Ride_Fast

Would it be better to carry weight on yourself or on the bike?

Altimis

Extra weights on bike have less effects than extra weights on body because bike did carriers jobs for you.

So you don't expense your energy for carrying extra loads, the bike did it for you instead. You just simple tires less.

CliffordK

I think I've seen a question like this before, but I don't remember the conclusion.

I'd vote for extra body weight.

One has to specify... lean/muscular body weight vs blubber.

However, even if it is mostly fat, a person carrying the extra fat also tends to be just a little stronger than someone who is lighter weight, in part due to passive exercise from the extra weight.

Also, if one is standing while pedalling, then the added weight on the pedals may well help some.

Machka 

If the difference is between wearing a backpack and using panniers ... I prefer to use panniers.

europa

The bike works for me, I don't work for the bike. Panniers or other forms of bags

jpescatore

Same here, and same answer for water bottles vs. Camelbak water backpacks.

If the question is "(a) spend $$$ on lighter bike or (b) be less overweight personally" I think (a) is more fun, (b) is more effective...

indyfabz

It depends.

Maelochs

I carry lots of extra weight on the body----so much so that I need panniers if I need to carry heavy stuff beyond myself.

pbekkerh

If you are touring the most important part of the whole entourage is your butt. Bad butt=> no tour, no matter what kind of fancy equipment you else have.

When wearing a backpack, you load your butt with extra weight and that can give you serious trouble.

mcours2006

If you carry too much weight on your body it puts extra pressure on your sit bone. One time I had to carry a watermelon in my backpack. It was just for a mile, but boy, did I feel it on my seat!

A little weight is fine, but I always prefer to carry the weight on the bike.

bicyclridr4life

On the bike.

gregf83 

Yes.

kcblair

Agree ^^ KB

bruce19

GCN did tests on this very subject. If I can find the video I"ll post it.

bruce19

jimmie65

Why is this even a question? On the bike.

Sy Reene

Hmm.. someone should invent bags that can strap to your shin or calves.

BobbyG

That, it does. How much weight are we talking about...and for what distance and amount of time. What are your personal physical capabilities...and what are you transporting?

I commute 40 minutes to an hour with a backpack which I rack on two bikes and wear on my old rackless road bike.

I have ridden my bikes toting the backpack and without. On the bikes with a rack, a hefty backpack full of clothes does impact the handling dynamics slightly, but an empty backpack, not so much. So the more weight on a rear rack, the more handling is affected.

Actually, no mater where the weight is loaded it will affect handling, rear rack, front rack, front or rear panniers (or both) and frame bag. My guess is a frame bag with the weight in the center of a diamond-frame bike is going to have the least effects.

When I wear a backpack on my old rackless roadbike the bike feels mostly the same no matter the weight of load, but my personal dynamics change. I ride leaning forward (it's a drop-bar roadbike). I ride with the bag loose and long, resting on the small of my back with little or no weight on my shoulders. THe bag definitely impedes my ability to straighten up quicker, and twisting my body to look behind me throws my balance off more than without a backpack (I mostly use a take-a-look-mirror though). Sitting up and riding no-handed, a position I'd be in on an upright bike, the weight of the bag is on my shoulders, and pressing down my spine, which as I close in on 60, is not so pleasant.

Then there is the question of what is being toted and does it need to be protected from shocks. With soft bottoms, panniers enjoy some natural shock absorption, same for frame bags. And there are some pannier systems that build in even more shock absorbtion via elastic straps and mounts. Racks are usually harsh. My utility bike has Wald folding baskets, which due to their light wire construction offer some minor cushioning through flexibility, but not a lot.

By far, a backpack would provide the greatest potential cushioning using your upper body as a shock absorber, and relying on the soft bottom of the backpack, and the relatively loose mounting to your body.

So when #indyfabz says "it depends"...it really does.

Troul 

Do your body a favor & put the load on your bicycle. If possible, between the seat's down tube & the stem before the bars.

cyccommute 

So far most people responding has gotten this mostly wrong. Let's start with a rider and a bike. Most of the weight is carried on the rider to begin with. Even heavy bikes weigh a fraction of what the rider does. Even when a bike is packed with a touring load, the load and bike are still substantially lighter than the rider.

But the real difference comes in sprung vs unsprung weight. If the rider is riding properly, the riders arms and legs act as the suspension of the bike. Even when riding off-road on a suspended bike, the rider's arms and legs provide much more suspension than the bicycle's suspension does. Many people (if not most) don't take advantage of this suspension and become unsprung weight in the saddle. That results in a harsher ride. If you ride lighter in the saddle...i.e. allow your legs and arms to take the impacts by hovering over the saddle and handlebars...your ride will improve since you are "springing" most of the mass of the rider/bicycle system.

There are limits, however, and this is how most of the posts are partially right. The problem with the bicycle/rider system is that while most of the mass can be suspended, it is suspended at a high center of mass which makes handling and braking difficult. Your center of mass on a bicycle is about hip height or even a little higher. The relatively high center of mass makes bicycles less stable and more prone to braking problems like going over the handlebars.

Putting a backpack with, for example, a touring load on you raises that center of mass even higher and makes the system even less stable. If you could carrying that load on your legs, it would actually be advantageous to do so but you have to move your legs up and down to move the bike which means that it takes more strength to move the load.

Generally speaking, it is a better trade off to carry a heavy load on the bike than put it high up on the rider. Not because the bike carries it better as unsprung weight but because the bike handles better with a lower center of gravity even with the unsprung weight.

Finally, I would say that there are times when carrying the weight on the rider is advantages within limits. Off-road, for example, it is better to carry anything you need on the trail on your person rather than on the bike. As a best guesstimate, I would say that up to 15 pounds carried on the rider probably has little impact on handling. Carrying anymore than that starts to impact the handling. It would probably be better for a road rider to do the same as their bikes are (usually) totally unsprung and the load would carry better on the rider than on the bike. However, given that most road bikes are substantially lighter than mountain bikes and the sprung to unsprung weight is high, it wouldn't make that big of a difference to carry a few tools and water on the bike.

cyccommute 

Gotta use both of you as an example of "heavy" riders. You may not have a lot of mass but it sounds like you don't ride your bikes like a "light (in the saddle)" rider would. If you use your arms and legs to hover over the saddle and handlebars, the extra weight on you shouldn't have that much impact on your delicate bits. As FBinNY describes it, you are ballerinas who ride like gorillas. Try to be more like the gorillas that ride like ballerinas.

There is a reason we call it a "saddle" and not a "seat". You use the saddle for support but you don't sit in it like a chair. Try pushing up more with your legs so that you have less contact with the saddle. Your delicate bits will thank you for it.

mcours2006

Understood, but when I'm riding my upright MTB fully loaded with an addition backpack I either choose to have that pressure on my seat/saddle or have to work harder with my legs keep myself 'light', as you call it, I choose to not work so hard with my legs. And for a mile or so I can live with that.

pbekkerh

Are you serious??!!

Standing up for 6-7 hours a day, for several months??

And even if it could be done, you'll only have that extra backpack load on your thighs instead!

ddub

Huh, I call it a seat.

northtexasbiker

Is that the reason why it's called a saddle? I just thought it was bike folks trying to be haughty.