Hey! Could anyone weigh their stock ALU Rail+ and post the weight, and size?
I don't trust the official weights, as this video shows the Rail 5 at 24,3 kg; - YouTube
If that is correct, the weight savings by going carbon is minuscle.
The bike in the video is a size small that's why it is lighter than Trek's weight listed on their website. The weights on their website are likely for a medium or large.
While manufactures aren't always great a stating proper weights I think for comparison purposes between models it's probably fine to use the stated weights. They likely got calculated from the same set of component figures on the same spreadsheet or else weighed using the same scales. Probably best to compare the alloy Rail+ 8 (25.08kg) against the carbon Rail+ 9.7 (23.73kg) to get an indication of the the weight difference between the alloy and carbon as the components are pretty much identical. So a 1.35kg difference, which I would say is in the usual ball park for a weight difference between carbon and alloy versions of the same bike.
I don't think weights differ that much from size to size. And some real weights could end the question. If the difference is less than a kg, I'll probably just go alu.
The odd kg is little difference in the grand scheme of things - as we all know, EMTB's are inherently chunky steeds anyway. Especially as we usually have a motor pulling uphill, or gravity pulling us down one
Let's not forget every litre of water carried weighs a kilo, in addition, not many component changes are required if you're that focussed on saving 1000 grams
I want the weight as low as possible, but not compromising on ride quality. And when considering if it's worth buying carbon, I think the weight difference is the biggest factor for choosing this or that.
But again. Some real weights would be appreciated...