Bicycling with a Backpack



"Brian Huntley" wrote: (clip) $12 if you include the litter.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Litter should not be included unless you ride with it.
 
I have a cargobox mounted on a reinforced bookrack on the back of a
non-suspended
mountain bike. I can load about 35 lbs. of groceries in it. I also
carry a lightweight but strong backpack inside for overflow. I can get
about 25 lbs. in it, but I wouldn't want more on my back. It would
affect control and balance and limit my effective response in a
defensive riding situation. Also, when I get more than 10 lbs. in the
pack, my problems with an aching sitdown become magnified. When there's
a lot of extra weight plus distance on that part of me, the pleasure of
riding drops exponentially. A mountain bike or one of the sturdier
hybrids is a good choice for a grocery-fetching workhorse.

Steve McDonald
 
In article <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:
>I need to bicycle 4 miles one way to a grocery store and carry back
>about 50 lbs.. I think it can all fit into a backpack I see online but
>I'm not sure if I will be able to ride ok. Does anyone have any kind of
>experience with short distance bicycle with a heavy ooaded backpack?

Bicycling with a backpack is unpleasant without back problems. You'll be a
lot happier with panniers - we use cheap Sunlite Grocery Getters which each
hold a standard paper grocery bag. Or a trailer - I also have a BOB Yak. The
trailer can haul more although it's more of a hassle to attach, park, etc.
--
<a href="http://www.poohsticks.org/drew/">Home Page</a>
In 1913 the inflation adjusted (in 2003 dollars) exemption for single people
was $54,567, married couples' exemption $72,756, the next $363,783 was taxed
at 1%, and earnings over $9,094,578 were taxed at the top rate of 7%.
 
In article <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:
>I need to bicycle 4 miles one way to a grocery store and carry back
>about 50 lbs.. I think it can all fit into a backpack I see online but
>I'm not sure if I will be able to ride ok. Does anyone have any kind of
>experience with short distance bicycle with a heavy ooaded backpack?

I've never done 50, but at one time I could carry a 20-30lb backpack,
on foot or on a bike, without any problems at all. Probably wouldn't
be able to now, though, now that I've stopped doing it regularly.

You definitely don't want to start by throwing 50lb of stuff in a
backpack and riding off. Your back muscles (if they can handle it at
all) will hate you for it, and you'll be top-heavy enough that you'll
have trouble balancing.

If you work up to it, though, you shouldn't have any problems.
Giving your muscles and your sense of balance lots of time to get used
to handling N lb well before you ask them to deal with N+5 lb will avoid
most of the possible problems that could come up.

You also want to make sure you have a backpack that fits well. It should
move with your shoulders when you try to turn and stop moving when you
stop moving, without flopping around.

If you don't mind putting in the time and energy to make sure you don't
run into problems with poor fit, overloaded muscles, and top-heaviness,
I don't see there being any other problems, except maybe not being able
to develop the muscle strength and balancing abilities enough to be able
to handle as much weight as you'd like to carry. But if you give it
enough time (especially if you're young-ish and already in reasonably
good shape) the upper bound should be well above 50lb.


Note that, no matter how you carry it, the extra weight will make you+bike
a lot heavier (I actually have no idea what average weights are, but 50lb
is probably 25-50% of the unladen weight of most person+bike combos?),
and that will affect things like balancing, maneuverability, stopping
distance, hill climbing and descending, and how fast you can get going.
(More weight means it tries harder to keep going (or not-going) the
same direction+speed as before, and tries harder to get to / stay at
the bottom of hills.) You definitely want to be aware of that when you
start instead of having to learn it the hard way.


dave

--
Dave Vandervies [email protected]
If that fails, I know a lot about mind games. My former students have
taught me well.
--Moebius Stripper
 
[email protected] wrote:
> I need to bicycle 4 miles one way to a grocery store and carry back
> about 50 lbs.. I think it can all fit into a backpack I see online but
> I'm not sure if I will be able to ride ok. Does anyone have any kind of
> experience with short distance bicycle with a heavy ooaded backpack?
>

50lbs is a lot, but as long as the pack is well adjusted, and has a hip
belt, it should be okay, what you don't want to have happen is for the
load to be able to shift side to side, as that could cause balance issues.

Another option is to add a rear rack to your bike and either use
panniers or attach the pack to the bike, using straps or bungie style
cords, this lowers the packs affects on your centre of gravity, meaning
if something does shift side to side then it's affect on balance is
considerably lower.

W
 
The Wogster wrote:

> 50lbs is a lot, but as long as the pack is well adjusted, and has a hip
> belt, it should be okay, what you don't want to have happen is for the
> load to be able to shift side to side, as that could cause balance issues.


Wog... and the rest of the backpackers....

How is this guy going to stop if he has to STOP, as in right now! right
away! STOP! The answer is he can't. He's got too much weight high and
too much weight on him to manage the bike if circumstances demand an
abrupt maneuver.

I used to deliver newspapers (the old days). A fully loaded bike, even
with balanced front and rear baskets is a bear to manage when the dog
runs you, or the car gets in your way, etc... but a 50 pound
backpack... COME OFF IT.

Will
 
Will wrote:

> The Wogster wrote:
>
>
>>50lbs is a lot, but as long as the pack is well adjusted, and has a hip
>>belt, it should be okay, what you don't want to have happen is for the
>>load to be able to shift side to side, as that could cause balance issues.
>
>
>
> Wog... and the rest of the backpackers....
>
> How is this guy going to stop if he has to STOP, as in right now! right
> away! STOP! The answer is he can't.

The answer is he can't anyways because if he did he will be going over
the handlebars with or without backpack.


He's got too much weight high and
> too much weight on him to manage the bike if circumstances demand an
> abrupt maneuver.
>
> I used to deliver newspapers (the old days). A fully loaded bike, even
> with balanced front and rear baskets is a bear to manage when the dog
> runs you, or the car gets in your way, etc... but a 50 pound
> backpack... COME OFF IT.
>
> Will
>

An abrupt stop
 
Will wrote:
> The Wogster wrote:
>
>
>>50lbs is a lot, but as long as the pack is well adjusted, and has a hip
>>belt, it should be okay, what you don't want to have happen is for the
>>load to be able to shift side to side, as that could cause balance issues.
>
>
>
> Wog... and the rest of the backpackers....
>
> How is this guy going to stop if he has to STOP, as in right now! right
> away! STOP! The answer is he can't. He's got too much weight high and
> too much weight on him to manage the bike if circumstances demand an
> abrupt maneuver.

Which is why I also mentioned a rack and panniers, which are probably a
much better option. A weight limit is rider specific, some riders have
good upper body strength, some don't. Personally I know how much I
would stuff into a backpack for a good ride, and it's probably closer to
25lbs then 50lbs. However for a one off, where it's fairly flat, then I
could do it, not that I would really want to. For 35 - 60lbs a rack and
panniers would be much better, over 60lbs then a trailer is probably a
much better idea. However, like most other things YMMV.

> I used to deliver newspapers (the old days). A fully loaded bike, even
> with balanced front and rear baskets is a bear to manage when the dog
> runs you, or the car gets in your way, etc... but a 50 pound
> backpack... COME OFF IT.

Paper is extremely heavy, a typical carton of 5000 sheets of 20lb paper
weighs about 50lbs (no kidding), so a full newspaper bag can easily
exceed 75lbs (been there, done that).

W
 
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Is there a much greater chance of falling with the backpack full and
> heavy? I mean would it be a fast fall with no waring or is it a
> balancing game?

High CG. Yeah, there's a greater chance of losing balance / control with a
high CG.
 
In article <[email protected]>,
Will <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>The Wogster wrote:
>
>> 50lbs is a lot, but as long as the pack is well adjusted, and has a hip
>> belt, it should be okay, what you don't want to have happen is for the
>> load to be able to shift side to side, as that could cause balance issues.
>
>
>Wog... and the rest of the backpackers....
>
>How is this guy going to stop if he has to STOP, as in right now! right
>away! STOP! The answer is he can't.

No, the answer is "The same way he would if he was pulling a 60lb
trailer, or carrying 50lb in panniers, or...". Or, more precisely,
"Pay attention to what's going on so you don't have to".

> He's got too much weight high and
>too much weight on him to manage the bike if circumstances demand an
>abrupt maneuver.

Any abrupt maneuver you can do, you can do while top-heavy, especially if
you're used to riding top-heavy anyways and you put some care into it.
If it's too much for somebody carrying 50lb in a backpack, it's also
too much for somebody carrying 50lb any other way.


dave

--
Dave Vandervies [email protected]
I wonder if Canada could take out the US in a surprise attack?
Only 25 steps according to MapQuest:
--Kevin in the scary devil monastery
 
Roger Houston wrote:

> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Is there a much greater chance of falling with the backpack full and
>>heavy? I mean would it be a fast fall with no waring or is it a
>>balancing game?
>
>
> High CG. Yeah, there's a greater chance of losing balance / control with a
> high CG.
>
>

....and one operates the bike in a manner under such conditions that
compensates for that.

Tractor/trailers have a high centre of gravity and will roll if cornered
too fast, so the operators compensate for that.
 
"Dave Vandervies" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:dle34p$rk5
>
> Any abrupt maneuver you can do, you can do while top-heavy, especially if
> you're used to riding top-heavy anyways and you put some care into it.

But it's a lot harder, unless you are in one of those states where they've
repealed the laws of physics.
 
In article <[email protected]>,
Mike Kruger <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Dave Vandervies" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:dle34p$rk5
>>
>> Any abrupt maneuver you can do, you can do while top-heavy, especially if
>> you're used to riding top-heavy anyways and you put some care into it.
>
>But it's a lot harder, unless you are in one of those states where they've
>repealed the laws of physics.

Yeah, especially when you ignore the parts about "put some care into
it" and "pay attention to what's going on".


dave

--
Dave Vandervies [email protected]
How about if I use it in a sentence: "a characteristic of the Scheme
community is that it doesn't suffer idiots gladly."
--Anton van Straaten in comp.lang.scheme
 
Leo Lichtman wrote:
> "Brian Huntley" wrote: (clip) $12 if you include the litter.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Litter should not be included unless you ride with it.

Carrying two buckets full of litter is more than I take with me on a
bike tour - possibly the heaviest thing I ever put on my bike. I don't
do it normally (one full bucket atop the rack is fine.)
 
Dave Vandervies wrote:
>
> Yeah, especially when you ignore the parts about "put some care into
> it" and "pay attention to what's going on".

The whole backpack -vs- pannier -vs- trailer debate will go on forever,
much like the helmet wars.

No matter where you carry the weight, it will affect the handling of
your bicycle, especially braking.

That being said, how much and what aspect of handling gets affected
depends on the location. I've cycled with heavy backpacks for years. It
wasn't unusual to carry 40lbs when I was in college (yes, I weighed the
backpack once with a typical load). This affected the bike very little
because I shifted backward during heavy braking just like on a normal
mountain biking experience. If 50lbs carried high made that much
difference in braking, we would see big heavy guys going over the bars
more often than little skinny guys. I can't say that is what I have
observed.

Loading the weight on your bike via panniers will affect your ability
to go over obstacles like speed bumps, curbs, potholes, etc. It does
make the bike feel more "sluggish" but it isn't surpassable - people
have been touring with loads for years.

A trailer has a different effect. You can definitely feel it pulling or
pushing you around when you have a large load (like two kids inside). I
wouldn't want to carry my kids on my back when cycling, but they wiggle
around a lot more than a bag of books. I have had a collision when
pulling an empty trailer simply because the braking was inadequate (it
was an older bike which I don't use for trailer-hauling duties any
longer).

As to a backpack being hot, they really aren't if you get the right
one. Try a Vaude out for size. Mine has held up hauling light and heavy
loads for nearly 8 years. I ride so much with a backpack that I almost
feel naked without one. When I don't need to carry a load, I usually at
least carry water in a Camelback. I find that it is hotter than my
Vaude.

-Buck
 
I have done 25# of lead in a backpack and it sucks rocks. you get used
to the handling but it is still very strange. panniers are far nicer.
Knight-Toolworks
http://www.knight-toolworks.com
affordable handmade wooden planes
 
Buck wrote:

A trailer has a different effect. You can definitely feel it
pulling or pushing you around when you have a large load (like two kids
inside). I wouldn't want to carry my kids on my back when cycling, but
they wiggle around a lot more than a bag of books. I have had a
collision when pulling an empty trailer simply because the braking was
inadequate (it was an older bike which I don't use for trailer-hauling
duties any longer).
----------------------------------------------------

A friend of mine, the gifted designer Gary Hale, made a very good
inertial-activated auxilliary brake for a large cargo trailer. It had a
one-lb. sliding weight on a longitudinal rod. The weight would move
forward when the bike's brakes were applied and it would pull on disc
brakes on the trailer. When the deceleration ended, the pressure on the
brakes ceased and the weight would slide back from the force of
acceleration. It helped a lot in slowing down the trailer, which could
carry several hundred pounds. On my trailer-hauling bike, I keep the
brakes in top working order and plan ahead for my stops, just as a
freight truck driver would do.

Steve McDonald
 
Steve McDonald wrote:

> It had a one-lb. sliding weight on a longitudinal rod.

What did this weight do on a the descent side of a hill?

Will
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Bicycling mag vs Strava
Replies
30
Views
5K
Road Cycling
CAMPYBOB
CAMPYBOB
Jerry Holtz
bicycling getaway
Replies
3
Views
725
Road Cycling
baj32161
baj32161
A
champions bicycling, autographed postcards
Replies
0
Views
781
Road Cycling
Albert Van den Bosch
A
J
Bicycling Magazine
Replies
20
Views
1K
Road Cycling
Dane Buson
D
J
Favorite music while bicycling
Replies
40
Views
2K
Road Cycling
Ralph Barone
R
Top Bottom Back