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

Lowrider boss location - how does your bike measure up?

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.

Lowrider boss location - how does your bike measure up?

Reply

Old 02-24-12, 11:57 PM
  #1  
Chris_in_Miami
missing in action
Thread Starter
 
Chris_in_Miami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,525
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Lowrider boss location - how does your bike measure up?

Another recent thread in this forum brought up the topic of standardization of the position of mid-fork braze ons as it relates to rack compatibility, and it got me wondering if such a standard existed. I decided to measure the bikes in my garage and found the following measurements (from the center of the mid-fork boss to the center of the rearmost dropout eyelet on the fork) :

1992 Santana Vision 70mm
1987 Schwinn High Sierra 70mm
1989(?) Peugeot Alpin 68mm
1985 Schwinn Voyageur 60mm

I don't believe there is a real standard, but I'm still wondering how broad the range of measurements is. I'd like to hear how other bikes measure up and it may prove useful to have a record of these measurements. Please share your own bike's measurement as described above
Chris_in_Miami is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-12, 02:13 AM
  #2  
seeker333
-
 
seeker333's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,603

Bikes: yes!

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 188 Post(s)
Check your measurement and/or conversion (25.4mm per inch).

I have 4 forks from 3 manufacturers, 3 measure 165mm, 1 measures 175mm.

I believe 165mm is the accepted standard, and the one used by Tubus, Surly, Civia (QBP brands in general).
seeker333 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-12, 08:53 AM
  #3  
rogerstg
Fred-ish
 
rogerstg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 1,800
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
1990 Miyata 1000 = 165mm
2009 Windsor Tourst = 160mm (Nashbar low rider rack fits well)
2009? Fantom CX = 165mm
rogerstg is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-12, 09:32 AM
  #4  
Chris_in_Miami
missing in action
Thread Starter
 
Chris_in_Miami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,525
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Originally Posted by seeker333 View Post
Check your measurement and/or conversion (25.4mm per inch).
Yes, I'm off to a great start

1992 Santana Vision - 170mm
1987 Schwinn High Sierra - 170mm
1989(?) Peugeot Alpin - 168mm
1985 Schwinn Voyageur - 160mm
Chris_in_Miami is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-12, 09:46 AM
  #5  
njkayaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,873
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1555 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Chris_in_Miami View Post
Yes, I'm off to a great start

1992 Santana Vision - 170mm
1987 Schwinn High Sierra - 170mm
1989(?) Peugeot Alpin - 168mm
1985 Schwinn Voyageur - 160mm
+- 2mm is probably within acceptable tolerances. The 160mm is the only different one.

Keep in mind that the acceptable range in distance numbers would be larger for a horizontal slot than it would be for two holes.

I get 173mm on my Rocky Mountain Sherpa (this might be 1-2mm off).

================

As far as I recall, the Blackburn Lowrider was the first of that kind of rack (it went against convention). It's that rack that motivated putting on the mid-fork eyelets (they didn't exist commonly before the Lowrider). And other manufacturers made their own versions of the Lowrider (presumably, matching the mounting dimentions).

http://www.adventurecycling.org/feat...ack_primer.cfm

In the early 1980s, Blackburn directed a series of experiments mixing various combinations of front and rear panniers, high and low pannier mounting, and handlebar bags. Blackburn and his test rider, Jim Gentes (who went on to found Giro helmets), found that the best-handling combination was high-mount rear panniers, low-mount front panniers, and a bare minimum of weight in a handlebar bag.
Of course, it's possible that some bicycle manufacturers didn't consider the location of the eyelets very carefully.

The end-fork eyelet the Lowrider kinds of racks use (the lower-rear one), is the fender eyelet (the original purpose). The eyelet at the front-top of the fork was the rack eyelet.

Randonneur bikes sometimes have small front racks (for supporting large handle bar bags, etc) and there might be eyelets on the fork for these racks (and the eyelets are higher up on the fork than the lowrider eyelets are located).

Last edited by njkayaker; 02-25-12 at 10:08 AM.
njkayaker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-12, 09:54 AM
  #6  
Chris_in_Miami
missing in action
Thread Starter
 
Chris_in_Miami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,525
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Yes, I was surprised to find that on a well regarded bike from that era. I measured it several times to be sure.
Chris_in_Miami is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-12, 10:03 AM
  #7  
njkayaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,873
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1555 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Chris_in_Miami View Post
Yes, I was surprised to find that on a well regarded bike from that era. I measured it several times to be sure.
For a rack that has a long-enough horizontal slot for the eyelet, it's the vertical distance that is critical. That is, it's possible that a original Lowrider rack would fit fine on the old Schwinn (1985 is around when the Lowrider was introduced).

Note, too, that increased fork rake or decreased head-tube angle will increase the distance between the two eyelets.

The mid-fork eyelets exist because of the original Lowrider rack.

Last edited by njkayaker; 02-25-12 at 10:14 AM.
njkayaker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-12, 10:51 AM
  #8  
Jim Kukula
Senior Member
 
Jim Kukula's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Utah
Posts: 589

Bikes: Thorn Nomad Mk2, 1996 Trek 520, Workcycles Transport, Brompton

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Both my 2010 Thorn Nomad Mk2 and my 1996 Trek 520 measure 165 mm.
Jim Kukula is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-12, 11:50 AM
  #9  
thecrunge
member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
My 1998 Cannondale T1000 measures 167mm.
thecrunge is offline  
Reply With Quote

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


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service