I loaded my Rambouillet with a Caradice Nelson Longflap when new to do a credit card camping take on the TranAm/Western Flyer route from Norfolk, VA to SF, CA via Pueblo, CO starting in early May. It was perfect, although I could see being a bit more prepared for contingencies (more stuff) would be good, but I was within tolerance range of the Rivendale stated optimal max load. All the good handling attributes felt like they were without damping by the rear load which in fairness was in front of the rear hub. I dare say every Rivendell model is different and presents a varying capacity by design for carrying loads on the front. Those that are more able in total still have an order by which you add your increments (bags and contents) of load as you close in on your total.
Fast forward a decade, I joined a group of Riv riders on the GAP starting at Cumberland, MD in April. The food and drink needs of the route and overnight, the climate changes from warm at the start, cool and rainy by Confluence, PA and snow from Ohiopyle on West Newton, PAwarranted that I added another bag which was a small VO Berthoud knock-with a little old French rack. Seemed innnocuous but either the total weight or the front load itself really snuffed the nice handling. It became more ponderous than the load would have predicted. My feeling riding it those hundred miles was that a bike needs to be designed for your load, meaning enough heft of the tube set and geometry that won't make necessary lots of fine inputs. Not a super riding bike empty. Loaded as it was, my Ram was awkward because of the deliberate effort necessary to input the small adjustments for its specified trail. Trail and handling are a dimension and outcome and the relationship overlooks lots of other dimensions with input to how the bike rides in your uses. I am over 6" tall and have long legs and a short torso for my height. That made the under square Rambouillet a very good option for me since I was a bit short of the experience I later found helpful when pursuing a custom bike but did prefer a sportier riding bike than say an early '90s MTB conversion. The front load on the Rambouillet overrode many of the details that kept it predictably handling without my toe ever tangling up with the front fender. It has, as previous Ram riders (Steve P.) have noted, a tendency to veer off track on slow, low-cadence, out of saddle climbs unloaded or rear loaded due to the higher trail. That I believe is a combination of the compensations of things that resulted in the front end geometry including trail and the out of saddle weight distribution coming forward. The trail dimension can also surprise you when a brief surface change that addresses the front wheel implies any lateral force to it. I have short, steeply ramped driveway curb cut that you cross on an angle in mind. The Ram can be flustered on my exact example, my subsequent lower trail bike is not, loaded or not. As James' at Analog's article points out no one thing is panacea. Everything has limits, beneficial or otherwise. I found that loading my Rambouillet enough for rides in austere place for more than a day, keeping the front unburdened enough left me with a limited size tire that had to be pumped up pretty high to account for the odd edge, rock or whatever rim pinch or worse. Not the best ride for this bike and it goes against some thought that the cargo load, even when compensated with tire pressure, makes a bike ride smother. I've had two rear wheel destroying hits on this bike the front wheel floated past unharmed. This rear bias in load preference, the declining comfort as the load or the road dictates rear tire pressure to increase and as the geometry for the front end's contribution to handling gave me the confidence I needed to step off into a custom. I wanted a bike that fit my non-stock body that had enough tire to ride on the mixed surfaces I frequent, capable of several days of non-camping load without feeling over burdened, more equalized F-R weight distribution so I can benefit from the tires' inflation instead of nearing the max to avoid flats, no toe overlap with fenders and that was fun to ride unloaded. I have a Disc Trucker commuter so that last point is emphasized as I find it intolerable after 35 miles due to both being generically overbuilt for loads and the top tube stock geometry. Andy Cheatham Pittsburgh On Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 9:50:44 AM UTC-4 brok...@gmail.com wrote: > I thought it might be somewhat pertinent to the discussion to link to this > article about low-trail bikes and handling. Written by James from Analog > Cycles a couple years back when it seemed like everyone was desiring a > low-trail frame: > https://analogcycles.com/pages/debunking-low-trail > > While it doesn't directly address the original post's questions about > front-loading on Rivendells, there's some good info about how certain bikes > handle with or without loads, but mostly how the design of trail on a bike > affects the ride in general. > > On Monday, September 5, 2022 at 5:41:00 PM UTC-4 Joe Bernard wrote: > >> My extremely biased view is Rivs aren't built for heavy front loads and I >> just won't anymore, it feels unweildy and unsafe. Can it be done anyway? >> Sure. By people who aren't me. >> >> On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 6:14:37 PM UTC-7 Patrick Moore wrote: >> >>> Just curious, after adjusting my Ortlieb Sports Packers to the front >>> lowriders and carrying home about 12 bulky lbs on the front of the 2020 >>> Matthews which is a geometrical clone of a 2003 Riv Road custom -- Riv lost >>> the geometry chart but I think it's med trail. >>> >>> 10 or 12 lb makes almost no difference in handling, but it does make >>> wheeling the bike one-handed (gripping stem and adjacent bar) through the >>> aisles less easy; 20 lb does slow the handling noticeably though not >>> impossibly. ~15 evenly divided is about the max for happiness. >>> >>> Rear loads are more stable. 20 lb in the rear is not noticeable, 30 lb >>> in the rear affects handling less than 20 (evenly distributed) does in >>> front, and I've carried 45 with the bike still rideable. (For comparo, my >>> best rear loader was an early 1970s thinnish wall and normal gauge 531 >>> framed racing bike with long stays and shortish front-center: Motobecane >>> Grand Record. Though light and flexy, with a *very* stiff 400 gram >>> Tubus Fly this carried 45 better than any stouter-tubed road bike I've >>> owned, including any of 4 Riv road models (well, if a first-gen Sam Hill is >>> "road). Another nice rear grocery load carrier was an '80s Fuji Royale "12 >>> speed" that actually handled better with 20 lb in back than it did unladen; >>> that one hated front loads. >>> >>> So, after that long windup, what is the benefit of front loading *on >>> Rivendell models*. Is it purely convenience? >>> >>> And, different question: what is the benefit of front loading on >>> *non-Rivendell >>> low-trail bikes*: convenience? >>> >>> Just curious and describing my own experience. >>> >>> -- >>> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> Patrick Moore >>> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum >>> >>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/2cd5a21f-ee8d-4e57-a766-83cd89d2a5a3n%40googlegroups.com.
