Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Framebuilders
Reload this Page >

Fork Eyelet/Low Rider Pannier

Notices
Framebuilders Thinking about a custom frame? Lugged vs Fillet Brazed. Different Frame materials? Newvex or Pacenti Lugs? why get a custom Road, Mountain, or Track Frame? Got a question about framebuilding? Lets discuss framebuilding at it's finest.

Fork Eyelet/Low Rider Pannier

Old 02-07-23, 07:37 PM
  #26  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South shore, L.I., NY
Posts: 7,169

Bikes: Flyxii FR322, Cannondale Topstone, Miyata City Liner, Specialized Chisel, Specialized Epic Evo

Liked 2,262 Times in 1,286 Posts
Originally Posted by etherhuffer
Interesting. I am going to measure my bikes, then head to Recycled Cycles and measure a few there too. The consensus so far has been 165mm most common followed by 180mm. Thanks for measuring, more data is always useful.
My 1998 Miyata City Liner is 150mm from dropout eyelet to mid fork eyelet. Odd size it seems, likely why an Axiom front rack would not install
Steve B. is online now  
Old 02-08-23, 07:38 PM
  #27  
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 309

Bikes: nothing to brag about

Liked 206 Times in 116 Posts
Hearing all of this, it's kind of amazing that a standard location for fork eyelets doesn't exist!
mdarnton is offline  
Old 02-08-23, 08:20 PM
  #28  
Senior Member
 
Andrew R Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 18,250

Bikes: Stewart S&S coupled sport tourer, Stewart Sunday light, Stewart Commuting, Stewart Touring, Co Motion Tandem, Stewart 3-Spd, Stewart Track, Fuji Finest, Mongoose Tomac ATB, GT Bravado ATB, JCP Folder, Stewart 650B ATB

Liked 4,067 Times in 2,411 Posts
Originally Posted by mdarnton
Hearing all of this, it's kind of amazing that a standard location for fork eyelets doesn't exist!
For what head angle and fork rake? Many production bike do have a constant eye to lowrider mid blade mount dimension that worked for the geometry and rack the designers were thinking of. But a custom builder will want what works for the one bike they are building, given the geometry and rack they are working with. A lot of variables to balance. Frame building at it's better levels is not a plug and play endeavor.

Now rack making companies will want a simple fit standard and do that. (Who here remembers Blackburn's SS1,2 and 3 and how they left the market?) but the rack guys don't make the bike. Andy
__________________
AndrewRStewart
Andrew R Stewart is offline  
Old 02-08-23, 09:46 PM
  #29  
Old fart
 
JohnDThompson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,926

Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.

Liked 3,541 Times in 2,003 Posts
Originally Posted by mdarnton
Hearing all of this, it's kind of amazing that a standard location for fork eyelets doesn't exist!
Yeah, well. At Trek, we worked directly with Blackburn to source racks for our touring frames. It probably helped that Tom French at Blackburn was a former Trek employee.

If you're adding rack mounts as an aftermarket thing, you really need to have the rack in hand to know where to put the mounts.

Last edited by JohnDThompson; 02-08-23 at 09:49 PM.
JohnDThompson is offline  
Old 02-09-23, 08:15 AM
  #30  
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 309

Bikes: nothing to brag about

Liked 206 Times in 116 Posts
Then one might ask why put in these fittings at all, since not putting them to a standard makes them relatively useless? "Let's drill some holes in your bike, but we'll make sure nothing can use them." Sure rakes, etc, are different, but if everyone got together and tried, I bet a useful system could be worked out. The point is that no one has even tried.

Originally Posted by Andrew R Stewart
For what head angle and fork rake? Many production bike do have a constant eye to lowrider mid blade mount dimension that worked for the geometry and rack the designers were thinking of. But a custom builder will want what works for the one bike they are building, given the geometry and rack they are working with. A lot of variables to balance. Frame building at it's better levels is not a plug and play endeavor.

Now rack making companies will want a simple fit standard and do that. (Who here remembers Blackburn's SS1,2 and 3 and how they left the market?) but the rack guys don't make the bike. Andy
mdarnton is offline  
Old 02-09-23, 09:20 AM
  #31  
Randomhead
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,691
Liked 3,908 Times in 2,664 Posts
Good luck totally revising the industry's approach to standards. They can't even agree on thread pitch for through axles.

I always wondered what happened to Tom French. Bevil Hogg recently retired after starting Kestrel and a couple of medical equipment companies.
unterhausen is offline  
Old 02-09-23, 09:56 AM
  #32  
Senior Member
 
Andrew R Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 18,250

Bikes: Stewart S&S coupled sport tourer, Stewart Sunday light, Stewart Commuting, Stewart Touring, Co Motion Tandem, Stewart 3-Spd, Stewart Track, Fuji Finest, Mongoose Tomac ATB, GT Bravado ATB, JCP Folder, Stewart 650B ATB

Liked 4,067 Times in 2,411 Posts
Originally Posted by mdarnton
Then one might ask why put in these fittings at all, since not putting them to a standard makes them relatively useless? "Let's drill some holes in your bike, but we'll make sure nothing can use them." Sure rakes, etc, are different, but if everyone got together and tried, I bet a useful system could be worked out. The point is that no one has even tried.
We install fittings that do work and there have been some standards that have sort of been agreed on (64mm between bottle cage bolts as example). But as Eric says it's like herding cats. I've followed the various standardization attempts over the 4+ decades dealing with rims/tires, thread forms, clamping diameters and more. The lack of these standards is some of what drove Howard Sutherland to create the first Sutherland's Manual.I have watched how reluctant people (companies, national industries/interests) are to change, to lose the value of their "way" and suffer the cost of having to do things another way. "We can use our rack dimensions and you have to stop using yours..."

My pipe dream of standard mounting points involves autos. I wish there was a standard roof rack mounting point pattern every auto had. Think how much easier it would be to than buy and install your roof top bike rack. I suspect most here will say how unlikely my dream is. Andy
__________________
AndrewRStewart
Andrew R Stewart is offline  
Old 02-09-23, 11:02 AM
  #33  
Randomhead
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,691
Liked 3,908 Times in 2,664 Posts
When did Sutherland give up? The last one I can find reference to (granted I didn't look too hard) was published in 1994 and was 3" thick.
I imagine it would look like an old-style encyclopedia at this point since the industry just gave up for the most part.
unterhausen is offline  
Old 02-09-23, 06:47 PM
  #34  
Senior Member
 
Andrew R Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 18,250

Bikes: Stewart S&S coupled sport tourer, Stewart Sunday light, Stewart Commuting, Stewart Touring, Co Motion Tandem, Stewart 3-Spd, Stewart Track, Fuji Finest, Mongoose Tomac ATB, GT Bravado ATB, JCP Folder, Stewart 650B ATB

Liked 4,067 Times in 2,411 Posts
I thought that Sutherlands did enter the on line era but by the early 2000s other sources of info seemed to become more common so I didn't need to look up stuff in the Manual too often any longer. Andy
__________________
AndrewRStewart
Andrew R Stewart is offline  
Old 02-09-23, 07:06 PM
  #35  
Randomhead
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,691
Liked 3,908 Times in 2,664 Posts
Sheldon probably killed them
unterhausen is offline  
Old 02-10-23, 07:17 PM
  #36  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
etherhuffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: West Seattle
Posts: 1,464

Bikes: Surly Long Haul Trucker,81 Fuji Gran Tour SE, 83 Fuji S12S LTD, Voyageur 11.8 chrome, Raleigh R300 Touring, Voyageur 11.8

Liked 551 Times in 239 Posts
So, Being the OP on this one, I have learned way more than I wanted to know! And just after I said that, how about any standards for handlebar bag supports? Some use p clamps, some use canti mounts, etc. Again it would matter what rack, as a diagonal support from fork to rack determines how level the rack is. Uff da!
etherhuffer is offline  
Old 02-10-23, 08:26 PM
  #37  
Senior Member
 
Andrew R Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 18,250

Bikes: Stewart S&S coupled sport tourer, Stewart Sunday light, Stewart Commuting, Stewart Touring, Co Motion Tandem, Stewart 3-Spd, Stewart Track, Fuji Finest, Mongoose Tomac ATB, GT Bravado ATB, JCP Folder, Stewart 650B ATB

Liked 4,067 Times in 2,411 Posts
Sorry, no bar bag info from me. All my bar bags end up behind my seat. Andy

__________________
AndrewRStewart
Andrew R Stewart is offline  
Old 02-11-23, 08:20 AM
  #38  
Randomhead
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,691
Liked 3,908 Times in 2,664 Posts
Originally Posted by etherhuffer
And just after I said that, how about any standards for handlebar bag supports?
It's nowhere near standard, but there are a lot of bikes with a mid-fork mount at 140mm below the brake hole through the fork crown. Obviously, brake bosses are going to go wherever they go so the brakes can be mounted.
unterhausen is offline  
Old 02-26-23, 04:13 PM
  #39  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 119
Liked 17 Times in 16 Posts
Originally Posted by mdarnton
I have spent some time on this problem. The first conclusion I came to was that the mid-fork mount isn't really weight-bearing. It keeps the rack from tipping forward or back, that's about it. My bike doesn't have these holes, but it has a steel fork and I bought threaded inserts to install instead of using the (Axiom) u-clamps, but then decided to look around some more.

At that point I found Pelago racks. They come in steel. They mount on the dropout eyelet and the fork crown. You can get a small, medium, or large (pizza) platform for the top, which I really like! (Got the medium). Their low-rider rig is in the form of replacement legs for the normal, non-bag mounting platform rack, and they use the same fork-end holes, no mid fork mount at all. Not everyone has the low-rider accessory legs--you have to look around.

So what you get is a nicely-designed steel rack, securely mounted, with your choice of platform sizes, and a low-rider below that. All for a pretty reasonable price. And you don't have to drill any holes in your steed.
Thanks for the review on the Pelago rack and lowrider combo. I'm runing a front VO rack for a basket on top of Tubus Tara lowrider and it's kinda clunky. I like the look of Pelago but a little turned off it doesn't use the actual lowrider brazeon mounting point! Are you running your Pelago with both a top and lowrider load? How's it handle?
Smitty2k1 is offline  
Old 02-26-23, 05:26 PM
  #40  
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 309

Bikes: nothing to brag about

Liked 206 Times in 116 Posts
I'm just using the top platform at this point. For that it's been incredibly stable. For instance the mount to the fork-top brake hole isn't a thin piece of sheet steel but a fabricated piece of real steel that's stiff. I like that the weight rests on the fork end. Most of the lowriders I've seen don't use the fork middle mounts for anything but stabilization, not weight, and don't do that job well at all, but this one skips that problem entirely.
mdarnton is offline  
Likes For mdarnton:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Your Privacy Choices -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.