Do you think there would be an interference problem with the high profile
brakes? I mean do the struts for the marks clear them ok? I would prefer
the Marks since if I do ever get another bag it has more than one use,
unlike a dedicated saddlebag rack.

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Allingham II, Thomas J <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Haven't used the R-10, but I had a Mark's Rack on the rear of my Quickbeam
> for a while.  It worked well for support of saddlebags -- better than the
> Bagman I replaced it with.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter M
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 12:08 PM
> To: RBW Owners Bunch
> Subject: [RBW] Nitto R-10 vs Marks Rack for Saddlebag
>
> So I have been waxing and waning over whether to get the Bagman for my
> Carradice Pendle.  I just don think it is a good choice due to the fact I
> want to just be able to mount it and not worry about it coming loose and
> the fact that I dont want anything mounted to my saddle. I was trying to
> decide now between the Nitto R-10 and the Marks Rack and was wondering if
> anyone has used both or has first hand experience with using either one
> with a sprung saddle and high profile brakes (paul neo retro). Thanks to
> any advice yall can offer.
>
> Peter
>
> --
> 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.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ****************************************************
>
> To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we advise you
> that, unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice
> contained in this message was not intended or written to be used, and
> cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under
> the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions
> or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
> tax-related matters addressed herein.
> ****************************************************
> ****************************************************
>
> This email (and any attachments thereto) is intended only for use by the
> addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or
> confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this
> email, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
> copying of this email (and any attachments thereto) is strictly prohibited.
> If you receive this email in error please immediately notify me at (212)
> 735-3000 and permanently delete the original email (and any copy of any
> email) and any printout thereof.
>
> Further information about the firm, a list of the Partners and their
> professional qualifications will be provided upon request.
> ****************************************************
>
> ==============================================================================
>
> --
> 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.
>
>

-- 
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