Those Super Cs look nice - where did you get them in tan?  I only see
black online...

wc.

On Dec 26, 3:44 pm, MichaelS <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello all-
>
> When it comes to panniers, I can't recommend highly enough the Super C
> panniers form Carradice.  They're made of stout cotton canvas, are
> totally waterproof, and have the best mounting hardware I've ever
> encountered.  I've toured thousands of miles with them and I've had
> them on my bike, daily, through five crappy, wet, icy, salty, slushy
> Boston winters (working on number six) and don't have a single
> complaint.  My stuff has *never* gotten wet.  I have a set of Ortliebs
> for the front when I go on extended tours and really prefer the Super
> Cs.  My major issue with the Ortliebs is that they keep water *in* as
> well as they keep it *out.*  When you're on the road for days or
> weeks in rainy weather this leads to constantly damp and soggy gear.
> The Carradices seem to "breathe" a bit so the gear doesn't tend to
> stay as soggy.
>
> Also, they've taken on a really nice patina (beausage?)  The last
> photo here was taken three years ago:
>
> <http://www.cyclofiend.com/cc/2007/cc360-michaelsmith0807.html>
>
> Happy New Year guys and gals!
>
> Cheers- Mike
>
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 6:24 PM, William Henderson
>
>
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the link to Lemolo Joel.  Those bags look quite a bit more
> > capable, and are actually $25 less than the Brooks!  Has anyone here
> > used them?  There's also a dearth of info of them on the web.
> > Wondering about water?
>
> > These Brooks bags are truly beautiful (more so than even the Lemolos,
> > IMHO) and will be hard to give up, but I do agree that they are
> > probably not cut out for touring.  FWIW though, the material appears
> > to be very durable, thick canvas stock.  Easily as thick and durable
> > as the old baggins panniers Riv. used to make (on that note, I've been
> > told they will be making some again 'soon', so I may wait and see what
> > they come up with).   The straps are also quite thick and solid
> > looking, however the way they are sewn into the bag is slightly less
> > solid and could be a potential point of failure.  Also, there are only
> > straps for the top of the bag (none on the bottom), so the bags will
> > probably flop a bit, putting more stress on the aforementioned top
> > straps.   All that being said, they are overall pretty solid looking.
> > I'd easily trust them for long day rides, and probably even on my 2-3
> > weekend trips.  I'm seriously considering keeping them for just that
> > (and all my day-to-day around-town trafficking, obviously) and then
> > buying some Ortliebs or whatever whenever I plan a longer trip.  It's
> > just that nagging conscience about owning two sets of panniers (one of
> > them a $300 set) that is keeping me from doing this...
>
> > Here's to hoping someone (Rivendell, say) will simply take this exact
> > Brooks design and slightly enlarge them, add proper mounts, and
> > improve the flap design.  According to Brook's catalog, they are also
> > working on a 'touring' pannier set (coming 'soon', again) but I can
> > pretty much guarantee they will be unaffordable.
>
> > wc.
>
> > On Dec 26, 8:52 am, JoelMatthews <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> If you are talking about these:
>
> >>http://www.wallbike.com/brooks/bags/bricklanepanniers/brick.html
>
> >> definitely not meant for long distance.  This is a thoughtful - and
> >> welcome re-make of classic panniers from pre-car days.  They are meant
> >> for hauling groceries, picnics, and other modest cargo in the rainy
> >> climate on the British isles.
>
> >> You don't need internal bracing for a good touring pannier - Ortlieb
> >> roll up panniers are among the best long distance panniers made and do
> >> not have internal bracing.  But you do need something made rugged.
> >> Brick Lane panniers are not designed for long distance touring.  As
> >> you point out, they do not really seal shut.  And the mounting
> >> hardware is built to look good while remaining easy to use, not to
> >> clamp onto your rack for hours long hauls over washboard pavement.
> >> Doesn't make them bad.  In fact, I am seriously considering them for
> >> around town use.
>
> >> If you are looking for panniers for touring but still smart enough for
> >> around town use, check out this nice design from a one person outfit
> >> in Portland called Lemolo:
>
> >>http://lemolobags.wordpress.com/2008/10/09/pannier-pictures/#comment-262
>
> >> The bags appears to be a great design.  Arkel mounting hardware is up
> >> there with Ortlieb as among the most adaptable and durable.  In my
> >> opinion the bags look great.
>
> >> On Dec 26, 10:24 am, William Henderson <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> > I just got a set of Brooks panniers as a gift yesterday.  I've
> >> > inspected them a bit and they appear to be quite well made, handsome,
> >> > and quite capacious.  I'm out of town and so haven't had a chance to
> >> > see how they might fit on the back of my bike.  Anyway, I was hoping
> >> > to solicit the opinions of anyone that might have used these bags?
> >> > Not sure if it's because they are new or so expensive, but there isn't
> >> > much info about them online.  Certainly not a thorough review.  Just
> >> > looking at them, they seem to be primarily designed as commuters or
> >> > grocery haulers.  The flaps, for example, don't seem like they'd do a
> >> > great job keeping out water.  Also, I'm not sure how they'll ride when
> >> > full since they have no stiffener.  What I'm really looking for is
> >> > some panniers that are stylish enough for everyday use but also
> >> > perform adequately on longer rides and tours.  Are these it?
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to