Doug and Rob, Thanks for answering my newb questions. I generally would imagine lower is better for a front bag, except its hard to see exactly why since a bag tightly fixed to the handlebars goes through the same rotation as a bag on a front rack as the bars are turned. I suppose it's related to the mysteries of bar/headset stability.
In any event, I saw a custom rack this weekend, similar to a Nitto M-12 mini front rack with a classic looking boxy rando bag (although i can't remember which.) However, instead of a decaleur coming down from the bars/stem, the vertical U loop at the rear of the rack had an attached extension (2 vertical standards, with a cross bar) functioned as a decaleur. Frankly, it seemed like an excellent solution since it eliminates a bag attachment up near the handlebars, where it can get in the way, and perhaps compromise handling. I just wonder why I haven't seen this before? If you're not too tired of my questions, why are boxy rando bags mounted cross-wise on a front rack? Is it just because the horizontal way makes for a more useful clear map pocket on top or is handling also an issue? Thanks, ...Roy On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 4:30 PM, doug peterson <dougpn...@cox.net> wrote: > Roy: > > +1 for Rob's general comments about loading. It does boil down to > personal preference. We've had several lively discussions re: trail, > load placement, etc., with no clear consensus. But it keeps us > thinking. > > To your question, my answer is an un-qualified "Yes". I've tried an > old fashioned handlebar bag what mounts to the stem. This places the > top of the bag roughly at handlebar height. On my Atlantis, this set > up was unacceptably floppy & squirrely, and I'm not fussy about these > things. Acorn's Boxy Rando is roughly the same size and mounts on a > small Nitto (M-12?) front rack. The overall weight of the 2 bags with > mounting is roughly the same BUT the weight is a couple of inches > lower. Even with the Acorn stuffed full of food, jacket, etc., effect > on handling is minimal. The Acorn may sit closer to steerer tube as > well, now that I think about it. So yes, lower & further back is > better, in my experience. Note the Atlantis is a high trail bike so > YMMV. > > dougP > > On Feb 23, 11:42 am, rperks <perks....@gmail.com> wrote: > > in General handling should be improved by keeping the load/mass lower > > and above the axel. This largely falls into the personal preferance > > range though. The loads I carry in the front: > > Panasonic GF1 > > Spare Tube > > Wallet > > Phone > > Keys > > Extra water on a big day > > this keeps the load weight pretty low, all things relative. I tend to > > carry too much food, water tools, and god knows what if I am leaving > > for more than a couple of hours. I had my Carradice Nelson LF on the > > back for a while, and with both bags loaded the handnilg was > > acceptable, but in the back of my mind I knew I had too much stuff I > > would never use. I used to belive that suble position changes of the > > load could not change haanling in a noticable way, in this case it did > > though. > > > > Load position and amound can and has been be disussed for eons, what > > is optimum for you boils down to personal experience. Popular theory > > would have Grant's designs primarily as rear loaders, but baskets seam > > to work as well as smaller front loads. I have hauled 45lbs of teff > > flour home balanced on the handlebars of my crosscheck(high trail > > geometry) for a couple of miles, far from optimum but I survived, and > > it was way faster than walking. For me Optimum seems to be less than > > 8 lbs or so on the front of a high trail bike, with any additional > > load on the rear. I have not yet had a low trail bike to ride. Any > > time I put more than 30 lbs up high in the front the forks go wobbily > > before I have to worry about general handling. > > > > Rob > > > > On Feb 22, 5:03 pm, Roy Yates <roydya...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > It sounds like you're saying that for a front bag, lower is always > better? > > > Is that right? > > > > > Does that mean a not-too-tall bag that mounts just on a (mini?) front > rack > > > is better than the similar size bag that also uses a decaleur or just > uses a > > > handlebar mount? > > > > > Thanks, > > > ...Roy > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<rbw-owners-bunch%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
