[RBW] Re: Advantages of front loading

[Wilson Wilson]

When it comes to front load whether be a Riv or not, placement to the 
headtube or hub are key. Even with a basket and high trail, placement 
matters relative to how high stacked above or below the top tube. Then is 
that load close to the headtube or not. My best practice no matter the 
trail is to get the load between those points: headtube, hub, and toptube, 
in some same manner. Sometimes it requires tossing out the stock rack and 
basket hardware for better positioning. One thing I do often happens on 
climbs. I will take the bags from the rear and mount on the front. It makes 
climbing much more sane and especially less stress on the legs when the 
gearing aint quite right.
On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 7:37:07 PM UTC-4 Will M wrote:

> I have a 1990s Cannondale adventure tourer with low-trail fork. With the 
> low riders (and front panniers), it's as stable as a motorcycle, no matter 
> how 
> much I overload the rear panniers 
> .
>   
> Influenced by Grant's *Riv Readers *of the late aughts, I removed the low 
> riders for a two-strut Nitto front rack and Wald 139 
> .
>   
> Don't notice so much difference from the higher center of gravity, but the 
> wobbliness of the lower-capacity Nitto rack...
>
> Will M 
>
> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 12:37:41 PM UTC-4 J J wrote:
>
>> This is such an interesting thread. I found myself nodding my head 
>> reading John Rinker's note. I bought my Hunq new in 2012, and I never 
>> thought about trail per se until 3 or 4 years ago when it seemed trail was 
>> in the air, everywhere I turned, and everyone was talking about it. Maybe 
>> it's something particular to the Hunqapillar compared with other frames, 
>> but I've never felt a need to ruminate over what I had on a front rack or 
>> rear rack, balancing loads, whatever. I just never had to think about it. 
>> It has always felt stable whether the front was loaded with nothing in the 
>> rear, or vice versa, or both front and rear were loaded, or without any 
>> load at all. That's not to say that hauling a good sized watermelon on the 
>> front rack — which is common for me during the season — doesn't change 
>> handling characteristics. It certainly does, but not anywhere close to a 
>> degree that I find uncomfortable or problematic at all. I carry what I need 
>> to carry, I do what I need to do, and my riding adjusts and compensates 
>> accordingly, with little thought about it. It's natural. Anyway, I think we 
>> are constantly adjusting how we ride due to varying surfaces, wind 
>> patterns, energy or fatigue level, tire pressure, how our muscles and 
>> brains feel, elevation, and so on. There are countless dynamic variables 
>> that affect handling, requiring us to adjust and readjust on the fly and 
>> then we get momentum. On the Hunq, for me at least, the net outcome is a 
>> sense of stability, comfort, and confidence regardless of how much I am 
>> hauling or where the haul is positioned on the bike. 
>>
>> Except when I experienced a puzzling shimmy. The handlebar would vibrate 
>> and swing wildly back and forth at speed if I removed one or both hands 
>> from the bar. The oscillation was palpable, annoying, and very much out of 
>> character for the bike. It  was not related to any front or rear load 
>> dynamics, nor to any lights, bells, or mirror mounted to the handlebar. The 
>> shimmy would diminish a bit if I touched either leg to the top tub or 
>> diagonal tube, but not completely. I bought an IRD double roller bearing 
>> headset thinking it might solve the problem (Rivendell was out of stock of 
>> their Tange/IRD NeedL BlastR at the time). But before having the new one 
>> installed, I reached out to Rivendell to ask about shimmy. In typical 
>> transparent and helpful fashion, Grant and Mark both said (paraphrasing): 
>> sometimes shimmy happens for no apparent or solvable reason. Bike physics 
>> and dynamics are super complicated. Keep your hands on the bar, don't ride 
>> ride no-handedly! Try removing the racks (it didn't help). 
>>
>> Finally Grant said, no need to spend money on a new headset. It doesn't 
>> always solve the problem. Try heavier grease in your headset, and tighten 
>> it down more than you normally would. You're not after "buttery smooth" 
>> movement. You want some friction and resistance. It won't interfere with 
>> steering. 
>>
>> Sure enough, these simple steps completely eliminated the shimmy. 
>> Stability returned to the Hunq! 
>>
>> I wished I had contacted Riv before I bought the new headset. It's a nice 
>> piece of kit, now taking up space in the parts bin. 
>>  
>>
>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 5:47:55 AM UTC-4 ascpgh wrote:
>>
>>> I loaded my Rambouillet with a Caradice Nelson Longflap when new to do a 
>>> credit card camping take on the TranAm/Western Flyer 

[RBW] Re: Advantages of front loading

[Will M]

I have a 1990s Cannondale adventure tourer with low-trail fork. With the 
low riders (and front panniers), it's as stable as a motorcycle, no matter how 
much I overload the rear panniers 
.
  
Influenced by Grant's *Riv Readers *of the late aughts, I removed the low 
riders for a two-strut Nitto front rack and Wald 139 
.
  
Don't notice so much difference from the higher center of gravity, but the 
wobbliness of the lower-capacity Nitto rack...

Will M 

On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 12:37:41 PM UTC-4 J J wrote:

> This is such an interesting thread. I found myself nodding my head reading 
> John Rinker's note. I bought my Hunq new in 2012, and I never thought about 
> trail per se until 3 or 4 years ago when it seemed trail was in the air, 
> everywhere I turned, and everyone was talking about it. Maybe it's 
> something particular to the Hunqapillar compared with other frames, but 
> I've never felt a need to ruminate over what I had on a front rack or rear 
> rack, balancing loads, whatever. I just never had to think about it. It has 
> always felt stable whether the front was loaded with nothing in the rear, 
> or vice versa, or both front and rear were loaded, or without any load at 
> all. That's not to say that hauling a good sized watermelon on the front 
> rack — which is common for me during the season — doesn't change handling 
> characteristics. It certainly does, but not anywhere close to a degree that 
> I find uncomfortable or problematic at all. I carry what I need to carry, I 
> do what I need to do, and my riding adjusts and compensates accordingly, 
> with little thought about it. It's natural. Anyway, I think we are 
> constantly adjusting how we ride due to varying surfaces, wind patterns, 
> energy or fatigue level, tire pressure, how our muscles and brains feel, 
> elevation, and so on. There are countless dynamic variables that affect 
> handling, requiring us to adjust and readjust on the fly and then we get 
> momentum. On the Hunq, for me at least, the net outcome is a sense of 
> stability, comfort, and confidence regardless of how much I am hauling or 
> where the haul is positioned on the bike. 
>
> Except when I experienced a puzzling shimmy. The handlebar would vibrate 
> and swing wildly back and forth at speed if I removed one or both hands 
> from the bar. The oscillation was palpable, annoying, and very much out of 
> character for the bike. It  was not related to any front or rear load 
> dynamics, nor to any lights, bells, or mirror mounted to the handlebar. The 
> shimmy would diminish a bit if I touched either leg to the top tub or 
> diagonal tube, but not completely. I bought an IRD double roller bearing 
> headset thinking it might solve the problem (Rivendell was out of stock of 
> their Tange/IRD NeedL BlastR at the time). But before having the new one 
> installed, I reached out to Rivendell to ask about shimmy. In typical 
> transparent and helpful fashion, Grant and Mark both said (paraphrasing): 
> sometimes shimmy happens for no apparent or solvable reason. Bike physics 
> and dynamics are super complicated. Keep your hands on the bar, don't ride 
> ride no-handedly! Try removing the racks (it didn't help). 
>
> Finally Grant said, no need to spend money on a new headset. It doesn't 
> always solve the problem. Try heavier grease in your headset, and tighten 
> it down more than you normally would. You're not after "buttery smooth" 
> movement. You want some friction and resistance. It won't interfere with 
> steering. 
>
> Sure enough, these simple steps completely eliminated the shimmy. 
> Stability returned to the Hunq! 
>
> I wished I had contacted Riv before I bought the new headset. It's a nice 
> piece of kit, now taking up space in the parts bin. 
>  
>
> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 5:47:55 AM UTC-4 ascpgh wrote:
>
>> I loaded my Rambouillet with a Caradice Nelson Longflap when new to do a 
>> credit card camping take on the TranAm/Western Flyer route from Norfolk, VA 
>> to SF, CA via Pueblo, CO starting in early May. It was perfect, although I 
>> could see being a bit more prepared for contingencies (more stuff) would be 
>> good, but I was within tolerance range of the Rivendale stated optimal max 
>> load. All the good handling attributes felt like they were  without damping 
>> by the rear load which in fairness was in front of the rear hub. I dare say 
>> every Rivendell model is different and presents a varying capacity by 
>> design for carrying loads on the front. Those that are more able in total 
>> still have an order by which you add your increments (bags and contents) of 
>> load as you close in on your total. 
>>
>> Fast forward a decade, I joined a group of Riv riders on the GAP starting 
>> at Cumberland, MD in April. The food and drink needs of the route 

[RBW] Re: Advantages of front loading

[J J]

This is such an interesting thread. I found myself nodding my head reading 
John Rinker's note. I bought my Hunq new in 2012, and I never thought about 
trail per se until 3 or 4 years ago when it seemed trail was in the air, 
everywhere I turned, and everyone was talking about it. Maybe it's 
something particular to the Hunqapillar compared with other frames, but 
I've never felt a need to ruminate over what I had on a front rack or rear 
rack, balancing loads, whatever. I just never had to think about it. It has 
always felt stable whether the front was loaded with nothing in the rear, 
or vice versa, or both front and rear were loaded, or without any load at 
all. That's not to say that hauling a good sized watermelon on the front 
rack — which is common for me during the season — doesn't change handling 
characteristics. It certainly does, but not anywhere close to a degree that 
I find uncomfortable or problematic at all. I carry what I need to carry, I 
do what I need to do, and my riding adjusts and compensates accordingly, 
with little thought about it. It's natural. Anyway, I think we are 
constantly adjusting how we ride due to varying surfaces, wind patterns, 
energy or fatigue level, tire pressure, how our muscles and brains feel, 
elevation, and so on. There are countless dynamic variables that affect 
handling, requiring us to adjust and readjust on the fly and then we get 
momentum. On the Hunq, for me at least, the net outcome is a sense of 
stability, comfort, and confidence regardless of how much I am hauling or 
where the haul is positioned on the bike. 

Except when I experienced a puzzling shimmy. The handlebar would vibrate 
and swing wildly back and forth at speed if I removed one or both hands 
from the bar. The oscillation was palpable, annoying, and very much out of 
character for the bike. It  was not related to any front or rear load 
dynamics, nor to any lights, bells, or mirror mounted to the handlebar. The 
shimmy would diminish a bit if I touched either leg to the top tub or 
diagonal tube, but not completely. I bought an IRD double roller bearing 
headset thinking it might solve the problem (Rivendell was out of stock of 
their Tange/IRD NeedL BlastR at the time). But before having the new one 
installed, I reached out to Rivendell to ask about shimmy. In typical 
transparent and helpful fashion, Grant and Mark both said (paraphrasing): 
sometimes shimmy happens for no apparent or solvable reason. Bike physics 
and dynamics are super complicated. Keep your hands on the bar, don't ride 
ride no-handedly! Try removing the racks (it didn't help). 

Finally Grant said, no need to spend money on a new headset. It doesn't 
always solve the problem. Try heavier grease in your headset, and tighten 
it down more than you normally would. You're not after "buttery smooth" 
movement. You want some friction and resistance. It won't interfere with 
steering. 

Sure enough, these simple steps completely eliminated the shimmy. Stability 
returned to the Hunq! 

I wished I had contacted Riv before I bought the new headset. It's a nice 
piece of kit, now taking up space in the parts bin. 
 

On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 5:47:55 AM UTC-4 ascpgh wrote:

> I loaded my Rambouillet with a Caradice Nelson Longflap when new to do a 
> credit card camping take on the TranAm/Western Flyer route from Norfolk, VA 
> to SF, CA via Pueblo, CO starting in early May. It was perfect, although I 
> could see being a bit more prepared for contingencies (more stuff) would be 
> good, but I was within tolerance range of the Rivendale stated optimal max 
> load. All the good handling attributes felt like they were  without damping 
> by the rear load which in fairness was in front of the rear hub. I dare say 
> every Rivendell model is different and presents a varying capacity by 
> design for carrying loads on the front. Those that are more able in total 
> still have an order by which you add your increments (bags and contents) of 
> load as you close in on your total. 
>
> Fast forward a decade, I joined a group of Riv riders on the GAP starting 
> at Cumberland, MD in April. The food and drink needs of the route and 
> overnight,  the climate changes from warm at the start, cool and rainy by 
> Confluence, PA and snow from Ohiopyle on West Newton, PAwarranted that I 
> added another bag which was a small VO Berthoud knock-with a  little old 
> French rack. Seemed innnocuous but either the total weight or the front 
> load itself really snuffed the nice handling. It became more ponderous than 
> the load would have predicted. My feeling riding it those hundred miles was 
> that a bike needs to be designed for your load, meaning enough heft of the 
> tube set and geometry that won't make necessary lots of fine inputs. Not a 
> super riding bike empty. Loaded as it was, my Ram was awkward because of 
> the deliberate effort necessary to input the small adjustments for its 
> specified trail.
>
> Trail 

[RBW] Re: Advantages of front loading

[ascpgh]

I loaded my Rambouillet with a Caradice Nelson Longflap when new to do a 
credit card camping take on the TranAm/Western Flyer route from Norfolk, VA 
to SF, CA via Pueblo, CO starting in early May. It was perfect, although I 
could see being a bit more prepared for contingencies (more stuff) would be 
good, but I was within tolerance range of the Rivendale stated optimal max 
load. All the good handling attributes felt like they were  without damping 
by the rear load which in fairness was in front of the rear hub. I dare say 
every Rivendell model is different and presents a varying capacity by 
design for carrying loads on the front. Those that are more able in total 
still have an order by which you add your increments (bags and contents) of 
load as you close in on your total. 

Fast forward a decade, I joined a group of Riv riders on the GAP starting 
at Cumberland, MD in April. The food and drink needs of the route and 
overnight,  the climate changes from warm at the start, cool and rainy by 
Confluence, PA and snow from Ohiopyle on West Newton, PAwarranted that I 
added another bag which was a small VO Berthoud knock-with a  little old 
French rack. Seemed innnocuous but either the total weight or the front 
load itself really snuffed the nice handling. It became more ponderous than 
the load would have predicted. My feeling riding it those hundred miles was 
that a bike needs to be designed for your load, meaning enough heft of the 
tube set and geometry that won't make necessary lots of fine inputs. Not a 
super riding bike empty. Loaded as it was, my Ram was awkward because of 
the deliberate effort necessary to input the small adjustments for its 
specified trail.

Trail and handling are a dimension and outcome and the relationship 
overlooks lots of other dimensions with input to how the bike rides in your 
uses. I am over 6" tall and have long legs and a short torso for my height. 
That made the under square Rambouillet a very good option for me since I 
was a bit short of the experience I later found helpful when pursuing a 
custom bike but did prefer a sportier riding bike than say an early '90s 
MTB conversion. The front load on the Rambouillet overrode many of the 
details that kept it predictably handling without my toe ever tangling up 
with the front fender. It has, as previous Ram riders (Steve P.) have 
noted, a tendency to veer off track on slow, low-cadence, out of saddle 
climbs unloaded or rear loaded due to the higher trail. That I believe is a 
combination of the compensations of things that resulted in the front end 
geometry including trail and the out of saddle weight distribution coming 
forward. The trail dimension can also surprise you when a brief surface 
change that addresses the front wheel implies any lateral force to it. I 
have short, steeply ramped driveway curb cut that you cross on an angle in 
mind. The Ram can be flustered on my exact example, my subsequent lower 
trail bike is not, loaded or not.  

As James' at Analog's article points out no one thing is panacea. 
Everything has limits, beneficial or otherwise. I found that loading my 
Rambouillet enough for rides in austere place for more than a day, keeping 
the front unburdened enough left me with a limited size tire that had to be 
pumped up pretty high to account for the odd edge, rock or whatever rim 
pinch or worse. Not the best ride for this bike and it goes against some 
thought that the cargo load, even when compensated with tire pressure, 
makes a bike ride smother. I've had two rear wheel destroying hits on this 
bike the front wheel floated past unharmed. This rear bias in load 
preference, the declining comfort as the load or the road dictates rear 
tire pressure to increase and as the geometry for the front end's 
contribution to handling gave me the confidence I needed to step off into a 
custom. 

I wanted a bike that fit my non-stock body that had enough tire to ride on 
the mixed surfaces I frequent, capable of several days of non-camping load 
without feeling over burdened, more equalized F-R weight distribution so I 
can benefit from the tires' inflation instead of nearing the max to avoid 
flats, no toe overlap with fenders and that was fun to ride unloaded. I 
have a Disc Trucker commuter so that last point is emphasized as I find it 
intolerable after 35 miles due to both being generically overbuilt for 
loads and the top tube stock geometry.

Andy Cheatham
Pittsburgh

On Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 9:50:44 AM UTC-4 brok...@gmail.com wrote:

> I thought it might be somewhat pertinent to the discussion to link to this 
> article about low-trail bikes and handling. Written by James from Analog 
> Cycles a couple years back when it seemed like everyone was desiring a 
> low-trail frame:
> https://analogcycles.com/pages/debunking-low-trail
>
> While it doesn't directly address the original post's questions about 
> front-loading on Rivendells, there's some good info about how certain 

[RBW] Re: Advantages of front loading

[Berkeleyan]

Here's some discussion on lower rake, and consequences for handling.

https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vintage/1164491-people-who-have-had-forks-re-raked-lower-tr-do-you-notice-lowered-front-end-2.html

My custom Rohlhoffer Diagatube frame has a re-raked RBW fork, and we did 
that specifically to accommodate carrying weight in front (I have a great 
big WaxWing Porteur sitting on a small front rack). I also have two 
low-rider racks I have not yet used. For reference, I also have a '98 
LongLow and an Orange 66cm QuickBeam, both with stock forks. The stock 
forks make for quick and light unladen handling, and both feel heavier with 
Wald baskets and ShopSacks. Heavier, but not really problematic, and I 
appreciate the convenience of gear up front, whether shopping, riding to a 
picnic, or camping. The handling on the re-raked fork is quite light 
without any weight on the fork, but feels really good with a full bag, and 
I'm glad we made the modification, it's perfect for all the riding I do.

- Andrew, Berkeley

p.s. Shoutout to Nick Payne for his Rohloff touring rig.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/04d81d32-eb3e-4c91-9686-a481a12bd17fn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Advantages of front loading

[Brian Turner]

I thought it might be somewhat pertinent to the discussion to link to this 
article about low-trail bikes and handling. Written by James from Analog 
Cycles a couple years back when it seemed like everyone was desiring a 
low-trail frame:
https://analogcycles.com/pages/debunking-low-trail

While it doesn't directly address the original post's questions about 
front-loading on Rivendells, there's some good info about how certain bikes 
handle with or without loads, but mostly how the design of trail on a bike 
affects the ride in general.

On Monday, September 5, 2022 at 5:41:00 PM UTC-4 Joe Bernard wrote:

> My extremely biased view is Rivs aren't built for heavy front loads and I 
> just won't anymore, it feels unweildy and unsafe. Can it be done anyway? 
> Sure. By people who aren't me. 
>
> On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 6:14:37 PM UTC-7 Patrick Moore wrote:
>
>> Just curious, after adjusting my Ortlieb Sports Packers to the front 
>> lowriders and carrying home about 12 bulky lbs on the front of the 2020 
>> Matthews which is a geometrical clone of a 2003 Riv Road custom -- Riv lost 
>> the geometry chart but I think it's med trail.
>>
>> 10 or 12 lb makes almost no difference in handling, but it does make 
>> wheeling the bike one-handed (gripping stem and adjacent bar) through the 
>> aisles less easy; 20 lb does slow the handling noticeably though not 
>> impossibly. ~15 evenly divided is about the max for happiness.
>>
>> Rear loads are more stable. 20 lb in the rear is not noticeable, 30 lb in 
>> the rear affects handling less than 20 (evenly distributed) does in front, 
>> and I've carried 45 with the bike still rideable. (For comparo, my best 
>> rear loader was an early 1970s thinnish wall and normal gauge 531 framed 
>> racing bike with long stays and shortish front-center: Motobecane Grand 
>> Record. Though light and flexy, with a *very* stiff 400 gram Tubus Fly 
>> this carried 45 better than any stouter-tubed road bike I've owned, 
>> including any of 4 Riv road models (well, if a first-gen Sam Hill is 
>> "road). Another nice rear grocery load carrier was an '80s Fuji Royale "12 
>> speed" that actually handled better with 20 lb in back than it did unladen; 
>> that one hated front loads.
>>
>> So, after that long windup, what is the benefit of front loading *on 
>> Rivendell models*. Is it purely convenience?
>>
>> And, different question: what is the benefit of front loading on 
>> *non-Rivendell 
>> low-trail bikes*: convenience?
>>
>> Just curious and describing my own experience.
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> ---
>> Patrick Moore
>> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/cfd6a944-955d-450e-b3c3-af1b7b164cbcn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Advantages of front loading

[Joe Bernard]

My extremely biased view is Rivs aren't built for heavy front loads and I 
just won't anymore, it feels unweildy and unsafe. Can it be done anyway? 
Sure. By people who aren't me. 

On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 6:14:37 PM UTC-7 Patrick Moore wrote:

> Just curious, after adjusting my Ortlieb Sports Packers to the front 
> lowriders and carrying home about 12 bulky lbs on the front of the 2020 
> Matthews which is a geometrical clone of a 2003 Riv Road custom -- Riv lost 
> the geometry chart but I think it's med trail.
>
> 10 or 12 lb makes almost no difference in handling, but it does make 
> wheeling the bike one-handed (gripping stem and adjacent bar) through the 
> aisles less easy; 20 lb does slow the handling noticeably though not 
> impossibly. ~15 evenly divided is about the max for happiness.
>
> Rear loads are more stable. 20 lb in the rear is not noticeable, 30 lb in 
> the rear affects handling less than 20 (evenly distributed) does in front, 
> and I've carried 45 with the bike still rideable. (For comparo, my best 
> rear loader was an early 1970s thinnish wall and normal gauge 531 framed 
> racing bike with long stays and shortish front-center: Motobecane Grand 
> Record. Though light and flexy, with a *very* stiff 400 gram Tubus Fly 
> this carried 45 better than any stouter-tubed road bike I've owned, 
> including any of 4 Riv road models (well, if a first-gen Sam Hill is 
> "road). Another nice rear grocery load carrier was an '80s Fuji Royale "12 
> speed" that actually handled better with 20 lb in back than it did unladen; 
> that one hated front loads.
>
> So, after that long windup, what is the benefit of front loading *on 
> Rivendell models*. Is it purely convenience?
>
> And, different question: what is the benefit of front loading on 
> *non-Rivendell 
> low-trail bikes*: convenience?
>
> Just curious and describing my own experience.
>
> -- 
>
> ---
> Patrick Moore
> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/e791e5ed-f5ed-4fa8-8e46-63de6782ba53n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Advantages of front loading

[Garth]

Back in the day I had a nice front bag that had a coated steel 
loop-over-stem frame that the bag slid in to. For vertical stability it had 
2 elastic cords that attached to the fork eyelets. It didn't rely on 
anything to keep it in place in the frame with it's L at the end that the 
bag slid in to. 

Anyways, it was perfect for food and a light jacket, with a map sleeve on 
top. That's about as as much load as I like not only in terms of handling 
and feel, but practicability. I didn't have to stop to access them on the 
road. Anything else non essential can go to the frame or back, if 
applicable. 

These days I don't care if I have to stop for some clothing, so a rear rack 
top bag is fine. Even then, carrying anything changes the way a bike feels. 
It's just not the same, ever. I never found riding a loaded bike 
particularly enjoyable no matter how I tried to justify and rationalize it. 
It doesn't work. I've never ridden a carbon racing bike, but I have had 
fine steel racing bikes back in the day. That to me is the funnest kind of 
bike to ride of all. Training loads typically involve a pump, tire levers 
and a tube, or a spare tubular. Any food went into the jersey pockets. Oh 
the burden ! 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/d7097115-917d-4bf3-91be-5db12688d38dn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Advantages of front loading

[John Moore]

Aww, that 80’s vintage Fuji Royale wasn’t so bad as long as you distributed 
weight properly - about double weight in front compared to back. What was scary 
were the descents with those side pull road brakes - seriously outmatched for a 
weighted Royale. 

How do I know this? 5+ months touring Europe in ‘84 from UK to Crete. It was an 
awesome adventure. 

Far older now but looking to get back into touring again. Atlantis frame 
arrives Wed. Can’t wait. 

> On Sep 5, 2022, at 3:22 PM, 'John Hawrylak' via RBW Owners Bunch 
>  wrote:
> 
> Patrick
> 
> Have you tried any loads split between the front and the rear???   Say 15# in 
> front and 30# in rear??   
> 
> John Hawrylak
> Woodstown NJ
> 
>> On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 9:14:37 PM UTC-4 Patrick Moore wrote:
>> Just curious, after adjusting my Ortlieb Sports Packers to the front 
>> lowriders and carrying home about 12 bulky lbs on the front of the 2020 
>> Matthews which is a geometrical clone of a 2003 Riv Road custom -- Riv lost 
>> the geometry chart but I think it's med trail.
>> 
>> 10 or 12 lb makes almost no difference in handling, but it does make 
>> wheeling the bike one-handed (gripping stem and adjacent bar) through the 
>> aisles less easy; 20 lb does slow the handling noticeably though not 
>> impossibly. ~15 evenly divided is about the max for happiness.
>> 
>> Rear loads are more stable. 20 lb in the rear is not noticeable, 30 lb in 
>> the rear affects handling less than 20 (evenly distributed) does in front, 
>> and I've carried 45 with the bike still rideable. (For comparo, my best rear 
>> loader was an early 1970s thinnish wall and normal gauge 531 framed racing 
>> bike with long stays and shortish front-center: Motobecane Grand Record. 
>> Though light and flexy, with a very stiff 400 gram Tubus Fly this carried 45 
>> better than any stouter-tubed road bike I've owned, including any of 4 Riv 
>> road models (well, if a first-gen Sam Hill is "road). Another nice rear 
>> grocery load carrier was an '80s Fuji Royale "12 speed" that actually 
>> handled better with 20 lb in back than it did unladen; that one hated front 
>> loads.
>> 
>> So, after that long windup, what is the benefit of front loading on 
>> Rivendell models. Is it purely convenience?
>> 
>> And, different question: what is the benefit of front loading on 
>> non-Rivendell low-trail bikes: convenience?
>> 
>> Just curious and describing my own experience.
>> 
>> -- 
>> 
>> ---
>> Patrick Moore
>> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/71f8081d-1b81-4629-b121-374866e6e25cn%40googlegroups.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/9F412434-3671-417F-9C16-C7E1984E278C%40chilmarkresearch.com.

[RBW] Re: Advantages of front loading

['John Hawrylak' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Patrick

Have you tried any loads *split* between the front and the rear???   Say 
15# in front and 30# in rear??   

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 9:14:37 PM UTC-4 Patrick Moore wrote:

> Just curious, after adjusting my Ortlieb Sports Packers to the front 
> lowriders and carrying home about 12 bulky lbs on the front of the 2020 
> Matthews which is a geometrical clone of a 2003 Riv Road custom -- Riv lost 
> the geometry chart but I think it's med trail.
>
> 10 or 12 lb makes almost no difference in handling, but it does make 
> wheeling the bike one-handed (gripping stem and adjacent bar) through the 
> aisles less easy; 20 lb does slow the handling noticeably though not 
> impossibly. ~15 evenly divided is about the max for happiness.
>
> Rear loads are more stable. 20 lb in the rear is not noticeable, 30 lb in 
> the rear affects handling less than 20 (evenly distributed) does in front, 
> and I've carried 45 with the bike still rideable. (For comparo, my best 
> rear loader was an early 1970s thinnish wall and normal gauge 531 framed 
> racing bike with long stays and shortish front-center: Motobecane Grand 
> Record. Though light and flexy, with a *very* stiff 400 gram Tubus Fly 
> this carried 45 better than any stouter-tubed road bike I've owned, 
> including any of 4 Riv road models (well, if a first-gen Sam Hill is 
> "road). Another nice rear grocery load carrier was an '80s Fuji Royale "12 
> speed" that actually handled better with 20 lb in back than it did unladen; 
> that one hated front loads.
>
> So, after that long windup, what is the benefit of front loading *on 
> Rivendell models*. Is it purely convenience?
>
> And, different question: what is the benefit of front loading on 
> *non-Rivendell 
> low-trail bikes*: convenience?
>
> Just curious and describing my own experience.
>
> -- 
>
> ---
> Patrick Moore
> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/71f8081d-1b81-4629-b121-374866e6e25cn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Advantages of front loading

[Chris Halasz]

Just a month or so ago I transitioned from front-loading to rear-loading on 
my Riv after asking myself the same question. 

Moving that ten pound load from a front basket to the rear, complemented by 
my (typically one-sided only) Ortlieb pannier, makes the bike feel so much 
better! 

Note the ten pound load is dynamic (a little dog), and the stability 
experienced with her squirming around (she's tethered) is remarkable. 

For many years, I've sought only bikes with fork eyelets. (Now free of that 
requirement, I wish the Roadeo had seat stay eyelets!)

As to the 'why', maybe had to do with appearances. Front-loading offered me 
the perception of a more spirited-looking ride, or something. 

>From here on, I may limit front loads to a light bar bag, Ian Hibell 
 stye. 

Cheers, 

Chris
Ketchum, ID

On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 7:14:37 PM UTC-6 Patrick Moore wrote:

> Just curious, after adjusting my Ortlieb Sports Packers to the front 
> lowriders and carrying home about 12 bulky lbs on the front of the 2020 
> Matthews which is a geometrical clone of a 2003 Riv Road custom -- Riv lost 
> the geometry chart but I think it's med trail.
>
> 10 or 12 lb makes almost no difference in handling, but it does make 
> wheeling the bike one-handed (gripping stem and adjacent bar) through the 
> aisles less easy; 20 lb does slow the handling noticeably though not 
> impossibly. ~15 evenly divided is about the max for happiness.
>
> Rear loads are more stable. 20 lb in the rear is not noticeable, 30 lb in 
> the rear affects handling less than 20 (evenly distributed) does in front, 
> and I've carried 45 with the bike still rideable. (For comparo, my best 
> rear loader was an early 1970s thinnish wall and normal gauge 531 framed 
> racing bike with long stays and shortish front-center: Motobecane Grand 
> Record. Though light and flexy, with a *very* stiff 400 gram Tubus Fly 
> this carried 45 better than any stouter-tubed road bike I've owned, 
> including any of 4 Riv road models (well, if a first-gen Sam Hill is 
> "road). Another nice rear grocery load carrier was an '80s Fuji Royale "12 
> speed" that actually handled better with 20 lb in back than it did unladen; 
> that one hated front loads.
>
> So, after that long windup, what is the benefit of front loading *on 
> Rivendell models*. Is it purely convenience?
>
> And, different question: what is the benefit of front loading on 
> *non-Rivendell 
> low-trail bikes*: convenience?
>
> Just curious and describing my own experience.
>
> -- 
>
> ---
> Patrick Moore
> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/7bdce083-3c95-4c2b-a0ec-03442678bb1bn%40googlegroups.com.