Carradice saddlebags

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

GrumpyGregry

Here for rides.
MacB said:
agreed I do prefer the aesthetics of the Carradice, but it stops there. Yet I still find myself having a battle to stop myself buying the Carradice. Even though I know I don't like buckles, the Tailrider is more aero, has easier access and is easier to transfer between bikes. If it wasn't for the fact I'd prefer not to need a rack, there's no contest.........and yet!

That's why i've gone down the Carradice road.... The rack can go on when I need panniers.

I'm not buying the 'rack bags as aero' arguments I hear, my saddlebag is more aero than I my fat r's.
 

MacB

Lover of things that come in 3's
GregCollins said:
I'm not buying the 'rack bags as aero' arguments I hear, my saddlebag is more aero than I my fat r's.

Agreed, for you, but we're talking my svelte posterior here:blush:
 
OP
OP
ChristinaJL

ChristinaJL

New Member
Darkmarkster said:
but a carradice bagman is going to look so ugly on the back of a carbon road bike but its a shame not to use my new bike and use my workhorse!

well, here's a photo of my bagman on the road bike, so you can see it's not that bad, I don't think so anyway. ;) Although granted I don't have a posh carbon bike. :biggrin:

4487307454_767c8fafca.jpg


4486657773_fe209a3a7d.jpg
 
OP
OP
ChristinaJL

ChristinaJL

New Member
GregCollins said:
That's why i've gone down the Carradice road.... The rack can go on when I need panniers.

I'm not buying the 'rack bags as aero' arguments I hear, my saddlebag is more aero than I my fat r's.

my sentiments too re the rack/panniers. :biggrin:

Tried out my camper longflap carradice on the touring bike full today, and by 'eck it don't half speed up descents. ;)
 

Darkmarkster

Über Member
Very nice! I recieved mine today.Fitted the bagman and put the Barley sitting on it on my commuter bike to test how it looks,looks really cool :biggrin:
Need to get some luggage straps now,what are the extra straps in the bag for that you get with the Barley? Check the photo gallery section for pics ;)
 

GrumpyGregry

Here for rides.
Have just worked out, whilst getting a glass of wine from the fridge, that, if I drop my butt ugly SQR a few inches*, I'd have room for a zip roll direct on the loops on the B17. But I'm going to look and see if I can retro fit a R&K kwik click mount on the bag.

*compact mtb style frame geometry has its advantages when you are 6' 2".
 

MacB

Lover of things that come in 3's
GregCollins said:
Have just worked out, whilst getting a glass of wine from the fridge, that, if I drop my butt ugly SQR a few inches*, I'd have room for a zip roll direct on the loops on the B17. But I'm going to look and see if I can retro fit a R&K kwik click mount on the bag.

*compact mtb style frame geometry has its advantages when you are 6' 2".

Hmmm, I have to agree the SQR does register as a bit of an epic fail. I think the Bagman QR with/without support would be my preferred option. So further questions:-

Greg, if I were to fit a Barley or Nelson with just the Bagman QR and no support would I be constantly banging the backs of my legs?

Do the bags tend to sway and, if so, is it better or worse with/without the support?
 

GrumpyGregry

Here for rides.
Swinging and a swaying is solved by strapping the bag to the seat post; back in the day on my old carradice I use a bit of plastic plumbing pipe to get the 'offset' i.e. the fixed distance from back of seatpost to front of bag, set right. I discovered that it was possible using this to push this back far enough to stop my legs hitting the bag as well. Though I did then have a fugly bit of plastic pipe strapped to my bike. Which I covered in black insulating tape in the end.

Will it 'bang yer legs'? depends on the angle of your seat post/tube and the size of your hamstrings I guess. But the support is surely part shelf part anti leg banging device

Mr Brooks and Mr Carradice need to sit down over a good lunch and develop the Brooks/Carradice QR saddle if you ask me. The frame of a Brooks with the QR loops of a Bagman QR, with the support as an optional extra. There's money in it.
 

MacB

Lover of things that come in 3's
Ok, I get the strapping the bag to the seatpost but if you go down the support route then the bag straps to the support struts. Do you know if the supports have a tendency to sway?
 

PpPete

Legendary Member
Location
Chandler's Ford
GregCollins said:
No! Please no! Have a heart, the SQR has the aethetics of a very ugly thing that fell off the ugly tree hitting every branch on the way down and then landed in a puddle of fugly at the foot of the tree.


Sorry could clarify your sentiments a bit Greg, not entirely sure what you are getting at there :biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:

Just tried my new/old Nelson direct on Brooks Pro saddle loops. Doesn't hit my legs, so I think I'll just get the bolt-on bag loops for the Swift and forget QR systems for now. Futile attempt to save money though, If I'm ordering from Spa there are those TA chainrrings I "need" too.
 

GrumpyGregry

Here for rides.
MacB said:
Ok, I get the strapping the bag to the seatpost but if you go down the support route then the bag straps to the support struts. Do you know if the supports have a tendency to sway?


The bagman I played with in the LBS, I could not see that swaying in a month of sundays if attached properly to the saddle. Not sure I'd strap the bag to the frame of a Bagman, esp a QR one, anyway. I'd use it as a shelf.

fwiw the SQR more than make ups for what it lacks in beauty in rigidity and non swayingness.

MNeanwhile I'm going to ask those nice people at Carradice if one of their lovely ladies can make me a zip roll with a klickfix mount whilst somehow retaining the wooden dowel to keep it semi rigid
 

GrumpyGregry

Here for rides.
hmmm...

according to the official chart

Barley = h15 x d15 x w28 = 7 litres volume
and
Pendle = h18 x d15 x w30 = 11 litres volume
but
15x15x28 = 6.3 litres
whilst
18x15x30 = 8.1 litres

are the pockets on a pendle pendle-ulous?
 

PpPete

Legendary Member
Location
Chandler's Ford
FWIW the side pockets on the Nelson are 17.5 tall x 10.5 wide x 6 deep so just over a litre each. But the basic bag dimensions 21 x 20 x 35 come out to 14.7 as against a rated 15.
But actually the side "panels" of the Nelson are not rectangular. That 20 is measured from the back of the bag (front end when on bike) to the "peak" of a pentagon. The depth at top and bottom of the bag is significantly less, so I reckon the main compartment is just less than 13 and the 2 side pockets make it up to 15.
Then they confuse things by giving the same basic dimensions for the Nelson longflap, and calling it 18 litres.
Goodness only knows what shape a Pendle is .....
 
Top Bottom