Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

For discussions about bikes and equipment.
OnYourRight
Posts: 283
Joined: 30 Jun 2013, 8:53pm

Re: Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

Post by OnYourRight »

Thanks for that, 531colin.

Hmm. Vega with known way to fix to bike (albeit not simultaneously with Bagman) or Fly with known way to affix but daunting bending of stays involved… Hard to know what to choose without having prior experience of both types.

Also, my Dawes Clubman has only one set of braze-ons at the rear dropouts, meaning I’ll have another little adventure to get mudguards and rack working simultaneously. Currently trying to figure out whether the pre-“evo” Tubus carriers are a better option for me, since they appear to have a second bolt hole that might support a mudguard stay…
User avatar
531colin
Posts: 16083
Joined: 4 Dec 2009, 6:56pm
Location: North Yorkshire

Re: Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

Post by 531colin »

Have a punt around Tubus website....http://www.tubus.com/product.php?xn=9#
"fixing instructions" have clear diagrams, Vega and Fly both have holes suitable for mudguard mounts on the plate that fixes to the dropout.
Fly has a single top stay, no reason why you couldn't attach that to one of your 2 upper pannier mounts.
I wouldn't use a bagman and a carrier.....presumably all you really need is a way to stop the saddlebag hitting the back of your thighs....eg. a strap from the saddle frame to the carrier top....heavy stuff goes in a pannier?

EDIT Tubus show a double stay accessory for "fly".......don't know who stocks it!!
OnYourRight
Posts: 283
Joined: 30 Jun 2013, 8:53pm

Re: Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

Post by OnYourRight »

531colin wrote:I wouldn't use a bagman and a carrier.....presumably all you really need is a way to stop the saddlebag hitting the back of your thighs....eg. a strap from the saddle frame to the carrier top....heavy stuff goes in a pannier?

I could live with that, but my saddle doesn’t have loops, so the Bagman is my only way to attach the saddlebag. If I take it off I’d have to buy yet another thing (i.e. a Brooks or attachable saddlebag loops) just to use the saddlebag at all.

531colin wrote:Tubus show a double stay accessory for "fly".......don't know who stocks it!!

St John Street Cycles does, and it’s only £6, but the stays don’t look suitable for mounting to the inside of my narrow braze-ons.

I’m tempted to get the Fly classic (the mounting instructions (PDF) show holes for mudguards) and figure out the best mounting arrangement when I get it. The Tubus dealer in Paris doesn’t stock the Fly, though, so I’d have to order online and hope for the best.

Have my heart set on Carradice Kendal panniers, which should work with the Fly from reports on the web.

Thanks again for your very kind help.
SA_SA_SA
Posts: 2360
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 1:46pm

Re: Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

Post by SA_SA_SA »

531colin wrote:I wouldn't use a bagman and a carrier.....presumably all you really need is a way to stop the saddlebag hitting the back of your thighs....eg. a strap from the saddle frame to the carrier top....heavy stuff goes in a pannier?

Replying, OnYourRight wrote:I could live with that, but my saddle doesn’t have loops, so the Bagman is my only way to attach the saddlebag. If I take it off I’d have to buy yet another thing (i.e. a Brooks or attachable saddlebag loops) just to use the saddlebag at all.
...


Couldn't you just use the Bagman saddle loop pair equivalent part on its own with a carrier replacing the L shaped bagman2 support?
(available separately, implying that your Bagman2 support hoop might be separable from its saddlebag loop pair equivalent part?):
http://www.carradice.co.uk/index.php?page_id=product&under=range&product_id=87)

EDIT Carradice would probably just sell you the spare lower clamp part that replaces the L shape support in the above item so that you could convert yours.
------------You may not use this post in Cycle or other magazine ------ 8)
OnYourRight
Posts: 283
Joined: 30 Jun 2013, 8:53pm

Re: Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

Post by OnYourRight »

SA_SA_SA wrote:Couldn't you just use the Bagman saddle loop pair equivalent part on its own with a carrier replacing the L shaped bagman2 support?

Possibly, but most carriers are too low to offer direct support for the saddlebag, since I have a Lowsaddle saddlebag but not a low saddle. (I chose the Lowsaddle because I like the way its low-profile shape sits high, not thinking I would eventually want to combine it with a rack.)

In any case, I’d have to buy that extra part (though if Carradice would sell me just the lower clamp it might not be too expensive).

Naturally, if I could do everything again from scratch I would probably choose a different saddlebag, a different Bagman, and likely a different bike. Still, I’ve learned a lot by solving these unexpected hitches, and I have ended up with some very nice stuff that will hopefully serve me well for many years. If I get a Tubus rack that should also carry my stuff down country lanes for many a year, offsetting the pain of its high price.
tim_f
Posts: 251
Joined: 12 Oct 2009, 10:37pm

Re: Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

Post by tim_f »

One option to mount Bagman and rack at the same time is collar which goes around seatpost -http://www.singletrackbikes.co.uk/m7b0s431p32154/Salsa_Post-Lock
OnYourRight
Posts: 283
Joined: 30 Jun 2013, 8:53pm

Re: Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

Post by OnYourRight »

(Old thread alert!)

I’m pleased to report the Bagman arrangement suggested by Norman H has worked perfectly for the last three months. Thanks Norman!

As for lightweight racks/carriers, in the end I opted for the Tubus Fly classic in stainless steel. Its design and construction are beautiful. I honestly don’t think it detracts at all from the appearance of my bicycle. It’s wonderfully neat and elegant. What’s more, it’s impressively stiff, resisting lateral forces far better than you’d expect from its feather-light weight.

Speaking of weight, there are claims on the web that Tubus weights are very optimistic, but thankfully not so for my example:

Carrier itself
Tubus claim: 369 g / my example: 366.8 g

Mounting parts
Tubus claim: 67 g / my example: 72.3 g (including the supplied spacers, since my bike (130 mm OLN) needed them)

Total installed weight
Tubus claim: 436 g / my example: 439.1 g

Installing it was tricky because I don’t have a vice. After a few failed attempts at bending the central stay by hand and between bits of wood (no chance!), I managed to give it a fairly neat bend by wrapping it in a bit of leftover handlebar tape, inserting it into a 13 mm ring spanner, and applying quite a bit of force. This method should work for anyone without access to a vice.

The little metal tab for mounting behind the brake calliper was easily bent by fixing it to the bike, fixing it to the stay, and moving the stay itself. The stay is much stiffer than the tab, so only the tab bends when you do this.

I mounted the mudguard stays to the secondary holes on the feet of the Fly classic (these holes no longer exist on the new “evo” models) with M5 bolts (and nyloc nuts) and a few washers between carrier and stays to keep them apart to avoid noise.

I’ll put photos up soon, hopefully tomorrow.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

Post by thirdcrank »

OnYourRight wrote: ... After a few failed attempts at bending the central stay by hand and between bits of wood (no chance!), I managed to give it a fairly neat bend by wrapping it in a bit of leftover handlebar tape, inserting it into a 13 mm ring spanner, and applying quite a bit of force. This method should work for anyone without access to a vice. ...


Although it's not actually a pipe, I bent mine with a pipe bender. I borrowed it from one of my sons who is a fitter.

FWIW, Aldi have them in at the mo:

https://www.aldi.co.uk/en/specialbuys/h ... pe-bender/
===========================================================
PS I'm not saying that a pipe bender is necessary or suitable for making the 90deg bend that would be needed to fit the end of the strut vertically to the seat stay bridge. When I fitted mine, to a bike which has a vertical hole through the bridge, the strut was pointing higher than the bridge when it was fitted into the rack. A gentle bend was needed to get it to meet the bridge. That's when I used the pipe bender.
NetworkMan
Posts: 727
Joined: 25 Aug 2014, 11:13am
Location: South Devon

Re: Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

Post by NetworkMan »

You really have to hand it to Dawes. I had almost exactly the same problem years ago when trying to fit a carrier to my 2001 Dawes Audax (yellow/black, horizontal top tube, 531c/cromo mix with lugs). It has Shimano 57 mm brakes and I was lucky in that the carrier arm *just* clears the brake. Your Tektro brakes look a little bulkier in that area. Amazing that they have managed to make the problem slightly worse in over 10 years! My problem was that the carrier arms were slightly too far apart so I had to space the non-brake one off with washers (no room on the brake side). You are not alone. I wonder if using the inside of the braze-ons reduces stability? Still it can be no worse than a single point fixing.
OnYourRight
Posts: 283
Joined: 30 Jun 2013, 8:53pm

Re: Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

Post by OnYourRight »

thirdcrank wrote:PS I'm not saying that a pipe bender is necessary or suitable for making the 90deg bend that would be needed to fit the end of the strut vertically to the seat stay bridge.

Mine didn’t require a 90-degree bend either, since Tubus supplies a little metal tab which accommodates much of the bending needed. I think your pipe-bender idea is much better than my method with a 13 mm ring spanner, but I didn’t have a pipe bender either!

NetworkMan wrote:I wonder if using the inside of the braze-ons reduces stability?

I’m certain it does, but it seems to be stiff enough for a lightly loaded Bagman, based on three months of use. Most of the force is in the vertical direction, of course – and using the inside of the braze-ons doesn’t reduce strength in that direction.

It doesn’t surprise me to hear that Dawes bikes have had this interference problem for years. A few details on this bike don’t seem brilliantly thought out, though the overall quality seems good – the paint, for example, is very tough and hard-wearing (and pretty!).

I will put up photos of my Tubus Fly installation as soon as I take them. When researching these topics I read a lot of threads that just petered out with no follow-up from the original poster. This one won’t be like that!
niggle
Posts: 3435
Joined: 11 Mar 2009, 10:29pm
Location: Cornwall, near England

Re: Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

Post by niggle »

My daughter's Dawes Duchess loop frame bike is similarly afflicted- the rack braze-ons clash with the rear v-brake, particularly the left one with the 'noodle'. A rack previously fitted had a cranked stay that almost made it, but the brake noodle just rubbed it slightly, not ideal.

That rack was rubbish anyway so I was going to fit a nice sturdy Minoura steel rack, as bought from Planet X last year for £19.99, but the very solid chromed steel struts do not lend themselves to being bent so I think I am going to just use p-clips (the seat post clamping is a traditional bolt in the frame, so cannot use one of those Salsa or M-Part clamps).
OnYourRight
Posts: 283
Joined: 30 Jun 2013, 8:53pm

Re: Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

Post by OnYourRight »

niggle wrote:… the very solid chromed steel struts do not lend themselves to being bent

Are they really steel? The stay for my otherwise steel Tubus Fly is some kind of light alloy. This is how I bent mine (with a protective covering of handlebar tape, though the spanner bit through the tape so I’m not sure how much use it was):

Image

It required a very hard squeeze. I was surprised at the force required. I also had to bend it repeatedly in small increments to get the angle just right without risking an overshoot.

I’m not suggesting this method is good for the ring spanner or the strut, but it worked for me and it may work for others without access to proper tools.

And here are pics of my Tubus Fly installation as promised. Pretty!

Image


Image


Image


Image


Image


Image
niggle
Posts: 3435
Joined: 11 Mar 2009, 10:29pm
Location: Cornwall, near England

Re: Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

Post by niggle »

Here is a picture Crepello posted last year of the same rack, the struts come in two different lengths, I think these are the shorter ones:

Image
User avatar
531colin
Posts: 16083
Joined: 4 Dec 2009, 6:56pm
Location: North Yorkshire

Re: Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

Post by 531colin »

niggle wrote:My daughter's Dawes Duchess loop frame bike is similarly afflicted- the rack braze-ons clash with the rear v-brake, particularly the left one with the 'noodle'. A rack previously fitted had a cranked stay that almost made it, but the brake noodle just rubbed it slightly, not ideal.

That rack was rubbish anyway so I was going to fit a nice sturdy Minoura steel rack, as bought from Planet X last year for £19.99, but the very solid chromed steel struts do not lend themselves to being bent so I think I am going to just use p-clips (the seat post clamping is a traditional bolt in the frame, so cannot use one of those Salsa or M-Part clamps).


Would a flexible noodle get you out of trouble?
niggle
Posts: 3435
Joined: 11 Mar 2009, 10:29pm
Location: Cornwall, near England

Re: Rear rack advice & Carradice Bagman problem

Post by niggle »

531colin wrote:Would a flexible noodle get you out of trouble?

Yes quite possibly- thanks :)
Post Reply