JeffS

I've never actually held an Ortlieb pannier to know what the size is. I'm looking at either the sport or bike packer. Thoughts?

I have size 48 shoes, so heel strike is always a concern. I'm thinking one of each would be ideal (one sport for normal days, adding a larger for grocery trips). Can't do that though... I guess I'm just wondering what others are using.



Also, has anyone heard what the 2009 redesign of these bags will bring? I hate buying at the end of a style.

Bekologist

you definetly want the rollers versus the packers for around town use. the front rollers are about the size of a paper grocery bag and near perfect for city and commuting use.

JeffS

What advantages do the rollers have? - other than price.

NeezyDeezy

Essentially none - unless you'll be completely submerging the bags in a pool of water

In fact, the closure system of the rollers reduces available space and is, in my opinion, less convenient.

Your actual question pertained to the question of size, not type, so I'll try to answer: it all depends on how many groceries you get. I can't quite fit 100% of all of the food I eat in a week (4 meals a day) in my two sport packers, but I can fit it in my two bike packers.

Nobodyetal

I've got the Bike Packers - I really like them, and the fit a ton of stuff.
Heel strike has not been an issue as they can be configured to ride on the very back of the rack at an angle if necessary (this has not been necessary on my bike, my shoes are size 44 I think).
I can fit my laptop, laptop AC adapter, mouse, lunch, spare tubes, pump, tire levers, etc in one and have it be mostly full - I can roll an entire week's worth of work clothes (with one pair of shoes) into the other. If I have to.
Most times they have more room than I need just with one. But I'm fine with that. Leaves space for running errands on the way home (yesterday I hit the music store, Performance, and the hardware store on the way home).

Never been grocery shopping with them.
Never tried the Rollers.
YMMV

Hope that helps,

zoltani

The benefit to the rollers is the fact that you can leave the roll closure open and really stuff it full of stuff (as long as it is not raining). This increases the capacity a great deal, and will definitely fit more stuff than the packers.

Boston Commuter

I have the Front Rollers. They're big enough for commuting and errands. For my purposes I thought the Back Rollers were overkill.

I like the roll-top closure, it's easy to use. If the Rollers are ever too stuffed full to roll down, you could just buckle the center strap over the top.

As for the roll-top end buckles (I hope that's clear, if not look at a photo) -- it's a pain to buckle them to the included shoulder strap and hook it through the clip on the front. So just remove the strap and buckle the ends to each other over the top like a canoe dry bag. Not really necessary to buckle the ends at all unless it's raining.

Ortlieb Roller panniers are very light for their volume, and not a drop of water gets in even when it's pouring. Great investment.

Bekologist

I've experimented with both on commutes and bike tours for more than 10 years and the rollers are much, much more convenient for use around town.

The rollers are way easier to use for commuting purposes. Keep top strap on, just fold over and go, when you get to your destination unclip and lift like shoulder bag for shopping. Stopping at a coffeeshop, want to toss a magazine in, grab a letter to mail, or put your shell away? The rollers are accessible when loosely rolled to provide a secure pannier but open enough for use as a grab and go basket.

with the packer styles, you will ALWAYS, and I mean ALWAYS be futzing with the tunnel collar and the top lid and the buckles. Great for camping and packing/unpacking the bike once a day, and securing big loads tightly on a bicycle but a pain for city use.

trust me on this one, get rollers for city use.

NeezyDeezy

Respectfully, this is enormous exaggeration. If there is a difference to you, it will be a small one, and it could go either way.