For the past month, I have been working on a rear rack prototype for the Bella Ciao "Superba" (which will look nothing like the Roadster rack above), so racks have been on my mind lately. I've been checking out the racks on practically every bike I see, and also paying attention to how I typically use mine. Although on occasion I will carry a substantial amount of weight on the rear rack of my bike, more often than not all I carry is a single pannier or bag. Sometimes there are groceries and packages involved, and even those often fit into a single large pannier. Once in a while, I will strap an item or two to the top of the rack, but it is not an everyday occurrence. When I look around at other cyclists, at least in the Boston area, I see mostly the same: One or two panniers attached to the side of the rack, or a bag strapped to the top. If I see more than that being transported (on a regular bike, not an Extracycle or a "utility bike"), it's an anomaly.
What about you? Be honest - how much do you really carry on your bicycle's rear rack on a typical day, assuming that it is a standard city bike?
Looking at other cyclists in the Boston area, I've also noticed a gender difference in how much stuff cyclists carry - with women typically having fewer things strapped to the rear rack than men. But there could be many factors accounting for this, and I am not sure how typical this trend is overall.
In addition to how much stuff I carry on the rear racks of my bicycles, I have also been trying to note in what ways I find them convenient versus not. For example, I often lament the lack of bungee cord attachment points on my Gazelle's rear rack. Also, not all racks are compatible with all pannier attachment system - the spacing of the slats on some racks can interfere with the spacing of the hooks. What major complaints, if any, do you have about the rear rack on your main transportation bicycle? You can select multiple items on this one:Having discovered how to embed these polls and surveys, I admit it's fun to set them up and then look at all the results - but hopefully also useful. I will soon be receiving a sample of the "Superba" rack prototype, and from there it should be just a matter of time until we're done. These racks will fit a standard 700C wheel bike, and regardless of whether you are interested in a "Superba" bicycle, the racks may be available for sale on their own. They won't be sold by me, but I will keep you posted - and your input will certainly be valuable.
I finally received a Giles Berthoud handlebar bag for the Randonneur. It's the Model 25 in gray, which is their medium size and features elastic ties for the pockets instead of leather straps.
The visual presence of this bag is almost too much for me. There is something about its colour scheme and construction that says "I am French and I am exquisite," and I find this both interesting and intimidating.
But happily, the Berthoud does not overwhelm the aesthetics of the bicycle. The size is a perfect fit. And the darker fabric and lighter leather combination parallels the contrast between the frame and lugwork. In comparison, the Ostrich handlebar bag on my own bike is more drab and also more bulky.
The bag has a large front pocket,
two side pockets
and two rear pockets. The top flap closes toward, rather than away from the cyclist, which is the opposite of what I am used to with the Ostrichand makes it counterintuitive for me to use - but this is of course user-specific. You can see that leather straps are provided for wrapping around the back of the rack. However, there are no provisions for securing the bag to the rack's platform, which surprised me (Ostrich includes straps for this). I know that some devise DIY systems, and if you've done so I'd love to hear about your process.
There are leather straps provided for attaching the bag to the handebars, though most opt for installing a decaleur. And here is where we are experiencing a little glitch. Ideally, the owner would prefer to forgo a decaleur: He plans to ride both with and without the bag, and a bagless decaleur sticking out of the bicycle doesn't look great (I agree). The handlebar straps hold the bag up fine, but without being secured on the bottom it bounces on the rack when filled with stuff and going over bumps. I am also told that the bag can move from side to side without a decaleur, though I haven't experienced thisyetduring my one test ride so far(with 10lb of weight in the bag).
As far as decaleurs go, we had planned to use one of theseif going without proved impossible, but I have since been warned that using it with the Nitto lugged stem (as opposed to the regular Technomic stem) is not a good idea, for complicated reasons related to clamp compatibility that I won't go into here. An alternative would be Berthoud's own decaleur, but it too apparently presents issues with the lugged stem - plus it is fairly obtrusive without the bag on. A headset-mounted decaleur is not possible here, because it would sit too low. So I am seeking a solution, and also wondering whether securing the bag at the bottom would in itself solve the problem. The bag is not nearly as large as my Ostrich, and I know that some do manage to use it without a decaleur. Sharing of experiences in this regard would be most appreciated.
Those who have been reading this blog for some time, are no doubt familiar with my rants against unicrown forks. "The bike is nice... if it weren't for that unicrown fork," and so forth. When the topic comes up, some agree, others question my fixation on this detail, and others still want to know what a unicrown fork is. Now that I am temporarily living with a unicrown forked bike, the time seems right to elaborate.
For some time now I've been trying to figure out the history of the unicrown fork, and I keep reading about the first mountain bikes, BMX bikes, and the quest for rigidity - suggesting that its origins were in the 1980s. But then I see antique bicycles- like this ancient Sterling pathracer at the Larz Anderson show last summer - which to me look like they are sporting hundred year old versions of unicrown forks. I have also seen what I can only describe as antique crownless flat-top forks - which appear to be similarly constructed, but are squared-off, rather than round. Would someone care to educate me on their history?
The thing about unicrown forks, is that I don't actually dislike them per se, at least not in of themselves. What I dislike is when they are incongruent to the overall design of the bicycle. On a welded frame, a unicrown fork looks perfectly natural - integrating harmoniously with the bicycle frame. Just like I prefer lugged frames to welded frames, I similarly prefer lugged forks to unicrown forks. But objectively speaking, a unicrown fork looks fine on a welded frame - like on the D2R Boogie above.
Unicrown fork on a welded DBC Swift, also looks appropriate. The frame joints and the unicrown fork match, and all are filed equally smoothly.
Unicrown fork on an ANT mixte. Now, if I were getting an ANT, I would opt for his segmented fork or his dual-plate crown fork - just because I prefer those styles and they are kind of his specialties. But I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with ANT using unicrown forks on TIG-welded bikes - again, the overall design is harmonious.
The only time a unicrown fork actually bothers me, is when it is attached to a lugged frame - which is done quite frequently nowadays. Azor/Workcycles puts unicrown forks on their lugged frames, as do Batavus, Velorbis (balloon tire models only) and Abici (above), just to name a few. The reason is most likely a cost-cutting measure, undertaken perhaps with the hope that most customers simply won't notice. And it bothers me, not because I think that unicrown forks in themselves are "bad," but because I feel that a traditional lugged bicycle - especially when the manufacturer takes pride in describing it as such - calls for a traditional lugged fork. When the frame is lugged but the fork is not, the overall look of the bike comes across as disjointed to me; it doesn't "flow." It's only my opinion, but I think it's a fairly simple and logical notion as far as design goes.
