nickw

I struggle with the concepts of pictures though. Sometimes taking pics takes away from the experience and lets be honest, besides *your* appreciation for them and *your* memories, nobody else really cares. I'm not saying that negatively, just that people are never going to understand how you felt and what you experienced which is a big part of why a picture is meaningful....

alan s 

Bikepacking is backpacking on a bike. It is a subset of touring. Hope that clears it up for everyone.

cyccommute 

It makes it harder to do a journal on crazyguy, however. Pictures make the presentation better.

nickw

Fair - any journals on there that don't have pics I generally skip...

TiHabanero

To summarize, bikepacking is a subset of bike touring defined by the surface traveled. Bike touring it is the generic term to cover it all.

djb

re a trip journal, what you bring up certainly has some truth to it, in my trip journals I often think of how the mix of photos and text can be used to describe my adventure. I have a pretty good understanding of how images work and the limitations that come up with showing something, so there are times where I dont have photos (either I know its not going to represent what I am experiencing well, or for cultural or just plain respectful reasons I dont take a photo of something, but use writing to describe it.
I often wish I take more random videos, not for putting together, but more for me, to hear the sounds and stuff of a situation that will be fun for me to look at.
I always appreciate how folks either use stills or video to put across a good feeling of an experience to others, and especially with video, how hard it is and how much work is involved.

but yes, I also tend not to look at trip journals without imagery, and when Im on tour, its fun for me to be a photographer again and live an experience using imagery in my story telling, even with the limitations and downsides.

saddlesores

......bikepacking is a subset of bike touring defined by the surface traveled. *NO*

there is no surface bikepacked that has not been toured upon/through with racks 'n bags.
i would have said "traditional" racks and bags, but the frame/bar/seat bags used in this
"new" style of touring are basically the same bags used by bike tourists in ancient times
updated with space-age materials...before the "new and improved" racks and bags were
developed.




you might argue that bikepacking is defined by the type of luggage, so riding
the bikecentennial route on paved surface with frame and seat bags should be
included in the definition.

which means you now have the same problem as backpacking, in which you have
an ill-defined term. i bet the folks at whiteblase have heated arguments about
whether gap-year "backpackers" eurailing and staying in hostels are backpacking.


......Bike touring it is the generic term to cover it all. *YES*

djb

Fricken 1898 hipsters, they really put me off with their fancy clothes and condescending looks at me on my horse as they go past me on a downhill with their feet up on those freewheeling pegs.

str

its very simple... bike packing, some little bags on the bike, not caring the whole house hold in panniers, bike behaves FAR better than with tons of weight in panniers.

cyccommute 

Not really. I use bikepacking bags off-road because the bags have more clearance but the load sits higher which raises the center of gravity significantly and does have an adverse effect on the handling.

On the other hand, I've seen a number of bikes loaded for bikepacking that are more overloaded than I'd ever carry even with 4 panniers. I suspect that none of those guys in saddlesores' post 67 above raved about how well their bikes handled. Panniers, after all, were invented to distribute the load on the bike better than the previous (see above) way of carrying luggage on a bicycle.

One other thing to note about the Alpine hipsters, they don't seem to be carrying camping gear. They were the 1890s version of credit card tourist. Camping gear of that period required teams of horses to carry.

str

for sure, without any doubt, bike handling with a saddle bag, frame bag and handle bar bag is much lighter, easier to move... compared when using panniers. at least around here ...

cyccommute 

Must be another universe with different physics.

str

for sure... its about weight

dancier

I toured with a guy through Yellowstone that was riding the GDMBR and he had all the bikepacking gear, but was carrying more stuff than I with two panniers. His mate started with four panniers and had two when I met him, so he was shedding gear along the way.

If you spend time on Backpacking light, you get to understand the lightweight mindset and thats fine for carrying a pack over long distances. For the touring that I do, I haven't been able to apply the same rule, and I ride some pretty doggy stuff by today's standard, given that I come from a Mtb background. So I don't think I'll ever go down the bikepacking road unless I race or traverse some really difficult terrain, so I'm stuck with two panniers until I see the benefits.

tyrion

str

I understand bike-packing LIGHT and I understand touring with panniers, both done many times...

and a bike light packed ---- bike packing, behaves light years better than a bike with panniers.

cyccommute 

WHOOOSH! Right over your head. I'm not talking about the total but where it is carried. As I said, I've seen many bikepackers who carry as much or more than I do on a tour and it is poorly positioned.

"Weight" means more than just how much mass you are dealing with. Where you carry it has as much of an influence as how you carry it. Would you carry your touring load in a backpack on your back? Probably not because most people recognize that the load is poorly positioned and is too high. All bikepacking bags do is move the load slightly lower but still high. Vehicles with high centers of gravity handle poorly compared to vehicles with lower centers of gravity.

Exactly.

I will say that for off-road touring even the downsides of bikepacking gear...higher center of gravity, limited capacity and interferences with controls...pale in comparison with the downsides of other methods of carrying gear. Trailers are a pain for off-road use. Lowriders improve the ride of a touring bike but they really can't be used on narrow trails or where there is the possibility of catching them on road or trail debris.

I wouldn't use a light weight road tour, however. For that a pair of small panniers on a lowrider rack is far superior to bikepacking bags.

Not if the loads are the same.

skookum

The conventional wisdom was always to carry weight low and closer to the centre of mass, thus low rider panniers and using rear panniers rather than just stacking things atop the rear rack.

Large handlebar bags suspended from the handlebars can make the steering very unstable. Now I see people with all kinds of crap lashed to the handlebars and I wonder how the bike handles.

People used to say “Load your bike not your back”, but that adage seems to be gone now.

One of the major advantages of a bike packing set up is it forces you to pack lighter
and carry less stuff. You just have to make sure your safety and comfort aren’t compromised.

alan s 

I’ve found a 20 liter dry bag and additional pouch using a handlebar harness has far less effect on handling than the traditional rack and pannier setup. Mainly due to less weight and a solid non-moving attachment.

Don’t overlook that bikepacking gear tends to be more aerodynamic than panniers, which makes a big difference in windy areas.

cyccommute 

You are correct which is why I argue that bikepacking bags are a compromise for off-road riding. Carrying panniers when you have to ride through rough narrow areas isn't ideal. Bikepacking bags aren't ideal either but they are adequate for the task they are designed for...i.e. Real™ adventure touring.

But, as I said above, if I'm carrying the same kind of load, I'd go with panniers if I don't need the off-road capability.

I wouldn't say you can make that claim. The handlebar bag has about the same frontal area as small front panniers. The rear panniers probably have less impact on the aerodynamics because they are behind the largest aerodynamic drag on a bicycle...the rider.

saddlesores

i would imagine your body posture would have more of an effect; sitting upright offers a
large sail to catch the wind. rear bags would be mostly in your leg turbulence zone
anyways, right?

and what about large frame bags in 20-25 knot cross winds?

cyccommute 

I agree. The rider is the biggest aerodynamic problem with bicycling and all else pales in comparison.

Yep. Panniers can be a pain in a cross wind but adding a solid piece of cloth across the largest open space on a bicycle is worse.

alan s 

Frontal area is greater with panniers than bikepacking gear. With bikepacking gear, everything is in line. Handlebar roll, body, frame bag, saddle bag. Panniers stick out adding significantly to the frontal area. Therefore, I can indeed make that claim.

djb

You know guys, at my meagre average power output, I'm not sure that there would be a big difference, but there has to be some. Less weight is going to help going up hill too.

I just can't be bothered spending more money on different bike stuff and just live a with what I have, and am realistic about what I am comfortable with stuff wise.

cyccommute 

The handlebar roll and the front panniers are the only thing that are going to add to the frontal surface area for headwinds. Both have about the same area so they have the same effect. Anything after the rider is going to have negligible drag as it's in the rider's wind shadow.

For side winds, the frame bag is going to present more surface area than the panniers.