Thorn Cycles Forum
Community => Thorn General => Topic started by: renma on March 05, 2019, 07:42:10 am
-
Hello
I am an owner of a Mercury (lightweight build), which I use for
training and special tours with small camping kit on sealed roads and
good quality non sealed roads. I love my Mercury, it is outstanding!
For longer tours with more load I currently use a Surly LHT. But I
like to replace it with a Rohloff based Thorn Nomad or Thorn Raven.
I am not sure whether I should go with a Nomad or a Raven. To be more
concrete: if one will carry 20kg of luggage (plus water) and will
cycle the following...
- Ruta Nacional 40 (Argentina)
- Pamir Highway (Central Asia)
- Iron Curtain trail (Eurovelo 13)
- East coast route (Eurovelo 10)
...which is more suitable Nomad or Raven?
Thanks
Renι
-
Nice problem to have! I would suggest a nomad would be the best option for the routes outside Europe. I am sure the raven would cope but that is what the nomad was designed for you. Given you already have a mercury there is little advantage in having a raven for more general use.
-
I've only used the Raven. Mine took me across the Pamir Highway, 4 panniers plus tent etc.
Performance was perfect. I came back thinking about how a Nomad could be better. I guess for carrying more weight over a longer period? But it certainly did the job for me.
I've since taken it on several fly in fly out tours where I haven't carried as much weight.
I did have a very short ride on a Nomad and recall feeling the extra weight of the bike.
Someone told me that if you're on a Nomad and see a tough track you consider taking, you'll take it without hesitation. On any other bike, you'll think twice.
If I get around to a long extended tour, it will be on my Raven with no doubts it will do the job.
-
It was the sight of a Nomad that had just traveled down the length of Africa that first got me motivated to own a Rohloff hubbed bicycle and a Thorn model specifically but in the end I bought a Raven. In the past two years I've done more than twenty thousand kilometers of touring on my Raven, mostly carrying between 20 and 30 kilograms of luggage, without any problems. This includes the Carretera Austral in Chile continuing from Villa O'Higgins over the mountain to Lago del Desierto and on to Ruta 40 in Argentina and later crossing the Andes a couple of times further north. Some of this was on really rough terrain. Also the length of Japan and various other meanderings around Japan, Korea, SE Asia and South Africa. I'm sure a Nomad would also have come though unscathed but I went for the Raven because I felt that as a smaller person (I only weigh about 58 Kg) the Raven suited me better. If you are a much heavier person the Nomad might be a better choice.
-
I had a first year of production LHT, but mine was defective. Surly refused to warranty it, I eventually put the frame in the metal recycling bin. I have a Sherpa (derailleur bike) and a Nomad Mk II.
I do not know what the weight rating of the Raven is, but I think it is similar to the Sherpa. I have used my Sherpa on routes that would probably have worked well with a non-defective LHT.
Nomad is rated for something like 60kg of gear not counting weight of rider. That is a LOT of stuff. Bike unladen is roughly 20kg, which is pretty heavy for a bike.
I wrote up my Iceland trip on my Nomad here if you are looking for some real world examples with photos:
http://thorncyclesforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=11917.0
My advice would be to not get the Nomad if the Raven will be sufficient. My Nomad has S&S couplers, my bike with the S&S Backpack Case will exceed most airline weight limits, I have to carry a few bits of the bike in my other luggage.
Do not get me wrong, my Nomad is a great bike. But, you will notice it is a heavy bike. My next trip will likely be with my Nomad, but that is because it has the S&S couplers, my Sherpa would be a better bike to actually use on that trip, but getting it to and from in a full size bike box would be a hassle.
A side note on the Nomad, it will also work with a 100mm suspension fork. I do not have a mountain bike but I have used my Nomad with a suspension fork on a couple trips that would have been more appropriate to use a Mountain bike. That is not something that you can do with the Raven. Some on one of those trips here, skip down to the post that has large text that says UPDATE:
http://thorncyclesforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=11321.0
On the Rohloff, new users often have the cables to tight, you need plenty of slack. And do not ford any streams that would result in submerging the hub.
I use drop bars on most of my bikes, Thorn recommends flat bars on the Nomad. After my Iceland trip, I moved my shifter location to the end of the handlebar with the Hubbub adapter, that allows me to have both hands on the bars for steering in difficult terrain while one hand is also on the shifter.
Since I have not used a Raven, I can't comment on the different shifter cable setup on that, I have only used the EX box that I think works quite well.
-
I reckon it depends on:
- 1 how much (or how little) luggage you intend carrying.
- 2 your own weight, a really heavy (or strong) rider is more likely to need a Nomad.
- 3 how often you use tracks and paths, especially sandy ones, where the ability to fit wider tyres on the Nomad will be an advantage.
- 4 how much water you need to carry to be safe on the longest sections between water sources.
You should tell Thorn the routes you intend riding and ask what they recommend.
I intended to get a Nomad, and after I told Andy Blance what kind of riding and where I intended to do it (camping load in Europe, with occasional use of tracks and paths) he persuaded me to get a Raven Tour instead. It has coped well with all my rides so far and I don't regret taking the advice.
IMO a Raven would be fine for the two Eurovelo routes (you should be able to get water more or less every day). I suspect that the South American and maybe the Pamir route may push the balance towards a Nomad.
-
The comments I wrote above, I was in a hurry to write them as I had to go somewhere. And I looked at your comment on 20kg (excluding water) for a load. I think my Sherpa is rated at 30 or 35 kg, thus I was thinking that your load would be on the lighter side for a loaded touring setup.
Europe and the S America route, the Raven I think would do.
But now after I am back at home, I put Pamir Highway into Google and clicked on images so I could see photos. That looks more like Nomad territory. Looked very similar to the photos I have from Iceland interior (link in my post above). And I have no idea how much food you might need to carry, your estimate of 20 kg might be rather light. I think I had over 40 kg on my Nomad at the start on my Iceland trip, at that time I had over two weeks of food on the bike. If you might need to carry weeks of food or large quantities of water or both, then the extra weight capacity of the Nomad may be pertinent.
So, you will have a difficult choice. I agree with MartinF, the people at SJS could provide good advice.
To point out how heavy duty the Nomad is, the rack bolts are 6 mm bolts, not 5 mm. Virtually all other bikes use 5 mm for rack bolts. (I at one time heard that some Nomad forks were 5 mm but my fork has 6 mm bolts.)
Thorn rates their heavy duty rear rack at 40 kg with 5 mm or 60 kg with 6 mm bolts. Thus when they are using 6mm bolts on their Nomad, that really says something about the weight capacity of the Nomad.
https://www.sjscycles.co.uk/carriers-racks/thorn-expedition-steel-rear-cycle-pannier-rack-black-powdercoat/?geoc=US
-
I've only used the Raven. Mine took me across the Pamir Highway, 4 panniers plus tent etc.
Performance was perfect. I came back thinking about how a Nomad could be better. I guess for carrying more weight over a longer period? But it certainly did the job for me.
I've since taken it on several fly in fly out tours where I haven't carried as much weight.
I did have a very short ride on a Nomad and recall feeling the extra weight of the bike.
Someone told me that if you're on a Nomad and see a tough track you consider taking, you'll take it without hesitation. On any other bike, you'll think twice.
If I get around to a long extended tour, it will be on my Raven with no doubts it will do the job.
Remember Matt, yours is a Raven Tour not the newer Raven, so it's a bit sturdier.
-
I've only used the Raven. Mine took me across the Pamir Highway, 4 panniers plus tent etc.
Performance was perfect. I came back thinking about how a Nomad could be better. I guess for carrying more weight over a longer period? But it certainly did the job for me.
I've since taken it on several fly in fly out tours where I haven't carried as much weight.
I did have a very short ride on a Nomad and recall feeling the extra weight of the bike.
Someone told me that if you're on a Nomad and see a tough track you consider taking, you'll take it without hesitation. On any other bike, you'll think twice.
If I get around to a long extended tour, it will be on my Raven with no doubts it will do the job.
Remember Matt, yours is a Raven Tour not the newer Raven, so it's a bit sturdier.
Good point.
Don't doubt you but what stats are there?
-
Many thanks for the complete and detailed answers to all involved!
The feedback is confusing me ;-) I was quit sure that everyone would
opt for a Nomad as the people at SJS do.
In fact the are many pros now for both the Nomad and the Raven.
It seams that heavier Raven builds are not recommended anymore
at SJS. I have an old Thorn Mega Brochure (2.02 from 2016) where
recipe [E3] is a Raven with sturdy Thorn carriers, Rigida Zak-19 rims
and Schwalbe Dureme tyres. In the actual Mega Brochure (4.01 from
2018) recipe [E3] is a Thorn Nomad with Thorn carriers, Zak-19 rims
and the Dureme...
I will have drops, this is maybe an argument for a short Raven (but
also the 565M Nomad will fit for me perfectly with drops).
Another argument for the Raven is that my plans for the Pamir aren't
in the near future and "mickeg" proposed not to get the Nomad if the
Raven will be sufficient.
On the other hand I am not light wight (74-80, depends summer winter ;-),
I like the "silhouette" of the Nomad, the long chain stays with possibility
of rear only loads and the Ex-Box cable routing.
I have to think about...
Beside the frame tyres and rims are important as well. Any experience
with the Zak-19-Dureme-Combo or do you use an Andra-Marathon-Combo in
any case?
-
Back in 2013, I was debating your choice, renma. At that time, there was a Nomad X available, a slightly lighter version of the Nomad Mk 2. The Nomad 2 was way more bike than I could use, so I was looking at a 590M Nomad X. After looking more closely/realistically at my requirements, though, I decided that the Raven was better suited to what I needed than the "Nomad-lite".
You might ask SJSC if there are any Nomad X frames still around, or perhaps a good used example that might work for you.
-
I am not sure how wide a tire you would want. Someone above (I do not recall whom) also mentioned tire width.
My Sherpa takes up to 50mm wide tires with fenders, I assume the Raven would be the same. The Nomad will take 57mm tires with or without fenders.
You asked about rims. I feel that the Andra 30 rims are too narrow for a tire as wide as 57mm. If you max out at 50mm if that is what the Raven has room for, that could be a good rim. I have Andra 30 rims, front and rear on my Nomad, in part I bought them because I wanted CSS rims. I do not know what the status of CSS rims is, they were dropped from the Ryde website. If you are interested in them, I have no idea if SJS still has any in stock or not.
I am in USA, I built up my Nomad from the frame. When I ordered my frame from SJS, I also included the rims in the order. If CSS rims had not existed, I probably would have bought a different brand and model rim here.
I am not familiar with the other rims you mentioned, I have no opinion.
You said you would use drop bars. Just curious, where is your shifter on your Mercury and where would you put it on the next bike?
You mentioned racks. Since I did not buy a complete bike from SJS and there was no discount to buy a Thorn rack when I bought the frame, I did not get the Thorn racks. I have been quite happy with the Tubus Logo rear rack on my bikes, have used it for most of my touring. It has a very narrow platform but the rack is designed for panniers, not for carrying a rack top bag without panniers. I only use the Logo for touring, around home i instead use a rack that has a wider platform. The Logo also lowers the center of gravity a bit.
And you mentioned rear load only. I tried a rear load with a pretty massive load, maybe 30 kg. And the Nomad did not ride as well as I had hoped. I think front and rear is best.
I am not recommending a front rack, the one I use on my Nomad I am not very happy with. It is not a Thorn.
Perhaps one thing that might help to decide is to firm up your weight estimate that you would have on the bike. Not just your gear, but your food, your water, the weight of the panniers and racks, and have that figure handy when you talk to SJS next. I assume your estimate would vary from one locale to the next.
-
You said you would use drop bars. Just curious, where is your shifter on your Mercury and where would you put it on the next bike?
On the Mercury I use Van Nicholas Rohloff drop bars (22.2mm diameter drop bars, which are joined in the middle) with a Van Nicholas lightweight stem. Used it for more than 10'000km now. No problems so far.
I have to think if I will used it on a Raven or Nomad or if I will use the Thorn 55mm Accessory bar.
And you mentioned rear load only. I tried a rear load with a pretty massive load, maybe 30 kg. And the Nomad did not ride as well as I had hoped. I think front and rear is best.
I am not recommending a front rack, the one I use on my Nomad I am not very happy with. It is not a Thorn.
Interesting! The Mega Brochure says that the Nomad will handle 27kg rear only and the Raven 18kg.
I have used a Tubus Tara for more than 10 years without faults.
Thank you very much for your inputs.
-
My Sherpa takes up to 50mm wide tires with fenders, I assume the Raven would be the same. The Nomad will take 57mm tires with or without fenders.
My Raven Tour is OK with 50 mm wide tyres. It would take slightly wider ones at the expense of mudguard clearance being tighter than I would like. AFAIK the current model Raven will also take 50 mm wide tyres with reasonable mudguard clearance.
You asked about rims. I feel that the Andra 30 rims are too narrow for a tire as wide as 57mm. If you max out at 50mm if that is what the Raven has room for, that could be a good rim.
Andra 30 rims work OK with 50 mm tyres, but if getting rims now I would prefer the wider Andra 40. Both are very strong rims.
You mentioned racks. Since I did not buy a complete bike from SJS and there was no discount to buy a Thorn rack when I bought the frame, I did not get the Thorn racks. I have been quite happy with the Tubus Logo rear rack on my bikes, have used it for most of my touring. It has a very narrow platform but the rack is designed for panniers, not for carrying a rack top bag without panniers. I only use the Logo for touring, around home i instead use a rack that has a wider platform. The Logo also lowers the center of gravity a bit.
And you mentioned rear load only. I tried a rear load with a pretty massive load, maybe 30 kg. And the Nomad did not ride as well as I had hoped. I think front and rear is best.
I am not recommending a front rack, the one I use on my Nomad I am not very happy with. It is not a Thorn.
I have Thorn racks front and rear and am happy with them. Not tried any other front low-loader, so can't compare. The platform on the Thorn rear rack is substantially longer than the Tubus rear racks I have used or seen, useful for piling on sleeping mats, tent, sleeping back, etc. A 45 litre rucksack also fitted strapped over the tops of the panniers without problems when I used my Raven Tour for a fixed centre cycling/walking holiday with my wife when I carried most of the luggage to even up our cycling abilities a bit. For really heavy loads I prefer the Thorn rear rack over anything else.
I have had over 30 Kg as a rear-only load on my Raven Tour on short shopping trips, it affects the handling so I wouldn't want to do this on tour. Adding front panniers means you can also increase the weight on the rear while maintaining stability. My own preference is to put heavy stuff (tools, spares etc.) in the smaller front panniers, the rest of the suff in the rear panniers and only use the top of the rack for bulky light items.
My Raven Tour works OK on roads and easy off-road tracks with full front and rear panniers, plus the 45 litre rucksack on the rear rack (not weighed the total with this set up, but enough luggage for two people for a week including walking boots/anoraks, etc. but not camping equipment). One full load I did weigh was 123 kg for everything, including rider.
I wouldn't want to carry any more stuff than that on tour, with the very important exception of extra food and water, probably only necessary outside Western Europe. Weight doesn't matter much on flat tarmac roads, but the lighter the load, the easier it is to climb hills and tackle off-road sections.
The current Raven from Thorn is probably slightly less suitable for heavy loads than my old model Raven Tour, so an intermediate option between a full-on Nomad expedition bike and a modern Raven would be a used Raven Tour.
-
About me, i reckon that the Raven looks like so many other bikes, compared to the Nomad who seems as a prototype.
It is true, Nomad is heavy and extremely rigid without weight, but so much comfortable and stable loaded.
I had a heart stroke for Nomad bike, today i will be curious to try the Nomad X, just to compare how it behaves..
What i love on the Nomad, frame geometry, finishing as brake and rohloff cable passage, welded fastening points in 6 mm for luggage racks, the Rohloff ex-box system, and the yellow color of course.
What i don't like, his weight, about 3 to 5 kg more compared with other bikes of same category, his rigidity to ride without weight.
-
I had a heart stroke for Nomad bike, today i will be curious to try the Nomad X, just to compare how it behaves..
Let us know please.
What i don't like, his weight, about 3 to 5 kg more compared with other bikes of same category, his rigidity to ride without weight.
I don't understand the 5kg.
- A new Raven 530S frame with ST26 fork weights 3680gr (2600+1080).
- A new Nomad 565M frame with Nomad fork weights 4580gr (3240+1340).
- The Ex-Box will add about 100gr.
In case the same components, tyres and rims are used, the Nomad will be about 1kg heavier than the Raven.
-
Regarding weight of the bike versus weight of the frame, I forgot to weigh the frame and fork before I built up my bike. At that time they did not list frame and fork weight anywhere, so I had no data on that. I weighed a bunch of the other parts, but thanks to a Windows update, I no longer have the software to read that data, thus all I can say is what my bike with all the components weighs. And when you are building up a bike to carry a load, you do not want to use lighter components that might be too weak, so I did not consider weight when comparing the components that I was using to build it up. Thus, I have some heavier components.
I tried a Tubus Tara on my Nomad, the horizontal bar was pretty far from horizontal, so I did not use it, used a different rack.
I commented above that:
Nomad is rated for something like 60kg of gear not counting weight of rider. That is a LOT of stuff. Bike unladen is roughly 20kg, which is pretty heavy for a bike.
I have not looked at a brochure on Thorn bikes for a few years. When I bought my Nomad frame in late winter/early spring 2013, the brochure had a table of data on each frame size, I did a screen print of that table and attached it. This was from the sales brochure for the Nomad dated Autumn 2012. I have the size 590M. Thus, with four panniers, handlebar bag and three water cages, the table lists capacity (assuming distributed properly) at 62 kg.
If they have changed the rated weight capacity, I am unaware of such a change. There was a comment above about the X frames, they are listed in the table too, if they have anymore X frames and if you are interested in it, this provides some data.
That table might have an error in the size you are looking at, the 565M, the chainstay length on the table looks wrong to me, as they list it shorter than the 540L. I suggest you get your data from the current brochure.
I have tried my shifter in at least three different locations. When I was going up hill on some difficult terrain on a cobbley road in Iceland, there were several times that I wished I could have taken one hand off of the handlebars to reach the the shifter to change gears, the shifter at that time was close to where you would have it if you use the 55mm accessory bar. But the terrain was so difficult that I could not take a hand of the handlebar to reach over to where I had the shifter, which was inconvenient.
I have several derailleur bikes with bar end shifters, I first used bar end shifters in the 1980s, so I am used to reaching to the end of the handlebar to shift. When I got home from that trip I decided to use the Hubbub Adapter to mount my shifter on the end of the handlebars, thus I can have both hands near the ends of the bars for better leverage when steering in difficult terrain and one of those hands can be on the shifter. I am very happy with this location. I routed my cables differently than most people, I used some V brake noodles to orient the cables further forward. Two photos attached. But as I mentioned, for decades I have reached to that location on other bikes to shift so it made sense for me to use that option. If you have never used bar end shifters, you might not like that shifter location.
-
I have several derailleur bikes with bar end shifters, I first used bar end shifters in the 1980s, so I am used to reaching to the end of the handlebar to shift. When I got home from that trip I decided to use the Hubbub Adapter to mount my shifter on the end of the handlebars, thus I can have both hands near the ends of the bars for better leverage when steering in difficult terrain and one of those hands can be on the shifter. I am very happy with this location. I routed my cables differently than most people, I used some V brake noodles to orient the cables further forward. Two photos attached. But as I mentioned, for decades I have reached to that location on other bikes to shift so it made sense for me to use that option. If you have never used bar end shifters, you might not like that shifter location.
I like your setup as I am using bar end shifters since three decades now.
Thanks for the images.
-
[/quote]
And when you are building up a bike to carry a load, you do not want to use lighter components that might be too weak, so I did not consider weight when comparing the components that I was using to build it up. Thus, I have some heavier components.
[/quote]
@ Renma : that's what i mean about 3 to 5 kg more than other travel bikes.
My Nomad weighs 20 kg dry.
I wanted something robust and indestructible.
It's a bike with remarkable qualities, but it was specially designed to carry weight on any type of paths. It's an exclusive bike.
-
Can I throw a metaphorical spanner into the spokes here?
On a bike like the Nomad that is designed to carry ' extra' weight, is there not a danger of filling her up to the max?
Thereby riding a heavier bike than if on a Raven.
Lots of variables here of course but surely a factor to consider?
I've no access to the stats quoted elsewhere but will always remember that weighty feeling I had when I sat on a loaded Nomad.
-
...
On a bike like the Nomad that is designed to carry ' extra' weight, is there not a danger of filling her up to the max?
Thereby riding a heavier bike than if on a Raven.
...
The solution is to buy small panniers. You do not load up a bike based on a weight rating, but you do fill up the panniers to their volume rating.
There are exceptions, like in the photo where it was quite early in my trip and I had a blue dry bag with overflow behind my seatpost, I could not get all the food into the yellow Ortlieb duffle or in the panniers. But if I had a lighter duty bike, I still would have carried as much food as I expected to eat.
-
"but you do fill up the panniers to their volume rating.
Bought a couple of CarraDry Rear Panniers years ago and boy can you fill them up with "essentials" plus "just in case" & the kitchen sink.
I only use them now on my paper round when delivering magazines.
I now manage with a couple of Ortlieb front panniers on the rear rack which will only carry "bare essentials".
Q E D
-
I carry pretty much the same lightweight kit no matter which bike I take on tour. Cold weather requires more warm clothing and a warmer sleeping bag and pad. Longer trips require a different stove and more fuel.
These factors determine which bike I take and how bulky/heavy my load is...
Location (i.e. near or far away from stores and resupply)
Climate (desert/hot climate touring requires much more carried water; cold weather requires warmer clothing and sleeping bag/mat)
Duration (time between resupply points and time away overall)
Bicycle load capacity as a function of the above.
Road surface (I choose my bikes with fatter tires if the roads will be really poor or if singletrack or cross-country. My bikes with the fattest tires also have the lowest gearing and so are best suited for hills)
I use compression straps so the same panniers can carry small/light loads without the contents rattling but retain capacity for larger loads if needed. If I am really going ultralight, then I use only my Carradice Camper Longflap alone or combined with a handlebar bag. This means I need to resupply with water and food daily or every other day at most and fuel about every third or fourth day with the lightweight stove I carry.
For long duration self-supported touring in remote areas without ready food resupply and hot temperatures where I must carry a lot (26+liters) of water, my 2012 Nomad Mk2 is my bike of choice. It also has dynamo lighting and charging and the lowest gearing of all my steeds and wide (2.0in) tires, making it my ideal expedition bike. Food and water are my biggest variables. Water weighs 1 kilogram per liter plus container weight. In the hottest desert temperatures I drink 8 liters/day plus whatever is required for cooking, so 26 liters is about a three-day supply. Food for a couple weeks at a time is not light even if you go mostly with self-prepared meals of dried ingredients as I do. Once those run out, then any meals purchased at stores will be heavier, most likely packed in pouches or cans. For such long trips away from resupply, I switch from my tablet or spirit stoves to one using white gas, as it burns hotter and more efficiently and I also carry more spare fuel. My Nomad alone weighs 20kg dry, but the weight increases rapidly when water and food are added to my basic load.
People often write to ask me which Thorn I would recommend for a given weight. If they will need to carry the heaviest loads in the worst conditions for a longer period of time, then the Nomad is the best choice in Thorn's lineup. It rides very comfortably fully loaded but is a "lot of bike" and stiff on rough roads when ridden unladen. I found it necessary to swap to a Thudbuster LT suspension seatpost to add the comfort I needed for riding it unladen on rough logging roads, making it a nice ride in all conditions. The Nomad's extra weight -- needed to make the frame robust enough to carry such loads on rough terrain -- makes for a heavier, stiffer bike when used unladen. Most people take one or two longer tours a year and often not in the back of beyond, so it is worth considering how you will use the bike the bulk of the time. I have a stable of bikes, so if I intend to cover a lot of ground (200+km/day) on paved roads, then I usually take one of my randonneur bikes instead, a matter of horses for courses.
I used a Raven Tour kindly loaned to me by Forum member AndyBG for four months in my 2014 double-crossing of Europe. Equipped with 2.0n tires, it rode very nicely even on Bulgaria's brutal backroads. I had no scales to weigh my load, but I probably carried around 23kg in gear and food for my more remote legs of the trip, plus occasionally as much as 8.5 liters/kg of water to get me through historic high temperatures in Romania and Serbia for a total of about 32kg/70lbs. The bike coped well but I think would have been overmatched in really poor conditions if I had carried much more as it just did not have the ultimate load capacity of my Nomad. Compared to the Nomad, it rode comfortably even unladen on rough roads without need for a suspension seatpost.
The current Raven has less load capacity than the Raven Tour I used, a factor worth keeping in mind.
Best,
Dan.
-
...
Bought a couple of CarraDry Rear Panniers years ago and boy can you fill them up with "essentials"
...
I got the rear Carradry about four years ago because I anticipated doing a tour with a rear only load, no front panniers due to a suspension front fork. So, I was looking for more capacity in the rear than my Ortlieb Backrollers offered. To make a long story short, the trip did not happen, so I can't say how the Carradry panniers worked but I still have them.
I am considering using the Carradry on my next tour. I have used the Tubus Logo rear rack for almost all of my touring, but the Carradry do not work well with that rack. So contemplating using the Carradry panniers with the RackTime AddIt rack instead of the the Backrollers on a Logo rack on my next tour.
Decisions. ... ... ...
Logo rated at 40kg, Racktime at 30kg. I expect less than 30kg on the rear rack, but I do like having a rack that is not being stressed.
-
The solution is to buy small panniers. You do not load up a bike based on a weight rating, but you do fill up the panniers to their volume rating.
Agree with that.
I have a range of luggage and bikes.
For day trips I have a Carradice Longflap saddlebag, so I can choose my lightweight Raven Sport Tour or my old derailleur bike if using predominantly good roads.
I use one of my heavier bikes with 50 mm tyres if I plan on significant use of non-tarmac roads or need more luggage.
For longer tours I have a set of Bikepacker rear (42 litres) and Sportpacker front panniers (30 litres) from Ortleib, which is generally enough luggage capacity for me when I'm on my own. I don't like handlebar bags, so for valuables I use a very light rucsack that generally goes in one of the panniers. Tent and sleeping pad go strapped on the rack, as does any overflow food purchased.
I sometimes carry a bit more luggage if on holiday with my wife, but I make sure the total volume is limited by not getting all the possible bags out at the packing stage.
If really necessary, I have a second set of Bikepacker rear panniers that can go on the front, adding 12 litres capacity, or I can strap more stuff on the rear rack.
I recently got a pair of Ortlieb Back Roller Pro Plus panniers (70 litres), which I don't really intend to use for touring. I got these because I need to carry bulky but fairly light stuff (waders, containers and a sample net) for the aquatic fauna surveys I now do. They are also good for my regular shopping trip, where I find it easier to load/unload two really big bags than using my 4-bag touring setup.
-
In the photo, near end of trip and had only one more day of food which fit in a pannier. The only bag on top of the rack in the rear was a tent pole bag for tent poles that are too long to fit in a pannier. I have since cut some tent poles that are shorter when folded, can fit in the pannier.
It was a short five day trip so did not need to carry a lot of extra stuff.