While I don't ordinarily focus too much on weight, there is an economic factor here that makes this issue worth discussion.
As I read this thread, the frame in question was 2 lbs. 7 oz. vs. the 2 lbs. 1.6 oz. listed by Calfee, a difference of 5.6 oz. Calfee says it weighs its frames without water bottle hardware. Perhaps I am wrong, but I did not understand this to mean without the bonded on threaded studs, which would seem an unequal comparison to a frame that didn't require them. Anyway, removing nuts from the water bottle holders would reduce this a bit, so lets say it is about a 4.5 to 5 oz. difference.
Although I completely agree that weight does not define performance in a high end bicycle, I would be interested in knowing the explanation for an apparent variance of approximately 14 to 15%. This is not insignificant. After all, Calfee states that the Dragonfly Pro and the Tetra Pro have the same ride quality, and emphasizes the Dragonfly's lower weight - 0.4 pounds, or 6.4 ounces.
The extra cost for the Dragonfly frame is $1,200, not a small price to pay for that weight savings. Now, it may well be that the Tetra Pro is also 15% heavier than the stated weight of 2.5 pounds, in which case, the higher cost would still result in a meaningful weight savings, depending on the particular frames involved. Or, you might get a Dragonfly that weighs only an ounce or two less than a Tetra - hardly worth $1,200 in my book.
Granted, aesthetics and passion often rule these choices far more than numbers, a fact I know from personal experience. But, if a 15% variance from stated weights can be expected, perhaps Calfee should say as much, so its customers can factor that into their purchase decisions. Remember, Calfee has made the choice to emphasize weight in marketing their frames. In light of that, it is not unreasonable to expect to have all the relevant facts.
|
Previous
Thread Index
Next
Flat
Re: Dragonfly 54cm Frame Weight (picture)
Edit
Reply
Quote
