mikhalit

Hi,

I've just assembled a new commuting/touring bike, it's nice and all, but the rear rack mounts are a bit too high. To make it disc compatible, manufacturer has put the rear rack mounts over the disc tabs. That makes the rear rack seat a bit too high.

I am using Tubus Cargo 26", it's sturdy and stable actually. I have tried riding with ~15 kilos in the rear, and there are not issues with stability. But it doesn't look that good. Plus I am a bit concerned what will it be when there will be more load.

Does anyone know a good rack that is not as tall as Tubus Cargo? Would love to hear your suggestions.

Here is the bike:

Cyclist0383

I use the Tubus Logo, which the mounting bar much lower than the Cargo. I used a shim to clear the disc caliper. Tubus daughter company RackTime makes a less expensive version out of aluminum.

MichaelW

Look for a rack designed for 24" wheels. Mine is adjustable and fits this style of high mounts.

fietsbob

You spread the rack wider at the bottom, to gain clearance for the disc brake
caliper, and use spacers around the bolts, to fit them onto lower mounting spots.

alternatively move the rack backwards to make the space for the caliper.

no1mad 

The OP already has a rack, but needs help to either lower it or finding a suitable substitute that won't have as much daylight between the rack and wheel/fender

Grim

I have a Super Tourist by Topeak. the legs have standoffs to clear Disc brakes. I dont have a Disc brake bike though... trade ya! lol

pallen

You might try the Axiom Streamliner road. It has the offset bar at the bottom that might allow you to use the lower mount points (if you have them on your frame). This is a compact rack though and isnt wide enough for a top bag.

https://www.amazon.com/Axiom-Streamli...pr_product_top

fietsbob

nomad1 missed the point. , obviously , the suggestion was just Spread the legs of the rack,
Wider to clear the disk caliper , meaning the guy who put it up so high.

they're are bent out of steel tubing already , anyhow. pry them wider.
add standoffs to the bolts. if you have to buy something someone else made
to do this, check in with Calhoun's, in MN.

Here is a link :https://www.calhouncycle.com/productc...&idcategory=81

bud16415

I’m with fietsbob on this one. I would stick with the rack you have and take off the lower adapter plate swing the rack down and or back and set it level about an inch or less above the fender and then make a new adapter plate to suit the distance from the lugs on the bike to the pair of holes on the rack. I know many people don’t have the skills or tools to do such a mode but a cardboard mock up could be made of what you would need and see if you can find someone to make it for you. Hardware stores sell flat aluminum bar stock that cuts easily with a hacksaw and can be bent pretty easy in a vice with a hammer and a wood block and hand drill the holes. I have done quite a few racks and they look and work so much better when as low as you can get them.

Burton

I'm also going to agree with fietsbob. In fact I have a hard time believing the rack was ever intended to be installed in that manner. You had no issues giving the front rack priority to the mounting points nearest the axle and using the upper mounting points for the fenders - suggest you use the same approach in the back

hopperja

Will the Jandd disc brake adapters allow you to mount it down where the fenders are screwed on?

Bike Hermit

I like the Nitto R-15. The lowers stays are adjustable. I use it touring and it is very solid. Made out of steel so it is durable, but not inexpensive.

Schwinnrider

I'm confused. Does the OP's frame really have the rack eyelets that high up on the seatstays, or is he utilizing some other mount? Is this sort of situation what disc-specific racks are designed for?

fietsbob

Since the OP likely has big shoes, rearward, as well as lower, may be the way to go..

custom made lower mounts, and extra long struts on top.

hopperja

In my opinion, it doesn't matter if he has high rack eyelets. His picture clearly shows he has low fender eyelets. The Jandd adapters I previously mentioned will allow him to mount the rack to the lower fender eyelets with the fender stays sandwiched in there. This would leave the rack eyelets unused, but who cares?

mikhalit

thank you all for your replies!
i think i shall explain my desire to use the upper mounts a bit better. I will make some pictures and get back to you.

mikhalit

--

fietsbob

Anyhow, i"d say ..
someone with a modicum of brazing skills, a torch and a length of 10mm/3/8" steel tubing
can make a rack just as you may wish.

perhaps even modify the one you have for a unique situation..

mikhalit

Long story short, managed with a workaround, still not 100% suitable.
Question: Do you think rear mounts with standoffs are strong enough for long tours on shaky roads with ca. 15 kilos/33 lbs of gear/food/water?

Now the long version, with photos:

First of all, I have managed to lower the existing rack by flipping the extensions upside down. Now it sits ca. 6cm lower, just as I'd do it in the best case, see the picture below:



However such a workaround created another problem, there is barely enough of heel clearance now. It's ridable, but i do hit the panniers every once in a while. It would be Ok for a smaller person, but (eh, like always) not for me.

I do need a lot of heel clearance, i have 205mm long cranks and wear shoes size 51 EUR/16 US.

The idea to move the rack rearwards was the first one i've thought of, seems very logical. In fact, if there were no upper mounts i'd just do it without hesitation.

But the upper mounts seem to be much stronger than the lower ones in the rear. The seatstays contact area of the upper braze-ons is at least twice as large.

Upper mounts:



Lower mounts:



Upper mounts seem to be much stronger, I can put sufficiently longer bolt through it.

Now I need your opinion, is the rear mount strong enough to hold a lot of luggage on shaky roads? Won't standoffs increase the leverage and the chance of mounts failure?
I see many people praising their steel frames for being able to repair the cracked rack mounts in the field. But I just want to avoid that if i have a chance.

PS. I have no chance to customize the rack right now, except for DIYing new extension plates. Got instruments and material some time ago (I saw the problem coming) but sooo little time..

no1mad 

Just a thought, but maybe you might consider switching to a Carradice saddle bag?

Out of curiousity, how long are your chainstays?

ivan_yulaev

My gut feel is that the difference in mount strength is a wash. The lower mounts have less contact area but appear to be integral with the drop-outs, whereas the top mounts have lots of contact area but appear brazed on.

I would not use standoffs. That seems very scary, for the reason you mentioned

Worst comes to worst, you might be sweating for no reason. I doubt have having your luggage 3" higher will make a huge difference in handling. Just pack the bags with the heavy stuff at the bottom, problem solved?

mikhalit

no1mad, about 470mm. Funny, finally a frame long enough, but old problems are still there. I lack only about an inch currently, I think i shall overcome this rack problem. These are consequences of being out of cash, and not able to get a custom build.

Ivan, the lower mounts were brazed on as well, i really fear they can fail under weight. The bike is not just a commuter, but a tourer as well. And I must admit, elevated rack is completely Ok for flat terrain and moderate loads. But when I climb out of seat with groceries (big family = heavy bags) or touring there is some waving in the rear that i'd like to get rid of.

no1mad 

You might want to shoot Wayne at the touringstore an e-mail about your situation. He's got some fit solutions that may or may not work for you. Until you get a definitive answer from him (or other qualified person with specific product knowledge), you basically have 3 options, IMO:

1. Keep the current rack up higher to avoid heel strike, but pack lighter to compensate.
2. Keep the rack, use a trunk bag for commuting, but get a Bob Yak trailer for touring/grocery runs.
3. Get a different rack that is designed for disc brakes and maybe still have to deal with heel strike.

mikhalit

Here is my latest attempt to gain some heel clearance, thought i'd share. I used Madison Ridge rack without its adjustable legs, with the Tubus extension plates instead.



I got the idea from mtbr forums, someone uses it on his fatbike. I am quite happy with how far back it sits now, the height is also fine, there is even some room for lowering it if I want to do some more drilling.

For a test I loaded about 20 kilos/45 lbs in the panniers and did some climbing out of seat leaning the bike a lot. I must say that lowering the rack improves stability in comparison to my initial setup, but the new rack feels a bit flimsy after Tubus Cargo. It's made of aluminium, so less options for repairing it in the field. Compromises... Looking at the tout terrain integrated racks design now...

Grim

Id try the lower mounts where the fender is with the bracket mounted normally to get the clearance on the caliper. It looks plenty strong to me. As strong as any of the 70's and 80's steel frames I have including the Fuji Touring III.

I have seen the upper mount used for the fender stays. Its high enough you don't have to put any funky bends in them. I believe one of the trek city bikes with disc is set up that way.