Racks

Sam Salt wrote:

What's the bees knees in rear racks these days.Tubus,Bor Yeuh,anything else
that folks can recommend.I was looking at a Tubus model ( The Logo )
http://www.kinetics.org.uk/html/tubus_racks.html

on which the panniers fit on a lower bar presumably making the bike more
stable.Anyone any comments as they are quite a price ( £70 ).

Carrying the weight lower doesn't make the bike more stable. Bikes
don't behave like four-wheeled vehicles when loaded. Having more weight
high up can actually make them *more* stable by making the natural
period of oscillation (wobble) longer - think of a pendulum upside down.

When loading a bike for camping or something else that requires massive
amounts of luggage, it's best to get it as close as possible to a line
drawn between the front hub and the top of the rear rack. This has the
least effect on handling, apparently.

Anyway, also look at the Blackburn range and the Thorn range at
www.sjscycles.com.

Dave Larrington wrote:

Avoid cheap Blackburn clones, as they are made from cheese.

But if you get the bonk on a long tour, they're great ;-)

Dave Larrington wrote:

Tubus are supposed to be the mutt's nuts, but unless you really need the
extra strength and capacity, then I for one am quite happy with Blackburn.
The one on my touring bike has been doing sterling service since 1984.

[snip, sig.]

I have three Blackburns from the '80s still going strong. Back then Blackburn
made beautiful, one piece aluminium alloy racks that bolted directly to
the frame. Nowadays Blackburn and others use cheesy bits of steel to provide
an adjustable link to the frame. WHY??

I've just had an anonymous rack that has done maybe 10,000 loaded and
bumpy
miles on my Cannondale break, so replaced it with a Topeak that seemed a good
idea at the time: it's made of strong tubing and has a dovetail slot for
accepting a rack pack. JOKE! Fit the pack and you can't attach
panniers to the rack! What crap prince of design thought this up?
Luckily, understanding LBS refunded me for the pack, but I'd bought the
rack a few weeks before, so I'm
now stuck with a rack with a rather unwanted top section:-(


--
Jan
Dreaming of a world in which companies get rid of their marketing departments
and just stick to designs that work.

Jan Wysocki wrote:
Dave Larrington wrote:

Tubus are supposed to be the mutt's nuts, but unless you really need
the extra strength and capacity, then I for one am quite happy with
Blackburn. The one on my touring bike has been doing sterling
service since 1984.

[snip, sig.]

I have three Blackburns from the '80s still going strong. Back then
Blackburn made beautiful, one piece aluminium alloy racks that bolted
directly to
the frame. Nowadays Blackburn and others use cheesy bits of steel to
provide an adjustable link to the frame. WHY??

Yup, those of us with old Blackburns are happy with them. Mine is like you
say, four point fixing no moving or loose parts


--
The Reply & From email addresses are checked rarely.
http://www.mseries.freeserve.co.uk

In message , Jan Wysocki
writes


Dave Larrington wrote:

Tubus are supposed to be the mutt's nuts, but unless you really need the
extra strength and capacity, then I for one am quite happy with Blackburn.
The one on my touring bike has been doing sterling service since 1984.

[snip, sig.]

I have three Blackburns from the '80s still going strong. Back then Blackburn
made beautiful, one piece aluminium alloy racks that bolted directly to
the frame. Nowadays Blackburn and others use cheesy bits of steel to provide
an adjustable link to the frame. WHY??


Presumably the great variation in frame sizes spacing of stays etc.?
The old balckburn rack on my tourer dates from the 80's and is fixed in
this way to the seat stays.

Anyway. my Tubus rack has very neat adjustable fixings....


On the question posed by the OP, I'm now a fan of Tubus racks having had
done on my town utility bike for a year or so. They are very sturdy, the
quality is good the adjustable fixings to the seat stay are nice. I
think they are good value for money, though of course not cheap.

Yes, I could buy maybe 3 cheapies for the same price, but I like things
that work and do the job well and are reliable.. Over the years I've
broken 2 cheapy Al racks (A Nimrod and B-Y), a front Blackburn rack
and bent the rear one.
--
Chris French, Leeds

Zog The Undeniable wrote:

Carrying the weight lower doesn't make the bike more stable. Bikes
don't behave like four-wheeled vehicles when loaded. Having more weight
high up can actually make them *more* stable by making the natural
period of oscillation (wobble) longer - think of a pendulum upside down.

If it's done properly, lower down weight is better. And I say this not
from imagining pendulums but from riding an 8 Freight with 50 Kgs of
coal in the back in a low slung bin and finding it a damn site more
stable than my old upright tourer ever was with less than a third of
that on board on normal, high mounted racks.

Also the case that loading my 'bent, where I have the option of low and
high racks, it comes out far more stable when the heavy stuff goes into
the lowriders that sit underneath me and close to the road.

When loading a bike for camping or something else that requires massive
amounts of luggage, it's best to get it as close as possible to a line
drawn between the front hub and the top of the rear rack. This has the
least effect on handling, apparently.

It's best to have a bike that takes loads better than a standard diamond
frame with front racks mounted on the steering forks. Aside from
specialist options like I have, if you want "massive amounts of luggage"
you may well be better off with a trailer (note how BOBs keep their
weight low down).

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 00:57:56 +0000, Jan Wysocki
wrote:

so replaced it with a Topeak

Hate to slag off another rack manufactor, but also had bad experience
with Topeak racks. They look ok, but put anything remotely heavy one
and it'll wag like the tail of a happy dog.
Blackburn is still the way to go IME.

Chris

Jan Wysocki wrote:

I've just had an anonymous rack that has done maybe 10,000 loaded and
bumpy
miles on my Cannondale break, so replaced it with a Topeak that seemed a good
idea at the time: it's made of strong tubing and has a dovetail slot for
accepting a rack pack. JOKE! Fit the pack and you can't attach
panniers to the rack! What crap prince of design thought this up?
Luckily, understanding LBS refunded me for the pack, but I'd bought the
rack a few weeks before, so I'm
now stuck with a rack with a rather unwanted top section:-(

Depends on your rack pack and panniers, I suppose. My panniers hang off
the sides on plastic hooks, and the rack pack straps round the top with
velcro. I can't see mine being a problem with any rack.