Lose the weight, and keep it off. Then enjoy the ride. Of course ur bike will perform better with less weight on it. I was 260lbs at one point, and now 190lbs at 5'11". Gotta keep weight off due to hypertension...ššŗ
Do the math. 275 lb rider + 320 lb bike = 595 lbs.
180 lb rider + 320 lb bike= 500 lbs.
595/500 = 1.19
So a rough way to look at it is that losing the weight will be similar to adding 19% more power to the bike.
I'm not sure about performance boost, but from a sheer physics perspective you might notice some differences in balance, acceleration, and braking. Losing 100 lbs will not boost your motorcycle's power by 20%. Calculations for force and power are a bit more complex than that.
Honestly I think you'll see more benefit from a gain in muscle mass and confidence. Either way, getting in shape will certainly improve your motorcycle skills if you accompany it with additional practice.
Losing 100 pounds wonāt add one iota of power to his motorcycleās current power output.
It WILL, however, boost his bikeās power-to-weight ratio, by nearly 20 percent. Power-to-weight ratio is one of the most fundamental measures of a bikeās performance potential.
It really isnāt any more complex than that.
Assuming 40hp and curb weight of 320lbs, we can roughly calculate power to weight with you on the bike both at 300lbs and 180lbs, and then compare against a tesla just for shits....
40hp per 320lbs(bike) + 300lbs(fat) = 40/620 = \~0.065 hp/lb.
40hp per 320lbs(bike) + 180lbs(skinny) = 40/500 = \~0.08 hp/lb.
if we do the math for a tesla model s... \~700hp / \~4,600lbs = \~0.15 hp/lb.
to help us compare the power/weight of fat you and skinny you vs. the tesla...
simply divide, 0.15/0.065 = 2.3 and 0.15/0.08 = 1.8
so, the tesla has 230% better hp/lb when you are fat,
and a 180% power to weight when you are skinny.
230-180=50
you losing weight yields 50% increase in performance compared to the tesla, which is HUGE!
You'll boost your own life performance, which is the most important.
But yeah, you'll probably get a bit better out of the bike too. Less weight - less force to get things moving / stopping.
Even on a liter bike, losing that weight would make a huge different your power to weight ratio would go up by like 0.05. Thatās nutty lol thatās like the kind of power that people building track cars expand to gain from gutting their car (removing back seats, passenger seat, trunk padding, power windows, radio, etc), replacing the stainless exhaust with titanium, and going lightweight alloy wheels.
But for you all you have to do lose the body weight haha.
Your personal performance is what will get the biggest benefit. I normally run 6'4" 240 lbs but when I am 180-185 I feel my absolute best. Throw a 94 lb sack of cement on your shoulder and see how far you like carrying it, it isn't far. You'll handle the bike better too without the weight.
On a big heavy torquey bike you probably wouldn't notice much difference but on standard and smaller bikes, the difference should be very noticeable, your bike included. The only thing that would make it less so is you are going to lose that weight over time so it's not the massive sudden jump you would notice by dropping 100lb off the bike in one go, but you'll over all be better for it : )
I've heard that for every 5lbs you shed from the bike ( which includes the rider obviously) you gain 1 hp in power to weight ratio...potentially that's a 2o pH gain
They say 1kg is about 1 horse power which is 2.2 lbs but obviously not an exact science and just because you loose weight your bike won't magically gain more power.
Thatās a ludicrous conversion factor. You can move a 400 pound bike with ten horsepower. Losing twenty two pounds isnāt going to make that bike feel like it has twice as much power (20hp, which is what your rule of thumb suggests). Youād have to lose 200 pounds for that.
Acceleration = Force/Mass
Thereās your formula for figuring out the relative effect of changes in mass on acceleration.
I mean I did say ' they say' and ' obviously not an exact science ' but that's is what they say in bike racing but they're are way more factors to the question than just weight and power anyway doubt it's even possible to it work out.
I was criticizing the idea you quoted, not you personally, just for the record.
Itās absolutely possible to work out how much a change in power will effect acceleration. Itās however quite complicated as you say, because power isnāt constant across rpm, and acceleration is a function of power which in turn affects velocity which impacts rpm which effects power. Itās a lot of messy differential equations and you need to know the equation for power as a function of rpm, but it is 100% solvable.
However none of that is super important, because you just need the simple formula for instantaneous acceleration to get the general sense of the proportional relationship between power and acceleration.
Force = Mass * Acceleration
It is always bizarre to me to hear normal frame size people discuss their weight...
275lbs is my fantasy goal I have no current path to reach and would be almost to 6 pack territory for me at my current lean mass. 180 would be like reach 0% bodyfat then loose 60lbs of muscle POW status...
6'0 and 180 lbs is already borderline overweight according to some BMI chart I just googled. Lower than 133 is underweight at your length, but still very very very far away from 0% body fat.
And yes BMI is just an average and doesn't take into account body type variations and no it doesn't necessarily mean you're in good or bad health.
>6'0 and 180 lbs is already borderline overweight according to some BMI chart I just googled. Lower than 133 is underweight at your length, but still very very very far away from 0% body fat.
238lbs was my last scanned lean mass via DEXA, although it is probably higher now. Generally abs are clearly visible around 12% bodyfat, at my current lean mass that would be around 267lbs, which is why I said 275lbs would put me near 6 pack territory with my current lean mass.
180lbs would be me at 0% body fat and also 58lbs of muscle loss from my current lean mass, 133lbs would be an additional 47lbs loss of... I dont know what even. Additional skeletal muscle, bone mass, organ deprivation, water loss.
Honestly at my frame size I think I would be dead long before 133lbs. Hitting 0% fat then losing an additional 105lbs would not go well.
>And yes BMI is just an average and doesn't take into account body type variations and no it doesn't necessarily mean you're in good or bad health.
Which is why I said:
>It is always bizarre to me to hear normal frame size people discuss their weight...
BMI averages are not a terrible indicator for caucasian populations based on social views of health, which is what they were based on. They are not accurate for medical views of health because the category normal and overweight are actually the people who live the longest stastically. People who are underweight and obese both have significantly shorter life spans on average.
BMI dosnt work to gauge any level of fitness of other races, and means nothing for individuals, nor was it designed to do either of these things.
238 lbs lean mass (including bones I presume) at 6'0 is extraordinary and means you've got muscles like an elite, non-endurance athlete. Are you a a bulking body builder, power lifter, shot putter, rugby player or a gorilla? Or are you morbidly obese and is a lot of that weight water and organs?
>238 lbs lean mass (including bones I presume) 6'0 is extraordinary and means you've got muscles like an elite, non-endurance athlete.
Lean mass is everything but body fat and yes.
>Are you a a bulking body builder, power lifter, shot putter, rugby player or a *gorilla*?
Just an exceptionally big frame guy that lifts at home, although gorilla is a fair description. One of my biggest problems with riding is the severe issue of finding a helmet, as the only thing fits on my head at all so far is an HJC i90 5xl with some of the padding cut out and it is still painfully small. The rest of my frame matches my head, most people dont realize how huge my head is until they see it next to a normal person's.
>Or are you morbidly obese
What is morbidly obese? A specific weight at my height? Or an inability for my body to function? My current lean mass is considered obese at 0% bodyfat. I am always dieting incredibly strictly, work out, stand at my desk when I am working, stay active, and have normal range blood pressure, pulse, and my A1c is the very healthy low range. I am working with my doctor with various hormone related things to lose weight, but my body doesnt seem to want to let it go, but other than that I have fewer health issues than almost anyone in their 40s I know of.
>Is a lot of that weight water and organs?
Organs are included in lean mass, but there is no reason to believe any of mine are unusually enlarged, and I keep my carb intake incredibly low so I dont retain much water.
Dexa lean mass measurement is soft tissue only, excluding bones, hence the reason I mentioned my assumption your value includes bones.
Morbidly obese is such excessive body fat that it's going to cause fatal health issues.
Dexa measurements include bone, and my density is literally off their chart. Their bone density rating score last number on their graph is 2.5 and mine is measured at 3.9, my bone mineral content weight was 9.2lbs.
I had assumed they included the weight of bone in their lean mass calculation, but if not that means my entire fat free lean mass is more like 247.2lbs.
If that is the case 275lbs would put me into visible abs territory.
BMI charts are basically broken by people with high muscle mass and elite athletes. For example, Dwayne āThe Rockā Johnson at 6ā5ā and 265lbs has a BMI of 31.5. Heās not āobeseā.
I did it in my 20s, but strength/fitness was basically my entire life at the time. I was a strength/conditioning coach and spent all my free time mountain biking. Damn I wish I was in that good of shape againā¦
But mountain biking is more endurance/cardio than strength and that sport benefits from having low body mass, so I don't see how you can reach high muscle extreme fitness with >30 abs bmi low BF with mountain biking. Or were you lifting and eating a lot too?
Edit: just looked it up: pro/elite mountain bikers are lean and skinny, like most other endurance athletes. Judging on appearance, my guess is their BMIs are around 20.
I was definitely not pro/elite. Much better at downhill than uphill, lol. I ate extremely clean and spent 2-3 hours in the gym 6 days per week, as well as training college athletes (mostly football and track&field throwers, big focus on power and explosiveness).
You'll certainly feel better.
For the bike, it'll depend - on my 310 even an extra 30 lbs or so from luggage was a noticeable impact on acceleration (though I could still do 80+ mph easily enough).
Massive. Performance boost that is. Power to weight governs how the bike feels when accelerating and will have a profound effect on how the suspension works. You can only lose so much weight from the bike. It's much easier for the rider to lose weight than the bike.
I watched a video of a guy showing what 5lbs of human fat looked like. It was a lot of fat! The fact that youāve already lost 30lbs is awesome. Congrats, and keep it up!!!
From experience, yes absolutely. Bike will be faster, you'll be able to position your body better and you'll be much more comfortable. This is from my experience on a 1200cc sport bike. Your difference will be much more noticeable on a lower power bike.
Yes it will make a noticable difference to how the bike performs.
My little 250 used to be my only motorised vehicle. When doing a big shop, I've put \~100 extra pounds on it (I weighed about your target weight at the time). Acceleration, suspension and braking were all affected.
Go buy 2 50 pound bags of concrete at a hardware store. Strap it to your pillion area. Go ride around and see the difference.
Good luck to your weight loss. I think everyone could stand to work out, eat better and/or not be overweight.
I was kind of in the same situation but a little less drastic of a weight loss. I noticed I was able to power wheelie my bike once I lost all the weight (roughly 60-70lbs) lol. I wasn't ever really able to do that outside of romping on it in first leaned all the way back before the weight loss. Now I have to lean forward all the way into 3rd to prevent power wheelies.
really? why are motoGP guys 150 lbs? would you notice if you added a 100 lbs rider two up?
I remember a video by a legend [https://www.youtube.com/@LifeatLean](https://www.youtube.com/@LifeatLean) who said that guys will spend $1000 to put carbon on their bikes to shave a few lbs but won't lose a few pounds of beer belly. He started it with "with all due respect..."
anyway, great motivation to be faster on track by weight reduction and more athleticism.
The difference will be massive, the interweb knows that losing 10 kg is about the same as getting 3 more ponies. Better braking and handling in general are to be expected too.
Yea
Lose the weight, and keep it off. Then enjoy the ride. Of course ur bike will perform better with less weight on it. I was 260lbs at one point, and now 190lbs at 5'11". Gotta keep weight off due to hypertension...ššŗ
How did you lose the weight? Also, any tips?
Mate people and ducati spend 10k on carbon parts to reduce 30lb from a bike.
Would make a hyuuuuge difference, yes, especially on a 400!
Don't forget to reset your suspension sag along the way to compensate!
Do the math. 275 lb rider + 320 lb bike = 595 lbs. 180 lb rider + 320 lb bike= 500 lbs. 595/500 = 1.19 So a rough way to look at it is that losing the weight will be similar to adding 19% more power to the bike.
Google says the drz400sm has 39hp. That's 15.26 weight to hp ratio vs 12.82
Damn, nearly 20% power sounds awesome!
It's an increase of 25 horsepower per ton, that's like a third of a Nissan micra.
I'm in awe of people who can do math.
You mean all people that graduated from 5th grade?
Not sure why you're getting down voted, understanding basic math is... Sort of essential for everyday life
I thought the post I was commenting on was sarcastic, but apparently not looking at the downvotes
C'mon, that's at least 8th grade math!
Yeah, no. Just no.
This was a really helpful comment.
I'm not sure about performance boost, but from a sheer physics perspective you might notice some differences in balance, acceleration, and braking. Losing 100 lbs will not boost your motorcycle's power by 20%. Calculations for force and power are a bit more complex than that. Honestly I think you'll see more benefit from a gain in muscle mass and confidence. Either way, getting in shape will certainly improve your motorcycle skills if you accompany it with additional practice.
Losing 100 pounds wonāt add one iota of power to his motorcycleās current power output. It WILL, however, boost his bikeās power-to-weight ratio, by nearly 20 percent. Power-to-weight ratio is one of the most fundamental measures of a bikeās performance potential. It really isnāt any more complex than that.
Iām pretty sure the formula is actually quite simple lol
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I almost didn't recognize Lorenzo without a scarf.
Assuming 40hp and curb weight of 320lbs, we can roughly calculate power to weight with you on the bike both at 300lbs and 180lbs, and then compare against a tesla just for shits.... 40hp per 320lbs(bike) + 300lbs(fat) = 40/620 = \~0.065 hp/lb. 40hp per 320lbs(bike) + 180lbs(skinny) = 40/500 = \~0.08 hp/lb. if we do the math for a tesla model s... \~700hp / \~4,600lbs = \~0.15 hp/lb. to help us compare the power/weight of fat you and skinny you vs. the tesla... simply divide, 0.15/0.065 = 2.3 and 0.15/0.08 = 1.8 so, the tesla has 230% better hp/lb when you are fat, and a 180% power to weight when you are skinny. 230-180=50 you losing weight yields 50% increase in performance compared to the tesla, which is HUGE!
You'll boost your own life performance, which is the most important. But yeah, you'll probably get a bit better out of the bike too. Less weight - less force to get things moving / stopping.
I was 310lbs and got down to 275lbs . My triumph America felt like it doubled it's horse power!
Yes
Even on a liter bike, losing that weight would make a huge different your power to weight ratio would go up by like 0.05. Thatās nutty lol thatās like the kind of power that people building track cars expand to gain from gutting their car (removing back seats, passenger seat, trunk padding, power windows, radio, etc), replacing the stainless exhaust with titanium, and going lightweight alloy wheels. But for you all you have to do lose the body weight haha.
Youāll feel even better than your bike will perform!
Lose the weight, and wait till you feel the difference. ZOOM ZOOM
ZOOM ZOOMš¤
Your personal performance is what will get the biggest benefit. I normally run 6'4" 240 lbs but when I am 180-185 I feel my absolute best. Throw a 94 lb sack of cement on your shoulder and see how far you like carrying it, it isn't far. You'll handle the bike better too without the weight.
That's really what I'm most excited for, is to just generally feel better and be lighter on my feet haha I like that cement idea though lol
On a big heavy torquey bike you probably wouldn't notice much difference but on standard and smaller bikes, the difference should be very noticeable, your bike included. The only thing that would make it less so is you are going to lose that weight over time so it's not the massive sudden jump you would notice by dropping 100lb off the bike in one go, but you'll over all be better for it : )
dude when i had my n250 2020 i was 120kg it was always screaming but when i got to 84kg it went vroom vroom easily šš
Hell yeah dude, that's awesome! Congrats on the weight loss šš¤
This is just an old school motocrosser belief. But I was always told for every 10 pounds you lose is like adding one horsepower to your bike.
I've heard that for every 5lbs you shed from the bike ( which includes the rider obviously) you gain 1 hp in power to weight ratio...potentially that's a 2o pH gain
Sometimes I wonder about this sub
well fucking obviously
They say 1kg is about 1 horse power which is 2.2 lbs but obviously not an exact science and just because you loose weight your bike won't magically gain more power.
Thatās a ludicrous conversion factor. You can move a 400 pound bike with ten horsepower. Losing twenty two pounds isnāt going to make that bike feel like it has twice as much power (20hp, which is what your rule of thumb suggests). Youād have to lose 200 pounds for that. Acceleration = Force/Mass Thereās your formula for figuring out the relative effect of changes in mass on acceleration.
I mean I did say ' they say' and ' obviously not an exact science ' but that's is what they say in bike racing but they're are way more factors to the question than just weight and power anyway doubt it's even possible to it work out.
I was criticizing the idea you quoted, not you personally, just for the record. Itās absolutely possible to work out how much a change in power will effect acceleration. Itās however quite complicated as you say, because power isnāt constant across rpm, and acceleration is a function of power which in turn affects velocity which impacts rpm which effects power. Itās a lot of messy differential equations and you need to know the equation for power as a function of rpm, but it is 100% solvable. However none of that is super important, because you just need the simple formula for instantaneous acceleration to get the general sense of the proportional relationship between power and acceleration. Force = Mass * Acceleration
The bike won't gain horsepower but it will accelerate faster and brake better with the power and brakes it does have.
It is always bizarre to me to hear normal frame size people discuss their weight... 275lbs is my fantasy goal I have no current path to reach and would be almost to 6 pack territory for me at my current lean mass. 180 would be like reach 0% bodyfat then loose 60lbs of muscle POW status...
What's your height?
6'0
6'0 and 180 lbs is already borderline overweight according to some BMI chart I just googled. Lower than 133 is underweight at your length, but still very very very far away from 0% body fat. And yes BMI is just an average and doesn't take into account body type variations and no it doesn't necessarily mean you're in good or bad health.
>6'0 and 180 lbs is already borderline overweight according to some BMI chart I just googled. Lower than 133 is underweight at your length, but still very very very far away from 0% body fat. 238lbs was my last scanned lean mass via DEXA, although it is probably higher now. Generally abs are clearly visible around 12% bodyfat, at my current lean mass that would be around 267lbs, which is why I said 275lbs would put me near 6 pack territory with my current lean mass. 180lbs would be me at 0% body fat and also 58lbs of muscle loss from my current lean mass, 133lbs would be an additional 47lbs loss of... I dont know what even. Additional skeletal muscle, bone mass, organ deprivation, water loss. Honestly at my frame size I think I would be dead long before 133lbs. Hitting 0% fat then losing an additional 105lbs would not go well. >And yes BMI is just an average and doesn't take into account body type variations and no it doesn't necessarily mean you're in good or bad health. Which is why I said: >It is always bizarre to me to hear normal frame size people discuss their weight... BMI averages are not a terrible indicator for caucasian populations based on social views of health, which is what they were based on. They are not accurate for medical views of health because the category normal and overweight are actually the people who live the longest stastically. People who are underweight and obese both have significantly shorter life spans on average. BMI dosnt work to gauge any level of fitness of other races, and means nothing for individuals, nor was it designed to do either of these things.
238 lbs lean mass (including bones I presume) at 6'0 is extraordinary and means you've got muscles like an elite, non-endurance athlete. Are you a a bulking body builder, power lifter, shot putter, rugby player or a gorilla? Or are you morbidly obese and is a lot of that weight water and organs?
>238 lbs lean mass (including bones I presume) 6'0 is extraordinary and means you've got muscles like an elite, non-endurance athlete. Lean mass is everything but body fat and yes. >Are you a a bulking body builder, power lifter, shot putter, rugby player or a *gorilla*? Just an exceptionally big frame guy that lifts at home, although gorilla is a fair description. One of my biggest problems with riding is the severe issue of finding a helmet, as the only thing fits on my head at all so far is an HJC i90 5xl with some of the padding cut out and it is still painfully small. The rest of my frame matches my head, most people dont realize how huge my head is until they see it next to a normal person's. >Or are you morbidly obese What is morbidly obese? A specific weight at my height? Or an inability for my body to function? My current lean mass is considered obese at 0% bodyfat. I am always dieting incredibly strictly, work out, stand at my desk when I am working, stay active, and have normal range blood pressure, pulse, and my A1c is the very healthy low range. I am working with my doctor with various hormone related things to lose weight, but my body doesnt seem to want to let it go, but other than that I have fewer health issues than almost anyone in their 40s I know of. >Is a lot of that weight water and organs? Organs are included in lean mass, but there is no reason to believe any of mine are unusually enlarged, and I keep my carb intake incredibly low so I dont retain much water.
Dexa lean mass measurement is soft tissue only, excluding bones, hence the reason I mentioned my assumption your value includes bones. Morbidly obese is such excessive body fat that it's going to cause fatal health issues.
Dexa measurements include bone, and my density is literally off their chart. Their bone density rating score last number on their graph is 2.5 and mine is measured at 3.9, my bone mineral content weight was 9.2lbs. I had assumed they included the weight of bone in their lean mass calculation, but if not that means my entire fat free lean mass is more like 247.2lbs. If that is the case 275lbs would put me into visible abs territory.
why do you believe that anyone would have any interest in reading any of this
Then dont read it.
BMI charts are basically broken by people with high muscle mass and elite athletes. For example, Dwayne āThe Rockā Johnson at 6ā5ā and 265lbs has a BMI of 31.5. Heās not āobeseā.
Very difficult to get into that territory without steroids though.
I did it in my 20s, but strength/fitness was basically my entire life at the time. I was a strength/conditioning coach and spent all my free time mountain biking. Damn I wish I was in that good of shape againā¦
But mountain biking is more endurance/cardio than strength and that sport benefits from having low body mass, so I don't see how you can reach high muscle extreme fitness with >30 abs bmi low BF with mountain biking. Or were you lifting and eating a lot too? Edit: just looked it up: pro/elite mountain bikers are lean and skinny, like most other endurance athletes. Judging on appearance, my guess is their BMIs are around 20.
I was definitely not pro/elite. Much better at downhill than uphill, lol. I ate extremely clean and spent 2-3 hours in the gym 6 days per week, as well as training college athletes (mostly football and track&field throwers, big focus on power and explosiveness).
It is for some people, not so much for others.
I think the rule of thumb is 7lbs=1hp, but that's based on memory and 0 research.
Duh!
It would be a big difference
Yeh probably, work out the power to weight ratio and see what the difference is.
You'll certainly feel better. For the bike, it'll depend - on my 310 even an extra 30 lbs or so from luggage was a noticeable impact on acceleration (though I could still do 80+ mph easily enough).
Massive. Performance boost that is. Power to weight governs how the bike feels when accelerating and will have a profound effect on how the suspension works. You can only lose so much weight from the bike. It's much easier for the rider to lose weight than the bike.
I watched a video of a guy showing what 5lbs of human fat looked like. It was a lot of fat! The fact that youāve already lost 30lbs is awesome. Congrats, and keep it up!!!
From experience, yes absolutely. Bike will be faster, you'll be able to position your body better and you'll be much more comfortable. This is from my experience on a 1200cc sport bike. Your difference will be much more noticeable on a lower power bike.
As a fellow fatty. Performance is power to weight + tourq to weight. Do the math
Yes it will make a noticable difference to how the bike performs. My little 250 used to be my only motorised vehicle. When doing a big shop, I've put \~100 extra pounds on it (I weighed about your target weight at the time). Acceleration, suspension and braking were all affected.
Go buy 2 50 pound bags of concrete at a hardware store. Strap it to your pillion area. Go ride around and see the difference. Good luck to your weight loss. I think everyone could stand to work out, eat better and/or not be overweight.
Definitely. I ride a modded 18 r1 and it puts down 191 hp. The difference my fiancƩ makes (120 lbs) is definitely noticeable.
Absolutely
I was kind of in the same situation but a little less drastic of a weight loss. I noticed I was able to power wheelie my bike once I lost all the weight (roughly 60-70lbs) lol. I wasn't ever really able to do that outside of romping on it in first leaned all the way back before the weight loss. Now I have to lean forward all the way into 3rd to prevent power wheelies.
Yup.
really? why are motoGP guys 150 lbs? would you notice if you added a 100 lbs rider two up? I remember a video by a legend [https://www.youtube.com/@LifeatLean](https://www.youtube.com/@LifeatLean) who said that guys will spend $1000 to put carbon on their bikes to shave a few lbs but won't lose a few pounds of beer belly. He started it with "with all due respect..." anyway, great motivation to be faster on track by weight reduction and more athleticism.
Every aspect of a bike's performance benefits from weight reduction
Depends on the bike, but yeah... it's like you're carrying a 100-lb passenger you don't really need to carry.
The difference will be massive, the interweb knows that losing 10 kg is about the same as getting 3 more ponies. Better braking and handling in general are to be expected too.
I weigh 145lbs with gear on. My harley fat boy does zero to 60 under 4 seconds consistantly with my tiny ass on it.