magnatom said:
Maybe I should take a break from the forum (a la Joe24) and come back and troll you till you beg for mercy.....
Cunobelin said:A menial and insignificant crime, compared with the real and ultimate transgression.........
A single pannier!
How could you?
Keith Oates said:Actually riding with a single pannier could save money. With only one pannier the bike would have to lean over to one side to make the balance equal, that would wear the tyre on one side more than the other. When that side of the tyre is getting worndown you could change them around so that the other side is getting most of the wear. Hence double the milage with one set of tyres.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cunobelin said:ultimate transgression.........
A single pannier!
How could you?
Keith Oates said:Actually riding with a single pannier could save money. With only one pannier the bike would have to lean over to one side to make the balance equal, that would wear the tyre on one side more than the other. When that side of the tyre is getting worndown you could change them around so that the other side is getting most of the wear. Hence double the milage with one set of tyres.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
purplepolly said:(edited)
In a perfect world every cyclist would only use single panniers, however I do recognise that sometimes two are necessary in order to carry large loads.
HLaB said:Oh in that case I've offended quite a bit, I better say 2 Our Fathers and 3 Hail Mary's
I like that mans thinking, if only it was true