# Seems like most people are going away from racks and panniers to seat and frame bags



## DeoreDX (Jul 28, 2007)

I'm not a bikepacker (Yet). I do have a rack and a set of panniers bags on my old 26" mtb I use for town duties. I can carry a lot of stuff on that cheap blackburn rack.










I've been wanting an "Adventure" bike. Something for mixed surface gravel, road, and single-track with the thought of eventually using it for bikepacking. I picked up an older 2016 model Salsa Mukluk for this purpose. Started looking into what people are using for carrying their stuff on bikes and it seems like most people are going away from racks and panniers and moving to smaller bags strapped all over the bike. I've done ultralight weight backpacking in the past and my 3 seasons gear (tent, 20 degree bag, water filter, cookware, spare clothes, food, water etc) would fit into a 35l backpack. Seems like i could easily fit that and more in my panniers on a rack and not need stuff strapped all over every inch of my bike.

Just checked my el cheapo Amazon panniers are 65l. What I have:









Amazon.com: Huntvp Bike Pannier Bag Bicycle Rear Rack Bag Waterproof - 3 in 1 Cycling Multi Function Rear Seat Bag with Rain Cover : Sports & Outdoors


Buy Huntvp Bike Pannier Bag Bicycle Rear Rack Bag Waterproof - 3 in 1 Cycling Multi Function Rear Seat Bag with Rain Cover: Panniers & Rack Trunks - Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY possible on eligible purchases



www.amazon.com





Is there a reason people are moving away from the rack/pannier systems to the... stuff strapped all over my bike system? Curious to hear some first hand experience contrasting the two systems. Fancy frame bag and dry bags on carriers on the forks do look a heck of a lot more adventurey and grammable.


----------



## Quercus agrifolia (Jan 30, 2005)

This has been discussed a lot in this forum. There are pros and cons to each approach.

Panniers are almost always easier to pack than soft bags, due to their large compartments. Also easier to over pack.

Rack n pannier systems have more points of failure, IME...bolts break, bag attachments fail, etc. It's happened to me on road tours more than once. Of course soft bag systems can fail, but can also generally be fixed with some rope, a spare strap, or duct tape.

Soft bag systems are generally more amenable to singletrack, being narrower on the bike and less bouncey. If you are talking about riding real chunk, soft bags have a definite advantage in being more stable than panniers.

Soft bag systems are better for hike-a-bike...panniers tend to get in the way when pushing the bike up hills.

I also come from a backpacking background, and was thrilled to find that all of my high-zoot UL gear translates perfectly to bikepacking. Having small and compressible gear (single wall tents, 800+ fill quilts, etc.) also makes that stuff much easier to pack on the bike, no matter your system.

Another item in the 'con' column for soft bags is cost, at least for the good stuff. Just like with backpacking t is worth it IMO to spend good money on stuff you use a lot, but it is a significant cost to outfit a bike with quality soft bags.

If I were starting out, and I had a rack n pannier system, I would not hesitate to load em up and get out there. 

I personally have come to prefer a bit of a hybrid system...lots of soft bags, but I much prefer a rear rack to a seat bag because it lets me use my seat dropper, and it is also generally a more flexible system...I can strap a dry bag to the top (typical), or use other attachment systems including panniers.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

It’s a weight distribution thing for me, even when I’m not riding singletrack. I tried commuting with a rack and panniers and hated the feeling of the steering being light because most of the load was over the back wheel. Frame bags keep a lot of your weight low on the COG and you can balance the cockpit and seat post bag so your load doesn’t feel at all cumbersome. I can’t imagine riding trail with a rear rack and panniers flopping around.


----------



## Catmandoo (Dec 20, 2018)

I recently did the math. Traditional F & R panniers on racks can carry more. I added up Ortleib gear, the pannier (BackRoller/SportRoller) method was at least 70 liters vs. the bikepacking method with a large duffel off the h-bar and the large seat bag, plus a frame back was around 37 liters (Ortleib F & R bags and frame bag). What most folks find gets squeezed is food, which then limits your number of days out without re-supply. Panniers with F & R racks are also pricier. The two methods I priced using gear available at REI was panniers and racks at around $650, vs. $485 for bikpacking method. And the weight, panniers and racks are heavier. One benefit to panniers is its more likely you can fit some gear you might already own and is not "lightweight" style backpacking gear. If you need to buy new gear to fit it into your bikepacking bags, that adds up in cost really quick. I would guess a bikepacking load on a lighter 22-23 lbs gravel bike vs. panniers on a touring bike might save 15 lbs or so. My tourer is 31 lbs, my gravel is 22. 

Type of bike used drives your choice though, if the route you are riding requires a mt. bike, you wont be using racks and panniers.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

A combined 107l? Wow, that's a huge amount of carry. I generally backpack with a 60l pack. Then again, I tarp, and my baseload is considered more ultralight than light.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Micro panniers. Get your weight as low as possible.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

I have components of both systems. I tend to use the soft bags for bikepacking/camping types of stuff because the bike is more maneuverable with gear attached that way.

But the traditional rack and panniers setup gets used for town hauling duties. If all your carry is on a rear rack, then yeah, your front end is going to get light and squirrely. You have to balance that load up front, also, to maintain stability. For pure load hauling, this method can still haul more. Part of it depends on having a bike meant to haul this way. Part also depends on having racks meant to haul the load you have. Otherwise, things get flexy.

For bulky loads with odd shapes, strapping it to a rack is more likely to enable you to transport it, short of having a cargo bike. It's still the preferred method for long distance traditional tourers, yet you do see those folks also adopting soft bags where they make sense for the load they're carrying.


----------



## chiefsilverback (Dec 20, 2019)

Handlebar roll, frame bag and then a rack with ‘micro panniers’ or a dry bag strapped to the top appears to be a very popular setup these days. It gets rid of the saddlebag interfering with a dropper, and it’s easy to lash on something big if needed.


----------



## Juansan (Dec 30, 2020)

I've done 1000's of miles of road touring carrying 60 to 80 lbs of gear, my main concern was bike handling. It wasn't uncommon to hit speeds of 50mph plus on downhills so having the weight down low on the bike was key. Rear panniers and front panniers on a low rider rack was my setup. No handlebar bag, bottle bosses on the down tube just above the bottom bracket, weight distributed low and towards the center. Draw a triangle over a bike with the top being your head ( your head or brain is the third heaviest organ ) one corner at your rear axle and the other at your front axle. Now this set up is for road touring, I can see how having panniers for back country single track touring would be a problem because of the width but at the same time some of the bags for Mt bike touring place too much weight up high. Check out Old Man Mountain racks they make racks for full suspension bikes.


----------



## 93EXCivic (Mar 12, 2018)

Quercus agrifolia said:


> I personally have come to prefer a bit of a hybrid system...lots of soft bags, but I much prefer a rear rack to a seat bag because it lets me use my seat dropper, and it is also generally a more flexible system...I can strap a dry bag to the top (typical), or use other attachment systems including panniers.


This is the route I am moving towards. A handlebar bar, a frame bar, a top tube bag, a Tumbleweed T-rack with dry bag strapped on top. The T-rack also has three pack mounts as well as the fork so I can carry extra water or use three pack mount bags to carry extra stuff if needed. 

I tried the seat pack. Not a fan. Hard to keep it from wiggling around, a pain to pack and unpack imo and limits dropper use.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Juansan said:


> I've done 1000's of miles of road touring carrying 60 to 80 lbs of gear,




I think most bikepackers these days are carrying about 1/2 that weight or less.


----------



## KThaxton (Jun 4, 2009)

I'm a bikepacking newb, but I chose a rack for both dropper post reasons and capacity. Not only dropper clearance, but the fact that my dropper wouldn't even raise up on its own with just a down sleeping bag in a saddle bag.


----------



## DeoreDX (Jul 28, 2007)

Why does this feel like it is going to be an expensive trial and error endeavor which I will and up with a lot of extra gear hanging around my garage


----------



## KThaxton (Jun 4, 2009)

Admit it....buying gear is half the fun.


----------



## DeoreDX (Jul 28, 2007)

KThaxton said:


> I'm a bikepacking newb, but I chose a rack for both dropper post reasons and capacity. Not only dropper clearance, but the fact that my dropper wouldn't even raise up on its own with just a down sleeping bag in a saddle bag.
> 
> View attachment 1992515


That's the setup I've been envisioning from this thread. On a fatbike too. I like the idea of being able to use a dropper.


----------



## 93EXCivic (Mar 12, 2018)

DeoreDX said:


> Why does this feel like it is going to be an expensive trial and error endeavor which I will and up with a lot of extra gear hanging around my garage


It probably will end up as a bit of trial and error. You can always buy some more budget gear to start and upgrade to nicer as you find what works. Or find used gear.

I didn't spend a ton on my first trip. Alpkit Joey for like $15, Alpkit 20l airlok dual for $22, a cheap amazon top tube bag for like $15 and Porclein Rocket was having a sale on their classic seat post bag for like $80. So my bag setup for the first trip was around $130 and that plus a hip pack carried everything for a two night trip. It was a pretty decent setup.

I would recommend just getting a nicer top tube bag right away because IMO that is one of the greatest bags and I use it just on long day rides to carry snacks or on rides in town to carry a chain lock and personally wish I had of had a stem bag.

Since then I have bought a Jack Supply Co Slugger handlebar bag cause I found I would prefer a more traditional handlebar bag for easy access, added the T-rack (which I will strap the Alpkit dry bag to), a Makeshift stem bag and an Oveja Negra top tube bag. Once I finish building my rigid bikepacking bike, I will have a custom frame bag made. As needed I will add 3 pack mount bags.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

Harold said:


> I have components of both systems. I tend to use the soft bags for bikepacking/camping types of stuff because the bike is more maneuverable with gear attached that way.
> 
> But the traditional rack and panniers setup gets used for town hauling duties. If all your carry is on a rear rack, then yeah, your front end is going to get light and squirrely. You have to balance that load up front, also, to maintain stability. For pure load hauling, this method can still haul more. Part of it depends on having a bike meant to haul this way. Part also depends on having racks meant to haul the load you have. Otherwise, things get flexy.
> 
> For bulky loads with odd shapes, strapping it to a rack is more likely to enable you to transport it, short of having a cargo bike. It's still the preferred method for long distance traditional tourers, yet you do see those folks also adopting soft bags where they make sense for the load they're carrying.


This is a good point. The bike I had panniers on was a short wheelbase cross bike, which is not a great platform for loaded riding. A touring bike would have been way better, unfortunately touring bikes are no fun for any riding other than loaded touring.


----------



## BadgerOne (Jul 17, 2015)

It's all about the use case. Racks with panniers, front and rear, are impossible to beat if you are gravel grade/two-track or mellower. They hold more and are more accessible and convenient. Singletrack and HAB changes everything, then it's soft bags all day. In either case, I like having a rear rack. It makes everything better and easier. And heed the advice about keeping a low COG, it makes all the difference.


----------



## chiefsilverback (Dec 20, 2019)

I picked up a set of the REI Link panniers when they were on sale earlier in the year to replace my real el cheapo Amazon set I'd used previously, now I just need to plan a trip to use them!


----------



## She&I (Jan 4, 2010)

There’s no real problem with any gear. It all works fine for one purpose or another.

The concept of a "bikepacking bike” seems backward to me. In my mind, the outing comes first, then a bike gets set up, built or even bought for just that ride, then torn back down to a regular MTB or sold until the next multi-day outing.

You dabblers have it rough. Trying to figure out if you like something that you don’t know how to do worth a damn yet. The odds are against you, but that doesn’t mean breaking through noobdom isn’t a worthy goal. So keep psyched by whatever means necessary, including building up a bike you think is going make you like it. Someone else will buy your shyt if/when it's a bust.


----------



## Catmandoo (Dec 20, 2018)

She&I said:


> The concept of a "bikepacking bike” seems backward to me.


I saw a nice one used by Darren Alf - AKA as the Bicycle Touring Pro (on his YT channel) the bike was a rigid mt. bike, rigid fork, 3" or so tires. Not a bike I would use for my ST riding but makes sense to not have a suspension fork for touring. 

BIKEPACKING the Rainbow Rim Trail - GRAND CANYON Cycling Adventure - EP. #222 - YouTube


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

She&I said:


> Someone else will buy your shyt if/when it's a bust.


Yea, I've never had a problem selling used gear. Just take care of it.


----------



## stiingya (Apr 30, 2004)

DeoreDX said:


> I'm not a bikepacker (Yet). I do have a rack and a set of panniers bags on my old 26" mtb I use for town duties. I can carry a lot of stuff on that cheap blackburn rack.
> 
> View attachment 1992433
> 
> ...


Seems to be fully dependent on where and how you want to bike pack. A lot of people these day's are looking for lighter, narrower and more balanced loads so they can spend more time on single track trails and less time on roads, etc. Not sure what kind of trail you could hit with that load out above?  BUT, flip side is you could set up an awesome camp since you got room for the espresso machine and the blender!! So neither way is wrong in my book!!


----------



## Juansan (Dec 30, 2020)

J.B. Weld said:


> I think most bikepackers these days are carrying about 1/2 that weight or less.


Regardless of the amount of weight it's still important to keep your weight low and towards the center of the bike.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Juansan said:


> Regardless of the amount of weight it's still important to keep your weight low and towards the center of the bike.



I agree, I think that's why frame bags are so good.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> This is a good point. The bike I had panniers on was a short wheelbase cross bike, which is not a great platform for loaded riding. A touring bike would have been way better, unfortunately touring bikes are no fun for any riding other than loaded touring.


Depending on the ride, I might use my older Salsa Vaya. It was marketed as a "light touring" bike at the time, but they market it as a gravel bike now. It's changed a little bit, but not a ton. I've got 700x40's on it right now and it's currently set up to do mixed gravel/pavement type rides. My tires have some tread, but not super aggressive so it still rolls on pavement okay. I rode it today on some kinda chunky gravel in fact. That's the bike I might set up with racks, but I can also use most of my bikepacking bags on (saddle bag and handlebar roll, as well as smaller bags, at least). I have some cargo cages to use in the frame's main triangle. for this bike.

If I have it set up more for commuting, then I've got a rack and full fenders to put on it. I have hard-sided repurposed cat litter bin panniers that are good to keep stuff dry when it's wet. I use these mostly for grocery runs. I haven't really used this bike for lengthy tours, but I've done longer road rides on it. 60, 80, 100mi type pavement rides with smoother 32mm tires. It's not a super "fun" bike per se, but it's versatile and functional.



She&I said:


> There’s no real problem with any gear. It all works fine for one purpose or another.
> 
> The concept of a "bikepacking bike” seems backward to me. In my mind, the outing comes first, then a bike gets set up, built or even bought for just that ride, then torn back down to a regular MTB or sold until the next multi-day outing.
> 
> You dabblers have it rough. Trying to figure out if you like something that you don’t know how to do worth a damn yet. The odds are against you, but that doesn’t mean breaking through noobdom isn’t a worthy goal. So keep psyched by whatever means necessary, including building up a bike you think is going make you like it. Someone else will buy your shyt if/when it's a bust.


Depends on what you mean by "bikepacking". To some people (not necessarily on mtbr), it's really just another word for touring, but specifically referencing the fact that you're using lightweight and/or ultralight gear, and with more of a push towards soft bags. There are some pretty light and functional racks marketed for this kind of riding, but they're not the same as what you'd use for fully loaded touring, which is the more "traditional" touring, with full racks and panniers, typically long distance on pavement (at least in the US) or global travel type stuff. Crossing countries, not counties.

For the kind of bikepacking I like to do, I keep it sort of in the back of my mind for whatever bike I buy. It's not a primary driver of my riding, but it is something I like to do sometimes. I'm not going to build a bike _just_ for bikepacking, but I do want to have at least one bike that's capable of being used for singletrack type bikepacking rides. My older Vaya is a bike that I bought specifically for commuting before bikepacking was on my radar. It just so happens that I can choose to do bikepacking rides on it if my terrain is focused on the smoother sorts of gravel and pavement. My hardtail is the one I'd choose if I wanted to include singletrack in my route. It has no accommodations for a rear rack, so that bike definitely gets soft bags. 

I get why some folks might want to have a "bikepacking bike" though. Some bikes are more difficult to load up. Say you have a FS bike without much space in the frame to keep your load low and centered. Or maybe you don't want any suspension at all, because you've been annoyed by the need to fuss with suspension settings to accommodate the extra load from your gear. Maybe you want a rigid bike with cushy tires. Something like this is super versatile, but maybe isn't the bike you'd choose to ride every day if you had something else. Maybe you especially want to choose a hardtail that has lots of space in the frame for a frame bag, so this means a less sloping top tube.

Doesn't necessarily mean you're doing one big trip on it. Maybe you just like to get out for regular weekend trips with the occasional weeklong trip. Maybe you get out for single overnights with some regularity and you want the simplicity of something you can load up and get out on without much fussing. If someone feels like they do those things often enough to warrant a bike specifically for it, what's your problem?


----------



## She&I (Jan 4, 2010)

Catmandoo said:


> I saw a nice one used by Darren Alf - AKA as the Bicycle Touring Pro (on his YT channel) the bike was a rigid mt. bike, rigid fork, 3" or so tires. Not a bike I would use for my ST riding but makes sense to not have a suspension fork for touring.
> 
> BIKEPACKING the Rainbow Rim Trail - GRAND CANYON Cycling Adventure - EP. #222 - YouTube


That's such a good platform for dirt touring. Surly Krampus is so perfect with a load. I'd get another one when a use comes up, but with a rigid fork I wouldn't choose it for trail riding, either.


Haha, Harold. My problem is: size matters. Divide the kit weight by outing nights. Lowest number wins. It's easy to win, but not for a slave to the grind. Lemming dives aside... I urge any rider to go have a safe night away from the warm bed where you'll never have to live on gas station food and brown water.


----------



## Quercus agrifolia (Jan 30, 2005)

Several folks have mentioned micro-panniers, I really do think those are a near-genius solution. I remember seeing some very nice ones from PR but I think they are out of production. EDIT: nope, still being made by Rockgeist! They look bigger than I remember tho.

One of the cottage backpack makers just produced some micro panniers. Thought it was Gossamer Gear but they are not listed on their website. I remember they looked pretty sweet...


----------



## Hopper333 (6 mo ago)

BadgerOne said:


> It's all about the use case. Racks with panniers, front and rear, are impossible to beat if you are gravel grade/two-track or mellower. They hold more and are more accessible and convenient. Singletrack and HAB changes everything, then it's soft bags all day. In either case, I like having a rear rack. It makes everything better and easier. And heed the advice about keeping a low COG, it makes all the difference.


^^^ This! ^^^


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Quercus agrifolia said:


> Several folks have mentioned micro-panniers, I really do think those are a near-genius solution. I remember seeing some very nice ones from PR but I think they are out of production. EDIT: nope, still being made by Rockgeist! They look bigger than I remember tho.
> 
> One of the cottage backpack makers just produced some micro panniers. Thought it was Gossamer Gear but they are not listed on their website. I remember they looked pretty sweet...


People seem to think that panniers need to mean giant luggage boxes, but there are several good options for micros.


----------



## evdog (Mar 18, 2007)

BadgerOne said:


> It's all about the use case. Racks with panniers, front and rear, are impossible to beat if you are gravel grade/two-track or mellower. They hold more and are more accessible and convenient. Singletrack and HAB changes everything, then it's soft bags all day. In either case, I like having a rear rack. It makes everything better and easier. And heed the advice about keeping a low COG, it makes all the difference.


With hard tails being a choice for many bikepackers getting onto singletrack, soft bags were an obvious choice for many. Especially with the explosion of bag makers in the last 10 yrs. They work well with a hard tail geometry, are pretty light and keep the weight fairly well centered.

I think we'll start to see people move back toward light weight rear racks and micro panniers though now that more people are getting into bikepacking who want to use full suspension bikes with dropper posts, and 27.5/29er wheels. There's not much room for a bike bag with any dropper post use on a full susp bike, especially medium or small size frames. A rear rack can hold a dry bag with similar capacity to a full size seat bag while still allowing full dropper use on a full susp bike. I put an old man mountain rack on my Transition Spur for that exact reason, and I've seen some bikepack racers trying them out as well. I'm less sold on the micro panniers for singletrack but they're there if you want them.


----------



## Johnny Chicken Bones (Jul 13, 2005)

All of the points above are good ones. And as you’ve seen- there are plenty of ways to crack this nut. 
It’s pretty rare that any of the ideas are truly wrong but some might drive you nuts in the wrong spots. 
Dragging a bike w/ panniers thru the willows beside the river? Oh man. Makes me frustrated just thinking of it. 
Riding for hours in the rain? (Except for Ortlieb) you might find that nearly all bikepacking bags eventually start to seep. 

Boxing a bike/bags for a plane is harder w/ racks. Easier w/ soft bags. 
Stuffing a bike Under a bus? On a train? Bikepacking bags are easier. 

Like bread? Found the perfect artisan loaf at some little side place? Good luck w/ your already overstuffed bikepack bags. 

Anyway, there’s no one solution. Or maybe there are plenty of solutions. 

Oh- hybrid? We just did a trip in Italy. 3 weeks. At the last moment wondered if we had enough space w/ bikepacking bags, so we went w/ just the F racks/panniers and some soft bags. I ran a low Rider (Salsa HD low rider- I can‘t say enough about how great it is if your fork is right for it), my partner ran Old Man Mountain (always an amazing option). She spent the trip thinking we should have skipped the racks. I thought they were fine. 
Two riders on the same terrain. Jumping thru the same hoops. And we each had different takes on it. 

Your system will evolve and will do fine nearly all the time, no matter what you’re using. 

I’d say get what you can as soon as you can, and go out. Whichever set up allows you so ride overnight sooner- try that. Beg/borrow and go camp. 

-JCB


----------



## oren_hershco (Mar 11, 2006)

Just a remark:

The pros and cons of each method were discussed here, and in other posts, and in a lot of other sites. But I do have to mention: whenever I see bikepackers with frame-bags, they always carry a backpack. And it's usually a medium-size backpack, about 25-35L. So most of the "I can fit anything I need in those frame bags and I don't over-load like you" hype fails in reality, at least for a significant percent of the riders. They *can't* fit all the stuff they need/ want in those tiny frame bags.

While this may help keeping the bike itself a little bit lighter, therefore more maneuverable, it has two *major* problems, at least for me:

*a. *It increases the pressure on the saddle, where the starting point is not-so-great to begin with (all the weight on a small area). The discomfort it creates, for me, is far worse than the advantage. So I'll ride slower on the trip. Not a big deal.

*b. *A weight on my back, even of a small backpack, causes my lower back to hurt. I can start suffering after 45 minutes of riding off-road with a backpack, while being without one has almost no limitations in the same part: I can ride 6-8 hours a day, without back pain.

So I put everything on the bike. In panniers. Yes, I'm limited. I can't ride the toughest singletracks with this setup, and I need to be careful on really rough terrain. It works for me, but I did have small failures in the past. The gear evolved since then, and the rack and panniers I have today seem sturdy enough:


----------



## Johnny Chicken Bones (Jul 13, 2005)

Very good point about the pack. It’s an easy way to carry more. Or maybe just put your sleeping bag in there. Something large and light. 
Depending on the trip (how often there’s resupply, where’s the water?, are we dragging packrafts along?) I can sometimes skip any pack.

The next step is to carry this teeny packable sack. It lives in the bike until a grocery shop. Then it’s bloated until we get to camp and have a good meal. The goes back in the bags until we need a bit more space.

After that I wear one of those runner type hydration vest/packs. 3 liters in the bag. Maybe a platypus stuffed in. Perhaps a small filter.

And after that is a larger pack that helps grind the undercarriage into dust. But those trips might be further off the deep end. Further away from things, and closer to the things I want more of.
-JCB


----------



## Brad In A Van (Nov 26, 2017)

It’s not light, and I’ve never weighed it. But it’s everything I need with nothing on my back. The roll on the handlebar gets larger depending on what sleeping bag I’m carrying.


----------



## She&I (Jan 4, 2010)

After a two-day recon of AZ Peace Trail, I knew a conventional bikepacking setup was wrong. So:










These well-loved "front" Ortleib Outbacks are mounted permanently to a "front" rack, shaving a lot of weight and ridiculousness. Note tie wire backing up the lower rack bolts and hrz compression straps added to the rack.

Terrain included lots of sand and spontaneous dismounting/dabs, so low-slung cargo, a light front end, quick steering and a full dropper was key. I didn't want a front roll, just a perfect little (Rockgeist Nigel) bar bag. I needed a backpack just after resupplies to keep the vittles from major crushing and a couple liters of water for a day or so. I use one that's like stuff sack with pack straps (REI Flash 18). Perfect for hanging food and sundries.


Circling back to the OP, trying to reinforce the point made here to think about setups as adjustable based on the outing. Source some used bags, fab something yourself, whatever. It won’t be perfect and it never truly is, so get out there and see if it shows signs of being your thing. Don't avoid something because you've never read about it being done. Most of it's common sense.


----------



## Johnny Chicken Bones (Jul 13, 2005)

She&I said:


> The concept of a "bikepacking bike” seems backward to me. In my mind, the outing comes first, then a bike gets set up, built or even bought for just that ride, then torn back down to a regular MTB or sold until the next multi-day outing.


Boy is that ever the truth. I’ve said we did a ”bikepack” running soft bags on actual skinny tire road bikes. Not even the “adventure, any road, all day, blah blah“ bikes. Truly skinny tires. The were light and went quick, even felt somewhat slippery in the wind, though I was cold at night. As usual.

And Ive done fat bike bikepacking. Slow ponderous heavy beasts that had trouble floating on the crust no matter what pressure I ran.
And the usual gravel riding high miles, not so rough roads, and I’ve done plus bike schlepping w/ overnight gear.
Somehow they’re all bikepacking but are still worlds apart.
And each of those rides was great.

And so, as you write. I check the route, then choose the tool to solve (hopefully anyway) the riddle.


----------



## Johnny Chicken Bones (Jul 13, 2005)

Oh- speaking of fabricating your own bags to get out-

I saw an impressive write up of a truly adventure ride. Somewhere in S America. Ecuador or whatever. Hard sketchy river crossings, tie your rig to a llama type stuff. 
One guy ran a frame bag (or would it be a box?) made of ccoroplast. It’s like corrugated cardboard, but of plastic. 
He used clever lacing and brass grommets. 

I picked up a bunch of old campaign signs after an election and made two versions of such a box. 
And damned if it wasn’t great. Duct tape, zipties, Velcro, and all was mostly fine. 
You can’t really stuff things into it that are too big. It won’t really bulge out well so hard items like a cook kit had some issue, but it was fine. 

So maybe. If you‘re a clever one and already spent too much on your 73 Voile straps and titanium coffee cup- I’d recommend it. 
Especially if it means you can go out and sleep from the bike sooner. 

-JCB


----------



## She&I (Jan 4, 2010)

Johnny, good stuff, and plus one on odd materials that happen to work. Even plastic corrugated could yield something temporary and cheap. 28 bucks for a 4x8 sheet of plastic wall board could be at least one frame box. Waterproof water storage…redundundant?










PS: The box sucks up 4.5 liters of Platypus bottles.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Johnny Chicken Bones said:


> And Ive done fat bike bikepacking. Slow ponderous heavy beasts that had trouble floating on the crust no matter what pressure I ran.



You might remember that not everyone present had difficulty floating, or going (occasionally) fast.

Point being that what you carry, and (most importantly) how you carry it can have a tremendous effect on your perception of the ride.


----------



## Johnny Chicken Bones (Jul 13, 2005)

mikesee said:


> You might remember that not everyone present had difficulty floating, or going (occasionally) fast.
> 
> Point being that what you carry, and (most importantly) how you carry it can have a tremendous effect on your perception of the ride.


You kidding me? Pretty sure the many many items you had saved my life. It was your pie pan panini maker sizzling over a campfire in the snow while you stuffed me w/ Gouda and snausages plus ample cups of hot Nuun that saved that trip for me. 
Your bike was somehow both bloated and feathery. Mine was ponderous and anchor like. 

But- I was on those pinner little skinny tires. And you had a pair of float plane pontoons made into wheels. 
What I recall is that you never had issues. And I mostly only had float issues. 
I blame the Luminati.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Johnny Chicken Bones said:


> You kidding me? Pretty sure the many many items you had saved my life. It was your pie pan panini maker sizzling over a campfire in the snow while you stuffed me w/ Gouda and snausages plus ample cups of hot Nuun that saved that trip for me.
> Your bike was somehow both bloated and feathery. Mine was ponderous and anchor like.
> 
> But- I was on those pinner little skinny tires. And you had a pair of float plane pontoons made into wheels.
> ...



You were on 4.8" Bud and Lou, no?

The epitome of pinner, for sure.


----------



## Johnny Chicken Bones (Jul 13, 2005)

Yep. 
actually the main issue was the R tire losing air the whole trip. Id air it up, it’d be too firm. Then perfect. Then too soft. 
so I’d air it up again.


----------



## schnee (Oct 15, 2005)

People keep saying like it's only one or the other. 

*Why not both?  *

This setup was fantastic because it kept the nose of the bike down on extremely steep climbs, and didn't get in the way when I had to push the bike. The steering was ponderous, but I was fine with that - it was like built-in damping.

And, when I got into a city, I could ditch the panniers and go for an all-day with just the frame and top tube bags.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

schnee said:


> View attachment 1994945
> 
> 
> People keep saying like it's only one or the other.
> ...


Well, because you can’t run a dropper. That’s why.


----------



## ddoh (Jan 11, 2017)

"while you stuffed me w/ Gouda and snausages" He was feeding you dog food!


----------



## schnee (Oct 15, 2005)

Jayem said:


> Well, because you can’t run a dropper. That’s why.


.... a dropper post and ... panniers?

This I gotta see.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

schnee said:


> .... a dropper post and ... panniers?
> 
> This I gotta see.


Makes getting on and off so much easier and then there’s all the descents, short drops, etc. so nice to have.


----------



## She&I (Jan 4, 2010)

schnee said:


> .... a dropper post and ... panniers?
> 
> This I gotta see.


One page back, post #36


----------



## schnee (Oct 15, 2005)

Huh, TIL. Thanks for the info. Sweet setups.

Looks like the concept is the same except for the seat bag. Trivial to drop that on a rack.

I'll keep that in mind when I tour on my fatbike, it can handle a dropper.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

schnee said:


> View attachment 1994945



If my bike was set up like that, I'd gouge my eyes out with spoons before the ride even began. 

But I have very particular tastes in what I'll ride and how I want to ride it. Not everyone sees things the same.

Glad you've found something that works for you.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

Like I said above, I haven't tried micro panniers but I have never had a single issue with a dropper specific seatpost bag. I have full use of my dropper with this pack (Rockgeist Gondola) so overcomplicating the rear end is just not something I am interested in I guess. Maybe part of it is that I am a light packer and hate having a big load in the rear, even if its balanced with the front. I try to put as much as I can in the middle of the bike near the COG and then lighten up the front and rear. Personal preference obviously... I could see using a rear rack with something like fat biking in the snow or dirt road touring. I mainly do singletrack routes though and I fee like most of the benefit of a dropper is gone if you try to get back over the rear tire and there's a rack and giant sleeping back sticking up a foot over the tire.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> I mainly do singletrack routes though and I fee like most of the benefit of a dropper is gone if you try to get back over the rear tire and there's a rack and giant sleeping back sticking up a foot over the tire.


You can still get way low and back on the frame with a bag on a rack. Tire-scraping stuff you are picturing only happens on Whistler-steep rock slabs IME. Yes, I like droppers for both, but that's a few grades of "extreme" higher. It may not make sense for mostly-road bike-packing of course...but then this is a mountain-biking site. It also benefits you because it forces you to move your weight lower on your bike, which will handle better anyway. There are some small seat-bags, like you have and even smaller that you can at least put a few things in to use a little of the space. I put a thin jacket in my Revelate Shrew seat-bag-for-dropper. Of course this is just my opinion, as bike-packing is more and more "mountain" terrain, I definitely want to have the dropper post. They seemed "only for freeriding" at first and now they are common in XC racing, winter fat-bikes, even many gravel bikes. I don't see this reversing.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

Jayem said:


> You can still get way low and back on the frame with a bag on a rack. Tire-scraping stuff you are picturing only happens on Whistler-steep rock slabs IME. Yes, I like droppers for both, but that's a few grades of "extreme" higher. It may not make sense for mostly-road bike-packing of course...but then this is a mountain-biking site. It also benefits you because it forces you to move your weight lower on your bike, which will handle better anyway. There are some small seat-bags, like you have and even smaller that you can at least put a few things in to use a little of the space. I put a thin jacket in my Revelate Shrew seat-bag-for-dropper. Of course this is just my opinion, as bike-packing is more and more "mountain" terrain, I definitely want to have the dropper post. They seemed "only for freeriding" at first and now they are common in XC racing, winter fat-bikes, even many gravel bikes. I don't see this reversing.


I am thinking about setups like this. Yes, you can get the saddle down and out of the way but it seems like you'd be sitting on your load trying to go down steep stuff. Maybe I am missing something, and I guess you could get away with not putting stuff on the top like this... Just seems awkward to me.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> I am thinking about setups like this. Yes, you can get the saddle down and out of the way but it seems like you'd be sitting on your load trying to go down steep stuff. Maybe I am missing something, and I guess you could get away with not putting stuff on the top like this... Just seems awkward to me.
> 
> View attachment 1995022


Just my opinion, you are missing that the rider is able to put their seat down 5-7" in that picture and that makes a massive difference in downhill handling. You are having to get your butt behind and lower than the saddle because you don't have a dropper.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

Jayem said:


> Just my opinion, you are missing that the rider is able to put their seat down 5-7" in that picture and that makes a massive difference in downhill handling. You are having to get your butt behind and lower than the saddle because you don't have a dropper.


Not arguing that, just thinking of steep loose stuff which (as you know) there is a lot of in Arizona. Not saying anyone has a bad setup, just having a hard time visualizing how that stuff is not in your way when things get steep.


----------



## trek4fun_4308 (5 mo ago)

My bike packing setup depends on the terrain and distance. I like a combination of racks and frame bags and for long self-supported gravel rides where I have to carry a lot of food and water, I may use a BoB Ibex trailer too. My rides tend to be 95% off road and span several days to several weeks. A few years ago I did 60-day self-supported off-road ride with a BoB and the BoB was a blessing!

IMO, a rear rack helps keep the load secure and can reduce the dynamic loading on my rear wheel. (Keeps the bags from bouncing) This not only gives me more trail confidence riding over more difficult terrain but, IMO, I am less likely to break spokes. My other bike has an Old Man Mountain rack. I also like my Bob trailer for gravel rides because it is much faster to pack and I can break camp 3x faster. It is also easier to use for heavier camera equipment.


----------



## mike_kelly (Jul 18, 2016)

I am also a fan of micro panniers. I love frame bags but the large seatbag sticking up in the air behind my seat bothered me. Also it is a pain to get at things when everything is stuffed into a big seat bag.
I now use a light ti rear rack and Revelate Nano panniers. Not much heavier, doesn't bounce around and gives easier access. Picture is from Revelate's website.
One real value of frame bags vs tradition setups is the lower volume forces you to use Ultralight Backpacking techniques. You will be much happier on the climbs that you did without.


----------



## trek4fun_4308 (5 mo ago)

mike_kelly said:


> I love frame bags but the large seatbag sticking up in the air behind my seat bothered me.


I also agree for rides where the terrain requires me to get behind my seat.


----------

