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

Rear Racks

Notices
Touring Have a dream to ride a bike across your state, across the country, or around the world? Self-contained or fully supported? Trade ideas, adventures, and more in our bicycle touring forum.

Rear Racks

Old 04-26-24, 04:02 PM
  #1  
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rear Racks

I'm considering buying a Tubus Logo Evo stainless steel vs a Nitto Campee silver, which has low rider pannier racks. This is mostly for touring, though I do shop with the bike most of the time in town. The Tubus is lighter, but the bags ride higher. The pannier racks on the Nitto are removable. Any opinions?
dminden is offline  
Old 04-26-24, 05:51 PM
  #2  
Clark W. Griswold
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: ,location, location
Posts: 13,999

Bikes: Foundry Chilkoot Ti W/Ultegra Di2, Salsa Timberjack Ti, Cinelli Mash Work RandoCross Fun Time Machine, 1x9 XT Parts Hybrid, Co-Motion Cascadia, Specialized Langster, Phil Wood Apple VeloXS Frame (w/DA 7400), R+M Supercharger2 Rohloff, Habanero Ti 26

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4518 Post(s)
Liked 4,216 Times in 2,822 Posts
I do love Nitto, they make quality stuff no doubt but Tubus all the way. They are a touring rack company they really care and understand touring through and through.
veganbikes is offline  
Likes For veganbikes:
Old 04-26-24, 07:30 PM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,334

Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.

Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3523 Post(s)
Liked 1,500 Times in 1,172 Posts
My only Nitto rack is much lighter duty than the one you are looking at, so can't comment on that.

I am extremely happy with my non-stainless black painted Logo EVO that I got over a decade ago. I only use the Logo for touring, it is an outstanding pannier rack. But for riding around home, I prefer a rack with wider platform on top, thus I use other racks for day to day use when not touring.

I was unaware they make one in stainless. Mine is painted black. I use black nail polish to touch up any wear spots.

If you plan to use a rack top bag, that narrow top may be a consideration.
https://ortliebusa.com/product/logo-evo/
https://www.tubus.com/fileadmin/user...Evo_TZ_2.0.pdf

What kind of bike is this going on? Some of the newer frames have moved the pannier mounting holes up higher. The logo works well with the rack mounts down low.
Tourist in MSN is offline  
Old 04-26-24, 08:24 PM
  #4  
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,485

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6286 Post(s)
Liked 4,329 Times in 2,425 Posts
If you are considering lowriders on the rear, I would suggest you read this article from when lowrider racks became available in the US. TL;DR version: Jim Blackburn doesn’t recommend them for the rear. Front, yes. Front and rear, no.
__________________
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!




Last edited by cyccommute; 04-26-24 at 11:31 PM.
cyccommute is offline  
Likes For cyccommute:
Old 04-26-24, 09:14 PM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
indyfabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,659
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18593 Post(s)
Liked 16,085 Times in 7,549 Posts
Link to the Nitto?
indyfabz is offline  
Old 04-26-24, 09:31 PM
  #6  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 81 Times in 64 Posts
Logo is great. I also have a Cargo Classic with another set of lower horizontal tubes brazed on. In some applications the clearence between the rear tire and the strut hardware under the rack can be tight in which case you can use those flat ss straps common to most other rear racks.
LeeG is offline  
Old 04-27-24, 09:11 AM
  #7  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: QC Canada
Posts: 2,012

Bikes: Custom built LHT & Troll

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 877 Post(s)
Liked 156 Times in 113 Posts
Perhaps take a look at Tumbleweed's. They sport bottle cage mounts so you can fit anything cages.
gauvins is offline  
Old 04-27-24, 10:48 AM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 1,157
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 430 Post(s)
Liked 522 Times in 310 Posts
slightly OT, but I have a set of Bruce Gordon racks. They are made of Chrome-Moly tubing and work great, and are quite light, and very durable. My question is why is nobody making something similar today?
Pratt is online now  
Old 04-27-24, 10:55 AM
  #9  
Senior Member
 
Yan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,976
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2060 Post(s)
Liked 697 Times in 477 Posts
We use this one on my wife's bike. It's lighter and cheaper than Tubus, and works with its own line of quick release rack-top trunk accessories.

We are currently cycling around the world and haven't had a problem with this rack after 11 months. I will say, the welding workmanship on the Racktime is far inferior to Tubus, which is a bit disappointing despite apparently not affecting the actual strength.

https://www.racktime.com/en/racktime...ightit-20-tour
Yan is offline  
Old 04-27-24, 11:15 AM
  #10  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,730
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1291 Post(s)
Liked 1,392 Times in 708 Posts
Originally Posted by Pratt
slightly OT, but I have a set of Bruce Gordon racks. They are made of Chrome-Moly tubing and work great, and are quite light, and very durable. My question is why is nobody making something similar today?
What in particular are other rack manufacturers not making. If it is the Chrome-Moly you are referencing there is nothing special about this as it was mainly used as marketing hype BITD, almost every time steel is used on a decent quality product it will be Chrome-Moly. Tubus racks use 25crMo4 and I am sure other better quality racks use similar quality of metals. There untold numbers of premium rack builders currently.

25CrMo4 is a Cr and Mo alloyed quench and tempering steel with low carbon content. The steel combine high strength with high toughness.

Last edited by Atlas Shrugged; 04-27-24 at 07:01 PM.
Atlas Shrugged is offline  
Old 04-27-24, 03:46 PM
  #11  
Clark W. Griswold
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: ,location, location
Posts: 13,999

Bikes: Foundry Chilkoot Ti W/Ultegra Di2, Salsa Timberjack Ti, Cinelli Mash Work RandoCross Fun Time Machine, 1x9 XT Parts Hybrid, Co-Motion Cascadia, Specialized Langster, Phil Wood Apple VeloXS Frame (w/DA 7400), R+M Supercharger2 Rohloff, Habanero Ti 26

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4518 Post(s)
Liked 4,216 Times in 2,822 Posts
Originally Posted by Yan
We use this one on my wife's bike. It's lighter and cheaper than Tubus, and works with its own line of quick release rack-top trunk accessories.

We are currently cycling around the world and haven't had a problem with this rack after 11 months. I will say, the welding workmanship on the Racktime is far inferior to Tubus, which is a bit disappointing despite apparently not affecting the actual strength.

https://www.racktime.com/en/racktime...ightit-20-tour
I feel like this was gone into not that long ago but Racktime is owned by Tubus but Racktime is their aluminum city rack (hence the different welds and look of inferior workmanship which is not really the case minus the Shine rack which has a poorly designed light at the back being the only drawback). Great stuff with excellent accessories that are cross compatible with MIK accessories with a different bottom plate.
veganbikes is offline  
Likes For veganbikes:
Old 04-27-24, 06:07 PM
  #12  
Senior Member
 
Aushiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Walyalup, Australia
Posts: 1,421

Bikes: Surly Long Haul Trucker, Salsa Mukluk, Riese & Muller Supercharger GT Rohloff (Forthcoming)

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Liked 39 Times in 32 Posts
I cannot comment on either rack directly but as a long-time Tubus user, I wouldn't hesitate to purchase another one again should the need arise. Mine have travelled thousands of kilometres and have been overloaded more time that I care to remember and continue to be in good nick.
Aushiker is offline  
Old 04-27-24, 07:49 PM
  #13  
Senior Member
 
indyfabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,659
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18593 Post(s)
Liked 16,085 Times in 7,549 Posts
Originally Posted by Pratt
slightly OT, but I have a set of Bruce Gordon racks. They are made of Chrome-Moly tubing and work great, and are quite light, and very durable. My question is why is nobody making something similar today?
I have the Nitto Big front and rear racks. Nickel plated CrMo. Not sure if they are made anymore, but I saw some available online a while back. Got mine from Riv back in 2011. They still look nearly brand new despite touring and commuting. I’ve carried large bundles of firewood on them.
indyfabz is offline  
Old 04-27-24, 07:55 PM
  #14  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,334

Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.

Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3523 Post(s)
Liked 1,500 Times in 1,172 Posts
Originally Posted by Yan
We use this one on my wife's bike. It's lighter and cheaper than Tubus, and works with its own line of quick release rack-top trunk accessories.

We are currently cycling around the world and haven't had a problem with this rack after 11 months. I will say, the welding workmanship on the Racktime is far inferior to Tubus, which is a bit disappointing despite apparently not affecting the actual strength.

https://www.racktime.com/en/racktime...ightit-20-tour
Originally Posted by veganbikes
I feel like this was gone into not that long ago but Racktime is owned by Tubus but Racktime is their aluminum city rack (hence the different welds and look of inferior workmanship which is not really the case minus the Shine rack which has a poorly designed light at the back being the only drawback). Great stuff with excellent accessories that are cross compatible with MIK accessories with a different bottom plate.
I have no complaints about my Racktime Addit rack welding. That rack is quite different in design than the one that Yan cited. My Addit is at this link:
https://www.racktime.com/en/racktime...-product/addit

That said, I also use a Tubus Logo EVO which I mentioned above that I was very happy with. I use the Logo EVO on my medium and heavy touring bikes. The Addit has a lower weight rating and I use that on my light touring bike.

Both the Logo EVO and the Addit are outstanding pannier racks.
Tourist in MSN is offline  
Likes For Tourist in MSN:
Old 04-27-24, 08:04 PM
  #15  
Clark W. Griswold
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: ,location, location
Posts: 13,999

Bikes: Foundry Chilkoot Ti W/Ultegra Di2, Salsa Timberjack Ti, Cinelli Mash Work RandoCross Fun Time Machine, 1x9 XT Parts Hybrid, Co-Motion Cascadia, Specialized Langster, Phil Wood Apple VeloXS Frame (w/DA 7400), R+M Supercharger2 Rohloff, Habanero Ti 26

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4518 Post(s)
Liked 4,216 Times in 2,822 Posts
Originally Posted by Tourist in MSN
I have no complaints about my Racktime Addit rack welding. That rack is quite different in design than the one that Yan cited. My Addit is at this link:
https://www.racktime.com/en/racktime...-product/addit

That said, I also use a Tubus Logo EVO which I mentioned above that I was very happy with. I use the Logo EVO on my medium and heavy touring bikes. The Addit has a lower weight rating and I use that on my light touring bike.

Both the Logo EVO and the Addit are outstanding pannier racks.
Agreed! I have a Racktime I-Valo Tour rack on a bike and it is great and another Racktime tour rack (though not I-Valo) on another bike. They are great racks and the welding is fine but to my point earlier they can seem to "look worse" compared to a steel weld which is usually less chunky and those who may not know that RT is aluminum and not steel like many of the Tubus racks.
veganbikes is offline  
Old 04-28-24, 01:30 AM
  #16  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 2,306
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1054 Post(s)
Liked 569 Times in 458 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute
If you are considering lowriders on the rear, I would suggest you read this article from when lowrider racks became available in the US. TL;DR version: Jim Blackburn doesn’t recommend them for the rear. Front, yes. Front and rear, no.
I read the article. I'm not sure lowrider rear now means the same as what is indicated as tested. My rear rack has a lower tier for the panniers that is maybe 2" or slightly more below the top platform, and this greatly improves putting the trunk bag on and off, as well as less interference between the trunk side pockets and the rear pannier top flap/pocket. This is a full-size rear rack, mounted on a 20" wheel bike so sits about 3" lower overall, and thus the panniers about 5" lower overall. The rack platform is about 5" higher than it needs to be for tire clearance, but this helps keep the big panniers high enough to clear tall curbs when pedaling near them, but it also means the trunk bag (heavy, full of tools and spares) sits high for the bike. The rear panniers are both completely behind the rear axle, to provide pedaling heel clearance. This sounds contrary to Blackburn's recommendations, but this is a stable setup, even when heavily loaded. Ironically, it's a Blackburn rack, TRX-2, I chose it specifically for the far-aft pannier position, and lower tier setup. However, in the article, Blackburn doesn't show the lowrider rear rack, just the standard rear rack (centered over the axle), and mentions "frame whip" with the panniers that far aft, but that may be due to insufficient rack lateral rigidity and not the mass position with respect to the bike overall. My rear rack and stays are rigid laterally. My front panniers hang from a "sixer" front brakepost rack, and thus, due to the small (20" wheel) fork length, the panniers end up being "lowriders" even without a proper lowrider rack. Again, stable setup.



Last edited by Duragrouch; 04-28-24 at 01:38 AM.
Duragrouch is offline  
Old 04-28-24, 06:21 AM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,334

Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.

Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3523 Post(s)
Liked 1,500 Times in 1,172 Posts
Originally Posted by Duragrouch
I read the article. I'm not sure lowrider rear now means the same as what is indicated as tested. My rear rack has a lower tier for the panniers that is maybe 2" or slightly more below the top platform, and this greatly improves putting the trunk bag on and off, as well as less interference between the trunk side pockets and the rear pannier top flap/pocket. This is a full-size rear rack, mounted on a 20" wheel bike so sits about 3" lower overall, and thus the panniers about 5" lower overall. The rack platform is about 5" higher than it needs to be for tire clearance, but this helps keep the big panniers high enough to clear tall curbs when pedaling near them, but it also means the trunk bag (heavy, full of tools and spares) sits high for the bike. The rear panniers are both completely behind the rear axle, to provide pedaling heel clearance. This sounds contrary to Blackburn's recommendations, but this is a stable setup, even when heavily loaded. Ironically, it's a Blackburn rack, TRX-2, I chose it specifically for the far-aft pannier position, and lower tier setup. However, in the article, Blackburn doesn't show the lowrider rear rack, just the standard rear rack (centered over the axle), and mentions "frame whip" with the panniers that far aft, but that may be due to insufficient rack lateral rigidity and not the mass position with respect to the bike overall. My rear rack and stays are rigid laterally. My front panniers hang from a "sixer" front brakepost rack, and thus, due to the small (20" wheel) fork length, the panniers end up being "lowriders" even without a proper lowrider rack. Again, stable setup.


The point of the article was assessing different locations for pannier center of gravity placement with the limitation of adequate heel clearance, and how that may impact handling. They compared a very high center of gravity where the bottom of the pannier was far above the axle against another setup with the center of gravity at the axle height.

Both setups that were compared are not really practical by current standards. Generally today the bottoms of the panniers are at about axle height, or higher. Nobody puts panniers so low that the pannier could impair derailleur function. Current racks and panniers are designed to be in between those two extremes that they described. (I am not considering the small bike packing racks for this discussion.)

And their testing was done on full size bikes in an era where almost all bikes were steel framed with smaller diameter tubing that made the frames quite flexible compared to today standards for tubing diameter. My rando bike has a frame very much like those older frames, and when I have a bag or two of groceries on that rear rack, it really impairs the handling, which is why that frame was never sold as a good frame for load carrying.

And they certainly are not practical to compare to your small wheel folding bike, which I assume has an aluminum frame and has all the weight well aft of the rear axle.
Tourist in MSN is offline  
Old 04-28-24, 09:51 AM
  #18  
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,485

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6286 Post(s)
Liked 4,329 Times in 2,425 Posts
Originally Posted by Duragrouch
I read the article. I'm not sure lowrider rear now means the same as what is indicated as tested. My rear rack has a lower tier for the panniers that is maybe 2" or slightly more below the top platform, and this greatly improves putting the trunk bag on and off, as well as less interference between the trunk side pockets and the rear pannier top flap/pocket. This is a full-size rear rack, mounted on a 20" wheel bike so sits about 3" lower overall, and thus the panniers about 5" lower overall. The rack platform is about 5" higher than it needs to be for tire clearance, but this helps keep the big panniers high enough to clear tall curbs when pedaling near them, but it also means the trunk bag (heavy, full of tools and spares) sits high for the bike. The rear panniers are both completely behind the rear axle, to provide pedaling heel clearance. This sounds contrary to Blackburn's recommendations, but this is a stable setup, even when heavily loaded. Ironically, it's a Blackburn rack, TRX-2, I chose it specifically for the far-aft pannier position, and lower tier setup. However, in the article, Blackburn doesn't show the lowrider rear rack, just the standard rear rack (centered over the axle), and mentions "frame whip" with the panniers that far aft, but that may be due to insufficient rack lateral rigidity and not the mass position with respect to the bike overall. My rear rack and stays are rigid laterally. My front panniers hang from a "sixer" front brakepost rack, and thus, due to the small (20" wheel) fork length, the panniers end up being "lowriders" even without a proper lowrider rack. Again, stable setup.
Here’s what the Nitto Campee looks like. The rack is using low low-riders like those described in the Blackburn article. The rails aren’t just a few inches from the top of the rack like you might find on some of the Tubus racks.
__________________
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!



cyccommute is offline  
Old 04-28-24, 11:55 AM
  #19  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,334

Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.

Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3523 Post(s)
Liked 1,500 Times in 1,172 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute
Here’s what the Nitto Campee looks like. The rack is using low low-riders like those described in the Blackburn article. The rails aren’t just a few inches from the top of the rack like you might find on some of the Tubus racks.
Thanks for posting. I have never seen a rack like that and the one pictured. I am quite sure that would be a heel strike problem for me.

From their diagrams, they also have the bottoms angling outwards so that the derailleur has adequate clearance to function, which means it could be quite wide in back.
Tourist in MSN is offline  
Old 04-28-24, 02:22 PM
  #20  
Senior Member
 
robow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,890
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 612 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times in 200 Posts

*NITTO* campee rear rack (silver)

IMO, At $206, a solution in search of a problem (that doesn't exist)

robow is offline  
Likes For robow:
Old 04-28-24, 07:55 PM
  #21  
Senior Member
 
indyfabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,659
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18593 Post(s)
Liked 16,085 Times in 7,549 Posts
Originally Posted by robow

*NITTO* campee rear rack (silver)

IMO, At $206, a solution in search of a problem (that doesn't exist)
I was wondering if that was what the OP was talking about. IIRC, it was/is known as the 33 or 23 or something like that.

Have never understood it, especially with what appears to be a relatively small platform.
indyfabz is offline  
Old 04-28-24, 08:15 PM
  #22  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 2,306
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1054 Post(s)
Liked 569 Times in 458 Posts
Wow, that Nitto Campo lowrider really is low! I'd be less concerned about the mass location, and more concerned that the section aft would wag laterally about the relatively short span on the rack main verticals.

My folder frame (monobeam) is the early Dahon Speed so 4130 chrome moly steel, but it's plenty rigid, even in torsion when climbing with load, that main ovalized beam contains a large torsional section modulus. I've added an improvised "Deltech", but that stiffens it only in longitudinal bending, not torsion.

My rear pannier is just low enough to possibly affect rear derailleur function, except it's all behind the rear axle so doesn't (even though the derailleur switched from Dahon compact forward of the axle to conventional mount aft of the axle), and, is spaced out an inch at the lower mount because the rack is designed for discs (my bike has none, and I would have preferred the non-disc rack so no cantilevered load at the lower mount, but the disc version was all that was left, on clearance sale at Nashbar).

While high rear load (like my heavy trunk bag) might have a mass-damping effect for speed wobble, the pannier load being lower does reduce noticeably the rocking inertia when climbing out of the saddle, I have more leverage on it, especially critical if a long handlebar riser (mine is the old non-telescoping steel riser, so more rigid than the telescoping aluminum riser that was later).

Last edited by Duragrouch; 04-30-24 at 12:36 AM.
Duragrouch is offline  
Old 04-29-24, 04:24 AM
  #23  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,334

Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.

Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3523 Post(s)
Liked 1,500 Times in 1,172 Posts
Originally Posted by indyfabz
I was wondering if that was what the OP was talking about. IIRC, it was/is known as the 33 or 23 or something like that.

Have never understood it, especially with what appears to be a relatively small platform.
Very good point on the small platform.

With my Tubus Logo EVO or Racktime Addit the platforms are quite narrow, but those racks have the tops of my panniers up higher, thus anything that is wide sits on top of the panniers instead of on top of the rack.

But the Nitto rack with the low pannier mounting would need to have a wide enough platform to support anything on top in back.

To make my point, photo below shows my Racktime Addit rack is lower than the tops of the panniers, the rack top bag sits on the panniers, not the rack. I have a sheet of coroplast in the bag to stiffen it, thus it does not sag in the middle. In the photo you can just barely see a gap between rack and rack top bag.



It is very hard to see in my photo above, but my derailleur would hit my pannier when in higher gears if my pannier was several inches lower. I believe that is the reason that the Nitto rack has the pannier mounts spread out that wide at the bottoms of the pannier supports.

One thing I like about the Logo EVO or the Addit racks is that the racks are narrow. Not wide like the Surly rack. That said, for around town use near home, I like a wide platform, but not for touring.

My Logo EVO in the photo below, on that trip I used a smaller rack top bag. On that trip we anticipated not more than three days between grocery stores, thus a lot less volume was needed for luggage. At end of trip the rack top bag was folded up and stowed in a pannier.



In the above example with the Logo EVO, having higher panniers on each side of the rack top helped keep the rack top bag centered, in this case the rack top bag sat on the rack top but was in a valley between the higher panniers. On the Nitto rack, that side support with the panniers would be lacking.
Tourist in MSN is offline  
Likes For Tourist in MSN:
Old 04-29-24, 05:38 AM
  #24  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 2,599

Bikes: 1992 Serotta Colorado II,Co-Motion Speedster, Giant Escape Hybrid, 1977 Schwinn Super Le Tour

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 460 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 112 Times in 85 Posts
Hey Tourist! Enjoy your pics showing the ACA triangle. We are getting ready to ride from Ohio to Tacoma and I just "pressed & flattened " ours!
Tandem Tom is offline  
Old 04-29-24, 07:02 AM
  #25  
Senior Member
 
indyfabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,659
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18593 Post(s)
Liked 16,085 Times in 7,549 Posts
Originally Posted by Tandem Tom
Hey Tourist! Enjoy your pics showing the ACA triangle. We are getting ready to ride from Ohio to Tacoma and I just "pressed & flattened " ours!
Heh. I was recently cleaning out my basement and found one from my 2010 Cycle Vermont tour. It needs a good pressing.
indyfabz is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

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