Author Topic: Saddlebags or rack-packs..?  (Read 17433 times)

Ray 6701

  • SO @ T
    • Tamworth cycling club
Re: Saddlebags or rack-packs..?
« Reply #75 on: 19 March, 2012, 03:05:38 pm »

Fungus, you do realise that to some of us you are tall, don't you?  ;)


Never been called tall before  :D. Cheers Crinkles  :-*
SR 2010/11/12/13/14/15
RRTY. PBP. LeJoG 1400. LEL.




Re: Saddlebags or rack-packs..?
« Reply #76 on: 19 March, 2012, 07:18:12 pm »

[/quote] There's an aerodynamic factor as well if the bag sticks out more sideways than your backside.
[/quote]

Not much chance of that :))

I was after a SQR Tour, or Nelson with Bagman or Nelson with uplifter: whatever doesn't rub my legs wins. Any obvious cons with any of these? My rack pack dissintegrated  (ziptied all the way round PBP) one of the holes on the bike for the rack is knackered too.
When you're too tired to continue you fall off                            

200(7) 300(4) 400(4) 600(3) 1200(1) 1400(1)

Re: Saddlebags or rack-packs..?
« Reply #77 on: 30 April, 2012, 11:53:09 am »
Well i eventually went for the SQR tour. I had 1.5 times the needed seatpost space? but still had to remove the mudguard to get it onto the quick release. I even had to push it hard onto the tyre to get it on. i pondered on refitting the race blade(wish i had).

I took it out on a wet and windy 300 to Cornwall at the weekend. It was splattered by the first control as was i.

 I found the wagging effect not bad if at all. :thumbsup:

I replaced my gloves and found 1 from inside a little damp? may have been too close to the drawstring bit.

Has anybody had similar, or does waterproof me sort of.

I also wore a brand new pair of WATERPROOF altura night vision gloves which stayed not saturated completely for about half an hour.

When you're too tired to continue you fall off                            

200(7) 300(4) 400(4) 600(3) 1200(1) 1400(1)