this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2026
497 points (98.8% liked)

Science Memes

19551 readers
1212 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] betanumerus@lemmy.ca 43 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

High end bicycle equipment has weight specs in grams.

[–] excral@feddit.org 35 points 3 days ago (6 children)

It's always hillarious to me to see boomers on expensive bikes that aim to save every gram while they could save 20kg on themselves.

[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Perhaps that's why they are on a bike?

[–] RaisinCrazyFool@kopitalk.net 3 points 2 days ago

If the point is to burn calories, then shaving weight off your equipment is counterproductive.

But if it makes you want to ride more, then great!

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 10 points 3 days ago

Or skinny dudes with enormous ballsacks wearing tight Spandex on 15 pound carbon fiber bikes, but a 20 pound motorcycle lock.

[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

In the cycling community we call those guys Freds.

And it's more of a light ribbing than a condemnation, since at least they've got themselves on a bike.

[–] somethingsnappy@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (4 children)

If you are trying to lose weight, you should be using the worst, heaviest bike possible.

[–] SpongyAneurysm@feddit.org 14 points 3 days ago

Well, not if you still want to have some fun while doing so.

But I agree, that a regular bike should suffice and you don't need to worry about optimizing gear weight if you're not competing for anything and just ride it for your own well-being.

[–] wolfpack86@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Well, not necessarily. A bike that's got a full carbon frame also absorbs shock and vibration from the road better. This means you can ride longer distances without getting fatigued in places like your wrists or ass. Longer rides = more exercise.

But once you have a carbon frame, chasing grams on other components gets to be a bit silly.

[–] somethingsnappy@lemmy.world 1 points 11 minutes ago

So using fewer calories.

[–] autriyo@feddit.org 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I've yet to ride a carbon frame for any amount of real distance, so idk how good they actually are.

But having a less harsh ride can also be archived by not using the thinnest pizza cutter tires at 10 bar. Especially if we care about time ridden and not avg. speed.

And it's going to be slightly harder to get the same speed out of comfy tires, so that's also more exercise.

[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

It was really funny about a decade back watching the entire bike industry all at once acknowledge friction coefficients, and suddenly the tires all went from 24mm/90psi to 38mm/40psi. All because the roadies started riding on gravel.

You could argue that TPI tubes / tubeless made larger road tires practical. But we all secretly know it was because people at the time just thought thin tires looked cooler and "more aero".

[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Steel is real. The road feel difference between carbon and steel is negligible, steel is usually way cheaper, survives a whole lot longer, is more often built to widely compatible standards, is fully recyclable, and in my humble opinion just straight up feels better under you on a ride. As for weight, unless one is a pro race cyclist there is never any reason to chase gram shavings, you will almost always lose more weight and go faster by working out your own body. But FWIW my default steel rig is 19 pounds and competes on weight with most carbon builds.

[–] jeffep@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You could also just walk whenever possible, burns more kcals/distance

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

That's less efficient time-wise though, since it takes significantly longer to walk the same distance compared to riding.

Ie, riding 2 hours burns FAR more calories than walking for 2 hours.

[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

There's a bell curve. If you burn out too quick you're not gonna get nearly as much cardio, and the torque required to move a real clunker is extra stress on your joints. Plus it's just not as much fun, cycling is a sustainable exercise largely because it's fun. But it's very true that a decent workout bike can be had for $100 if you look. My two workout bikes were both built in the 90s.

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

That's a stationary bike

[–] betanumerus@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago

I can't say I've ever seen that.

[–] psoul@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago

Well, it’s also fun to go places you know. If a shitty bike can only get you 20mi / 30km but a on a good one you feel confident doing a 30mi / 45km ride then the purchase makes sense.

[–] BuboScandiacus@mander.xyz 5 points 3 days ago (3 children)

But, why ? You drink a bit more water that day and it’s void.

[–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It's a competition between brand. They're at the point where decrease a single gram is incredible task and are all racing to become the lightest weight and aero-est bicycle and get to claim that.

[–] megopie@beehaw.org 1 points 3 days ago

And then you have E bike companies producing lead bricks that are non-functional without the motor doing 90% of the work. Or with the massive motorcycle seats that make pedaling actually impossible.

[–] betanumerus@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago

A cup of water plus 250g is less than a cup pf water plus 500g. That's why.

[–] moody@lemmings.world 4 points 3 days ago

But what if you drank more water and you didn't have the weight savings?