Hydration pack for road cycling

I like the ones made by HydraPak.
http://www.hydrapak.com/packs/matrix.shtml

Pat in TX

Kovie said:

I recently purchased a fairly large "cycling" hydration pack, the Deuter
TransAlp 25, which I intend to use mostly for long day hikes, and
occasionally for commuting or lugging books and such to a local cafe or park
on my road bike. It's a really nice pack, but way too big (1500 cubic
inches) for long day rides, and I'd like to get a second, smaller pack for
such use. I'd like to be able to pack some food, a light shell or
microfleece jersey, a paperback to have something to read at the turnaround
point (I'm big on destination riding), a small digital camera, my callet,
cell phone, small first aid kit, etc. It would also do double-duty for short
hikes and long urban walks. I'd like a 100oz reservoir, since I tend to
sweat a lot.

I've been eyeing several Camelbaks, especially the MULE, Blowfish and HAWG.
I like the compact size of the MULE, but am concerned that it might be a tad
too small, and that if I packed its various expandable pockets, it would
become unwieldy and shift around. I like the capacity of the HAWG and its
cinch straps, but am concerned that even with these it might be a bit too
big for long rides. As for the Blowfish, it seems an ideal compromise,
expecially with its expandability, but it struck me as less rugged than the
other two.

I think the MULE sounds appropriate for anyone who is willing to carry
that much stuff on his or her back for that length of time on a
bicycle.

I think that if you need to carry that much stuff you should mount it
on your bicycle. I would also look to frame mount that much water, as I
recently suggested in another thread.

Quoted message said:

Kovie said:

I recently purchased a fairly large "cycling" hydration pack, the
Deuter TransAlp 25, which I intend to use mostly for long day hikes,
and occasionally for commuting or lugging books and such to a local
cafe or park on my road bike. It's a really nice pack, but way too
big (1500 cubic inches) for long day rides, and I'd like to get a
second, smaller pack for such use. I'd like to be able to pack some
food, a light shell or microfleece jersey, a paperback to have
something to read at the turnaround point (I'm big on destination
riding), a small digital camera, my callet, cell phone, small first
aid kit, etc. It would also do double-duty for short hikes and long
urban walks. I'd like a 100oz reservoir, since I tend to sweat a lot.

I've been eyeing several Camelbaks, especially the MULE, Blowfish
and HAWG. I like the compact size of the MULE, but am concerned that
it might be a tad too small, and that if I packed its various
expandable pockets, it would become unwieldy and shift around. I
like the capacity of the HAWG and its cinch straps, but am concerned
that even with these it might be a bit too big for long rides. As
for the Blowfish, it seems an ideal compromise, expecially with its
expandability, but it struck me as less rugged than the other two.

I think the MULE sounds appropriate for anyone who is willing to carry
that much stuff on his or her back for that length of time on a
bicycle.

I think that if you need to carry that much stuff you should mount it
on your bicycle. I would also look to frame mount that much water, as
I recently suggested in another thread.

I think you should have quit writing after your first paragraph (and even
/it/ sounded condescending, as if there's something wrong with someone "who
is willing to carry that much stuff on his or her back for that length of
time on a bicycle"😉.

Why on earth would the OP want to "mount" all his or her stuff on the
bicycle, when modern hydration system packs are light, aero, convenient,
roomy, and affordable? (Not to mention that it's the OP's indicated
preference.) Plus you can lock the bike and carry your belongings inside or
whatever, and not have to worry about them being stolen.

I agree, though, get the MULE. (I'm not familiar with the Blowfish, and the
HAWG is huge so probably too similar to what OP already has. Other brands
are fine, too, no doubt.)

Bill "feeling trolled, but WTH..." S.

Per Pat:

Quoted message said:

I like the ones made by HydraPak.
http://www.hydrapak.com/packs/matrix.shtml

Back when I was comparing, what I liked about HydraPak was the roll-top
reservour. Easier to clean thoroughly.
--
PeteCresswell

Bill Sornson said:

Why on earth would the OP want to "mount" all his or her stuff on the
bicycle, when modern hydration system packs are light, aero, convenient,
roomy, and affordable?

100oz water = 6+lbs., plus additional weight of food, reading
material, jersey, digital camera, cell phone, first aid kit, "etc." The
weight of the hydration system is completely beside the point, which is
the weight of the stuff the OP is going to put in it.

Quoted message said:

(Not to mention that it's the OP's indicated
preference.)

Maybe the OP hasn't considered the alternative. What person in this ng
would recommend carrying all this stuff on their back on a bicycle as
preferable to panniers or some other way of bike-mounting?

Quoted message said:

Plus you can lock the bike and carry your belongings inside or
whatever, and not have to worry about them being stolen.

There are solutions to this. You could get a rack with a bag that could
be unclipped as easily as taking off a backpack.

Quoted message said:

I agree, though, get the MULE. (I'm not familiar with the Blowfish, and the
HAWG is huge so probably too similar to what OP already has. Other brands
are fine, too, no doubt.)

Bill "feeling trolled, but WTH..." S.

Trolled arguably, but, regardless, the best advice for a bicyclist does
not involve recommending a backpack for carrying that much gear any
significant distance.

Quoted message said:

Bill Sornson said:

Why on earth would the OP want to "mount" all his or her stuff on the
bicycle, when modern hydration system packs are light, aero,
convenient, roomy, and affordable?

100oz water = 6+lbs., plus additional weight of food, reading
material, jersey, digital camera, cell phone, first aid kit, "etc."
The weight of the hydration system is completely beside the point,
which is the weight of the stuff the OP is going to put in it.

Hopefully others have read the entire OP /and/ all that I (and others)
replied.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(Not to mention that it's the OP's indicated
preference.)

Maybe the OP hasn't considered the alternative. What person in this ng
would recommend carrying all this stuff on their back on a bicycle as
preferable to panniers or some other way of bike-mounting?

Hopefully others have read the entire OP /and/ all that I (and others)
replied.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Plus you can lock the bike and carry your belongings inside or
whatever, and not have to worry about them being stolen.

There are solutions to this. You could get a rack with a bag that
could be unclipped as easily as taking off a backpack.

Quoted message said:

I agree, though, get the MULE. (I'm not familiar with the Blowfish,
and the HAWG is huge so probably too similar to what OP already has.
Other brands are fine, too, no doubt.)

Bill "feeling trolled, but WTH..." S.

Trolled arguably, but, regardless, the best advice for a bicyclist
does not involve recommending a backpack for carrying that much gear
any significant distance.

Says you.

Hopefully others have read the entire OP /and/ all that I (and others)
replied, Bill S.

What about road cyclists with 16 pound carbon fibre race bikes? No
eyelets for racks (thank goodness), no way of clamping anything to the
bike. Sure, if you go touring on a regular basis you'll have racks and
panniers and all sorts of other [censored] bolted to your bike - but for an
occasional ride, why NOT carry the stuff on your back? On your back
it's sprung weight, on the bike it's unsprung weight, so there's a
handling advantage over racks or panniers.

I like the Camelback Rogue myself (although it's slightly smaller than
the OP is looking for). After a few minutes you don't notice it's there
any more. You can carry food and get to it while riding (in the mesh
pouch), so you can both eat and drink without stopping. Works both
on-road and off. Carries the equivilent of 4+ water bottles. Carries a
pump and tools. What's not to like?

Road cyclists DO NOT use hydration packs/backpacks!!!!! You will look
like a DUI rider. There are bottle cages to fit every bike.

sunderland said:

What about road cyclists with 16 pound carbon fibre race bikes? No
eyelets for racks (thank goodness), no way of clamping anything to the
bike.

Are there really people with this kind of bike who would go for
frequent long rides with all this stuff on their backs? Probably, but
not many, I'd guess. It is certainly possible to construct a strawman
that would justify the use of a backpack, but does that make it the
best solution to offer when someone asks about how to carry stuff on a
bike?

Quoted message said:

I like the Camelback Rogue myself (although it's slightly smaller than
the OP is looking for). After a few minutes you don't notice it's there
any more.

If you say so; not my experience with a pack with any significant
amount of stuff in it. Personally, I think that anything that adds to
overall fatigue should be avoided where possible.

(PeteCresswell) said:

Per [email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

I would also look to frame mount that much water,

Around here (Southeastern Penna) I find that goose [censored] thrown from the tires
diminishes the aesthetics of that practice.

I can't argue with that.

Quoted message said:

Road cyclists DO NOT use hydration packs/backpacks!!!!! You will look
like a DUI rider. There are bottle cages to fit every bike.

As a road cyclist (five road bikes, one MTB), I own a CamelBak MULE. I
don't use it on every ride by any means, but it comes in handy in some
instances. Example, riding in the Rockies where one can expect an
afternoon thunderstorm it's a good place to carry rain gear. I also
carry a small first aid kit in the back packet.

To prepare for really hot days you can fill the bladder half way and
put it in the freezer overnight. The top it up in the morning and
you'll have cold water for most of your ride. It takes some
trial-and-error to figure out how much water to freeze. The MULE is
pretty well insulated. One time I used it for a day hike in the
Rockies and wound up taking a block of ice for a walk in the woods.

My girlfried just bought a Blowfish, and if it was available when I
bought the MULE I might have oped for that model. IIRC it has the same
size bladder as the MULE and when expanded a lot more capacity. I also
seem to recall the bladder can be filled without removing it from the
pack (it's not handy to me at the moment), but then I might be
thinking of the CamelBak Classic I just bought for my son, an avid
MTBer.

jeverett3<AT>earthlink<DOT>net http://home.earthlink.net/~jeverett3

Quoted message said:

sunderland said:

What about road cyclists with 16 pound carbon fibre race bikes? No
eyelets for racks (thank goodness), no way of clamping anything to the
bike.

Are there really people with this kind of bike who would go for
frequent long rides with all this stuff on their backs? Probably, but
not many, I'd guess.

What if your guess is just flat-a$$ wrong?

Quoted message said:

It is certainly possible to construct a strawman
that would justify the use of a backpack, but does that make it the
best solution to offer when someone asks about how to carry stuff on a
bike?

Lots of people are buying them. Lots of people are using them. Few
seem to be complaining about them.

You're swimming up a pretty powerful stream. If you're enjoying
yourself, then--by all means--continue.

Per [email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

I would also look to frame mount that much water,

Around here (Southeastern Penna) I find that goose [censored] thrown from the tires
diminishes the aesthetics of that practice.
--
PeteCresswell

Ah . I see. So, Bobby Julich - who has raced in the Tour de France with
a Camelback - is just a wannabee mountain biker??

He didnt win and I wouldnt emulate him .He's so skinny and looks not so
masculine

"sunderland" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What about road cyclists with 16 pound carbon fibre race bikes? No
eyelets for racks (thank goodness), no way of clamping anything to the
bike. Sure, if you go touring on a regular basis you'll have racks and
panniers and all sorts of other [censored] bolted to your bike - but for an
occasional ride, why NOT carry the stuff on your back? On your back
it's sprung weight, on the bike it's unsprung weight, so there's a
handling advantage over racks or panniers.

I like the Camelback Rogue myself (although it's slightly smaller than
the OP is looking for). After a few minutes you don't notice it's there
any more. You can carry food and get to it while riding (in the mesh
pouch), so you can both eat and drink without stopping. Works both
on-road and off. Carries the equivilent of 4+ water bottles. Carries a
pump and tools. What's not to like?

Exactly. While I don't have a high-end carbon bike, I do have a fairly nice
Ti bike with no eyelets for panniers and such. I could get a seat post rack.
I understand they even make ones that can accept panniers. Or, I could try
to figure out a c-clamp solution so I could use the pannier rack I already
have (which used to go on my now dissassembled previous road bike). Or I
could mount a nice frou-frou wicker basket to my handlebars in case I want
to carry Toto around as I ride to market...

But that's not the point. As you correctly surmised, this is for OCCASIONAL
use, not every day. Obviously, if I needed to lug this much stuff every time
I went out riding, I'd do best to mount panniers on my bike and keep the
weight (and fatigue) off my back. That's a no-brainer. Most times I go
riding, though, I can fit everything I need in either my jersey pockets or
seat pack. E.g. tools, tube, patch kit, a couple of branola bars, etc.

Every once in a while, though, I'd like to be able to ride 25-30 miles to
some destination where I can relax and read a book for a couple of hours,
maybe take some pictures, eat something that doesn't come in foil wrap,
etc. And for that, panniers are overkill, and jersey pockets and a seat pack
not enough. Thus, the need for a modestly-sized pack. And since I tend to
sweat a lot and may not always be near a source of potable water, it might
as well be a hydration pack.

Put another way, what I really need is a hydration pack, and what I want is
one that can also carry a few things that won't fit into jersey pockets and
a seat pack, and for which panniers would be overkill. Seemed pretty simple
when I made my OP. ;-)

--
Kovie
[email hidden]

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Road cyclists DO NOT use hydration packs/backpacks!!!!! You will look
like a DUI rider. There are bottle cages to fit every bike.

I could care less if I don't have that wannabe Lance look down. Hell, I
don't even shave my legs (yes, I'm male), and most of my cycling clothes are
mail order house brand (the only Pearl Izumi I own is a pair of worn out
socks). So your point isn't pertinent to my situation and needs. And I
already have 2 cages on my bike, but even with 2 24oz water bottles, I have
to refill more often than I'd like, and hate drinking from them while in
motion. And I think I was quite clear about why I'd like a pack. But if you
have a non-aesthetic point to make, I'd love to hear it.

--
Kovie
[email hidden]

"John Everett" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Road cyclists DO NOT use hydration packs/backpacks!!!!! You will look
like a DUI rider. There are bottle cages to fit every bike.

As a road cyclist (five road bikes, one MTB), I own a CamelBak MULE. I
don't use it on every ride by any means, but it comes in handy in some
instances. Example, riding in the Rockies where one can expect an
afternoon thunderstorm it's a good place to carry rain gear. I also
carry a small first aid kit in the back packet.

To prepare for really hot days you can fill the bladder half way and
put it in the freezer overnight. The top it up in the morning and
you'll have cold water for most of your ride. It takes some
trial-and-error to figure out how much water to freeze. The MULE is
pretty well insulated. One time I used it for a day hike in the
Rockies and wound up taking a block of ice for a walk in the woods.

My girlfried just bought a Blowfish, and if it was available when I
bought the MULE I might have oped for that model. IIRC it has the same
size bladder as the MULE and when expanded a lot more capacity. I also
seem to recall the bladder can be filled without removing it from the
pack (it's not handy to me at the moment), but then I might be
thinking of the CamelBak Classic I just bought for my son, an avid
MTBer.

jeverett3<AT>earthlink<DOT>net http://home.earthlink.net/~jeverett3

When in its non-expanded configuration, does she find the Blowfish to be
pretty compact and unobtrusive? Is the lack of cinch straps a problem, or an
asset (i.e. no flopping around)? And do you find the MULE to be a bit too
small sometimes while road riding? I'm probably going to choose between
these two so this would help (I suspect that the HAWG would be overkill for
my riding needs and be too close in size to the larger pack I just bought).

--
Kovie
[email hidden]

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I think the MULE sounds appropriate for anyone who is willing to carry
that much stuff on his or her back for that length of time on a
bicycle.

I think that if you need to carry that much stuff you should mount it
on your bicycle. I would also look to frame mount that much water, as I
recently suggested in another thread.

I think Bill had it right, this IS pretty condescending. Read my other posts
(as well as the original one) to see why panniers or a rack is overkill for
my needs. I'm sure you mean well, but this is a rather heavy-handed way to
go about it.

--
Kovie
[email hidden]