-
Thank you as well @TM for explaining - this all makes sense to me,
and indeed I have not tried a setup like this yet / probably would not be asking these questions if I did,
just like @Thrustvector, I just ride with not much stuff most of the time (apart from certain events - where I use the little "utility bike" I posted above, and then it's also just rather short distances usually and super flat city routes and I just throw most of the stuff in a large rucksack). -
Added bonus of carrying most of your stuff in front is that you can keep an eye on it in case some of it decides to bounce of during moments of spirited off road rambling.
-
Hammered or SS guards would be my preference #forthegram but I’ll be replacing with black bluemels purely because they spring back into shape. Had to do a front puncture on it and realised metal guards will get knackered in no time. Plus, Thorn do custom stays for SKS guards (which are in situ) so it’ll be easy to just swap the blades. If you’re going to suggest silver SKS then >>>>>>>
White guards? Lol. Might go for bamboo.
-
If you’re going to suggest silver SKS
Special place in hell reservation confirmed. You go silver and don't do Metal, you're basically hell spawn.
I get the flexibility thing. The daily commuter has Bonty ones and they're taken a proper beating over three years with nay a pip. PDW's didn't survive 6 months.
-
Why do so many of these bikes have a massive bag on a front rack
(instead of in the back / like with a regular rack above the back wheel).
Where have you been??
Your weight is already at the back, putting a rack on the back already stress the rear end of the bike a lots.
Plus, more importantly, it's connected to the frames which mean unless it's a touring frame, will handle noodly.
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.
-
Yeah I noticed that - not sure? Seems they are another framebuilder based in Berlin doing similar things to Meerglas
-
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.
-
Because it's easy and cheap, safer if something breaks, the frames are all overbuilt, and you can put stacks of weight on the back without fucking your steering, getting confused and riding into a ditch.
Basically, like most good things, front loading requires a bit of thought and care, so it's not standard.
salad
MisterMikkel
cplw
atz
spotter
TM
Chak
Tijs
user97116
mattyc
edscoble
PhilDAS
TvH-
Post a reply
About
Functional bikes. Not Porn not Anti
Posted by
@lessmann
Ha!
I was under the impression that's a shirt by some vegan activists with a bit of a harsh sense of humour - so it's actually a butcher's shop with bit of a harsh way of marketing?