Frame bags cf conventional panniers.

[iandriver]

Isn't one of the key features of fully loaded bike-packing luggage panniers on the front and no rear panniers?

Think we have to be careful quite what we call bike packing. Being someone who rides 60cm + frames, I love the frame bags (not the full triangle fit, the ones that hang under the top tube), but I still have room for two 1 litre bottles also.

[andrew_s]

I think this style of bag is more of an ethos. It forces you to take less kit over panniers.

That's my view too.

Frame bag, seat pack, and handlebar roll is, to my view, OK, but once you start strapping stuff to the fork blades you start to lose any advantages

I've never considered bikepacking gear on account of...
a) I've already got a full set of panniers etc, so it's just extra cost.
b) I ride with my knees almost brushing the top tube, and there's only just space for a seat tube bottle in a minimal size bottle cage before it gets annoying, so I don't figure I'd get on with a frame pack. It wouldn't hold much I I tried to pack it so it wasn't wider than 3 inches anyway.
c) They depend on the contents for the shape, so careful packing is required, and getting at stuff during the ride is more awkward.
d) A rear rack is a permanent fixture on my bike, on account of supermarket shopping etc.
e) They make lights difficult. These are also a permanent fixture on my bike, and there's a limit in how far I'll go in stripping the bike down for a tour.

[mjr]

e) They make lights difficult. These are also a permanent fixture on my bike, and there's a limit in how far I'll go in stripping the bike down for a tour.

Only if you use the current usually-legally-insufficient junk lights strapped on the handlebars and seatpost. If you use traditional lights on forks and stays or mudguard, there's no conflict and bolted-on fork and mudguard lights means less faff every stop.

[mattheus]

e) They make lights difficult. These are also a permanent fixture on my bike, and there's a limit in how far I'll go in stripping the bike down for a tour.

Only if you use the current usually-legally-insufficient junk lights strapped on the handlebars and seatpost. If you use traditional lights on forks and stays or mudguard, there's no conflict and bolted-on fork and mudguard lights means less faff every stop.

Hmmm ... mudguards and bike-packing?? Not something often seen together

[mjr]

e) They make lights difficult. These are also a permanent fixture on my bike, and there's a limit in how far I'll go in stripping the bike down for a tour.

Only if you use the current usually-legally-insufficient junk lights strapped on the handlebars and seatpost. If you use traditional lights on forks and stays or mudguard, there's no conflict and bolted-on fork and mudguard lights means less faff every stop.

Hmmm ... mudguards and bike-packing?? Not something often seen together

As always, mudguards are controversial, but many bikepackers do use lightweight chromoplastics to protect the often-expensive lightweight luggage from being destroyed prematurely by a steady stream of muck and water.

[Adnepos]

Sorry, this is a bit of a long request for advice...

I'm shopping for bikepacking kit. I'm not going to use my lovely panniers because of the narrow tracks on my intended route (Great North Trail) rather than any need for speed... However, I would rather sit my luggage on a rack over the back wheel rather than in one of those 'seat packs'. Seat packs look to get in the way if lowering the seat post/saddle for descents, even if they are designed for use with droppers. My cycle has perfectly good bosses to attach a rack so this system could provide a stable home for gear besides allowing some fun on descents and providing a lower centre of gravity than a seat pack. It also means I can load a bit more up back, so I don't need to splurge on a custom-made full frame bag; keep my meths and a water bottle in the usual place and buy an off-the-shelf partial frame bag.

I've looked at what is available for the back and the Tortec Super Tourer pannier rack (I have disc brakes but I reckon I could fit the non-disk brake version) looks to be my best option. I like the idea that the solid top to this rack may spare my luggage at the back the worst of the mud and water.

Is there any other rack system that would offer me the advantages that I describe above for the Super Tourer pannier rack? Blackburn Interlock or Topeak Super Tourist might do but both are more expensive -they have 'bells and whistles' that I don't need.

[barkers]

Really good points there Adnepos, I've been through a similar thought process about racks and tried a few different options.

I was very inspired by the arrival of bike packing gear and it inspired me to go YHA touring on my 'racing bike' which has no rack fittings. Many great aspects to it, mainly I think it forces you to leave things behind because there's just no room. Consequently you have an easier time, maybe feeling as if you're bowling along, because your whole setup is so much lighter (and maybe more aerodynamic). I've got a seatpack, and a framepack that leaves room for two bottles but have only improvised a handlebar mounted drybag instead of getting something fancy.

After a lot of careful 'leaving things off the kitlist' I even managed a two night camping trip on the racing bike, which was great - I think it was so nice to be travelling light!

I've also tried a number of combinations of luggage on the heavy tourer / trekking bike (vintage rigid MTB) on a mixture of on road and off road camping tours (including the South Downs Way and the Pennine Bridleway). I had a couple of days trying. front panniers on the low rider rack - a predictably poor experience off road (ouch), having the tent on the bars (too heavy/bulky) combined with a frame bag and full size rear panniers (which meant I took too much stuff, although it was a longer trip), then small rear panniers and a light rucksack (OK but always suboptimal having weight on the body).

My conclusion from all of this - a rear rack is excellent! Yes it weighs a bit, but unless you just can't fit one then it's worth it.

My preferred arrangement after these various trials (and errors) came out as

- Rear rack with two small front panniers and the tent strapped on top.

- Frame bag with tools, spare, pump, lock, lights - any bits and pieces that fit in and help keep some weight off the rear.

- Front Drybag with sleeping bag and mat - just strapped on anyhow it fits securely which isn't the neatest but it's a good balance between bulk (that would fill up the limited rear pannier space) and weight (balancing front to back across the bike without being enough to affect the steering).

Nothing hangs low enough to foul in narrow rutted tracks, the weight isn't all on the back causing the front wheel to lift, the carrying capacity is enough without having too much room or having to hang things in places where they can get lost or snag or get muddy.

Seat pack and frame bag are Apidura, so fairly fancy for me, rack is classic 1980s Blackburn, small panniers same vintage Karrimor, front Drybag modern Karrimor secured with (1948 pattern?) Army surplus webbing...it works.

I'm a trendy consumer. Just look at my Moto G (4) using hovercraft full of eels.

[pq]

Three more reasons I know of:

1. Frame bags weigh less than a pannier carrier + panniers.
2. Bike will work better off road - panniers can be horrendous on narrow trails.
3. Makes touring on an unsuitable bike easier

I think they're a great idea, but not for everyone or every circumstance.

[mattheus]

Three more reasons I know of:

1. Frame bags weigh less than a pannier carrier + panniers.
2. Bike will work better off road - panniers can be horrendous on narrow trails.
3. Makes touring on an unsuitable bike easier

I think they're a great idea, but not for everyone or every circumstance.

Not always: https://road.cc/content/review/237625-t ... ht-package

:- ;

[ "but not for everyone or every circumstance." - indeedy! ]

[Sweep]

Three more reasons I know of:

1. Frame bags weigh less than a pannier carrier + panniers.
2. Bike will work better off road - panniers can be horrendous on narrow trails.
3. Makes touring on an unsuitable bike easier

I think they're a great idea, but not for everyone or every circumstance.

By narrow trails do you mean tracks with bushes or whatever tight on either side?

If so how common are those?

[mjr]

Three more reasons I know of:

1. Frame bags weigh less than a pannier carrier + panniers.
2. Bike will work better off road - panniers can be horrendous on narrow trails.
3. Makes touring on an unsuitable bike easier

I think they're a great idea, but not for everyone or every circumstance.

By narrow trails do you mean tracks with bushes or whatever tight on either side?

If so how common are those?

It depends what you mean by narrow but I've seen someone rip her pannier off, snapping the hooks, crossing a bridge in Belgium on an OK cycleway. It only takes a wobble into the side and the wider your panniers, the less margin for error you have.

[hamish]

I use a frame bag with small rear panniers for all my off road touring/bikepacking. I don't like those long sticky out seat packs and I don't like bulky handlebar rolls. I like panniers.

My panniers sit quite high on my rack as its on a fat bike and the rack mounts are quite high up an already high seat stay. The panniers have never been a problem in use and I have ridden most of the Pennine BW, the An Turas Mor, Cairngorm Loop, much of the Highlands 550, etc.