why does cycling have bike weight limits?

just looked up the answer
shit time to be alive

>be me
>get credit
>buy 3000 bucks carbon wheelset
>train with them the first time
>they explode

>>962821
>$1 bottlecages
>because weight weenies

>>962839
The reason was so carbon frames and components manufacturers wouldn't go crazy creating extremely light and therefore feeble parts to achieve the lightest possible bike, but this has been a non-issue for a long time. It was only a concern when carbon fiber was a somewhat new technology.

In fact the UCI is contemplating lowering/removing the weight limit.

>>962839
In essence - to avoid a high dollar arms race to get the lightest bike possible, thus making the cost of entry into competetive sport prohibitive for upstart teams.

Bikes on which pros race in UCI sanctioned events must conform to certain dimensions and must be production models for the same reason.

>>962951
>$1 bottle cages
>arms race

>>962858

buying shit you can't afford
buying shitty factory built wheelsets
falling for the low spoke count meme
riding like a fred

...priceless

>>962821

Thanks OP

https://2lo8.wordpress.com/my-non-carbon-bike-6-7kg/

the linked blog post is 100% informative bike porn

>>962951
It's still a frigging bike, the most expensive carbon experimental frame would still cost less than mantaining an amateur rally car, which is what most "upstart teams" can manage to do.

>>962839
>>963009
>It's still a frigging bike, the most expensive carbon experimental frame would still cost less than mantaining an amateur rally car, which is what most "upstart teams" can manage to do.

Some pro conti teams can't even afford to fly out both TT and road bikes to some races. That's pro conti. Lots of conti teams can't even afford to pay their riders a salary, let alone spurge tens of thousands of euros on a bike. Shit, even some world tour teams are just about able to afford rider salaries and general opex.

If there was no weight limit/relaxed technical regulations, then riders on the biggest teams would all have €50,000+ superbikes, vs riders on smaller teams who even now only just make 6.8kg.

Giving away 1 kg in weight is huge in the mountains, especially over stage races, but this would see a difference of 3 kg, perhaps even 4 kg, which just isn't fair, and would straight up stop all but the biggest teams from being competitive in so many events.

Not to mention the impact it would have on poorer national teams, and also the development of cycling in poorer countries.

>>963011
Well then they should invest fucking more in their teams.

>>963012
those that can, such as Sky or to a lesser extent QuickStep, do, but most simply can't.

>>963011
>vs riders on smaller teams who even now only just make 6.8kg.

If you watch the gcn pro bike overviews very very few bikes of even the WT teams get under 7kg.

>>962858
>this shit again

>>962914
Neat. Sub 5 kilo bicycles coming to pro peloton! Interesting to see if such things can be made to withstand the powers and torque the pro riders put through them. Technology is crazy.

>>963012
Well why? It's just bicycle racing. Why should it be big money high tech? To make new tech available for freds?

Lowering the weight limit would kill-off any incentive to switch to disc-brakes. Components makers would bitch like all hell.

>>963434
Some of the lightest rim brake bikes are just under 5kg, the lightest disc bike is 5.5kg. Let's call it 700g, that's not a huge amount and current bikes vary by more than that. Lowering the limit by 1kg would probably be a good idea, it's attainable with either braking system and very few bikes would end up weighing that much, but it would still allow some improvements and less bikes would have to add ballast to meet the limit (I don't actually know how common this is). Even if the limit was lowered even further, below the lightest disc bike, there are people out there (me being one, if I was a competitive racer) who would choose discs over slightly less weight.

>>962914
If they do you're going to.see a rise in disposable one race frame sets

Like f1 cars before the engine limit.

>>963443
Ballast hasn't really been an issue since they started making aero parts. You just use aero wheels as ballast.

>>962903
More like 50$ cages. That shit isn't cheap

>>962821
>http://www.bikerumor.com/2016/05/31/readers-rides-breaking-uci-weight-limit-without-carbon-fiber/


those early super trick aluminum frames had downtubes so thin they would get all dented up from little pebbles dinging them

I built some wheels like that guy with bitex hubs/kinlins, they weigh like 1250g, rear wheel was always fucked and impossible to true

>>964425
Maybe because you're fat. You do realize those wheelsets are for lightweight climber types unless you put extra spokes on the rear?

>At just 383 grams, the Kinlin XR-200 is Kinlin's lightest road clincher rim, perfect for a climbing wheel or the weight weenie in you. Riders over 130 lbs should consider 24 or 28 holes and riders over 190 lbs should consider the XR-19w, XR-270, or XR-300.

>>963009
Google scca rallycross

>>964377
You are literally retarded

https://2lo8.wordpress.com/2016/05/04/generic-plastic-cage-2/