Do I put the rack back on?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
When I first started commuting by bike I used a rucksack and after about a month or so switched to using a rack and panniers and it's been the same ever since. Cleaning the bike at the weekend I took the rack off and thought I'll use the rucksack a go for a week.

Well it's the end of the week now and apart from a sweatier back, even though the rucksack doesn't sit directly on the back, I've really felt the difference on the back of the bike and as a whole it just feels livelier and more responsive, especially on the hills.

I'll be in the garage again this weekend doing a bit of fettling so the question really is do I put the rack back on?
 

gouldina

New Member
Location
London
andylaw79 said:
When I first started commuting by bike I used a rucksack and after about a month or so switched to using a rack and panniers and it's been the same ever since. Cleaning the bike at the weekend I took the rack off and thought I'll use the rucksack a go for a week.

Well it's the end of the week now and apart from a sweatier back, even though the rucksack doesn't sit directly on the back, I've really felt the difference on the back of the bike and as a whole it just feels livelier and more responsive, especially on the hills.

I'll be in the garage again this weekend doing a bit of fettling so the question really is do I put the rack back on?

I prefer rucksacks - at least the Deuter air comfort type which come off your back. I hate faffing around taking panniers on and off and I don't like the weight distribution.
 

Norm

Guest
I would. Even a low-speed spill can be turned into something nasty if you are wearing a rucksack.
 

Brahan

Über Member
Location
West Sussex
Hey andylaw - exactly the same as me. I made a big deal about, 'needing panniers' and enjoyed using them tbh. There was a certain satisfaction in scalping a skinny racer type whilst I was fully loaded :biggrin:

Then I took them off and reverted back to the rucksack and sweaty back and since then my panniers and rack have been gathering dust in the shed.

I don't think I'll really bother putting them back on either, as you have already said - the bike feels better and less sluggish.
 

biking_fox

Legendary Member
Location
Manchester
I also prefer Rucksack - for just the reasons stated: bike handling.

I do have a rack fitted, because it does depend on how much you are carrying. If it's more than a pocket, but not too much then a racktop bag works well. More than that = rucksack. Full loading I'd probably goto dual paniers.

Even a low-speed spill can be turned into something nasty if you are wearing a rucksack.

I found the opposite - a low speed spill onto my rucksack meant the rucksack got beat up, and I was unmarked.
 

Amanda P

Legendary Member
It also depends on how much you carry, how much that varies and how much capacity you want. You can comfortably carry a lot more stuff in panniers than in a ruscack.

If you need to carry something unexpectedly, you can always bungey a carrier bag onto your rack. Hard to do if you don't have a rack fitted.

You can always leave the rack on and be able quickly to choose which you use. You might cycle to work with your work stuff in the rucsack and empty panniers, then do the shopping on the way home, filling the panniers.
 

Moodyman

Legendary Member
I prefer a rack and pannier as my commute is 12 miles one way with significant climbs. I carry quite a bit so it's nice to keep the weight off my back and to avoids the sweaty back.

I would prefer the backpack over shorter distances. It's more convenient and I don't need to leave it permanently attached to the bike like I do with the pannier.
 

BentMikey

Rider of Seolferwulf
Location
South London
This is perhaps the ultimate "pannier", a tailbox. Looks great, has virtually no effect on handling, makes the bike faster, and can carry advertising.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ls-mike/3878648564/in/set-72157611214389627/
 

gouldina

New Member
Location
London
Moodyman said:
I prefer a rack and pannier as my commute is 12 miles one way with significant climbs. I carry quite a bit so it's nice to keep the weight off my back and to avoids the sweaty back.

I would prefer the backpack over shorter distances. It's more convenient and I don't need to leave it permanently attached to the bike like I do with the pannier.

Agreed. I think distance is the decision-maker. Longer = pannier, shorter = rucksack.
 

StuartG

slower but no further
Location
SE London
Is the handling to do with the type of bike you have? A tourer should feel more comfortable with racked load, a racer should not.

Having said that I use a rucksack on my Galaxy if I'm just popping down to the shops for a loaf. Wouldn't dream of going any distance with one though ... rack stays on all the time.
 

darthpaul

Well-Known Member
Location
Bristol
So dont carry a U lock in the bag? is that not what the frame clamp is for? I have been riding with a rucksack for 18 months and has a 17inch laptop in, fell off a few times in ice and never come off worse because of the bag.
 
Top Bottom