Burley Nomad cargo trailer--a review
06-28-04, 08:18 PM
#1
Banned.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 616
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I should say at the outset that my comments are directed mostly to the use of a trailer for utility purposes. I do tour, when I have the time, but I have panniers for that. I will say some things about the trailer for touring purposes, too, though. Because the people interested in trailers on this site tend to be in the Touring Forum, this is where I decided to put the thread.
The mission profile: carrying oversized, misshapen, and very heavy items for many miles, trips that would otherwise have to be taken with a car. I wanted to use my bike even more for longer trips out of town than I do now. I already shop with panniers, but it would be nice to have even *more* room, especially to buy large bundles of paper items, electronic things, small furniture, or other household items that wouldn't attach so easily to the bike and rack alone. A secondary consideration would be to use the trailer for camping.
An acquaintance of mine has a Bob trailer, so I am able to make some direct, albeit incomplete, comparisons with a Bob.
The design:
You can find Burley's own description of the Nomad, with pictures, to supplement my account, here:
www.burley.com
The Burley Nomad is a two-wheeled trailer. It is made with aluminum tubing, with heavy canvas stretched from the tubes to form the body of the trailer. Like Burley's child carriers, the Nomad can be taken apart. The sidewalls can be removed without tools, as can the canvas front piece, the tailgate, and the top aluminum crossbar. So, the trailer can be used as a flat bed trailer, a covered fully enclosed trailer, or any permutation in between.
The aluminum and canvas construction is surprisingly strong-- I've already carried heavy items like a generator, weights, and tools without any problems-- yet it is light. Someone worried about ripping the floor with an especially dense or sharp item could cover the floor first with cardboard or plastic. So, though I wondered about it at first, overall I think this is a better design choice than the metal construction of a BOB. It saves weight, for one thing. For another, the whole trailer breaks down without tools (the wheels and axles can be removed from their housing by opening a quick release), and can be packed relatively flat.
Burley claims the trailer weighs 14.5 pounds empty, and I would say that's about right. Burley says the trailer can carry 100lbs, and I'm sure they're right about that. I've carried that much already. In fact, though don't tell Burley, I've slightly exceeded that load for short trips. (BOB, by comparison, is rated only for 70lbs.)
The interior space of the trailer, when fully enclosed, is 32"L x 18"W x 15"H. As I mentioned, though, the top, sides, or any combination can be removed, so these dimensions are not a limit on the volume of the trailer. The trailer has 16" wheels, and sits about 23" off of the ground at its highest point. The overall width of the trailer, including the wheels, is 25".
The cover has a closed canvas strap for blinky, and the trailer comes with right and left rear reflectors. It also comes with a safety flag.
It's an attractive trailer when it's all put together.
Attaching the trailer:
One of the things I like about the Nomad is the attachment hardware. No modifications to the bicycle are necessary. The trailer has a rigid aluminum arm that attaches on the left side of the bicycle, at the junction of the chain stay and the seat stay. Attachment is by means of a plastic hook and hardware assembly, and can be done in less than a minute without tools. The attachment itself is very secure,and has a canvas strap with a clip that loops around the chain stay for a backup.
The trailer-bike attachment swivels in two dimensions-- horizontally, and in yaw. This means that that the trailer doesn't tilt with the bike. So, since the trailer has two wheels, only the bike *has* to be supported to attach the trailer, and the trailer can be attached fully loaded. In fact, the trailer can even be attached to the bicycle with one hand, once you know how to do it. So, you can attach the trailer without there being anything to lean the bike against. You can balance the bike with your left hand and attach the trailer with your right hand. I guarantee you that if you use the trailer much for utility purposes you will find this convenient.
Attachment is better than the BOB, which is more difficult to attach to a bicycle. Since the Bob leans with the bike, attachment requires that at least the bike be supported. The BOB shouldn't be attached fully loaded, either.
One point of worry I have: the yaw swivel occurs by means of what I think is a thick piece of rubber which can take some twisting. (It's inside of the aluminum tubing, so I can't be sure). How long will that last? I know Burley uses a similar design on its child carriers, though, and those have a good reputation for longevity, so I won't worry too much about that. Burley recommends replacing the hitch every five years, so I assume the rubber bit is designed to last that long under normal use. Burley also warns against using the trailer when it's below freezing, precisely because of the worries about this rubber attachment. That would be a fatal drawback, if you wanted to use a trailer in freezing weather.
One especially nifty point is that the trailer can attach to many bicycles that have a large rear rack. I can attach my Nomad to my 520 with its Jand Expedition rear rack, and can even use the trailer at the same time as my Arkel rear panniers. There are no problems.
Burley sells a skewer attachment for non-standard bicycles, like recumbents or others with weird rear ends, but the standard attachment should work with just about any standard diamond frame bicycle, even with a rear rack.
Riding with the trailer:
The trailer rides very smoothly, with good manners, and always in a cooperative spirit. Even if the trailer is *very* heavy, the bicycle's handling is almost entirely unaffected. Because the trailer doesn't lean with the bike, it's possible to rock back and forth while climbing, or to lean easily while turning. Furthermore, since the trailer has two wheels, the trailer wheels bear nearly all of the weight. Burley says that the tongue and rear bicycle wheel bear only 10% of the load, and I think that is about right from my experience. So, even with a 100lb load, the rear wheel bears only another 11.4 pounds of weight (load plus trailer). This makes the heavy use of the trailer *and* rear panniers possible.
Furthermore, the trailer doesn't develop any weird wobble, or an uncertain feeling in the handling with loads over forty pounds or so as single-wheel trailers do. The trailer does develop a subtle push-pull with a very heavy load, as you accelerate, but that doesn't place the handling in any jeopardy. It just provides an extra sensation.
It is the greater stability, the better handling, and the greater weight capacity that are the strongest advantages of a two-wheeled trailer compared to a BOB. These properties are why I bought the Nomad instead of a BOB.
The trailer *can* tip over, though, unlike a single-wheel design. If you take turns at reasonable speeds, though, this is not a danger. Burley recommends you take no turns at faster than 5 mph, but I've taken full turns at 10 - 15 mph with the trailer with no problem. I would recommend turns closer to 10, though, with a heavy load. Snaking turns can be taken faster, of course, and hairpin turns should be slowed for.
As I said above, the trailer is about 25" wide with the wheels, so it is a bit wider than the bars on a touring bike. Thus you have to be attentive when you are clearing tight passages. Still, the width is not excessive, even for riding in traffic (which Burley, no doubt moved by the legal department, says they do not recommend). My frond end is about 25" wide when my Arkel panniers are on the front rack with any kind of load in them. I have never worried that the bike is too wide to be ridden even on narrow roads with my panniers, and I've never found myself wanting to ride through an opening I couldn't, so the trailer is no additional worry in that regard.
In fact, though, the trailer gets attention from motorists, with or without the flag. Drivers give me extra room with the trailer attached. Even if it were wider than what I've ridden with already, I wouldn't worry about it myself.
The trailer is not centered exactly behind the bicycle. It is slightly to the left. This is a good thing, and another example of the thoughtful design at Burley. Riding as you normally would on the edge of a narrow road, with a ditch on the right, perhaps, the right wheel stays on the pavement. This lessens the danger of the trailer leaning off of the road, and possibly tipping over. This is yet another product of Burley's child trailer design, I'd wager.
For very narrow passages, or to reduce the wind to a minimum, the BOB would be a better choice. So, if you weren't carrying much load, as when touring, a Bob might be a better trailer. If you were going to tour on narrow paths offroad, I would not recommend the Nomad.
The Nomad has a waterproof cover, but there are gaps in the canvas of the corners of the trailer. These gaps allow you to manipulate plastic joining clips that reinforce the attachments of the sidewalls. So, the trailer is not fully waterproof. Plastic bags would be the order of the day if there were heavy rain and you had to keep things inside dry.
Overall:
I think the Nomad is clearly a better trailer for utility purposes than the BOB. Its ease of attachment, better handling, and greater weight capacity all outdo the BOB.
I wouldn't hesitate to use the Nomad on a long road tour, either, though here the width of the trailer is a disadvantage compared to the BOB. If you were going on a long road tour, I think the BOB would be better. For dual use, I think the Nomad is a better trailer.
The BOB and the Nomad are about the same price. I got mine for $280, which is what BOB Yak goes for around here, too.
The mission profile: carrying oversized, misshapen, and very heavy items for many miles, trips that would otherwise have to be taken with a car. I wanted to use my bike even more for longer trips out of town than I do now. I already shop with panniers, but it would be nice to have even *more* room, especially to buy large bundles of paper items, electronic things, small furniture, or other household items that wouldn't attach so easily to the bike and rack alone. A secondary consideration would be to use the trailer for camping.
An acquaintance of mine has a Bob trailer, so I am able to make some direct, albeit incomplete, comparisons with a Bob.
The design:
You can find Burley's own description of the Nomad, with pictures, to supplement my account, here:
www.burley.com
The Burley Nomad is a two-wheeled trailer. It is made with aluminum tubing, with heavy canvas stretched from the tubes to form the body of the trailer. Like Burley's child carriers, the Nomad can be taken apart. The sidewalls can be removed without tools, as can the canvas front piece, the tailgate, and the top aluminum crossbar. So, the trailer can be used as a flat bed trailer, a covered fully enclosed trailer, or any permutation in between.
The aluminum and canvas construction is surprisingly strong-- I've already carried heavy items like a generator, weights, and tools without any problems-- yet it is light. Someone worried about ripping the floor with an especially dense or sharp item could cover the floor first with cardboard or plastic. So, though I wondered about it at first, overall I think this is a better design choice than the metal construction of a BOB. It saves weight, for one thing. For another, the whole trailer breaks down without tools (the wheels and axles can be removed from their housing by opening a quick release), and can be packed relatively flat.
Burley claims the trailer weighs 14.5 pounds empty, and I would say that's about right. Burley says the trailer can carry 100lbs, and I'm sure they're right about that. I've carried that much already. In fact, though don't tell Burley, I've slightly exceeded that load for short trips. (BOB, by comparison, is rated only for 70lbs.)
The interior space of the trailer, when fully enclosed, is 32"L x 18"W x 15"H. As I mentioned, though, the top, sides, or any combination can be removed, so these dimensions are not a limit on the volume of the trailer. The trailer has 16" wheels, and sits about 23" off of the ground at its highest point. The overall width of the trailer, including the wheels, is 25".
The cover has a closed canvas strap for blinky, and the trailer comes with right and left rear reflectors. It also comes with a safety flag.
It's an attractive trailer when it's all put together.
Attaching the trailer:
One of the things I like about the Nomad is the attachment hardware. No modifications to the bicycle are necessary. The trailer has a rigid aluminum arm that attaches on the left side of the bicycle, at the junction of the chain stay and the seat stay. Attachment is by means of a plastic hook and hardware assembly, and can be done in less than a minute without tools. The attachment itself is very secure,and has a canvas strap with a clip that loops around the chain stay for a backup.
The trailer-bike attachment swivels in two dimensions-- horizontally, and in yaw. This means that that the trailer doesn't tilt with the bike. So, since the trailer has two wheels, only the bike *has* to be supported to attach the trailer, and the trailer can be attached fully loaded. In fact, the trailer can even be attached to the bicycle with one hand, once you know how to do it. So, you can attach the trailer without there being anything to lean the bike against. You can balance the bike with your left hand and attach the trailer with your right hand. I guarantee you that if you use the trailer much for utility purposes you will find this convenient.
Attachment is better than the BOB, which is more difficult to attach to a bicycle. Since the Bob leans with the bike, attachment requires that at least the bike be supported. The BOB shouldn't be attached fully loaded, either.
One point of worry I have: the yaw swivel occurs by means of what I think is a thick piece of rubber which can take some twisting. (It's inside of the aluminum tubing, so I can't be sure). How long will that last? I know Burley uses a similar design on its child carriers, though, and those have a good reputation for longevity, so I won't worry too much about that. Burley recommends replacing the hitch every five years, so I assume the rubber bit is designed to last that long under normal use. Burley also warns against using the trailer when it's below freezing, precisely because of the worries about this rubber attachment. That would be a fatal drawback, if you wanted to use a trailer in freezing weather.
One especially nifty point is that the trailer can attach to many bicycles that have a large rear rack. I can attach my Nomad to my 520 with its Jand Expedition rear rack, and can even use the trailer at the same time as my Arkel rear panniers. There are no problems.
Burley sells a skewer attachment for non-standard bicycles, like recumbents or others with weird rear ends, but the standard attachment should work with just about any standard diamond frame bicycle, even with a rear rack.
Riding with the trailer:
The trailer rides very smoothly, with good manners, and always in a cooperative spirit. Even if the trailer is *very* heavy, the bicycle's handling is almost entirely unaffected. Because the trailer doesn't lean with the bike, it's possible to rock back and forth while climbing, or to lean easily while turning. Furthermore, since the trailer has two wheels, the trailer wheels bear nearly all of the weight. Burley says that the tongue and rear bicycle wheel bear only 10% of the load, and I think that is about right from my experience. So, even with a 100lb load, the rear wheel bears only another 11.4 pounds of weight (load plus trailer). This makes the heavy use of the trailer *and* rear panniers possible.
Furthermore, the trailer doesn't develop any weird wobble, or an uncertain feeling in the handling with loads over forty pounds or so as single-wheel trailers do. The trailer does develop a subtle push-pull with a very heavy load, as you accelerate, but that doesn't place the handling in any jeopardy. It just provides an extra sensation.
It is the greater stability, the better handling, and the greater weight capacity that are the strongest advantages of a two-wheeled trailer compared to a BOB. These properties are why I bought the Nomad instead of a BOB.
The trailer *can* tip over, though, unlike a single-wheel design. If you take turns at reasonable speeds, though, this is not a danger. Burley recommends you take no turns at faster than 5 mph, but I've taken full turns at 10 - 15 mph with the trailer with no problem. I would recommend turns closer to 10, though, with a heavy load. Snaking turns can be taken faster, of course, and hairpin turns should be slowed for.
As I said above, the trailer is about 25" wide with the wheels, so it is a bit wider than the bars on a touring bike. Thus you have to be attentive when you are clearing tight passages. Still, the width is not excessive, even for riding in traffic (which Burley, no doubt moved by the legal department, says they do not recommend). My frond end is about 25" wide when my Arkel panniers are on the front rack with any kind of load in them. I have never worried that the bike is too wide to be ridden even on narrow roads with my panniers, and I've never found myself wanting to ride through an opening I couldn't, so the trailer is no additional worry in that regard.
In fact, though, the trailer gets attention from motorists, with or without the flag. Drivers give me extra room with the trailer attached. Even if it were wider than what I've ridden with already, I wouldn't worry about it myself.
The trailer is not centered exactly behind the bicycle. It is slightly to the left. This is a good thing, and another example of the thoughtful design at Burley. Riding as you normally would on the edge of a narrow road, with a ditch on the right, perhaps, the right wheel stays on the pavement. This lessens the danger of the trailer leaning off of the road, and possibly tipping over. This is yet another product of Burley's child trailer design, I'd wager.
For very narrow passages, or to reduce the wind to a minimum, the BOB would be a better choice. So, if you weren't carrying much load, as when touring, a Bob might be a better trailer. If you were going to tour on narrow paths offroad, I would not recommend the Nomad.
The Nomad has a waterproof cover, but there are gaps in the canvas of the corners of the trailer. These gaps allow you to manipulate plastic joining clips that reinforce the attachments of the sidewalls. So, the trailer is not fully waterproof. Plastic bags would be the order of the day if there were heavy rain and you had to keep things inside dry.
Overall:
I think the Nomad is clearly a better trailer for utility purposes than the BOB. Its ease of attachment, better handling, and greater weight capacity all outdo the BOB.
I wouldn't hesitate to use the Nomad on a long road tour, either, though here the width of the trailer is a disadvantage compared to the BOB. If you were going on a long road tour, I think the BOB would be better. For dual use, I think the Nomad is a better trailer.
The BOB and the Nomad are about the same price. I got mine for $280, which is what BOB Yak goes for around here, too.
06-29-04, 07:46 AM
#2
X-Large Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: NYC, NY
Posts: 580
Bikes: 2004 Rivendell Atlantis, 2004 Thorn eXp, 2004 Bob Brown Cycles Custom
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Great review... sounds fair, thoughtful and confirms what I suspected- that I'll be using one soon!
Thanks!!
Thanks!!
06-29-04, 05:05 PM
#3
My Daily Driver is a Bike
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Northeast Tennessee
Posts: 52
Bikes: Cannondales T-2000 for Touring T-400 for Commute F-1000 for Mountain Biking
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Just curious . . . Do you notice any extra drag with the nomad?? I have a bob and love it for off road camping trips . . . But this spring, I hooked up with a guy pulling a nomad and noticed that when I was behind him, that the nomad seemed to not track nearly as smooth as the bob . . . Of course I have never been behind my bike/bob either and mine might look similar . . . Good review of the nomad! And the Bob sure ain't easy to hook to the bike while loaded! In fact, its about impossible without a buddy!!!!!! But I love the fact that I can unhook it, and flip it over to make a great table for cooking and eating!
06-29-04, 05:54 PM
#4
Senior Member
Great review! You did a good job of comparing the Nomad design with BOB and single wheeled trailers. In a couple months I might get a trailer for a cyclocross bike, and this gives me something to think about. Keep us updated with how it works.
One thing I like about the BOB trailers is that the bag is seperate from the trailer assemby. In some situations, this make it easier to travel with (like on a bus) than the nomad. The nomad is easy to disassemble, but if you're traveling with gear, that doesn't matter (if the trailer is dissassembled, where do you put the gear when traveling on a bus, train, or plane?).
One thing I like about the BOB trailers is that the bag is seperate from the trailer assemby. In some situations, this make it easier to travel with (like on a bus) than the nomad. The nomad is easy to disassemble, but if you're traveling with gear, that doesn't matter (if the trailer is dissassembled, where do you put the gear when traveling on a bus, train, or plane?).
06-29-04, 11:00 PM
#5
Banned.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 616
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Hi All,
I'll try to answer the questions you all asked.
(1) Extra drag with the Nomad compared to the BOB?
I never did ride my acquaintance's bike *without* the BOB, so I am not certain about the apparent difference in drag. My guess is that there is not *noticeable* difference in road-wheel drag between the Nomad and the BOB. Still, the Nomad's got an extra wheel, so there must be twice the drag. Wheel resistance is very low, so I just don't think that it would be felt by a rider.
The Nomad does make for slightly more drag than without a trailer-- no surprise there. I find I have to pay attention very carefully, or ride the bike and immediately attach the trailer, to notice it, though. With significant weight, then yeah, you know the trailer's there. I think it's got to be about the same with a BOB, though.
I do think the BOB would provide less aero drag, as it is narrower than the Nomad and narrower than the cyclist's front end. A minute or two an hour on tour can add up.
(2) Tracking wobbly compared to the BOB?
I've found the Nomad tracks very well. The BOB is not *truer* in its tracking, I'm sure. That is, the Nomad doesn't slide or wobble, absolutely or in comparison to the BOB. Of course, on the Nomad neither of the rear wheels follows the path of the bike's rear wheel. Just the way it is with a two-wheeled trailer.
A bike's natural wobble at the front end will induce some back and forth in a trailer, of course. Maybe the Nomad's longer than a BOB if you include the tongue, and it is certainly wider, so these facts might exaggerate the back and forth as viewed from the behind a trailer. I don't know about this, though.
I got a Nomad in part because I'm sure it will track true even with a heavy load. Since the bike frame won't bear that twisting motion a BOB makes when it uses the frame to balance itself, there is no risk of a dangerous wobble. So, I think that the Nomad will track better, and handle more safely, with a heavy load than a BOB. I don't think I would trust a BOB at full load on a steep descent, for example, where I would put more confidence in a two-wheel trailer.
(3) Table?
You could use the Nomad as camp furniture pretty easily, though not as easily as the BOB. You could take the wheels off in a moment and sit the thing on its side. Of course, the table would be canvas, not metal, so that's not quite as good. You could put a plate on it, but not a cup of liquid, or the stove.
The Nomad will also stand on its rear end, but that makes it a bit tall for a sit down table.
(4) Travel, with no separate bag?
Yeah, I'd agree that if you were planning on putting the Nomad on a train or a plane you'd have to have an extra bag for your gear. But the trailer itself can pack very flat, and that would make it easier to travel with, and it might even save you some money on baggage charges.
I think I'd want an extra bag(s) anyway, if I were touring with the Nomad, to keep my things organized, and, as I said above, to make sure nothing inside got wet.
Breaking down the Nomad or just removing the wheels might be a nice thing when it comes to storing the trailer in the garage or in the house. With the cover on, it is bigger and less wieldy than the BOB.
Overall, the difference between the Nomad and BOB is almost all determined by the two- vs. one- wheel designs. The two-wheel trailer will bear greater loads more stably than the single wheeled design. The one-wheel trailer will be narrower and thus more manageable with lighter loads. It will also have less aero drag, and, less importantly, less wheel resistance. It also has one less tire to go flat.
The Nomad's an excellent execution of a two-wheeled trailer. I've had mine for a few weeks and I love the thing. It'll carry *anything*: oversized, overweight, you can get it on the Nomad. It has a lot more floor area than a BOB to make carrying many utility loads more practical. You can fit fifty pounds of gardening dirt in the front of the trailer and two twelve packs of paper towels in the back, for example (though you couldn't close the top in the back then). If you want to use your bike for everything from ferrying r.c. aircraft to buying firewood to carrying picnic supplies with chairs the Nomad's got the edge on the BOB, in my view.
Still, if were thinking of a trailer just for touring, I think the BOB would be better. I wouldn't carry that much weight on tour, and the BOB's narrower profile would be a nice thing. (Still, even on tour I would feel more comfortable on longer descents with a two-wheeled trailer. But, on balance, the BOB's a better touring trailer, I think.)
I'll try to answer the questions you all asked.
(1) Extra drag with the Nomad compared to the BOB?
I never did ride my acquaintance's bike *without* the BOB, so I am not certain about the apparent difference in drag. My guess is that there is not *noticeable* difference in road-wheel drag between the Nomad and the BOB. Still, the Nomad's got an extra wheel, so there must be twice the drag. Wheel resistance is very low, so I just don't think that it would be felt by a rider.
The Nomad does make for slightly more drag than without a trailer-- no surprise there. I find I have to pay attention very carefully, or ride the bike and immediately attach the trailer, to notice it, though. With significant weight, then yeah, you know the trailer's there. I think it's got to be about the same with a BOB, though.
I do think the BOB would provide less aero drag, as it is narrower than the Nomad and narrower than the cyclist's front end. A minute or two an hour on tour can add up.
(2) Tracking wobbly compared to the BOB?
I've found the Nomad tracks very well. The BOB is not *truer* in its tracking, I'm sure. That is, the Nomad doesn't slide or wobble, absolutely or in comparison to the BOB. Of course, on the Nomad neither of the rear wheels follows the path of the bike's rear wheel. Just the way it is with a two-wheeled trailer.
A bike's natural wobble at the front end will induce some back and forth in a trailer, of course. Maybe the Nomad's longer than a BOB if you include the tongue, and it is certainly wider, so these facts might exaggerate the back and forth as viewed from the behind a trailer. I don't know about this, though.
I got a Nomad in part because I'm sure it will track true even with a heavy load. Since the bike frame won't bear that twisting motion a BOB makes when it uses the frame to balance itself, there is no risk of a dangerous wobble. So, I think that the Nomad will track better, and handle more safely, with a heavy load than a BOB. I don't think I would trust a BOB at full load on a steep descent, for example, where I would put more confidence in a two-wheel trailer.
(3) Table?
You could use the Nomad as camp furniture pretty easily, though not as easily as the BOB. You could take the wheels off in a moment and sit the thing on its side. Of course, the table would be canvas, not metal, so that's not quite as good. You could put a plate on it, but not a cup of liquid, or the stove.
The Nomad will also stand on its rear end, but that makes it a bit tall for a sit down table.
(4) Travel, with no separate bag?
Yeah, I'd agree that if you were planning on putting the Nomad on a train or a plane you'd have to have an extra bag for your gear. But the trailer itself can pack very flat, and that would make it easier to travel with, and it might even save you some money on baggage charges.
I think I'd want an extra bag(s) anyway, if I were touring with the Nomad, to keep my things organized, and, as I said above, to make sure nothing inside got wet.
Breaking down the Nomad or just removing the wheels might be a nice thing when it comes to storing the trailer in the garage or in the house. With the cover on, it is bigger and less wieldy than the BOB.
Overall, the difference between the Nomad and BOB is almost all determined by the two- vs. one- wheel designs. The two-wheel trailer will bear greater loads more stably than the single wheeled design. The one-wheel trailer will be narrower and thus more manageable with lighter loads. It will also have less aero drag, and, less importantly, less wheel resistance. It also has one less tire to go flat.
The Nomad's an excellent execution of a two-wheeled trailer. I've had mine for a few weeks and I love the thing. It'll carry *anything*: oversized, overweight, you can get it on the Nomad. It has a lot more floor area than a BOB to make carrying many utility loads more practical. You can fit fifty pounds of gardening dirt in the front of the trailer and two twelve packs of paper towels in the back, for example (though you couldn't close the top in the back then). If you want to use your bike for everything from ferrying r.c. aircraft to buying firewood to carrying picnic supplies with chairs the Nomad's got the edge on the BOB, in my view.
Still, if were thinking of a trailer just for touring, I think the BOB would be better. I wouldn't carry that much weight on tour, and the BOB's narrower profile would be a nice thing. (Still, even on tour I would feel more comfortable on longer descents with a two-wheeled trailer. But, on balance, the BOB's a better touring trailer, I think.)
07-01-04, 11:05 PM
#6
contre nous de la tyranie
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Little Siberia
Posts: 564
Bikes: Trek 830, Trek 520, Surly 1x1 fixed
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I made a mistake by getting rid of my child trailer and buying the Burley Flatbed last year. I was able to carry so much more, and with ease using a trailer with four walls and a convertable top. THe Nomad this year looks much nicer than what I saw last year, so I might have waited and gotten that, had I known it would be improved.
Two Ortleib panniers can hold almost anything, so I use these most of the time. When I put >50 lbs in them though, I wish I was using a trailer. I know that I've pulled a lot of weight and never had a problem with either of the Burleys that I've had. I agree that the hitch is very easy to use.
When I save up enough, I might get a Bikes at Work. Ive only heard many good reports from people who use them. Their trailers are built to pull almost any size load.
Two Ortleib panniers can hold almost anything, so I use these most of the time. When I put >50 lbs in them though, I wish I was using a trailer. I know that I've pulled a lot of weight and never had a problem with either of the Burleys that I've had. I agree that the hitch is very easy to use.
When I save up enough, I might get a Bikes at Work. Ive only heard many good reports from people who use them. Their trailers are built to pull almost any size load.
07-03-04, 11:54 PM
#7
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I have a friend that has a bob trailer and he steered me to a garage sale that had a schwinn joyrider child trailer and so I snag it and now use it for grocery shopping, twice so far and I really like it so much better than using the pannier bag.
I notice that I can hold quite a load at least three bags full of food and then let the top collaspe over the food reduce wind drag, rather then leave it up full expansion. I also like how the driver behind me tend to give me more space.
I can unhitch the trailer and wheeled it around the store like a shopping cart. although its a bit wider then a grocery cart, so I had to be carefull not to clip anyone in the ankle. I cant wait to go shopping again! Now all I need is a wife and two kids and i'm off with the trailer! I recommend the trailer over the pannier bags anyday. I have so much better control over the bike with a trailer.
I notice that I can hold quite a load at least three bags full of food and then let the top collaspe over the food reduce wind drag, rather then leave it up full expansion. I also like how the driver behind me tend to give me more space.
I can unhitch the trailer and wheeled it around the store like a shopping cart. although its a bit wider then a grocery cart, so I had to be carefull not to clip anyone in the ankle. I cant wait to go shopping again! Now all I need is a wife and two kids and i'm off with the trailer! I recommend the trailer over the pannier bags anyday. I have so much better control over the bike with a trailer.
07-17-04, 09:27 PM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Plymouth,WI
Posts: 724
Bikes: TREK-520 & 830
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Please bear with my first use of a thread........
Great review.
I've got one of the "way old" red & yellow Burly child totin' trailers and am considering a Nomad or BOB. I've been in e-contact with someone has used a BOB style trailer across continent, his complaints were that the bearings would go bad after about a thousand miles. Any knowledge of this?
The "big" Burly that I have is the two seater which makes it impossible to roll through doorways. Otherwise it's really great to use. I have tipped it over only once, with a loose & shifting load, going too fast through right to left zig zag turns (my falt).
Another good reason that a Burly rides a little left of center is that you can stop along a city curb, put your foot down on top of the curb without smacking the curb with the right side of the trailer. This also keeps you the rider a little farther from the traffic.
I've used this one for everything from groceries to kiddos to dogs to campfire wood to coolers of ice. And yes it's been overloaded several times and still shines. Matter of fact I used to blow out rear spokes on my moutain bike because they weren't heavy like my touring bike's are.
As for keeping stuff water proof in a trailer, wouldn't a couple of canoe bags work?
Great review.
I've got one of the "way old" red & yellow Burly child totin' trailers and am considering a Nomad or BOB. I've been in e-contact with someone has used a BOB style trailer across continent, his complaints were that the bearings would go bad after about a thousand miles. Any knowledge of this?
The "big" Burly that I have is the two seater which makes it impossible to roll through doorways. Otherwise it's really great to use. I have tipped it over only once, with a loose & shifting load, going too fast through right to left zig zag turns (my falt).
Another good reason that a Burly rides a little left of center is that you can stop along a city curb, put your foot down on top of the curb without smacking the curb with the right side of the trailer. This also keeps you the rider a little farther from the traffic.
I've used this one for everything from groceries to kiddos to dogs to campfire wood to coolers of ice. And yes it's been overloaded several times and still shines. Matter of fact I used to blow out rear spokes on my moutain bike because they weren't heavy like my touring bike's are.
As for keeping stuff water proof in a trailer, wouldn't a couple of canoe bags work?
07-04-05, 05:55 AM
#10
Macaws Rock!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 1,513
Bikes: 2005 Soma Doublecross
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
I've had a Nomad for several years. Since I am car-free, it has come in handy lots of times for grocery shopping. I have managed to get the entire contents of a big shopping cart into it, and the bike and trailer handle fine with that kind of load in it.
I had a Bob first, and didn't think it was nearly as suitable as a utility trailer, although it would sure be a better choice for off-road touring.
I lost my flag... I wonder if I can get another from Burley?
I had a Bob first, and didn't think it was nearly as suitable as a utility trailer, although it would sure be a better choice for off-road touring.
I lost my flag... I wonder if I can get another from Burley?
__________________
---
San Francisco, California
---
San Francisco, California
07-04-05, 06:47 PM
#11
Year-round cyclist
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Montréal (Québec)
Posts: 3,023
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
I only have personal experience with the Chariot 2-children carrier. Wider than a Nomad (32.25" vs 25") and sometimes, it makes a huge difference, and the child trailer has more frontal area, hence more drag than a Nomad.
A few comments on tracking and number of tracks
The claimed superiority of the BOB is that its single wheel tracks exactly in the footprint of the rear wheel of the bicycle. That's because the pivot is actually behind the bicycle. It's a great feature in singletrack riding or even on other technical terrain, but having the pivot behind the rear wheel rather than in front of it makes the BOB a little more prone to fishtailing at high speed. Single wheel is also great if you need to manoeuvre your way on a road infested with potholes or in snow. But balance may also be problematic if you want to carry lots of liquids in a BOB, for example.
By contrast, the Nomad and other 2-wheel child or cargo trailers overhang a bit inside curves. It might be a problem if you like to manoeuvre through tight spots – chicanes, for example – but I have driven without problems my tandem bike + trailercycle + child trailer. Riding in the woods may be a problem because you need a 25"-wide road surface; so the Nomad doesn't work for singletrack. And riding in snow obviously means you have to dig three tracks instead of one.
A few comments on tracking and number of tracks
The claimed superiority of the BOB is that its single wheel tracks exactly in the footprint of the rear wheel of the bicycle. That's because the pivot is actually behind the bicycle. It's a great feature in singletrack riding or even on other technical terrain, but having the pivot behind the rear wheel rather than in front of it makes the BOB a little more prone to fishtailing at high speed. Single wheel is also great if you need to manoeuvre your way on a road infested with potholes or in snow. But balance may also be problematic if you want to carry lots of liquids in a BOB, for example.
By contrast, the Nomad and other 2-wheel child or cargo trailers overhang a bit inside curves. It might be a problem if you like to manoeuvre through tight spots – chicanes, for example – but I have driven without problems my tandem bike + trailercycle + child trailer. Riding in the woods may be a problem because you need a 25"-wide road surface; so the Nomad doesn't work for singletrack. And riding in snow obviously means you have to dig three tracks instead of one.
07-07-05, 09:38 AM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 58
Bikes: 2006 Specialized Allez Elite; 2003 Surly Cross-Check; 1992 Bianchi Volpe
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Merriwether
One especially nifty point is that the trailer can attach to many bicycles that have a large rear rack. I can attach my Nomad to my 520 with its Jand Expedition rear rack, and can even use the trailer at the same time as my Arkel rear panniers. There are no problems.
My panniers are REI something-or-others, so perhaps it's just a difference in the construction of the bags? I know that the Arkel connection system is uber-adjustable, so maybe that's a factor too.
My bike is a Surly Cross-Check, but I don't see how that could really make a difference.
Any thoughts?
07-07-05, 10:55 AM
#13
Year-round cyclist
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Montréal (Québec)
Posts: 3,023
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
I don't know how low the Jandd pannier goes nor exactly how high the Burley hitch/arm goes, but I have a Chariot 2-children trailer and Arkel T-42 and GT-54 panniers.
The pre-2003 models end at exactly the quick-release height. Just low enough that the bottom of the quick release tends to scratch and wear out the fabric... and just enough that I had to sew a part of the T-42 after 5 or 6 years of year-round use. The newer T-42 has fully adjustable hooks and sits slightly higher, so it doesn't rub on the quick release. Practically speaking, it means both models can be used sucessfully with a trailer that hitches around hub level.
On the other hand, very low panniers like Arkel's TT-84 won't fit with a trailer.
The pre-2003 models end at exactly the quick-release height. Just low enough that the bottom of the quick release tends to scratch and wear out the fabric... and just enough that I had to sew a part of the T-42 after 5 or 6 years of year-round use. The newer T-42 has fully adjustable hooks and sits slightly higher, so it doesn't rub on the quick release. Practically speaking, it means both models can be used sucessfully with a trailer that hitches around hub level.
On the other hand, very low panniers like Arkel's TT-84 won't fit with a trailer.
07-09-05, 01:45 PM
#14
Waaay Newbie!
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Aspen, Colorado
Posts: 174
Bikes: Old MTB and BRAND NEW Cannondale T2000. Yipee!!!!!
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
What an incredible thread. How do other newbies to touring cope without this forum?
Thank you so much. I have just ordered my nomad for a CO-CA trip in October. I now have full confidence that I've made the right choice. BOB might be better as far as wind resistance, but as that is the only 'plus' that I can find, that relates to me...... I am ready for my nomad. Thanks again.
Thank you so much. I have just ordered my nomad for a CO-CA trip in October. I now have full confidence that I've made the right choice. BOB might be better as far as wind resistance, but as that is the only 'plus' that I can find, that relates to me...... I am ready for my nomad. Thanks again.
08-28-05, 05:26 PM
#16
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Vancouver, Washington
Posts: 13
Bikes: Trek 520
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Merriwether has provided an excellent review here. I wish I had had an opportunity to inform myself with such a review when I began touring two years ago and was agonizing over the grand debate -- trailer vs. panniers. It would have made my ultimate decision much easier.
After much research and queries of other tourers, an important consideration for me to decide on a trailer was cost. A good set of panniers plus racks can easily run into $400-$500. Then I had all those accessories to buy -- tent, cookware, stove, etc. Once I decided on a trailer, then began the debate of BOB vs. Burley. Again, after much research and many questions, I was leaning toward a Burley for most of the reasons Merriwether outlined in his review -- ease of connecting and disconnecting; less stress on the bike frame; greater load capacity; zero effect on handling characteristics of the bike, and so on. But a strong personal reason that pushed me over to the Burley side of the fence was the opinion of a very respected, even legendary, tourist here in the Portland area. Mike S. has had over 20 years' touring experience, all with panniers until two years ago. A friend lent him his Burley, and Mike said he would never go back to panniers. Decision made! Then I was fortunate enough to acquire a barely used Burley on Ebay for $100.
Merriwether's review needs no further comment, but I can't help point out one thing that he did not mention. Regarding stability on fast descents, many of the BOBers I have encountered have stated that above 30 mph the BOB tends to become unstable in the longitudinal axis. Living in Washington state, hills are the norm. As I typically carry 50-65 pounds of cargo in my Burley (still a novice tourer and have not yet mastered the science of minimalization
), it is not difficult to quickly build up speed even on a short downhill. But it seems that the faster I go, the more solid my rig becomes. I've been as fast as 45 mph on one long downhill, and I had no sensation that I was carrying any weight--it felt rock solid and as if I was being propelled. I think I'll try to avoid that kind of speed in the future, but 35 mph is quite common and comfortable with a good load in my Burley.
In my opinion, the two greatest shortcomings of the Burley are lack of weather resistance and unavailability of fenders. The former is mitigated by the necessity of a design that enables easy dismantling for storage or packing. Merriwether packs his stuff in bags. I generally line the compartment with a common garden debris bag--fits just right and it can be used to discard garbage at tour's end. I once rode 65 miles with rain all the way and everything stayed nice and dry. The latter is a different matter. With all the rain we get here in the Pacific Northwest, the top of my Burley gets covered with mud splatterings. I wish Burley or an after-market provider would see a market here and respond accordingly.
After much research and queries of other tourers, an important consideration for me to decide on a trailer was cost. A good set of panniers plus racks can easily run into $400-$500. Then I had all those accessories to buy -- tent, cookware, stove, etc. Once I decided on a trailer, then began the debate of BOB vs. Burley. Again, after much research and many questions, I was leaning toward a Burley for most of the reasons Merriwether outlined in his review -- ease of connecting and disconnecting; less stress on the bike frame; greater load capacity; zero effect on handling characteristics of the bike, and so on. But a strong personal reason that pushed me over to the Burley side of the fence was the opinion of a very respected, even legendary, tourist here in the Portland area. Mike S. has had over 20 years' touring experience, all with panniers until two years ago. A friend lent him his Burley, and Mike said he would never go back to panniers. Decision made! Then I was fortunate enough to acquire a barely used Burley on Ebay for $100.
Merriwether's review needs no further comment, but I can't help point out one thing that he did not mention. Regarding stability on fast descents, many of the BOBers I have encountered have stated that above 30 mph the BOB tends to become unstable in the longitudinal axis. Living in Washington state, hills are the norm. As I typically carry 50-65 pounds of cargo in my Burley (still a novice tourer and have not yet mastered the science of minimalization
), it is not difficult to quickly build up speed even on a short downhill. But it seems that the faster I go, the more solid my rig becomes. I've been as fast as 45 mph on one long downhill, and I had no sensation that I was carrying any weight--it felt rock solid and as if I was being propelled. I think I'll try to avoid that kind of speed in the future, but 35 mph is quite common and comfortable with a good load in my Burley.In my opinion, the two greatest shortcomings of the Burley are lack of weather resistance and unavailability of fenders. The former is mitigated by the necessity of a design that enables easy dismantling for storage or packing. Merriwether packs his stuff in bags. I generally line the compartment with a common garden debris bag--fits just right and it can be used to discard garbage at tour's end. I once rode 65 miles with rain all the way and everything stayed nice and dry. The latter is a different matter. With all the rain we get here in the Pacific Northwest, the top of my Burley gets covered with mud splatterings. I wish Burley or an after-market provider would see a market here and respond accordingly.
11-05-06, 10:55 AM
#17
Newbie
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Amherst, MA
Posts: 1
Bikes: 2005 Tarmac Pro, 2005 Redline Conquest Disc-R, Fixie
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I just wanted to add a few notes about the Nomad I just bought.
I was looking for a trailer in order to cut down the use of my gas-guzzling truck. My main commuter bike is a 2005 Redline Conquest Disc-R (cyclocross bike with disc brakes---great for winter/snow commuting) with an OldManMountain rack in order to clear the disc brake. I looked at a BOB, but because of the extra-large rear skewer required by the rack (about 220mm) it wasn't really feasible. Using a BOB hitch would have required either not using the rack or finding a welder and machine shop to do a chop job to the BOB hitch and skewer.
My LBS had an '03 Nomad sitting in their display room gathering dust, but again because of the big rack and disc brake, the stay-mounted hitch was impossible. The solution was a very simple and very effective.
We ditched the stay mounted-hitch and substituted a Bontrager skewer-mount ball hitch. This required undoing the bolt on the end of the Nomad hitch arm, inserting the Bontrager rubberized plastic ball hitch in place of the Burley one, and voila! I had to wrap the Bontrager part with a layer of frame wrap to fill the extra 1mm, but that was easy. To mount the hitch i simply pulled out the skewer and put it back on, easy since I had about 5mm extra thread already on the end of the big skewer.
I think this solution is even better than the Burley design, and the hookup is effortless. The ball allows really nice tracking/turning and it sits low enough on the axle that I can still use my Arkel GT-18 panniers on the rear rack with plenty of clearance. I also have no worries about trailer-push with heavy loads thanks to the disc brakes.
The best part is that since it was the older model I got the Nomad and new hitch for $180.
I was looking for a trailer in order to cut down the use of my gas-guzzling truck. My main commuter bike is a 2005 Redline Conquest Disc-R (cyclocross bike with disc brakes---great for winter/snow commuting) with an OldManMountain rack in order to clear the disc brake. I looked at a BOB, but because of the extra-large rear skewer required by the rack (about 220mm) it wasn't really feasible. Using a BOB hitch would have required either not using the rack or finding a welder and machine shop to do a chop job to the BOB hitch and skewer.
My LBS had an '03 Nomad sitting in their display room gathering dust, but again because of the big rack and disc brake, the stay-mounted hitch was impossible. The solution was a very simple and very effective.
We ditched the stay mounted-hitch and substituted a Bontrager skewer-mount ball hitch. This required undoing the bolt on the end of the Nomad hitch arm, inserting the Bontrager rubberized plastic ball hitch in place of the Burley one, and voila! I had to wrap the Bontrager part with a layer of frame wrap to fill the extra 1mm, but that was easy. To mount the hitch i simply pulled out the skewer and put it back on, easy since I had about 5mm extra thread already on the end of the big skewer.
I think this solution is even better than the Burley design, and the hookup is effortless. The ball allows really nice tracking/turning and it sits low enough on the axle that I can still use my Arkel GT-18 panniers on the rear rack with plenty of clearance. I also have no worries about trailer-push with heavy loads thanks to the disc brakes.
The best part is that since it was the older model I got the Nomad and new hitch for $180.
11-05-06, 06:24 PM
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,082
Bikes: Trek, Cannondale Tandem, Surly LHT
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Michel Gagnon
I only have personal experience with the Chariot 2-children carrier. Wider than a Nomad (32.25" vs 25") and sometimes, it makes a huge difference, and the child trailer has more frontal area, hence more drag than a Nomad.
A few comments on tracking and number of tracks
...but having the pivot behind the rear wheel rather than in front of it makes the BOB a little more prone to fishtailing at high speed.
A few comments on tracking and number of tracks
...but having the pivot behind the rear wheel rather than in front of it makes the BOB a little more prone to fishtailing at high speed.
Merriweather, thanks for your insightful review. You certainly make many good points, none of which I can disagree. I use my BOB exclusively for touring, and like you said, it's probably superior for that application. It also fits nicely in the vestibule of my tent.
11-05-06, 06:36 PM
#19
-
Thanks for the review.
It seems to me a burley flatbed would work better for mostly utility purposes. It'll haul more weight and volume, plus its about a hundred bucks cheaper than the nomad.
https://www.burley.com/products/trail...?p=Flatbed&i=7
It seems to me a burley flatbed would work better for mostly utility purposes. It'll haul more weight and volume, plus its about a hundred bucks cheaper than the nomad.
https://www.burley.com/products/trail...?p=Flatbed&i=7
11-06-06, 01:05 PM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Southern Oregon
Posts: 208
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Burley Nomad
Very nice review and responses. This type of thread is what it is all about. I started touring, many years ago, with panniers. I then went to a BOB and then to a Burley Nomad. Now I go back and forth between the Nomad and panniers with panniers winning out most of the time. The Nomad gets used a lot around town with shopping, recycling etc. Both trailers and the panniers all have their good and not so good points. The one thing that I do like about the Nomad is that it takes a lot of weight off of the bike so less worry about broken spokes.
11-06-06, 07:59 PM
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,082
Bikes: Trek, Cannondale Tandem, Surly LHT
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Just for the fun of it, I placed a 30# box of kitty litter all the way forward on my BOB and a bathroom scale under the trailer's "drops." The amount of weight on the rear bicycle axel would be about 16 lbs. or less. If I moved the box all the way back on the trailer, the weight decreased to about 12 lbs. And these weights were probably on the high side because of the downward angle. The scale is lower than the rear axel of my bike, so lifting the trailer shifts a bit of the weight more to the trailer's rear wheel.
I only mention this, because it illustrates how much "gentler" a trailer can be on rear wheels. A two wheeled trailer could actually place "negative" weight on a bike's rear axel (not a good idea due to stability, though). Of course, I understand that bumps tend to hammer the rear axel some, but probably less than added weight via other means. Just thought you might be interested.
I only mention this, because it illustrates how much "gentler" a trailer can be on rear wheels. A two wheeled trailer could actually place "negative" weight on a bike's rear axel (not a good idea due to stability, though). Of course, I understand that bumps tend to hammer the rear axel some, but probably less than added weight via other means. Just thought you might be interested.
03-24-07, 09:39 PM
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Houston, TX 77095
Posts: 1,470
Bikes: Specialized Sequoia Elite, Schwinn Frontier FS MTB, Centurion LeMans (1986)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Add the cost of some premium touring wheels to the cost of panniers and you are talking about some serious money. That's why I'm looking a trailers as well.
How about a flatbed trailer simply carrying a large duffel bag? How would that work out for touring? Comments?
How about a flatbed trailer simply carrying a large duffel bag? How would that work out for touring? Comments?
Originally Posted by Supertick
Very nice review and responses. This type of thread is what it is all about. I started touring, many years ago, with panniers. I then went to a BOB and then to a Burley Nomad. Now I go back and forth between the Nomad and panniers with panniers winning out most of the time. The Nomad gets used a lot around town with shopping, recycling etc. Both trailers and the panniers all have their good and not so good points. The one thing that I do like about the Nomad is that it takes a lot of weight off of the bike so less worry about broken spokes.
03-25-07, 12:52 PM
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Plymouth,WI
Posts: 724
Bikes: TREK-520 & 830
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by kf5nd
Add the cost of some premium touring wheels to the cost of panniers and you are talking about some serious money. That's why I'm looking a trailers as well.
How about a flatbed trailer simply carrying a large duffel bag? How would that work out for touring? Comments?
How about a flatbed trailer simply carrying a large duffel bag? How would that work out for touring? Comments?
Another difficulty with a Burly tralier (one of the few for me) would be the spray that comes off of the tires.
12-15-10, 09:08 AM
#24
Micro Rider
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Oregon
Posts: 92
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Love the Burley Nomad trailer
I enjoy camping, however riding with panniers on my recumbent trike can be a pain.
When a group of friends and I when on a week long bike trip that was for the most part self supporting, I thought I should look for something more substantial.
Enter the Burley Nomad.
This trailer has been a great little workhorse for what it is. I couldn't have ask for anything better.
Doug
When a group of friends and I when on a week long bike trip that was for the most part self supporting, I thought I should look for something more substantial.
Enter the Burley Nomad.
This trailer has been a great little workhorse for what it is. I couldn't have ask for anything better.
Doug
