Originally Posted by jfurf
No, it's not meaningless. All bikes require fluids/battery/etc. But some bikes have different fuel capacities, which skews the comparison. So as a metric, dry weight is actually a better tool to measure the weight of the materials used to build the bike.
You're right that the wet weight is useful to know, but it's not a good way of measuring lots of different bikes against one another.
dry weight doesn't include things like loctite or assembly lube, it's more or less a fictitious number derived from the sum of the calculated masses of a CAD file.
the only numbers worth anything aren't even given by mfg's, they're found by independent sources rolling the bike onto a scale.
It's just as fair to weigh bikes full of fuel and expect people to be able to calculate the weight difference due to fuel capacity, as it is to weigh the bikes empty of fuel and expect people to calculate the weight difference due to fuel capacity.
what doesn't make sense is to use the dry weight figures, which are unverifiable unless you want to fully disassemble a bike and clean it of all contamination and weigh all the parts, unless you do this all you're getting is a mfg claim which is pretty much always subject to a good degree of fudging.
I personally wouldn't mind if people started measuring CG location and MOI about various axes, and then for giggles measured the MOI's again at various engine and wheel RPMs. a guy can dream