jignall

I'm making my first tour in September (Italy for two weeks) and am looking for the best pair of panniers to get. While first tour is credit card, I want panniers that give me flexibility to increase load, etc...for future tours. I've narrowed my choices to the Ortlieb Bike Packer Plus and Arkel GT-54. I know the basic pros and cons (Ortlieb's pros: are waterproof, have easier attachment mechanism, one big pocket allows load to settle in easer: cons: waterproof can work against you, no pockets); Arkel GT-54 (pros: pockets, very good design overall, well constructed: cons: limited waterproofing, more difficult attachment mechanism).

The biggest issue I'm wrestling with is capcity. Ortliebs speced at 2441 cu. in. while Arkels are 3300 cu. in.. That's a considerable difference. Does anyone have any experiences with both panniers that could give me an opinion as to whether this capacity difference truly plays out. Also, any other insight in helping me make a decision on which one to choose would be great.

Thanks in advance.

john bono

I have the sport packer, and I love the thing. The mounting system is simply awesome. It takes about two seconds to mount on a rack, and about one second to remove, and once it is in place it is locked on tight. A damn good pannier.

The Smokester

I just went through the same tradeoffs when I retired my 30+ year old Bellwether Panniers. Here is my analysis. I am showing my biases in comments after each attribute.

- Alleged Volume: Packer Plus 2410 cu; GT54 3300 cu. Comment: Both more than adequate volume for me. In fact the Arkel T42 may be a fairer comparison with the Packer Plus. No advantage for me.
- Weight: Packer Plus 68.8 oz = 4.3 lb; GT54 6.6 lb. Comment: The unloaded Arkel weights more than the packer. The T42 would weight about the same. Advantage to Ortlieb or no advantage with T42.
- Waterproof?: Packer Yes; GT54 No, need extra rain cover. Comment: The Packer, unlike the Roller, is more open at the top and hence can breath so I don't think that this is a problem (it can possibly be with the Roller). Not carrying a rain cover is an advantage. Advantage Ortlieb.
- Style: Packer Single large bag; GT54 Large bag plus many clever pockets. Strictly a matter of preference.
- Attachment system: Packer QL2 mount; GT54 Arkel hook system. I have used both, have had an Arkel partially come off over bumps (probably just my incompetence and can be avoided with better attention to fitting and adjusting the locking mechanism better or with different rack--I use Tubus Cargo) and slightly prefer the QL2 which has never come off on me. Advantage Ortlieb because it is possibly more idiot proof.
- Reputation: Packer The Gold Standard; GT54 Superb. No advantage or maybe slight tilt to Ortlieb because of the much larger user base.
- List Price: Packer US$200; GT54 US$339 (T42 US$189). Advantage Ortlieb except if considering T42 in which case possible advantage Arkel T42. Also, Ortlieb can be found online discounted...Never found Arkel discounted except possibly when haggling in stores.

As I see it the decisive considerations are: Do you need the extra volume of the GT54 or can you consider the T42 which is more comparable to the Packer Plus? Do you prefer one main bag like the Packer Plus or many handy pockets like the Arkels (note the Packer Plus has external and internal pockets but nothing like the Arkels)? Do you like carrying an extra rain cover or want an inherently waterproof bag (a damaged cover can be replaced while a damaged Orlieb needs to be repaired)? The QL2 suspension system may be slightly more idiot proof based on one idiot's experience?

I ended up with the Packer Plus and the Sport Packer Plus but believe that you cannot go wrong either way..

valygrl

I have the GT54's and wouldn't buy them again - they are very heavy, and most of the 'features' turn out to be useless gimmicks. i think they improved them a bit since i got them 2 years ago, but the thermarest pocket and removable butterfly flap pockets and fannypack-pocket just add so much extra weight - i would rather have a bag with a few medium sized external pockets.

also, the internal waterproof thingy have fiddly zippers, so i prefer just packing in my old waterproof liner bags, which double as pillows and laundry bags, and i use 2 per rear pannier, to help keep stuff organized.

the main reason i went with the arkels is the side-opening feature, instead of top opening - for me it is really important to be able to access the main compartments of my rear panniers, even if i have a tent or something lashed on top of the rear rack.

if i got a do-over, i would get the arkel 42's

i used to have some cannondales that were perfect, but they died in a crash

Bekologist

zippers=bad.

Erick L

I had the GT-54 and changed them for T-42. My GT-54 were an older model with a non-detachable tube pocket. To me, they're "too much of a good thing". The T-42 are nearly perfect IMO.

balsingh

Personally, I have the Arkel GT-54s and love 'em to death. However, I think that if I were to do it again, I would get Ortleibs for their simplicity and the fact that they're a worry-free waterproof, meaning you don't have to put on rain covers if need be like the Arkels. I guess I say this because w/ Ortleibs, you're prepared for any weather and don't have to bring and extra gear or have to stop to put the covers on. And I also say this after touring in France for a month this past summer with showers on a routine basis. IMO, I'dd sacrifice a few pockets for a worry-free pannier. Arkels are awesome panniers and do have a ways to waterproof them, don't think just because I advocate Ortleibs doesn't mean their inferior, just different.

Bal

stokell

If you have ever packed something on the bottom of your pannier and can't stand the chaos of unpacking everything to get to it, then there is really no choice. The Arkel.

Add to that the fact that everything including the zippers are top quality and somebody really thought about what tourers need, and included every little detail about quality and design. Arkel!

It's the difference between keeping your possessions in a rubber boot or a Gucci bag.

Miles2go

Since I've used both extensively I guess I'll add something to this opinionated discussion. Here's mine:

I like both pannier styles enough to be running one set of each style. I was using my Arkel E-XR Expeditions on the front and GT-54s on the back. I found something more ideal *for me* though and recently sold the GT-54 set to a friend.

Here's what I do now and why:

Front Panniers: Arkel EX-R Expedition
I carry stuff up front that I access during the ride. My tire change gear rides in the nicely sized top pocket on my left pannier. My toolset rides in the top pocket of the right front pannier. In the outer mesh side pockets I carry stuff that I want to get at real fast like bug spray, bear repellent and bike lube (since I don't want it leaking inside anything). I still have enough mesh to put small things, like leg warms, etc. to dry. One of the front panniers carries my rain gear and an insulating shirt plus my cable and lock. The other front pannier carries food and cooking gear. You can see how this compartmentalization can come in handy.

Rear Panniers: Ortlieb Bike Packer Plus
The big and relatively light stuff that I carry goes in the bigger rear panniers, thereby helping to even out the weight distribution of the bike. Since this is a bunch of stuff I don't access while riding and that I'm never in a hurry to get at, why not put it all in simple waterproof panniers? Tent, ground cloth, sleeping pad, all my off bike clothes and extra riding stuff for future use is kept in these.

Fantastic system for my needs.

geoffs

Ortleib for being 100% waterproof and for the mounting system.
Why would you need 54l of space??
If you have the space, you will fill it and you will have to get the extra weight up the hills.

We use the Packer plus on the back with a medium rackbag and the sport packer plus on the front.
This has enough room for the two of us on our tandem.

Cheers

Geoff

xilios

We will be looking for front and rear panniers in the future as our very cheap AGU's that were using now will need to be replaced and we're following this comparison closely.
We use rain covers for our cheap bags and see no problem stoping for two min. to put them on, our bags are still water resistant (as i'm sure Arkel is) so there is no real rush to stop jump off the bikes and put the covers on. Besides you can see bad weather coming on.
The only real difference than is how easy it is to store our stuff, how easy it is to get to it. All those pockets are good for suntan lotion, toilet paper, locks, food, extra drinks and all those little things one needs quick access to. We also like to use plastic ziplock bags to keep things dry and also apart. Also if there is extra space no one said it has to be filled, besides when passing by a nice bakery its nice to have some room for a loaf of bread and tommorow mornings sweet roll with the coffee.
So for us the best bet would be Arkel. And when our cheap bags finally give out thats what were getting.
cheers