I think your last point is the most important, but I'd like to turn it around a little. The reality is that it's very rare for anyone to be able to add enough luggage such that it equals the weight of carrying a pillion.

If you truly want to get an idea of how much all that luggage is going to adversely affect your handling then simply get a bit of practice riding with a pillion. If you're fine with carrying the shifting weight of a pillion then the significantly reduced weight of immobile luggage is not going to be an issue.

My heaviest bike weighs a massive 430kg without rider or luggage, but all that weight almost disappears once you get above 5mph.

__________________
Garry from Oz - powered by Burgman

lots of you guys think soft is the way to go but don't really explain why and as a no nothing like me can't see it so please can you go in to detail about how they will make a difference off road cheers

as mentioned above, there are dozens of threads on this forum that go into that in a lot of detail. You do need to do a search and read up on the topic if there is not enough information being given to you in this thread.

Basically riding a big bike off road can be a bit like driving a 3 wheeled bus across a sand dune. Soft bags are considerably lighter (most set ups will save 12-15 kgs), and considerably safer (falling and trapping a leg under your soft bags is a non issue. Its a different story if your bike falls on your leg via hard boxes.

Weight is critical - ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL - if you are doing serious long distance dirt or off road riding. Did you watch Long Way Round? 2 guys who didnt know how its done, or what they were doing ... (was their first trip) ... decided to go on the heaviest possible bikes and then added 3 metal boxes AND a 90 litre roll bag each on top of that. They only had 2 serious off road / dirt road sections in the whole trip, Mongolia and the Road of Bones ... and they didnt really complete either of them. Mongolia was a real struggle and they wanted to quit it anyway - when luckily Russ rolled his truck allowing them to hot foot it by asphalt and train 2500 km away. Then they were unable to complete the Road of Bones - apparently because Charley hurt his back manhandling his 350 kgs of bike and luggage.

If thats what you want out of overlanding, go for metal boxes - its the fashion, the image. You will hate the off road and want to quit when you get to Mongolia and then you will drop your bike in every river crossing in Siberia before damaging your back picking the bike up out of the water.

or ... you can take the advice of people who do this a lot and think rationally and critically about the gear they choose, and choose a lighter bike and soft bags.

__________________

#
Well said !!!

__________________
Did some trips.
Rode some bikes.
Fix them for a living.
Can't say anymore.

To add to that about the weight debate and why it's so important or all important we have to go back to our highschool physics days. Riding a bike is experimenting with all the physics you've learned. The debate about why a bike self balances under momentum still hasn't been answered BTW (it's not the rake of the forks. That's been discounted) so don't feel bad if you don't get this.

On advanced turning training on road surfaces you're taught to lean your weight into the corner and with the shoulder leaning into the turn and the head vertical. More advanced is to put your bum cheek onto the side of the seat of the turn. This it to put the stress onto the contact patch and force the bike into the turn something that's unnatural to it by moving the bike COG into the turn away from the contact patch. To speed this up the more weight further out from the contact patch the tighter you can turn with more control (there is a limit). This summarises as: weight used = bike static weight + body weight. leaving out momentum and distance from the contact patch. With luggage on the bike the (static) weight is increased and puts more stress onto the contact patch. This is not ideal because the COG of the bike it not centred because the luggage ruins the engineers efforts on the bike balancing and suspension setup. So for road performance the weight issue is just as valid but for different reasons. FWIW this is where the pillion argument falls over because it's not static weight. They're meant to move with the rider hence increasing bike control.

The technique above assumes a perfect traction from the ground surface to prevent washing out. Riding on natural / dirt surfaces this technique is completely opposite from above. The name of the game is to keep the COG exactly and perfectly above the contact patch at all times. Mostly on the front wheel. Master this and you master riding off road. It's not as easy as it sounds. Add timing and forward and rear ward weight adjustments and it becomes a constant effort to move left, right, rear and forward on the bike depending on the ground conditions which is (partly) why the pro's stand up nearly all day. This is also done due to momentary forces. The closer the weight is to the contact patch vertically and horizontally the better.

This is the important bit. The limit of control on an off road bike riding off road is the amount of weight the rider has to counter act the weight of the bike. The heavier the bike, the more weight the rider needs to shift the COG above the contact patch. Less balance means the rider can't force the bike to turn as well. Hence smaller / lighter bikes react more nimbly. But this wouldn't be the case if the weight balance ratio would be equal to a rider with a big bike. A midget on a TTR still wouldn't control the bike as well. For this reason I've got massive respect for the female Dakar riders. They've got less weight to work with and still manage to ride those things better that I'll ever manage. They have to use the techniques perfectly and to the fullest degree.

Going back to luggage. This is static weight meaning that unless you make yourself heavier to counter act these forces away from the COG on the contact patch you'll make the whole thing hard work and slower, scarier, less accurate, meaning more corrections and less fun to ride. There is a limit to this because the total weight is still a factor. This is why people with some experience tend to flock to soft luggage. As said, in my case this took 2 trips and getting a trail bike to make this happen. If I'd still live in NW Europe (no off road opportunities) I'd probably still be on the hard stuff. Probably pelican. I think a lot of people from areas with little adventure riding that do use soft right away have a motorcross background. Cause they know all about making things lighter.

__________________
Tacos Tyring Travels.com

That's it, ...forget about luggage, plastic-, soft- or otherwise... I'll just pack my toothbrush and credit card - problem solved

__________________
Thomas

"Hey, ...I'm just ridin' shotgun"

Yes, and no. I realise I am in the majority on this one but I have spent many years on the road riding all sorts of unsuitable machinery in all the wrong conditions.

What are we really trying to achieve? The vast majority of our riding is done on bitumen NOT off road. The vast majority of our off road riding is on tracks travelled regularly by locals in non off-road vehicles.

Yes, it's great to have a super light bike and premium price super light / super compact luggage but what are we really trying to achieve here?

International travellers are usually spending extended time on the road and require a few creature comforts. They are also not usually facing tight deadlines (or why else would we do these rides), and an extra day here and there spent taking a "not the best bike for the conditions" vehicle through difficult conditions is not a major problem - if it is then we can usually change our plans accordingly.

So where do you compromise? Do you want the lightest bike with the lightest (most expensive) luggage so you can get the farthest off the beaten track in the shortest possible time, or do you want some creature comforts and are prepared to pay the price - going a little slower and taking a little more time? You still get there in the end either way - look at the people who did these rides 80-90 years ago, the roads were a lot worse then and the equipment was much heavier and a lot less reliable and there wasn't a posse of other RTW riders a day or two behind them who they could ask for help if they really got stuck.

Hmm, then again maybe I'm just getting old.

__________________
Garry from Oz - powered by Burgman

I have the Andy Strapz soft bags, they're excellent. The only time they've failed on me in the last 2 years has been recently when I crashed my bike at 80km/h and they came slightly apart at the seams. I had these resewn by a guy on the street for 15 Bs, like $2 and they're good to go again!

A few other benefits:

• They look cool
• They're really light
• Very waterproof
• Can hold heaps of stuff
• You can carry both bags into your hotel/hostel room at the same time - I don't think this is possible with two large metal boxes. As a matter of fact I can carry all of my gear at one time.
• Easy to adapt to the motorcycle
• Very strong
• Only take as much room as what you put in them

Also security has never been an issue for me.

Speaking of light bikes, my ride is a little DR200, it's a great setup for off-roading, though if I had the money I'd upgrade to a DRZ400.

Here she is


Also, imagine being in this situation on a 1000+cc bike with hard cases? This was in the middle of nowhere...


My opinion is that big bikes and hard luggage have their place but it's sure as hell not in Bolivia

This is why I initially talked about what riding you enjoy. Typically the first timer has no off road experience and usually end up hating it because off the wrong gear. Some keep trying to find ways to improve, other just don't get into that environment. How many threads asking about road conditions aren't there. Often the best places are the hardest to get to. I couldn't make it to Uruya because of the setup I had. That sucked. Crossing the altiplano would have been heaps more enjoyable if I wouldn't have to wrestle the bike. Sure you can get on with it, but it's hard work. Avoiding that is the biggest creature comfort. Some people avoid going to those places as a means to avoid battling the overweight bike. To me that's the weirdest thing for a biking trip you can do. To me it's all about riding out of the way places away from the backpacking trails and rental cars etc and have a blast doing it. Not just for the scenary. What can't you bring with soft luggage you can with hard?

The cost thing is wrong in my view. GL is by some considered expensive, but try getting hard luggage including mounting hardware for that price. But with the GL all you need it that, no mounting hardware required and a typical roll closure bag behind it. Some roll closure bags for some stuff to go inside it. Pretty cheap I reckon.

The same compromise it true with tyres. I run only knobbies because I prefer to cater for the harshest terrain and find the little compromise on the road is negligible. I do the same on choice of luggage which to me makes the most sense for the affects on handling as explained earlier.

__________________
Tacos Tyring Travels.com

Positioning of weight on the bike will change the handling. Hard or soft doesn't matter as long as it's static. If the extra weight moves then the handling will change. Unless of course you can get your panniers to move like a pillion.

Ahhhh my good man ! I'm not sure which luggage you prefer but one of the main advantages of soft, is that it's also WAAAAAY cheaper !

And because it's soft, doesn't mean it has to be small. My soft bags must be about 80L combined. There is no luxury lost there.

They weigh 20kg less than my old M-Mules and fit the same stuff.

__________________
Did some trips.
Rode some bikes.
Fix them for a living.
Can't say anymore.

I think I am having a déjà vu here, four pages of it...

Hey Ted, it's not the weight or price of the bags I'm on about it - it's the premium price people pay for superlight weight tents and other gear that goes in the bags. I'm debating it on ADV at present where my argument that spending $350 on a tent to save a kilo in weight doesn't make any sense when my elcheapo tent cost a tenth of the price and does the job just as well (for me at least).

__________________
Garry from Oz - powered by Burgman

I'm right there with you bro !! My £15 Tesco tent actually lasted longer than a £120 one which actually weighed more....

Cheap and disposable is the best way ever... There's nothing worse than carting around some expensive, bulky item that you hardly use or want to change, but can't ditch or give away because it cost too much..

I've done it too many times


When I finished my trip in South America, I ended up giving away an expensive riding suit and sleeping bag because I couldn't carry it home. I left a £200 tent in Buenos Aires because I got sick of carrying it too..

In Malawi I sold a £150 for £40 because I was bored of it and ended up ditching loads of other stuff that I was sick of carrying..

I'm like a rolling overland equipment charity...

__________________
Did some trips.
Rode some bikes.
Fix them for a living.
Can't say anymore.

so whats next mate? ditching the 15 quid tesco tent for a bag of jelly babies?

__________________