| |
Main
Date: 03 Jul 2007 11:26:28
From: AEngineerDU
Subject: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
Earlier I posted a query about replacing my Trek-700 and received very
helpful replies. I'm now exploring what are my best options if I buy
a new bike. In many ways I'm a standard, older urban commuter making
short trips every day in whatever weather the skies throw at me.
The one thing that's somewhat different is that I often have to carry
fairly heavy loads on my rear rack, up to 50# in addition to my fully-
clothed 200#. (I stand 5'6").
My question, therefore, is about recommendations for the best style of
bike to deal with these requirements. I've looked at Trek, Jamis and
Specialized web material (all of it horribly written) and cannot
determine whether I want a "road" or "hybrid" or maybe even "comfort"
bike.
I'd like to spend in the <$700 range but would be willing to go higher
if it made a big difference.
Any recommendations would be appreciated.
Jim Mitchell
|
|
| |
Date: 26 Jul 2007 17:13:37
From: AEngineerDU
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
On Jul 3, 7:26 am, AEngineerDU <AEnginee...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Earlier I posted a query about replacing my Trek-700 and received very
> helpful replies. I'm now exploring what are my best options if I buy
> a new bike. In many ways I'm a standard, older urban commuter making
> short trips every day in whatever weather the skies throw at me.
>
> The one thing that's somewhat different is that I often have to carry
> fairly heavy loads on my rear rack, up to 50# in addition to my fully-
> clothed 200#. (I stand 5'6").
>
> My question, therefore, is about recommendations for the best style of
> bike to deal with these requirements. I've looked at Trek, Jamis and
> Specialized web material (all of it horribly written) and cannot
> determine whether I want a "road" or "hybrid" or maybe even "comfort"
> bike.
>
> I'd like to spend in the <$700 range but would be willing to go higher
> if it made a big difference.
>
> Any recommendations would be appreciated.
>
> Jim Mitchell
For what it's worth here's what I finally decided to do after reading
here and consulting with another, hopefully better, local bike shop.
Retension the wheel by hand, with a dope compound to ensure that the
nipples stay tight.
I'm also replacing the drive train and what I believe is called the
head assembly.
|
| |
Date: 07 Jul 2007 23:04:41
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
In article <468fc974$0$16397$88260bb3@free.teranews.com >,
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > writes:
> Tom Keats advocated freewheel hubs:
>> ...
>> I simply have to suggest an older '80s MTB w/ rigid fork,
>> old-style (not V-brake) cantilever brakes, and 6 or 7-speed
>> freewheel. My reasoning for the latter spec is thus: there's
>> not so much dishing in the rear wheel as is required with
>> "narrow chain" clusters, so (IMO) the wheel therefore
>> stands up better to weight-related stresses. Parts are
>> still readily & economically available. I'll even go so
>> far as to recommend a nutted, rather than Quick-Release
>> rear axle. The FAQ has a detailed comparison of failures
>> of both types of axle; I've been able to eke home on
>> busted nutted rear axles by resisting the temptation to
>> pull the loose (non-drive-side) half out, plus some
>> ginger pedalling. Busted QR axles ostensibly can be held
>> together with the skewer, but I opine they're more
>> susceptible to breakage when loaded with cargo as well
>> as rider. I guess going with nutted axles is
>> counter-intuitive, but that's what's worked best for me.
>> YMMV....
>
> I agree with J. Brandt about the benefits of cassette hubs versus
> freewheel hubs as concerns bearing location:
> <http://sheldonbrown.com/brandt/free-k7.html>.
So do I.
But I, like the OP, am talking about adding weight
directly *over* the back wheel of a utility bicycle
carrying a cargo load. Now, bear in mind that I
haven't had much experience with using panniers,
which of course carry loads lower on the bike than
putting stuff on top of the rack (and rear wheel.)
I rather supspect Jobst's experience doesn't include
packing home overweight, too-tall loads of groceries
very much. Of course I could be wrong.
And more extreme dishing (i.e: shorter spokes on the drive
side of the rear wheel) seems to result in greater danger
of spoke breakage when subjected to stresses exceeding
those for which the wheel was designed.
> The really bad part of axles flexing and braking is that this can damage
> the frame by twisting the dropouts.
That's really not much of a consideration with the old-timer
chro-mo MTBs. Maybe with latter-day alu frames.
> Add in that freewheels are a PITA to
> remove compared to a cassette,
They're not that bad if you stick some Phil grease
on the hub threads, and occasionally maintain 'em.
>and the only reason to use freewheel hubs
> would be if they are readily available at very low cost.
They are, here. Especially Hyperglide 14-28s. I'm up
to my knees in 'em. They're practically giving them away.
That, + a PC-48, 'n yer off 'n runnin'.
cheers,
Tom
--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
| |
Date: 06 Jul 2007 03:39:57
From: bob prohaska's usenet account
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
AEngineerDU <AEngineerDU@gmail.com > wrote:
>
> The one thing that's somewhat different is that I often have to carry
> fairly heavy loads on my rear rack, up to 50# in addition to my fully-
> clothed 200#. (I stand 5'6").
>
> My question, therefore, is about recommendations for the best style of
> bike to deal with these requirements. I've looked at Trek, Jamis and
> Specialized web material (all of it horribly written) and cannot
> determine whether I want a "road" or "hybrid" or maybe even "comfort"
> bike.
>
Since nobody else has brought it up, have you considered a chassis
extension? They're made by an outfit called ExtraCycle:
http://www.extracycle.com
I can't vouche for them personally, but I've seen a few around
Davis CA, which is a fairly bike-savvy place. The utility of
a long wheelbase is nicely demonstrated by a good load of
groceries in pannier baskets on a standard-wheelbase bike;
the rig gets very twitchy.
If you're loading to the point that wheel strength becomes an
issue, then a new bike seems worth considering.
bob prohaska
|
| | |
Date: 06 Jul 2007 10:41:01
From: Ron Hardin
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
bob prohaska's usenet account wrote:
> I can't vouche for them personally, but I've seen a few around
> Davis CA, which is a fairly bike-savvy place. The utility of
> a long wheelbase is nicely demonstrated by a good load of
> groceries in pannier baskets on a standard-wheelbase bike;
> the rig gets very twitchy.
Twitchiness is caused by its not being stiff. You can, though,
adjust to the load even so. A flimsy rack or flimsy load produces
the effect.
The chief killer in heavy loads is whether the rear wheel stays true
under load. The load does not give like your butt, and so bumps
really work hard on the wheel.
Huffy MTB wheels have been very good on this, in my experience.
Meaning, no problems with 40 pounds anyway. (You can buy wheels
from Huffy, by the way, in the spare parts department. Or buy one
on a bike and you get other spare parts too. Or just use the bike.)
--
Ron Hardin
rhhardin@mindspring.com
On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.
|
| |
Date: 05 Jul 2007 17:23:54
From: SMS
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
AEngineerDU wrote:
> Earlier I posted a query about replacing my Trek-700 and received very
> helpful replies. I'm now exploring what are my best options if I buy
> a new bike. In many ways I'm a standard, older urban commuter making
> short trips every day in whatever weather the skies throw at me.
>
> The one thing that's somewhat different is that I often have to carry
> fairly heavy loads on my rear rack, up to 50# in addition to my fully-
> clothed 200#. (I stand 5'6").
>
> My question, therefore, is about recommendations for the best style of
> bike to deal with these requirements. I've looked at Trek, Jamis and
> Specialized web material (all of it horribly written) and cannot
> determine whether I want a "road" or "hybrid" or maybe even "comfort"
> bike.
>
> I'd like to spend in the <$700 range but would be willing to go higher
> if it made a big difference.
It all depends on your preferences, there are several ways to go.
A true touring bicycle, such as the Surly Long Haul Trucker ($900) would
be fine for 50# loads, with the advantage of also being a capable road
bike for recreational riding. "http://www.surlybikes.com/lht_comp.html"
The Windsor Tourist
("http://bikesdirect.com/products/windsor/tourist.htm") would also be
good and it's $600.
OTOH, something like the Novara Buzz ($629) would be a good commute and
hauler bicycle ("http://www.rei.com/product/744800"). Be sure that a)
you're an REI member, and b) you get an REI Visa prior to purchase as
this will be 15% back. Or wait for the fall sale where it's likely that
the bicycles will be 20% off, plus the 5% from the Visa card.
Get a good quality rear rack of course.
See "http://nordicgroup.us/rearracks" for details. Also get good lights
of course, see "http://bicyclelighting.com".
|
| |
Date: 04 Jul 2007 16:36:12
From: Brian Kerr
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
AEngineerDU wrote:
> Earlier I posted a query about replacing my Trek-700 and received very
> helpful replies. I'm now exploring what are my best options if I buy
> a new bike. In many ways I'm a standard, older urban commuter making
> short trips every day in whatever weather the skies throw at me.
>
> The one thing that's somewhat different is that I often have to carry
> fairly heavy loads on my rear rack, up to 50# in addition to my fully-
> clothed 200#. (I stand 5'6").
>
> My question, therefore, is about recommendations for the best style of
> bike to deal with these requirements. I've looked at Trek, Jamis and
> Specialized web material (all of it horribly written) and cannot
> determine whether I want a "road" or "hybrid" or maybe even "comfort"
> bike.
>
> I'd like to spend in the <$700 range but would be willing to go higher
> if it made a big difference.
>
> Any recommendations would be appreciated.
>
> Jim Mitchell
>
I suggest you consider the Jamis Nova. It retails for $1300 which I
realize is a little higher than you are hoping for, but you'll forget
about the price over the next 10+ years as you enjoy the bike. It is
actually a cyclocross bicycle and offers some intriguing features including:
an extra strong bottom bracket with oversize external bearings (great
for heavy guys wanting to put power to the wheels)
heat treated cro-moly rear stays and investment cast dropouts
Reynolds 631 cro-moly frame
double eyelets on the rear for fender and rack mounting, eyelets on the
front for fender mounting
32C tires (also great for heavier guys)
With an advertised weight of 22.25# and a complete Shimano 105 group I
think this bicycle would be an ideal fit for you. It has the strength
you need but it's not so heavy as an old 80's style that was previously
suggested. It also affords you the opportunity to take advantage of
today's technological advances such as the brifters, etc.
50T/34T crankset - much more realistic gearing for non-racers than the
53T/39T many bikes today come with.
If you really like Trek you could look to the touring model 520 but for
about the same price I personally like the Jamis Nova better.
I should say I do own a Nova so I may be biased, but for commuting and
occasional heavier load trips I think it is the way to go. It's also
surprisingly quick unloaded, even with the 32C tires!
HTH,
Brian
|
| |
Date: 03 Jul 2007 23:01:45
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
In article <1183461988.537157.275010@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com >,
AEngineerDU <AEngineerDU@gmail.com > writes:
> Earlier I posted a query about replacing my Trek-700 and received very
> helpful replies. I'm now exploring what are my best options if I buy
> a new bike. In many ways I'm a standard, older urban commuter making
> short trips every day in whatever weather the skies throw at me.
>
> The one thing that's somewhat different is that I often have to carry
> fairly heavy loads on my rear rack, up to 50# in addition to my fully-
> clothed 200#. (I stand 5'6").
>
> My question, therefore, is about recommendations for the best style of
> bike to deal with these requirements.
I simply have to suggest an older '80s MTB w/ rigid fork,
old-style (not V-brake) cantilever brakes, and 6 or 7-speed
freewheel. My reasoning for the latter spec is thus: there's
not so much dishing in the rear wheel as is required with
"narrow chain" clusters, so (IMO) the wheel therefore
stands up better to weight-related stresses. Parts are
still readily & economically available. I'll even go so
far as to recommend a nutted, rather than Quick-Release
rear axle. The FAQ has a detailed comparison of failures
of both types of axle; I've been able to eke home on
busted nutted rear axles by resisting the temptation to
pull the loose (non-drive-side) half out, plus some
ginger pedalling. Busted QR axles ostensibly can be held
together with the skewer, but I opine they're more
susceptible to breakage when loaded with cargo as well
as rider. I guess going with nutted axles is
counter-intuitive, but that's what's worked best for me.
YMMV.
Those old MTBs have the eyelets (mount points) for fenders
and racks. They also have the low gearing for hauling weight.
I've had all kinds of bad luck with busting aluminum racks,
but all kinds of good luck with finding new freebie ones.
In fact I passed one by today, discarded in a street planter,
because I just didn't need it. I also shone-on a similarly
discarded, good kickstand. The joys of living in a cycling
city.
Anyways, if I was going to do an Abercrombie & Fitch
expedition, I'd want a steel rack, like a Tubus or
Bruce Gordon. And then there are Axiom[tm] racks.
The main thing with rear racks is to have 4 points
of mounting.
50 pounds is, I think, pretty much the upper limit
for a rear load. With weights somewhat above that,
I think it's time to think about having both front
and rear racks, and arrange your load 2/3 in the
back and 1/3 in the front. If you're not going to
do it that often, a trailer is probably your best
option -- use it when you need it, and put it away
when you don't.
cheers,
Tom
--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
| | |
Date: 07 Jul 2007 13:04:20
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
Tom Keats advocated freewheel hubs:
> ...
> I simply have to suggest an older '80s MTB w/ rigid fork,
> old-style (not V-brake) cantilever brakes, and 6 or 7-speed
> freewheel. My reasoning for the latter spec is thus: there's
> not so much dishing in the rear wheel as is required with
> "narrow chain" clusters, so (IMO) the wheel therefore
> stands up better to weight-related stresses. Parts are
> still readily & economically available. I'll even go so
> far as to recommend a nutted, rather than Quick-Release
> rear axle. The FAQ has a detailed comparison of failures
> of both types of axle; I've been able to eke home on
> busted nutted rear axles by resisting the temptation to
> pull the loose (non-drive-side) half out, plus some
> ginger pedalling. Busted QR axles ostensibly can be held
> together with the skewer, but I opine they're more
> susceptible to breakage when loaded with cargo as well
> as rider. I guess going with nutted axles is
> counter-intuitive, but that's what's worked best for me.
> YMMV....
I agree with J. Brandt about the benefits of cassette hubs versus
freewheel hubs as concerns bearing location:
<http://sheldonbrown.com/brandt/free-k7.html >.
The really bad part of axles flexing and braking is that this can damage
the frame by twisting the dropouts. Add in that freewheels are a PITA to
remove compared to a cassette, and the only reason to use freewheel hubs
would be if they are readily available at very low cost.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| |
Date: 03 Jul 2007 21:25:03
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
In article <ta3ql4-dul.ln1@curare.zuvembi.homelinux.org >,
Dane Buson <dane@unseen.edu > writes:
> The last option I'll throw out is to buy an Xtracycle. I use mine for
> grocery shopping and kid hauling here in Seattle.
>
> Complete cargo bikes starting at $599:
>
> http://www.xtracycle.com/complete-subs-c-5.html
Here's another intriguing option along similar
lines -- the Yuba Mundo:
http://yubaride.com/
It's pretty in the pictures, anyway. I'd like to
see one in person.
cheers,
Tom
--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
| |
Date: 03 Jul 2007 17:00:00
From: AEngineerDU
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
I spent time today at two bikeshops. The one that sold me the
original wheel now wants to sell me a hand-built wheel, though they
weren't specific about the characteristics. Another said "replace the
bike" but weren't convincing about the wheel characteristics of the
new one. I'm not overwhelmed with the advice they've givenr.
************
Perhaps someone can provide an explanation about what's actually
happening and what I can do about it. The symptoms are that the nuts
on the wheel become loosened (unevenly) from a presumably carefully
tightened state and thus allow the wheel to get out of true.
- Is this a common symptom of overloading a bike/wheel?
- Or is it perhaps an indicator that the the spokes and nuts are
somehow not proper - I've certainly never had it happen before in
fifty years of bike riding?
- Would it make sense to try and address this problem with my current
wheel by getting some sort of "dope" to prevent the nuts from
loosening?
BTW - I ride with heavy loads only occasionally - most of the time
it's me and pannier weighing perhaps 15#.
> At 200 lbs + 50 lbs of cargo you need decent wheels. Any 32 or 36 spoke
> rear wheel *should* be able to handle those loads. That predicates that
> it is tensioned sufficiently however. If it's a machine-built wheel out
> of a box it won't be. A *good* bike shop would have retensioned it or
> offered to build you a stronger hand-built wheel. Have they done that?
>
> If you are running less than 32 spokes on your rear wheel, invest in a
> new wheel.
>
> Other options are available, like using a dishless setup with an
> internal gear hub, or running heavy duty rear hubs (48 spoke or
> what-not). I doubt it's worth the expense or bother to you to do that
> however.
>
> The last option I'll throw out is to buy an Xtracycle. I use mine for
> grocery shopping and kid hauling here in Seattle.
>
> Complete cargo bikes starting at $599:
>
> http://www.xtracycle.com/complete-subs-c-5.html
>
> You can also buy the kit to retrofit the bike you currently have (the
> option I chose). I love my Xtracycle, but I'm blessed in having plenty
> of garage space to store bikes.
>
> --
> Dane Buson - sigd...@unixbigots.org
> Cross platform apps are like unisex underwear.
|
| | |
Date: 18 Jul 2007 13:34:08
From: Dane Buson
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
AEngineerDU <AEngineerDU@gmail.com > wrote:
>
> Perhaps someone can provide an explanation about what's actually
> happening and what I can do about it. The symptoms are that the nuts
> on the wheel become loosened (unevenly) from a presumably carefully
> tightened state and thus allow the wheel to get out of true.
They're called spoke nipples not nuts.
If they were under sufficiently high tension, they would not unscrew in use.
> - Is this a common symptom of overloading a bike/wheel?
No, it a common symptom of a poorly built wheel.
> - Or is it perhaps an indicator that the the spokes and nuts are
> somehow not proper - I've certainly never had it happen before in
> fifty years of bike riding?
Possible, but unlikely.
> - Would it make sense to try and address this problem with my current
> wheel by getting some sort of "dope" to prevent the nuts from
> loosening?
Not really. But a re-tensioning of the wheel to an even *high* tension
would probably fix it.
--
Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org
"I am not sure what this is, but an `F' would only dignify it."
-- English Professor
|
| | |
Date: 05 Jul 2007 20:25:13
From: Booker C. Bense
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
In article <1183507200.594896.143690@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com >,
AEngineerDU <AEngineerDU@gmail.com > wrote:
>I spent time today at two bikeshops. The one that sold me the
>original wheel now wants to sell me a hand-built wheel, though they
>weren't specific about the characteristics. Another said "replace the
>bike" but weren't convincing about the wheel characteristics of the
>new one. I'm not overwhelmed with the advice they've givenr.
>
>************
>
>Perhaps someone can provide an explanation about what's actually
>happening and what I can do about it. The symptoms are that the nuts
>on the wheel become loosened (unevenly) from a presumably carefully
>tightened state and thus allow the wheel to get out of true.
By nuts, do you mean at the end of the spokes? The bits that
attach it to the rim? Generally they are called spoke nipples.
If those are coming loose it's a sign that either the wheel
wasn't properly built in the first place ( spoke tension too
loose ) or the rim is bent. Most machine built wheels need some
hand fine tuning for long life. What you describe is typical of
wheels that are under-tensioned.
>
>- Is this a common symptom of overloading a bike/wheel?
>- Or is it perhaps an indicator that the the spokes and nuts are
>somehow not proper - I've certainly never had it happen before in
>fifty years of bike riding?
>
>- Would it make sense to try and address this problem with my current
>wheel by getting some sort of "dope" to prevent the nuts from
>loosening?
>
>BTW - I ride with heavy loads only occasionally - most of the time
>it's me and pannier weighing perhaps 15#.
Ask around and see if you can find the local wheel building
guru. There is generally one around somewhere and have him/her
tension and true the wheel.
Or you can try it yourself, wheelbuilding is simple if you
have the patience. Try working through this tutorial
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/wheelbuild.html
If you have a wheel that's already laced and nearly true, all the
hard work has been done. You just need to go through the steps
of getting the spokes to the proper tension. Rear wheels are
harder than front wheels, but even if you never touch a spoke
wrench you'll at least understand what the shop should be doing.
_ Booker C. Bense
|
| |
Date: 03 Jul 2007 07:24:36
From: Will
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
On Jul 3, 8:23 am, AEngineerDU <AEnginee...@gmail.com > wrote:
> I've not had problems with the rack coming apart. My problems
> (recently) have been with the rear wheel not staying true. The LBS
> claims that it's probably due to my carrying loads on the rear - this
> being somewhat suspect because I had a rear wheel for 15 +/- years
> that stayed true.
You might want to look here:
http://www.cetmaracks.com/
I have not used this product but I've seen it around town, mostly
students lugging loads of books and gear.
When I was a kid, I used to deliver newspapers via bike racked front
and back (remember those giant Wald baskets?). Loading the front is
definitely better from a handling perspective. These days I use a BOB
trailer for general hauling, but this cetma rack is a lot cheaper and
has plenty of capacity.
|
| | |
Date: 05 Jul 2007 10:48:48
From: It's Chris
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
Fifty pound? I don't carry that much on my bike even on a long tour!
Even distributed, I would think it would make the bike too unmanageable
to be safe.
Now don't get me wrong, it is possible to transport heavy loads (besides
the rider!) on a bike. I've brought home as much as 100 pounds of feed
at a time using my bike. But I carry it in a two wheeled trailer behind
the bike.
Trailers are a lot less expensive than new bikes too. Just be sure the
trailer capacity is up to the weight you're carrying.
- -
Compliments of:
"Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"
If you want to E-mail me use:
ChrisZCorner "at" webtv "dot" net
My website:
http://geocities.com/czcorner
|
| |
Date: 03 Jul 2007 13:23:27
From: AEngineerDU
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
On Jul 3, 8:48 am, cmcanulty <cmcanu...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Use a blackburn expedition rear rack, they come with a lifetime
> replacement warranty . I carry a dog, groceries, books, etc all the
> time. I have gotten new racks free 2x. Also since I learned this no
> more rack breakage-bungee all heavy loads down to bottom of rack by
> the axle to pull rack together. If you attach to top of rack under the
> rack body you pull rack apart.
Thanks very much, I'll probably get one if I buy a new bicycle.
I've not had problems with the rack coming apart. My problems
(recently) have been with the rear wheel not staying true. The LBS
claims that it's probably due to my carrying loads on the rear - this
being somewhat suspect because I had a rear wheel for 15 +/- years
that stayed true.
|
| | |
Date: 05 Jul 2007 20:14:48
From: Booker C. Bense
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
In article <1183469007.016797.197680@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com >,
AEngineerDU <AEngineerDU@gmail.com > wrote:
>
>I've not had problems with the rack coming apart. My problems
>(recently) have been with the rear wheel not staying true. The LBS
>claims that it's probably due to my carrying loads on the rear - this
>being somewhat suspect because I had a rear wheel for 15 +/- years
>that stayed true.
>
Get a better LBS that will build you a solid wheel. If rear
wheels going out of true is your only problem with your current
bike, then you just need better wheels. There are lot's of people
doing loaded touring with much higher loads than you're talking
about.
Check out this site
http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/Wheels.asp
A fatter tire on the back will also help with load carrying and
getting long life out of your wheels.
_ Booker C. Bense
|
| | |
Date: 03 Jul 2007 07:33:33
From: Dane Buson
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
AEngineerDU <AEngineerDU@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jul 3, 8:48 am, cmcanulty <cmcanu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Use a blackburn expedition rear rack, they come with a lifetime
>> replacement warranty . I carry a dog, groceries, books, etc all the
>> time. I have gotten new racks free 2x. Also since I learned this no
>> more rack breakage-bungee all heavy loads down to bottom of rack by
>> the axle to pull rack together. If you attach to top of rack under the
>> rack body you pull rack apart.
>
> Thanks very much, I'll probably get one if I buy a new bicycle.
>
> I've not had problems with the rack coming apart. My problems
> (recently) have been with the rear wheel not staying true. The LBS
> claims that it's probably due to my carrying loads on the rear - this
> being somewhat suspect because I had a rear wheel for 15 +/- years
> that stayed true.
At 200 lbs + 50 lbs of cargo you need decent wheels. Any 32 or 36 spoke
rear wheel *should* be able to handle those loads. That predicates that
it is tensioned sufficiently however. If it's a machine-built wheel out
of a box it won't be. A *good* bike shop would have retensioned it or
offered to build you a stronger hand-built wheel. Have they done that?
If you are running less than 32 spokes on your rear wheel, invest in a
new wheel.
Other options are available, like using a dishless setup with an
internal gear hub, or running heavy duty rear hubs (48 spoke or
what-not). I doubt it's worth the expense or bother to you to do that
however.
The last option I'll throw out is to buy an Xtracycle. I use mine for
grocery shopping and kid hauling here in Seattle.
Complete cargo bikes starting at $599:
http://www.xtracycle.com/complete-subs-c-5.html
You can also buy the kit to retrofit the bike you currently have (the
option I chose). I love my Xtracycle, but I'm blessed in having plenty
of garage space to store bikes.
--
Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org
Cross platform apps are like unisex underwear.
|
| |
Date: 03 Jul 2007 12:48:48
From: cmcanulty
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
Use a blackburn expedition rear rack, they come with a lifetime
replacement warranty . I carry a dog, groceries, books, etc all the
time. I have gotten new racks free 2x. Also since I learned this no
more rack breakage-bungee all heavy loads down to bottom of rack by
the axle to pull rack together. If you attach to top of rack under the
rack body you pull rack apart.
|
| | |
Date: 03 Jul 2007 13:16:30
From: Ron Hardin
Subject: Re: Right Style Bike for Carrying Rear Loads
|
cmcanulty wrote:
>
> Use a blackburn expedition rear rack, they come with a lifetime
> replacement warranty . I carry a dog, groceries, books, etc all the
> time. I have gotten new racks free 2x. Also since I learned this no
> more rack breakage-bungee all heavy loads down to bottom of rack by
> the axle to pull rack together. If you attach to top of rack under the
> rack body you pull rack apart.
I use the Delta Megarack (good for 40 pounds, it says; of course you
can go higher) which is pleasantly rigid. I use a Huffy hard-tail
MTB. The failures are going to be in the rear wheel, but Huffy does
remarkably well with the rear wheel staying true.
Rope a milk crate atop it; and since the milk crate is going to half
hang off the rear of the rack, put a strip of scrap wood under it,
either across the milk crate at the back of the rack, or along the
rack and extending under the whole milk crate, so that the load isn't
on a single bit of plastic. Holds up for years. You can tie plastic
grocery bags to the crate holes, when you buy too much. A milk crate
holds two paper grocery bags, or 4 gallon jugs, easily.
My setup http://home.att.net/~rhhardin4/odyssy9.jpg
The trailer adds about 150 lbs in capacity, when the 40 on the rear
and 20 in the front basket isn't enough. Hills get very steep though,
with that load.
--
Ron Hardin
rhhardin@mindspring.com
On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.
|
|
