Rack ... How much !!

[Cyril Haearn]

jack 93
I've just written a long post about my reservations on th Tailfin and lost the bloody lot due to the forum's weird structure of which I'm rechnically ignorant of,arrrrgghhhhhh!
If I regain the will to live I'll write it again at some point,but presently you'll have refer to my previous posts.

I use the 'save draft' function, then my text does not get lost and I can shorten or modify it when I have calmed down
You could just draft your text in a word document and copy...

It would be grt if people wrote more concisely, I confess I do not read every word of the longer psts

In (tabloid) journalism there are certain rules: KISS, pyramid, one 'fact' per paragraph..

[jack93]

J

So it still comes back to the same thing, If I was standing in front of you in person, with my lightweight road bike with no eyelets and a burning desire to go away for a few days what would you say to make me consider buying your rack over other alternatives that also can mount to the axle/QR and a seatpost collar and cost £50 or less?

Hi there Amediasatex - thanks very much for your reply. It's really great to hear such considered and well-thought through feedback. Indeed it's constructive criticism that keeps the world turning!

Many of your criticisms are completely valid. I think ultimately this all comes down to people as individuals and what they want. There are other alternatives out there that will work, and that are cheaper, but our system is easier to fit, use and detach, and takes a great deal less mechanical knowledge to do so - that is the point of difference. In my experience of seat post collar options, it can well be a bit of a nightmare figuring out what solution is compatible with your bike unless you are prepared to really immerse yourself in it, or if you have a very good LBS. I doubt Evans would be much help in this department. If you are a competent bike fettler who actively enjoys the process of fitting panniers, or seat collar post options, then that is fine! But if you don't have the time for fettling, or just aren't interested in figuring it out, then that is where our solution comes in. It has always been designed to be 'plug and play' - it comes out the box and it goes on the bike. But like you say, cycling is a big world, and there is room for a lot of different cyclists.

The other thing I do want to keep banging on about is the ride quality - I can confidently say that our rack and bags provide a considerably better experience for the rider when on their bike. There is no rattle, no sway, everything is held in place totally securely - it sounds like marketing guff, and I will get stick for it I'm sure, but I often forget that the rack is on my bike at all. That's the second point of difference, to other systems where in my experience the presence of the rack and bag can mean that the ride is spoiled slightly.

Cheers for the chat! Maybe one day we'll convert you...

[amediasatex]

Thanks for the further reply, the more you clarify the more I think perhaps you do need to make more of a point of pushing the fitting and removal aspect. You are right that other systems exist and they can be just as easy, but as you rightly point out often are not, or require additional work on the part of the fitter to customise, so if you have a decent USP there then definitely bang that drum.

Personally for me easy and quick removal and refitting of a rack is not something that would sway me as it's not a requirement I would ever look for in a rack. I either fit a rack or don't, but this product isn't for me and if that is an important requirement to someone and your system really is that good then that is worth a fair chunk of money to some people.

I'm intrigued by your claims with regard to the ride quality aspect, as in my experience a well adjusted and fitted traditional setup is neither noisy, rattly or has any appreciable sway, but the crux of that comment is 'well adjusted' and maybe that's another aspect you should push, if your system is plug and play and requires NO adjustment or fettling to get right then that could be a big win for some people too, the disappointing truth is that a lot of people are lazy and that a great deal of their performance problems (with racks and other things, gears brakes etc.) are often down to poor adjustment, and anything which makes it easier or less time consuming can be a positive in some markets.

I still think you're facing an uphill battle at present, but better positioning and description might change that, ie: if it's 100% clear from the outset what your rack is supposed to do differently or better than existing racks and some more decent blurb about the fitting/removal and ride quality aspects of it as the important things might make it clear what you're trying to offer.

Maybe one day we'll convert you...

I very much doubt it, but only because I'm not the kind of person you're trying to sell to

When I ride a bike with luggage it's a bike designed and built for hauling luggage, when I ride a light fast bike or race there's no chance of me wanting to carry more than a banana. When the two meet it's an Audax bike, again home built and fettled, so it's simply a case of your product not meeting my criteria, because it was never supposed to.

[broadway]

Ask the commuters who are now forced to use the new Thameslink trains with the "wooden" seats if they think new=better. Some are reported taking cushions to sit on!

Apparently they will get more comfortable with use according to the Transport Minster

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/0 ... e-used-jo/

[Cyril Haearn]

Ask the commuters who are now forced to use the new Thameslink trains with the "wooden" seats if they think new=better. Some are reported taking cushions to sit on!

Apparently they will get more comfortable with use according to the Transport Minster

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/0 ... e-used-jo/

People sit while cycling to the station, they sit at work all day, they should stand on trains, that is much healthier, uses space better
BTW I have some fat on my bottom, had a picnic sitting on a stone today, quite comfortable

[reohn2]

Right,I'll have another go.
Jack93
My prejudice against carbon fibre in certian applications is it's suceptability to failure due to impacts and scrapes on walls and other bike's sharpe bits when stack parked,something bikes suffer from,from time to time,particularly when touring with other others,the Tailfin's single arch is its potential downfall in those situations as if hit or scraped hard enough such as in a fall,its practically unrepairable and henceforth unuseable,tour ruined.
CF suffers from one particlar problem in UK weather,that when bonded to other materials it becomes unbonded after a bit of English rock salt and rain.My experience of CF is limited but I've witnessed three CF fork legs on different bikes that have delaminated from their aluminium fork crown after only three or four winter's use with mudguards fitted and careful cleaning by their owners,the Tailfin is designed for mudguardless touring bikes that will spray all of the rack with anything that's on the road including rock salt.

I don't like the single T bar fixing to the main arch as it's under much stress and is what amounts to a single point fixing especially with wider fixing points of conventional panniers compared to a conventional rack with two or more legs per side.

You mention stiffened backs on the Tailfin panniers as being a safety feature.,I disagree because should a pannier fixing fail either on the bag or rack the stiffened backing will cause more problems should it go into the wheel,this doesn't happen with multi leg racks and less stiff pannier backings.

The quick release feature is a positive but only if its required,I think personally and I suspect most tourists even lightweight tourists would prefer a more semi perminant fitting,if only for security reasons when parked,but also confidence when riding.

I linked to a Tubus Airy Ti rack which though not as QR is more durable,harder wearing,lighter,and I'm betting as stiff,and at £140 cheaper,plus it's load weight is 7kg more,and it's more practical having a small top grid for quick access to rain gear etc.


TBH I like inovation,IMO this doesn't rate as that inovative when there are products as good if not better on the market.

[amediasatex]

Saw one of these on a bike in real life for the first time last week. It was bolted to a very nice carbon fibre racing bike, dripping in Dura-Ace as the rider slogged round a very wet audax (with no guards, silly billy ;- )).

Didn't get a chance to chat to him about how he thought it performed and if he was happy with it but he appeared to be the kind of guy who had the money to buy whatever he liked without too much trouble so I doubt the cost bothered him much. The thing that made me chuckle is that he had no bags on it, so clearly wasn't making use of the quick release feature!

Anyone else seen any out and about and in use (with bags on?) yet?

[nigelnightmare]

Personally I can't see the point of it.
You spend ££££'s on a "lightweight carbon bike", then WHY would you put a pannier rack on it so you could carry an extra 18kg(40lb) around.
Kinda defeats the original point of the carbon framed bike.

Your bike your rules, I suppose.

[foxyrider]

Personally I can't see the point of it.
You spend ££££'s on a "lightweight carbon bike", then WHY would you put a pannier rack on it so you could carry an extra 18kg(40lb) around.
Kinda defeats the original point of the carbon framed bike.

Your bike your rules, I suppose.

I have fitted my Tubus Ti rack on my carbon bike - it allowed me to do a three week trip incorporating two mountain sportives (inc the Otztaler which at 5500m climbing and nearly 260km is a big undertaking) I doubt I would have done the trip without going down this route.

[pwa]

Personally I can't see the point of it.
You spend ££££'s on a "lightweight carbon bike", then WHY would you put a pannier rack on it so you could carry an extra 18kg(40lb) around.
Kinda defeats the original point of the carbon framed bike.

Your bike your rules, I suppose.

I did a tour a few years ago where I did a circuit around Provence with four panniers and stuff on top of the rack. Then on a day off touring I stripped the bike of some excess weight and went up Mont Ventoux to eat my butties at the top. One bike can do different jobs. When I got back to base the extra stuff went back on.

[andrew_s]

Personally I can't see the point of it.
You spend ££££'s on a "lightweight carbon bike", then WHY would you put a pannier rack on it so you could carry an extra 18kg(40lb) around.
Kinda defeats the original point of the carbon framed bike.

N+1 is a popular idea, but it doesn't work for everybody - for example if you live in a not over-large flat, and only have storage space for one bike (or one decent bike that can't just live locked up on the street).
You might want your nice light carbon bike for regular club/evening/weekend rides, but still want to tour at holiday time, at which point the rack and luggage goes back on.