You are reading a single comment by @edscoble and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • Thank you for chiming in as well!

    Your weight is already at the back, putting a rack on the back already stress the rear end of the bike a lots.

    This makes sense.
    Yet 99% of the bikes I see with a rack have one in the rear and none in front.
    Hence my question (as I mentioned I'm not a pro / touring / whatever cyclist).

    Most front load bicycle are on the fork only, meaning the fork take the weight, leaving the frame alone allowing it to be nice and lively.

    Yea I get that - yet I'd have thought the rather big and sturdy frame could easily take a few kilos, whereas it's the fork that should be nice and lively and not packed with weight.

    Guess it's like @TM said one has to try it.
    Just made me wonder as, like I said, every fucking bike I see around here uses rear racks.

  • whereas it's the fork that should be nice and lively and not packed with weight.

    Get out of the saddle and give it the wellies; the back end should feel very spirited, rather than feeling like a damp sausage.

    The front-load lark is very popular for one reason; it is much cheaper to get a custom fork designed for a front load without compromising the handling, they're design to be VERY twitchy without a load, so once loaded up, it feel nice and stable yet still allow more precise steering input than even a race bike.

About

Avatar for edscoble @edscoble started