I did a search on this and the last one with anyone comparing the two was from 2011. Maybe some more people have some new insights or info for us all.

I have a Surly Disc Trucker in size 58cm with the typical 700c wheels. I'm looking to put longboard p45 fenders on, if that matters (probably not). I am 6 feet tall with a 34" inseam. I will definately want a trunk bag for normal riding around and day rides of 40 - 60 miles. I don't mind rigging up some kind of platform to compensate for the narrow top of the logo, if everything else points me in that direction.

So it comes down to things that I possibly couldn't know about. How the panniers fit, how easy to put on, take off, whether the lower position of the panniers on the logo really matters or not, etc. I probably couldn't begin to guess about other things that are nice or irritating about either one. Maybe it doesn't matter that much. I really don't want to end up buying both. I have way too much other stuff yet to buy.

If you have had one or both, I would appreciate your thoughts on what you like/liked or don't/didn't.

Thanks.

I have The Logo .. it works fine .. but it has a Narrower 10cm wide upper ,
so your bag adapter spreader idea may be a good concept.

By using Ortlieb's Panniers I slide & fix the hooks in their slots, well forward ,
so the bags are set back more, on the rack , for heel clearance..

I like that the Logos ends aren't bent up under the saddle which makes it a bit easier to cram my rack bag under it.

Panniers on the lower rungs make them a bit easier to take off without removing the rack bag first, I imagine - minor point tho

This one has its own mounting scheme QR ORTLIEB Produkt-Details

Klick Fix is another quick snap rack top bag Mount..
sold separate from bag, though they offer rear baskets using the same fitting .
to casually carry stuff..

I have the Cargo. It went on easy and is a very solid rack. I don't love the turned up tubing on the top of the rack since I mount my dry bag lengthwise. It isn't a huge deal but that design feature isn't doing anything for me. The lower mounting bars on the logo look they would make it easier to secure things to the top of the rack. I'd like to hear from others about how helpful this is.

Another possible consideration with the Logo is the length of the platform. I don't like my tent poles hanging off the back because it obscures my blinky lights.

Have you looked at The Touring Store's website? There are direct comparisons there of the cargo and logo. Also, Wayne knows this stuff well and is happy to answer your questions on the phone.

I see also that there are 40 reviews of the Logo on Wiggle.

I have looked over all the info on Wayne's site. I spoke with him on the phone last year right after I had purchased my Surly. Of course we talked mostly of touring and a bit about what might be good for my wife who is a bit on the short side. My own needs are more defined now, so what we talked about last year doesn't cover all my questions now. Wayne has lost his voice due to illness and cannot chat on the phone at this time.

The point regarding the flat top of the Logo is a good one. I plan on making some stuff to fit my own needs better and that would definately be a bonus. I will also have to measure my tent poles. Another good point.

I'll check out the reviews on Wiggle.

Thanks.

That's interesting, but overkill for me. As far as trunk bags, I'm going to rig something up myself or modify something more cost effective. My trunk bag will really just be for fair weather day rides. I don't need fancy, expensive Ortlieb for that and I doubt very much I'll be using a trunk bag for touring.

I have a Cargo and prefer it over the Logo. I'm not a fan of the low mounting point of the Logo and can't really see the point. The idea that you want the load on the back mounted lower isn't necessarily a good one either. Frank Berto did tests for Bicycling Magazine when Blackburn came out with the Lowrider rack back in the 80s and determined that while mounting the bags low on the front wheel helped with handling, mounting them low over the rear wheel destabilized the bike and made it harder to handle.

The upsweep on the front of the rack also keeps tents and sleeping bags from sliding forward.

As to the width, the Logo uses a similar profile to the Vega which I have on my commuter bike. Traditional velcro mounts for racktop bags are too wide for the Vega and the bags tend to flop around more. I've solved the problem by using an Ortlieb mounting like the bag that fietsbob linked to. I used a basket adapter from Ortieb and a Racktime Trunkit plus the Ortlieb adapter. The Ortlieb bag that fietsbob linked to is on the small size while the Trunkit is larger. Unfortunately, the Trunkit can't be used on an Ortlieb rack as is because of the way it mounts on the Racktime rack.

I wouldn't have had to go through all that hassle (on 6 bikes, by the way), if I'd used a Cargo which fits wider trunk bags better.

I struggled with a similar conundrum a few weeks ago, essentially, trying to figure out the different ways I'll be using my bike and how to scale down and build-up cargo accessories for each use.

I ended up not going with a trunk bag at all. I ended up going with a saddle bag for day trip duty. It's rad.

I remember now that Wayne's suggestion for me was to get the Logo for my wife who is 5'2", for the ease of throwing her leg over the baggage. After reading over the info on the site again, I'm leaning toward the Cargo. However, I am curious as to why you mind things slipping forward. Wouldn't you use the seatpost as a stop and tie things down accordingly? I'm asking as someone who has yet to tour, so I have no experience.

And while we're at it, what do you like for a front rack?

I went through this when I bought my rack and frankly, I ended with the Logo because they had it in silver and it matched my bike. It turned out the lower rails make it easier to strap things on the rack while the panniers are on. I wouldn't go back to a "standard" rack for that alone, unless it's ultralight. I prefer the flat front too. I use a trunk bag when not touring and the narrower platform has never been a problem. Not sure why the front part isn't wider though.

For front rack, I use and Old Man Mountain Sherpa and it's solid and convenient.

What trunk bag do you use and how is it attached? Thanks for the info. I'm back on the fence.

Why not a Cosmo? Lower rails are nice for attaching/removing bags without interfering with what's on the rack. After using a Topeak rack with lower rails I had some brazed on a Cargo.

It's a MEC trunk bag. Mine doesn't have a shoulder strap underneath like the current model. The velcro attachements clip over the bag and you can tighten them, unlike many trunk bags. The Cosmo looks nice. The front of the platform is open and raised though. The old Cargo is like that and it was minus when I chose mine. The new Cargo platform is closed so you can attach things more securely.

I have cantilever brakes on my touring bike and anything that slides forward would hit the brake cable first. That's not good for the operation of the brakes and the brake cable can wear holes in the waterproof bags. If the cargo on the top of the rack is bulky enough, it could interfere with your legs as well. It's best to have the cargo strapped down tightly but stuff happens.

For a front rack, I use a Tubus Tara lowrider rack. It's about the best one I've every seen or used.

I have the Cargo and can't say enough good things about it. As CCC said, the upturned keeps bags from hitting your brakes. The wider top makes it better for carrying trunk bags. All Tubus racks are designed to fit seamlessly with Ortlieb panniers.

Logo Evo here. Had the Logo first (older model) then was nearly t-boned by a motorist, the rack was destroyed but it saved the rest of my bike. I wanted to replace it but by then the Logo Evo was already out as the new replacement model. Just as happy with the new one...if not happier. You noted that you are about 6' with a 34" inseam. I'm pretty much the same and have size 13 ft to go with all that. If you have bigger feet like me, the extra few centimeters of rearward pannier placement afforded by the Logo Evo is really great to have. I also like that the rack is narrower at the top than it is at the bottom. It makes the bike, loaded with panniers, narrower than most rear racks. Also, the lower rail positions the top of most panniers so that htey are level with the top deck of the rack. This lends better to laying things across the top of the rack AND the tops of the panniers for more capacity and better security of the load.

Many people talk about stability with regards to positioning of racks/panniers on a bicycle. My perspective, as an engineering student, is that the closer to a pivot that a mass is placed. The less force that mass can exert about that pivot (what is called a moment). For bicycles with respect to panniers, there are two pivots of concern, as I see it. With the bicycle frame being a reference plane and the ground another, the frame pivots about the intersection of it's plane with the ground plane; where the rubber meets the road, so to speak. To better illustrate this, imagine you are out of the saddle, cranking up a hill. Most cyclists will have the bike frame rocking from left to right as a result of the intense cranking. A higher mounted pannier in this situation has more leverage about the pivot of the contact point between the tires and the road. Theoretically, the lower the panniers are mounted, the less effect they can have on influencing this left to right motion of the bicycle and the more likely the bicycle will respond as if it were unladen (except for the added mass, of course). The other set of pivots are about the axles of the bicycle. Imagine when turning left to right, that bike frame pivots about a vertical axis that passes through the rear wheel/ground contact point and the rear axle. The nearer the center of mass of the panniers to this vertical axis, similar to the other pivot mentioned previously, the less of an effect the added mass will have on the bike's turning because it has less leverage about this axis.

It comes down to a matter of preference, really. What some will call stable, others may call unresponsive. What some may call nimble, others may call squirrelly. I, for one, prefer a bicycle that handles more like it is not loaded. So, the lower the load and the closer to the aforementioned vertical axes, the more "nimble"; in my opinion. Additionally it is a well observed phenomenon that with a heavy load centered behind the rear axle, many cyclist experience wobble at higher speeds which is a result of the cumulative vibrations oscillating the rear rack in sort of a positive feedback loop. Small vibrations cause the rack and load to wobble which in turn causes the frame to wobble which causes more vibrations thus increasing the wobbling unless the rider slows down to control the situation. Unfortunately for me, I have to put my load as far back as it can be placed on my rack so that I do not experience heel strike. This means that basically, I have to be very careful to control my downhill speed when the bike is heavily loaded in the rear.

So, with all this in consideration, the logo offers a lower rail for mounting panniers, thus getting closer to the pivot point of the wheel with the road. Because it is also narrower, it keeps the load closer to the center-line of the bicycle having similar effect as already discussed. Mind you, we are talking about positional differences of less than 10% but hey, every bit counts right? I don't claim to be an expert on this subject, just my personal observations and thoughts as a cyclist, bike mechanic, and engineering student.

I've never used the Logo, but have used the Cargo extensively over the past 2 years. It has worked out very well for me while touring, or grocery shopping rides from home. Its solid , and wide enough. Easy to install.