# Backpack vs Pannier



## sayek1 (4 May 2010)

I normally use a pannier on the way to and from work, but today I decided to try a small rucksack instead - same kit/load. The results were outstanding;

Normally I do the journey (19miles) in anything between 1hr 11min & 1hr 17mins - dependent upon the weather/wind etc. Every journey is a race so I always push a fair bit.

This year the quickest I have managed is 1hr 13min - just getting back into it and not fully fit yet.

Well today, the bike seemed lighter (weather was same as last week). I was standing and pushing very hard up any slight hill (which I dont do with panniers) and the end result was 1hr 7mins.

Not sure about the science, but I will now be binning the pannier and sticking to the rucksack. Maybe its a mixture of drag, wind resistance and balance?

"Sweaty back" is not a problem - the amount I push/sweat means I am soaked even without the pack!!

I am sure someone will provide a more scientific explanation, but panniers are now out for me.


----------



## Tynan (4 May 2010)

keep us informed, one ride is hardly proof is it?

the weight is still there, drag you might be saving granted


----------



## Norm (4 May 2010)

Depending what you have in the rucksack, try not to fall off too badly. 

The journey would take a lot longer in a wheelchair.

(Yeah, I know, it's sensationalist but it helps to make the point  )


----------



## Davidc (4 May 2010)

A rucksack is a part of you when riding, so its weight is added to yours when you stand on the pedals, giving a greater driving force. Panniers are attached to the frame so they're added to the weight you're pushing against.

The extra work still has to come from your legs, as you have to keep lifting the higher total weight up, so you're not getting anything for nothing.

I did work this problem through some time ago and decided this idea was right, but I'm happy to see a reasoned contradiction, if for no better reason than to justify my preference for sitting on the seat, and using panniers!


----------



## lukesdad (4 May 2010)

I use a backpack but I think its just down to personal preference.


----------



## Helly79 (4 May 2010)

I prefer to use my pannier as I did find my rucksack made my back hurt.


----------



## aberal (4 May 2010)

I use a Berghaus Freeflow backpack which holds the bag off your back and keeps you dry. I wouldn't try and convince anyone that its the same as _not _having a bag on your back, but it's the next best thing.


----------



## slowmotion (4 May 2010)

Davidc said:


> A rucksack is a part of you when riding, so its weight is added to yours when you stand on the pedals, giving a greater driving force. Panniers are attached to the frame so they're added to the weight you're pushing against.
> 
> The extra work still has to come from your legs, as you have to keep lifting the higher total weight up, so you're not getting anything for nothing.
> 
> I did work this problem through some time ago and decided this idea was right, but I'm happy to see a reasoned contradiction, if for no better reason than to justify my preference for sitting on the seat, and using panniers!



That had me scratching my head for a while 

I'm not sure if it is true, but it may be. What I could do is try a little experiment...

1) remove my rack, panniers and contents, and weigh them,

2) put the same weight of lead in my boots,

3) see if my top speed on the flat goes up.

It might, but only if I get out of the saddle, perhaps?

Thanks for your post.


----------



## l4dva (5 May 2010)

Wouldn't the extra weight on your feet be amplified by the fact that the weight will be rotating around while pedaling - rotating mass effect?? 

That could amplify the extra weight making it a lot lot harder... I might be wrong though...


----------



## e-rider (5 May 2010)

I'd have thought that this was a no brainer.

Off roaders use small backpacks (camelbaks) for obvious reasons, but the rest of us should definitely be using panniers.

On short rides the difference might only be a sweaty back but on longer rides and with heavy loads a backpack just isn't an option.


----------



## GazK (5 May 2010)

tundragumski said:


> I'd have thought that this was a no brainer.
> 
> Off roaders use small backpacks (camelbaks) for obvious reasons, but the rest of us should definitely be using panniers.
> 
> On short rides the difference might only be a sweaty back but on longer rides and with heavy loads a backpack just isn't an option.



+1 to that. I used to commute to work (10 miles each way) with a backpack and it didn't bother me. Recently I did 30 with a backpack over towpaths, carrying a Kryptonite New Yorker lock (think heavy). My shoulders were killing me by the end of it.


----------



## sayek1 (5 May 2010)

I guess it depends on the load in your pack - I am guessing, but mine is probably no more than 7 to 8 lbs........ small lock, washkit stuff, very small towel, spare kit for journey home (shorts etc as its warmer), tee-shirt, base-layer, wallet, phone, pump etc.

Much more and it would be uncomfortable I am sure. I was looking tonight at bigger backpacks in Evans and decided why bother..... much bigger and it will end up hurting, sending you off balance and defeating the whole object. I'll stick to my 15 or 20 litre pack.

I will keep testing the theory on pack vs panniers and report back in the future.


----------



## Wobblers (6 May 2010)

tundragumski said:


> I'd have thought that this was a no brainer.
> 
> Off roaders use small backpacks (camelbaks) for obvious reasons, but the rest of us should definitely be using panniers.
> 
> On short rides the difference might only be a sweaty back but on longer rides and with heavy loads a backpack just isn't an option.



+2 

Backpacks are okay for short distances, but over a few miles or when you need to carry heavy loads, panniers are by far the best option. I'll use a backpack when I cycle in on the Dahon, but it just gives me backache on the Galaxy. It's not just a matter of a sweaty or sore back: because a rucksac is high up, I find it has an adverse effect on handling which is made all the worse if don't use a waist strap to stop it swaying around.

Edit: panniers do cause some drag, so you'll find it quicker without them. But I just view using them as resistance training!


----------



## MancRider78 (6 May 2010)

I use panniers and still find it easy to stand and pedal; the sweaty back with a backpack, I have a Karrinmore air flow pack (still mega sweaty back), doesn't make for a comfy ride. As mentioned just my personal preference but 8m one way I would rather be as comfy as possible


----------



## jimboalee (6 May 2010)

This is an old nutmeg that has been argued about since year dot.

Backpack. - Adds to bodyweight when you stand on the pedals but also adds to flying mass when you fall in ditch.

Panniers - Are a 'dead weight' on bike but stay on bike when the rider flys into ditch.


PRK, spare tube, wallet, phone etc go in rear pockets or backpack.

4 cans of lager, curry and naan go in panniers.


----------



## cyberknight (6 May 2010)

All depends on the weight you carry asyesterday i had around 30llbs of stuff in my panniers, i would not have liked to cycle a long distance with that on my bike.
I like the opportunity to be able to carry more stuff if i need to and hate sweaty back syndrome.

next you will fall in love with mudguards ...you cannot resist the power of the practical side


----------



## MancRider78 (6 May 2010)

Mudguards, MMM, those and a pannier rack swayed the decision of the bike I bought!!!


----------



## young Ed (10 Jul 2013)

i cycle to the bus to get to school and back every day 2 miles there and 2 miles back with a rucksack on my back and have never found it uncomfortable i have in the past had a 20 litres i believe when laden weighing about 5-6kg im guessing but at the moment im on a 10 litre that probably weighs in at 2-3.5 kg when laden
never tried paniers but i am considering investing in a pair from the bay as they post pennies!
Cheers Ed


----------



## Kookas (10 Jul 2013)

Panniers are lower in the SCR food chain; I wear my rucksack on my 16-mile commute, no intention of changing any time soon either.


----------



## pally83 (10 Jul 2013)

I commute 23 miles each way and have never had any problems using a backpack. Don't like the look of panniers on road bikes.


----------



## vickster (10 Jul 2013)

I see you are in Glasgow. I wouldn't want a backpack on for an hour plus in the current temps in London! However good an airflow system it has


----------



## ianrauk (10 Jul 2013)

I much prefer panniers on my commute bike.
But with a disc brake bike, you need one of those panniers that stick out about a foot either sidfe.
Not a good look.
So I stick to the ruck sack.


----------



## young Ed (10 Jul 2013)

why do you need panniers that stick out so far you need a wide load sticker wth discs? because of the idsc itself and the calipers?
Cheers Ed


----------



## ianrauk (10 Jul 2013)

young Ed said:


> why do you need panniers that stick out so far you need a wide load sticker wth discs? because of the idsc itself and the calipers?
> Cheers Ed


 

Because the calipers stick out from the seat stays so you need extenders on the holding bolts


----------



## young Ed (10 Jul 2013)

ianrauk said:


> Because the calipers stick out from the seat stays so you need extenders on the holding bolts


 
ah i can imagine that looking somewhat silly! 
Cheers Ed


----------



## ianrauk (10 Jul 2013)

young Ed said:


> ah i can imagine that looking somewhat silly!
> Cheers Ed


 


It doesn't look silly.
It just doesn't look great.


----------



## MrJamie (10 Jul 2013)

ianrauk said:


> Because the calipers stick out from the seat stays so you need extenders on the holding bolts


Mine cleverly has the calipers on the chainstay rather than the seatstay, so it doesn't get in the way of the rack. http://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-gb/bikes/model/seek.2/9319/49834/#overview 

I haven't got round to finding a bag for the rack yet though, anyone got any suggestions for a cheapish one?


----------



## ianrauk (10 Jul 2013)

MrJamie said:


> Mine cleverly has the calipers on the chainstay rather than the seatstay, so it doesn't get in the way of the rack. http://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-gb/bikes/model/seek.2/9319/49834/#overview
> 
> I haven't got round to finding a bag for the rack yet though, anyone got any suggestions for a cheapish one?


 


Yup, Gaz' Norco also has the same.


----------



## Sara_H (10 Jul 2013)

ianrauk said:


> I much prefer panniers on my commute bike.
> But with a disc brake bike, you need one of those panniers that stick out about a foot either sidfe.
> Not a good look.
> So I stick to the ruck sack.


 
I have a disc brake rack (toepeak super tourist, if you're interested). Yes it's quite wide, but I like that. Don't know why - I like things to look substantial.

OH has a rack on his disc brake bke that fits through the wheel on a skewer (hope this makes sense I'm a bit unsure of my terminology) and it's no wider than a standard rack.


----------



## Sara_H (10 Jul 2013)

This one in fact.http://www.tweekscycles.com/Product...annier Racks&gclid=CMDSkdvbpbgCFYfMtAodfE4ACA


----------



## ianrauk (10 Jul 2013)

Sara_H said:


> This one in fact.http://www.tweekscycles.com/Product.do?method=view&n=3348&p=298964&c=215&utm_source=Google&utm_medium=Base&utm_campaign=Pannier Racks&gclid=CMDSkdvbpbgCFYfMtAodfE4ACA


 


Yup, I would need one of those.
But wouldn't put one on my bike.
They just don't look good.


----------



## Sara_H (10 Jul 2013)

ianrauk said:


> Yup, I would need one of those.
> But wouldn't put one on my bike.
> They just don't look good.


 
Function over form! OH doesn't care what it looks like - he was carrying some seriously heavy stuff to work every day, he was just pleased to find a solution to his woes!


----------



## ianrauk (10 Jul 2013)

Sara_H said:


> Function over form! OH doesn't care what it looks like - he was carrying some seriously heavy stuff to work every day, he was just pleased to find a solution to his woes!


 


For sure, fully understand that.
Luckily all I have to carry is a change of clothing.


----------



## fossyant (10 Jul 2013)

Topeak Super Tourist here, but non disc type. I had always used a rucksack, but a shoulder injury put an end to it. I quite often carry heavy loads with locks on site visits, so panniers were the answer.

They also give me extra bonus point multipliers in SCR, and on fixed too, really upsets some folk. Hee Hee.


----------



## Frood42 (11 Jul 2013)

I have never tried panniers, as I have always got along fine with my rucksack.

No problems with the recent commutes where I have done 200+miles in the week.
No problem when I have been out for up to 70-80 miles on a Saturday or Sunday ride.


----------



## lulubel (11 Jul 2013)

When I first got a road bike for my commute, I used a rucksack to carry my food and change of clothes. I didn't notice it was particularly uncomfortable, but I did notice how free and unrestricted I felt at the weekend when I cycled without it. It didn't take me long to get a rack put on the bike so I could switch to using panniers.

There's absolutely no way I'd use a rucksack here in the summer. Even if it didn't increase sweating, the reduction in air flow and associated cooling would make the risk of heat stroke higher.


----------



## Kookas (11 Jul 2013)

lulubel said:


> When I first got a road bike for my commute, I used a rucksack to carry my food and change of clothes. I didn't notice it was particularly uncomfortable, but I did notice how free and unrestricted I felt at the weekend when I cycled without it. It didn't take me long to get a rack put on the bike so I could switch to using panniers.
> 
> There's absolutely no way I'd use a rucksack here in the summer. Even if it didn't increase sweating, the reduction in air flow and associated cooling would make the risk of heat stroke higher.



The rucksack makes your back hot, but I don't think it has any effect on head temperature. I don't think you can get heatstroke from just a hot back. That's one good reason not to wear a helmet, though.


----------



## lulubel (11 Jul 2013)

Kookas said:


> The rucksack makes your back hot, but I don't think it has any effect on head temperature. I don't think you can get heatstroke from just a hot back. That's one good reason not to wear a helmet, though.


 
Heat stroke isn't about the temperature of your head. It's caused by your core temperature rising to dangerous levels.

NHS - Heat Exhaustion and Heat Stroke


----------



## Kookas (11 Jul 2013)

lulubel said:


> Heat stroke isn't about the temperature of your head. It's caused by your core temperature rising to dangerous levels.
> 
> NHS - Heat Exhaustion and Heat Stroke



Oh, didn't know that. I thought it was a brain overheat thing.


----------



## BigonaBianchi (11 Jul 2013)

I just rode over 1000 miles on le jog with a rucksack and never had a back ache....arseache sure, back ache no lol!


----------



## dinkydexy (7 Oct 2015)

Ask yourself this question:

Q. Why was the wheelbarrow invented?


----------



## RoubaixCube (7 Oct 2015)

I have a set of Altura Urban 20 'Dryline' Panniers that i use for my longer rides or if i need to transport some stuff to and from work that wouldnt normally fit in my Topeak MTX Trunkbag DX which i use for my commute. Its just about big enough to hold all the basics and some odds and ends like wash kit. first aid kit, bottle of water etc etc. 

Ive seen some timbuk2 messenger bags on sale and i was so tempted as messenger bags look so cool, but honest to god i hate having a sweaty back. My back is reserved for carrying my Osprey Raptor 6 hydration pack during long rides. 6L is quite small but i dont really put much else inside apart from some small food items like fruit bars or energy gels. Most of my tools and other stuff goes in the trunkbag or pannier.


----------

