Weight Balancing / Load Distribution
 

I see most people just load up the rear of their bike putting little to nothing upfront. To me this makes no sense, as it surely places an undue amount of weight and stress on the rear wheel. I do realize that weight distribution has a great effect on handling, so is that the reason, or is it more a matter of "that's what everyone else does", so I'll do it that way too?

Some ride with all weight on the rear.
Some ride 60%rear 40%front.
Some ride 50-50.
Some ride 40%rear 60% front.

Depends on what a person likes, what gear the have, and how their bike handles.

Some bikes handle better than others with a front load. This is from what ive read and not experience as my touring bike handled great with a front load of probably 70%.

Some handle poorly with a front load due to fork and head tube geometry.



All weight in back, to me, makes for a very easy bike to tip backwards. Ive ridden that way many times and its perfectly enjoyable on relatively flat land. Going downhill or uphill is less stable.

Having not had the opportunity to ride with a full load yet, but hopefully before too much longer, it looks like I'll need to do some test rides with varying load balances to see what works best for my particular bike and setup. Thanks for the info. :thumb:

Some don't have enough stuff to justify front panniers.

I pack way too light to consider using 4 panniers these days, but I have done a wise range of packing styles over the years.

I started out packing fairly heavy (45-55 pounds). At that time I used 4 panniers. The back were kind of medium sized and the front pretty small. I put light but bulky stuff in the back and heavy, but small stuff in the front,

Next as the load got lighter (22 pounds) I went with only front panniers with a the tent on the rear rack.

When I went ultralight (less than 15 pounds) I stopped using panniers altogether and started using waterproof stuff sacks on top of the rack with either a bar roll or a handlebar bag.

I also packed for an off road tour with only very small rear panniers.

Ditto this.

If you can drop an entire rack and two packs, you start really getting ahead of the game in weight savings.

What's important to me is being able to ride fully loaded no-handed, and I can do that with my rear-only set-up.

If you get light enough, say under 20 pounds, it doesn't really matter much where you put it. A friend of mine with that kind of load can even ride with it on his back and he uses his carbon frame road bike. He couldn't be happier.

When y'all say x pounds, what exactly do you mean?
Do you count food? Water? Your helmet? The clothes you're wearing? The panniers? The racks?

I use skin-out base weight: Everything minus my naked self, the bike, food, and water. Racks, panniers, helmet, sunglasses, bike shoes, water bottles all count, even if they don't go in the panniers, because you still gotta push 'em up the hill. Food and water don't count because sometimes you're not carrying any, or very little.

Using this metric, I've only gotten as low as 25 pounds, and I feel like I'm packing light (no front panniers or handlebar bag).

This ^^

I've tried riding with 4 panniers, but just couldn't come up with enough stuff to justify it.

I also try to ensure that the weight of my bicycle + all my stuff comes in at approx. half my body weight ... or less if I can manage that. So even though I usually carry most of my stuff on the rear rack, it isn't that much stuff.

I ran rear panniers on a front rack the last time i was out. Then a compression dry bag atop the rear rack.

Coulda gotten a bikepacking saddle bag thing that sticks out behind the saddle or a carradice bag to replace the rear rack and compression dry bag to save some weight...though not sure how heavy a careadice bag is.


Anyways, i had only 2 panniers but ran em up front and they were large rear volume bags.

Most anything goes if it works for you. Like many other parts of touring, there is more than one way to skin a cat...or to move happily down the road.

This is us travelling quite heavily laden. The weight of bicycle + all the stuff came in just over half my body weight which did pose a few issues, but we managed. It was a long trip, so we brought a few extras. For a somewhat shorter trip, I'd go a bit lighter.

I count panniers or any other bags. I count all camping gear. I count any clothing that gets packed. Basically anything that goes in the bags other than consumables gets counted.

Food, water, and fuel are too variable to count IMO. I don't carry much food or fuel at a time any way though and shop daily and late in the day when possible.

I don't count one set of the most basic clothing that is always on me when riding (what I always have on on a warm day).

I count racks and anything that is always on the bike whether on tour or not as part of bike weight, not gear weight.

By that accounting method, on recent tours I have gone with 9-15 pounds depending on the trip. I think I'd probably be at least three pounds heavier if I used "skin out" accounting.

For me, full skin out:

13 BPW - single pannier, full camping gear, gadgets, clothing, rain gear, good to ~40F
5 - worn clothing, pocket EDC
5 - consumables - 2 lbs (days) food, 3lbs water
32 - loaded bike, fenders, racks, tools, tube, cable lock, lights, helmet, 1lbs water

60lbs Max weight start of trip/after re-supply, from birthday suit, and can still shave weight (too much emergency use gear that never gets used).

Good question. FSO (from skin out) is not as well known to most as "base weight," which does not include stuff you always wear including the helmet, and stuff always on the bike like patch kit and pump. I personally never ride naked or without those things on the bike, so I don't consider FSO. Base weight should not include consumables like you said since they're so highly variable.

Though my base weight is around 17 pounds, I'd guess I would be in the same 25 pound FSO weight as you, since the load is hardly noticeable and I also have no front panniers or handlebar bag.

Are you also a hiker? I've met a few hikers who use FSO. There are also hikers who use the metric "with a full load of food and water," mainly on the AT. Well, what does that mean?

For me weight distribution hardly matters, I adjust to any pack style after riding a minute or two. I can pack all my gear&supplies into two rear panniers, a small handlebar bag, and my tent strapped to the rack.

http://ziligy.com/photos/posts/LHTD-...onalForest.jpg

But actually I prefer four bags with everything packed including tent. I like the convenience of easily popping the panniers on and off the bike. I like having a separate kitchen bag for easy lunch breaks. The fours bags also allow extra room for fresh and/or bulky food items (a bag of bagels takes a lot of space). Having the extra space also lets me carry an extra day or two of food when heading into more remote areas.

http://ziligy.com/photos/posts/LHTD-EndOfTour.jpg

For my tour this past July I only used small front bags. I had to pack a limited kitchen and keep food supplies to a minimum, so for me this is not optimal. The weight and distribution aren't really big factors for me. Anyhow here's my light packing (17 lbs base-gear) from this summer.

http://ziligy.com/photos/posts/ParisSportOnTour2016.jpg

Yep. I've thru-hiked the AT, though culturally, I fit in more with the PCT. I've hiked a long section of it, my first backpacking trips were in the Sierras, and I was introduced to backpacking by my Californian uncle. Between the two, I prefer bike touring.

Most hikers I've met use base weight - everything in their pack, including the pack itself, except food and water. So no skin-out clothes, nor their trekking poles. It's also common to hear "But I usually carry X pounds of food and water" after they tell you their base weight, especially among thru-hikers, who become intimately acquainted with their pack and their food/water resupply routine by the end of the hike.

I prefer skin-out because, as previously mentioned, you have to push it all up the hill, whether it's in your panniers, part of your bike, or on your body. For hiking, it almost seems more important. The heaviest items outside your pack are your shoes and poles, and you constantly have to pick them up and set them back down again. So their weight matters.

For me, BPW and total PW are the most relevant as the *increment* for a given activity. Virtually all of my miles walked includes my regular clothing, shoes, and pocket EDC, and virtually all of my miles biked includes bike, tools, helmet, lights etc (my baselines) so the incremental activity of backpacking and bike touring (over walking and bicycling) is really just the incremental bag, gear, and consumables needed to sustain for multi-day walking/biking over the daily baselines.

I've found handling to be a bit better with some of the weight up front. But as long as I keep the load down to around 20 lbs. the handling is acceptable with all of it on the rear rack along with a few items in a handlebar bag and that's how I generally tour. Saves the added weight of a front rack and panniers and I don't have to always see the weight I'm carrying. Those advantages outweigh the slightly worse handling characteristics for me.

Many decades ago it was shown that what had become American touring convention in the '60s and '70s, big rear panniers with perhaps a handlebar bag, was the least stable way to load a bicycle. In the early '80s, many, but not most, tourists had picked up on this and were primarily rolling front panniers, with rear load as necessary if they travelled heavy (which many did).

When Americans rediscovered touring a dozen-odd years ago, many seemed to have looked at photos from the '70s and copied those horrid loads. Unless your bike has ridiculously large front trail, a front load is much more stable than a rear load and should always be the starting point for loading a bike. It's not just more stable, it actually increases the stability of the bike while rear loads decrease it.

That said, ride what you like. If the appearance of big bags in the rear appeals to you, that's a good enough reason to roll that way. Goodness knows many of us have features on our bikes, or the entire bike itself, that isn't necessarily the best way to get the job done but just happens to be what we want. There is no "best" way, since we're mostly touring for the sheer joy of it.

I like to spread the weight front to rear, including in the frame main triangle. Not too concerned about weight, but more about having what I need.

Perhaps I need to clarify. I'm not talking about people going light, so therefore have no need or concern with this issue. I'm talking about people who have quite a bit, but still cram it all on the rear of the bike, placing more weight on the rear wheel than they likely should.

I wonder whether people in this sub even notice how every thread mentioning weight always tends to devolve into a circlejer about reducing weight (kinda feels like going heavy is doing it wrong...)

Well ... it is more difficult. :)

Do people actually do that? Or is that just your impression.

More difficult? How so?
If the idea is to get from point A to B in a certain time then sure, but it's pointed in almost every thread that touring isn't a competition.

It's more difficult carrying it all from one train to another when you've only got 9 minutes until the next train leaves.

It's more difficult carrying it all up 4 flights of stairs to your hostel room.

It's more difficult cycling up long, steep hills all day long.

It's just so much more comfortable and less of a slog with a lighter load. :) To a point, of course. You've got to have what you need plus a luxury item or two. :)

9 minutes is plenty of time even when you need to get 2 fully loaded bikes up and down a flight of stairs cause the station has no elevators. But sure, I've seen examples which would not even fit into a train (well, they might fit into a Finnish night train but that's pretty exceptional in terms of space). I guess I advocate a maximum amount of luggage one can comfortably carry up stairs (in my case 120lbs of bike and gear)

Same as above

This has more to do with gearing in my opinion. I push the same watts whether I have all the gear or no gear on my bike. It's the time I spend going uphill that changes but since I don't have time limits it doesn't matter.

More comfortable? A loaded bike does highlight a bad fit the same way a trainer does, but if said fit is in order there should not be problems.
Luxury items are of course subjective as are certain necessities (I had a rackpack full of medical supplies for example).
There are also bonuses to a bit more load on the bike, like the missil'esque descending properties a well balanced bike gives.

If going heavier works for you ... great.



Doesn't work for me ... and I don't have to live my life according to the way you want to live yours. So thankful for that. I do things the way I want to do them.

Well it's a good thing you finally understood the point of my first post in this thread.

What I don't understand is this sudden negative attitude towards me defending heavier travelling. But I did point out earlier that it does happen a lot in the Touring subforum

not as important what other people are doing.
what are you (will you be) doing and why?

how much weight will you carry, and how much do you weigh?
***if you're 120 pounds, go crazy, if 220+, then.....
what wheels and tires does you got?
***16 aero spokes? 24 radial spokes? 20mm tubulars?
where will you ride, what terrain and surface?
***pavement or packed dirt or gravel or bushwhack your own trail?
and what for bike do you have, or will have?
***ultralight racer with assploding carbon fork?

what for touring have you done so far?
what personnel experience do you personally have to
evaluate recommendations?

As a Winter backpacker I never carried more than 35 pounds. I could see myself carrying 10 pounds more with a bike, but not doing so just because I could. There are some pieces that are nice but not essential. For one thing, food is much more readily available on the road than the Appalachian trail. An alcohol stove is much lighter and less expensive than a Jet Boil. Tire repair, tools, and security are going to replace luxury items.