You are reading a single comment by @umop3pisdn and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
umop3pisdn-
I dislike frame bags for how they sometimes bulge if not packed perfectly.
I also find when doing more distance I prefer my knees to be following a comfortable path and not trying to avoid rubbing on a bag.
And I like stuff sacks for how they compress things.
A bar bag and stuff sack is already a nice thing... I just want similar on the rear of the bike. And it makes sense to point it in the direction of travel and put it on top of a rack rather than hang a cone-like shape under the saddle (which is what the Apidura and others are today).
-
Backpack and bumbag
Velocio
dancing james
I've done saddle bags including a Carradice, and I've got the Apidura at the moment.
I dislike how the weight feels during climbing or exertion... if you swing the bike the bag swings, and one can feel it.
I like how the panniers I have on the Mather can't really be felt, they're that secure. But they're way too large, too tempting to fill, requires a little balancing of weight on both sides, and does nothing for aero.
So I want a bag that is light, small but expandable, puts the weight central, can be wide enough to fit realistic things (clothing, rolled up bivvy, superlight tent, etc)... and doesn't swing with exertion.
I think my ideal heavy set up would be a small top tube bag for spares and some food, a bar bag sometimes for cycle clothing or dirty clothes (rotate these around bags), and a tube like rack top bag for sleeping equipment and other bits of camp based clothing.
The light setup would likely just be either the bar bag or the rack top bag... depending on how they feel.