UCI weight limit - static for a decade

[thatsallfolks]

The UCI weight limit for a road bike is 6.8 kg. This was bought in around 2000 (please correct me). I believe the reasoning for a minimum weight limit to avoid super light and super weak products being used (early 90's mtb ing a good example).

However has the technology not moved on in over a decade that lighter weight components which are as strong or stronger have been developed?

It seems the 6.8kg is an arbitrary line (bit like the 50% hematocrit level before the EPO test) without any foundation in reality.

 

[Black Dog]

They should keep it. It makes the sport more accessible since a light weight bike is now more affordable and safe.

 

[thatsallfolks]

Rubbish, bikes being more lightweight and safe are due to improvement of technology!

In fact it is now easy to buy a bike well under the UCI limit and they meet all statutory requirements regarding safety. If the limit stays the same for two decades a £1K bike will be lighter than the pro's!

 

[Black Dog]

Rubbish, bikes being more lightweight and safe are due to improvement of technology!

In fact it is now easy to buy a bike well under the UCI limit and they meet all statutory requirements regarding safety. If the limit stays the same for two decades a £1K bike will be lighter than the pro's!

Yes, that was my point, exactly. I never said that the rule made bikes lighter.

 

[Met de Versnelling]

I do believe, that as well as the now redundant "cost" issue, there is something about limiting the minimum weight for safety. I can't remember the exact reason specifically, but i have read safety is involved.

 

[BrindSurch]

i wouldnt say many "normal" bike are on the weight limit unless ones makes a big effort to reduce the weight which does make the bike less stiff and less durable which is an issue for pros as they cant be getting new bikes every week....

For example running carbon stems makes the bike stiffer but also heavier...

 

[thatsallfolks]

For example running carbon stems makes the bike stiffer but also heavier...[/QUOTE]

I do believe alu stems and bars are stiffer. That is why sprinters tend to use them. See the Cavendish Bar+Stem combo for example. Carbon is used for a bit more comfort and give, as well as all important bling factor!

The point i am making is WHATEVER THE REASON FOR THE WEIGHT LIMIT, IT SURELY HAS TO BE REVISED DOWNWARDS AT SOME POINT TO AVOID BECOMING A BARRIER TO PROGRESS AND DEVELOPMENT. Discuss

 

[BroDeal]

The limit should be raised by a kilo. Racing should be a competition between riders not a competition between which company can get the Taiwanese to manufacture the lightest widget.

 

[thatsallfolks]

sure, lets have 'em all on fixed steel workhorses and make them fix their own bikes like Eugene Christophe. Then the rider with the finest dopage wins!

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

The point i am making is WHATEVER THE REASON FOR THE WEIGHT LIMIT, IT SURELY HAS TO BE REVISED DOWNWARDS AT SOME POINT TO AVOID BECOMING A BARRIER TO PROGRESS AND DEVELOPMENT. Discuss

The UCI weight limit is set at 6.8kg most importantly because of safety, secondly to have everyone on equal footing regarding equipment. Because it hasn't changed in about a decade does not mean it's holding back the advancement of R & D on new equipment. Pretty much every top line bike out there can be built under the UCI weight limit depending on the sum of the parts. Trust me, the average consumer is not effected by UCI weight limits in any form or fashion. If it changes anytime soon it's not going to be by much.

 

[BroDeal]

sure, lets have 'em all on fixed steel workhorses and make them fix their own bikes like Eugene Christophe. Then the rider with the finest dopage wins!

Oh, poor you. You might have to compete with everyone having the same weight of bike, even the ones who don't want to spend a bazilliion dollars to get the latest and greatest. Let's all shed a tear.

If George Hincapie would have been using a steel steerer tube then he might be a Paris-Roubaix winner right now. Instead Trek tried to save a few grams with aluminum and he ended up with a busted collar bone.

 

[ElChingon]

One thing about the weight limit I didn't understand, they'd weigh the bikes preRace but never postRace. I knew some teams would setup certain riders bikes with heavier wheels preRace and once the race move on they'd swap the wheels and those bikes would be under the weight limit. It was an unwritten thing to do to use lighter bikes, easy to verify by watching race video's that actually show the riders preRace lining up and then seeing them postRace, not one wheel is the same, sure they get flats but not both wheels and then to be matched up exactly.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Well, Yeah!

sure, lets have 'em all on fixed steel workhorses and make them fix their own bikes like Eugene Christophe. Then the rider with the finest dopage wins!

I know the reply is ironic, but it brings up a related point. People are discouraged from participating without the bling. I'm in favor of raising the weight limit for low categories and definitely raising the limit for juniors. Just to keep the cost of participation down.

I could go either way at the very top of the sport. A little heavier would be okay, and so would lowering the limit. Wanna-be's with more money than brains will still buy the equivalent of a USPS Madone for riding slowly.

 

[oldborn]

One thing about the weight limit I didn't understand, they'd weigh the bikes preRace but never postRace. I knew some teams would setup certain riders bikes with heavier wheels preRace and once the race move on they'd swap the wheels and those bikes would be under the weight limit. It was an unwritten thing to do to use lighter bikes, easy to verify by watching race video's that actually show the riders preRace lining up and then seeing them postRace, not one wheel is the same, sure they get flats but not both wheels and then to be matched up exactly.

What do you mean Dude? I was watching 4,5 hours stage and never seen a "wheel swap phatamorgana", did you. Come on it is impossible, how they can do it? I know David Copperfield is a mechanic guy for all of them.

 

[slartiblartfast]

The advances in technology mean that the pros can ride deep section wheels and frames and slightly less than top spec builds (eg Record instead of Super Record) and still stay close to 6.8 kg. The aero road bike category was virtually created by the 6.8kg weight limit.

You could debate the merits of this but it is better than having no minimum weight limit where a weight weenie arms race would ensue with diminishing safety margins and rising costs.

 

[Fowsto Cope-E]

I know the reply is ironic, but it brings up a related point. People are discouraged from participating without the bling. I'm in favor of raising the weight limit for low categories and definitely raising the limit for juniors. Just to keep the cost of participation down.

I could go either way at the very top of the sport. A little heavier would be okay, and so would lowering the limit. Wanna-be's with more money than brains will still buy the equivalent of a USPS Madone for riding slowly.

The problem with having juniors use heavier bikes is that it makes it harder on the juniors who ride category races. They are already at a disadvantage with junior gears.

 

[brianf7]

It costs big$$$$ to loose 1kg just like the big diet companys keep the money unless someone else is paying like a pro tour team.

Just go to the loo before a bike race its good for you. You could try clenbuterol

 

[blaxland]

The UCI weight limit is set at 6.8kg most importantly because of safety, secondly to have everyone on equal footing regarding equipment. Because it hasn't changed in about a decade does not mean it's holding back the advancement of R & D on new equipment. Pretty much every top line bike out there can be built under the UCI weight limit depending on the sum of the parts. Trust me, the average consumer is not effected by UCI weight limits in any form or fashion. If it changes anytime soon it's not going to be by much.

+1 agree with this post...safety should be the number one reason to set these limits.

 

[barn yard]

One thing about the weight limit I didn't understand, they'd weigh the bikes preRace but never postRace. I knew some teams would setup certain riders bikes with heavier wheels preRace and once the race move on they'd swap the wheels and those bikes would be under the weight limit. It was an unwritten thing to do to use lighter bikes, easy to verify by watching race video's that actually show the riders preRace lining up and then seeing them postRace, not one wheel is the same, sure they get flats but not both wheels and then to be matched up exactly.

an old bloke i met a few years back claimed 'back in my day we used to fill the bikes with water and freeze them to get up to weight, then it would thaw out and you had a lighter bike halfway thru the race!'

i never asked him where they were hiding these massive freezers pre-race

 

[BroDeal]

an old bloke i met a few years back claimed 'back in my day we used to fill the bikes with water and freeze them to get up to weight, then it would thaw out and you had a lighter bike halfway thru the race!'

i never asked him where they were hiding these massive freezers pre-race

They didn't have weight limits back in the day.

 

[simo1733]

The thing I don't like about the weight limit is when the guy with the smallest size frame has to add weight so that his bike is the same as a 60cm size.

 

[Polyarmour]

an old bloke i met a few years back claimed 'back in my day we used to fill the bikes with water and freeze them to get up to weight, then it would thaw out and you had a lighter bike halfway thru the race!'

i never asked him where they were hiding these massive freezers pre-race

And nobody noticed the condensation or cold spots on the bike either?

 

[forty four]

ice come on stupid really stupid. just off the top of my head dry ice comes to mind still there is condensation but no water dumb cyclists.

 

[Polyarmour]

The point i am making is WHATEVER THE REASON FOR THE WEIGHT LIMIT, IT SURELY HAS TO BE REVISED DOWNWARDS AT SOME POINT TO AVOID BECOMING A BARRIER TO PROGRESS AND DEVELOPMENT. Discuss

1/. Where is the evidence that component manufacturers are no longer worried about the weight of their components?

2/. Some technology advances add weight to the bike. For example Di2 added 50g over DuraAce. Deep section wheels add significant weight. Keeping the weight limit at 6.8kgs enables heavier technology innovations to be included by having lighter components elsewhere on the bike.

3/. While the weight limit is 6.8kgs, how many of the pros ride their bikes right on this limit?

 

[mad black]

In my opinion there should be a weight limit for the frame and fork. Probably about 1000g. When I look at some of the current top of the line road frameset as a mechanic it really concerns me that these are getting lighter and lighter. It's fine for the pro team to swap frames every 6 month but as a privateer you find your bling carbon frame softening up after one season or even worse cracking after 2 years. And warranty is usually a pain because "unfortunately that model was discontinued."

On another note I'm pretty sure I've seen weights being added to bikes to meet the 6.8kg rule which means that lighter bikes are already out there and being ridden which totally invalidates the safety argument brought up here.

Furthermore, I was of the opinion a lot of pros use the aluminium bar/stem combo because it's less prone to (unexpected) breakage. Please correct e if I'm wrong.