weighed each part and came up with these figures. I also weighed the completed bike and came up with the same numbers. It is do-able! |
| re: The guy claiming a sub-23 superlight was right !!! Read on. | Mat
Mar 13, 2002 9:44 AM | | FROM AN OLD TOPIC:
Forks: Rock Shox SID 00 Race 1157g
Wheels: Dave's Speeddreams Rear 32 694g
Tune Hubs Front 28 589g
Crankset: Morati cranks
w/ Boone ti rings & ti bolts 451g
Bottom Bracket: Action Tec 136g
Cassette: XTR 8spd 204g
Tires: Fast Freds 696g
Tubes: Performance Lunar Lites 170g
Chain: Sachs p61 280g
Saddle: Tune Speedneedle Carbon 100g
Brakes: Proshift with Ti kit 278g
Peddals: Bebops 178g
Seatpost: Extralite 290mm 27.2 162g
Handlebars: Tune Carbon 100g
Stem: Extralite w/ti bolts 120g
Headset: Chris King w/Ti race & bolt 112g
Grips: Bontrager Race 8g
Shifters: Sram Attack 148g Brake levers: Proshift w/Ti bolts 116g
Skewers: Tune 53g Deraillleurs: Front XT w ti bolts 122g
Rear Proshift w/ ti bolts 165g
Crank bolts/Dust caps: Aluminum 16g
Avid Flack Jackets 165g
Total Parts 6220g
Frame SC/SL 2336g
Total: 8.556 kg |
| |
