Which Rack Design do you prefer?

Which Rack Design would you prefer ?

  • Option 1: Trapezoid design

    Votes: 1 7.7%
  • Option 2 : Angular design

    Votes: 12 92.3%

  • Total voters
    13

Ravi Kempaiah

Well-Known Member
Hey Folks,

I am needing a few extra pairs of keen eyes to get some feedback on the design.
We just designed the suspended rear racks and they are made strong with heavy duty tubing to withstand 55lbs of cargo. I am hoping to make it compatible with Racktime accessories.
But aesthetically, which design do you prefer. Any suggestions or feedback?

Option 1: Trapezoid design

1588657795830.png


Option 2: Angular Design

Note* suspension travel is fully compressed and that is why the wheels are closer to the rack but it's fine.

1588657872475.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: JRA

E-Wheels

Well-Known Member
Hey Folks,

I am needing a few extra pairs of keen eyes to get some feedback on the design.
We just designed the suspended rear racks and they are made strong with heavy duty tubing to withstand 55lbs of cargo. I am hoping to make it compatible with Racktime accessories.
But aesthetically, which design do you prefer. Any suggestions or feedback?

Option 1: Trapezoid design

View attachment 51572

Option 2: Angular Design

Note* suspension travel is fully compressed and that is why the wheels are closer to the rack but it's fine.

View attachment 51573
Option 2 as the leading edge of the rack complements the lines of the top tube
 
Hey Folks,

I am needing a few extra pairs of keen eyes to get some feedback on the design.
We just designed the suspended rear racks and they are made strong with heavy duty tubing to withstand 55lbs of cargo. I am hoping to make it compatible with Racktime accessories.
But aesthetically, which design do you prefer. Any suggestions or feedback?

Option 1: Trapezoid design

View attachment 51572

Option 2: Angular Design

Note* suspension travel is fully compressed and that is why the wheels are closer to the rack but it's fine.

View attachment 51573
Option 2
 

Ravi Kempaiah

Well-Known Member
Thank you very much guys @JRA , @E-Wheels , @17Stratton and @opimax .

What E-wheels quoted is right. There is certain coherence in the way top tube and leading edge of the rack are geometrically related.

I will refine the Option 2 and send it to production. Thanks again for helping me with this.
 

Mr. Coffee

Well-Known Member
A couple thoughts:

(1) "Double-decker" racks like the Tubus Logo Classic are nice because (1) you can choose a high or low position for your panniers, and (2) you can more easily strap things on top of the racks (and unstrap them) while the panniers are in place.

(2) Most panniers have a hook at the bottom that helps keep the pannier in place. It helps greatly if there is a place on that rack for the hook.
 

Ravi Kempaiah

Well-Known Member
A couple thoughts:

(1) "Double-decker" racks like the Tubus Logo Classic are nice because (1) you can choose a high or low position for your panniers, and (2) you can more easily strap things on top of the racks (and unstrap them) while the panniers are in place.

(2) Most panniers have a hook at the bottom that helps keep the pannier in place. It helps greatly if there is a place on that rack for the hook.
Very valuable suggestions. I made those changes. I will have to tweak a bit after the tubes for formed and welded.
What do you think?

@onlineaddy , you're right. R&M has a long lower arm and different angle. I experimented with 7 different designs. A functional rack should have strong arms to hold panniers, a holder for rear light,
blocking rails so that panniers don't hit the wheel etc. When I started amending my design with smoother lines and curves, it was morphing closer to what R&M had done. I think they have done a very nice job considering their lower mounting points are so low.

1588708460682.png
 

Alaskan

Well-Known Member
I prefer #2 as it resembles the lines of the Delight rack and seems more harmonious with the lines of the bike, also the deck extends further back. That said #1, while the lines are not well integrated with the lines of the bike, looks like it might be structurally stronger.

Two items which would be nice to see on either one

  1. ring with an inner hook at 12 o'clock to secure a naked bungee loop or one with a hook from the panier
  2. lower pannier rails, 2-3cm wider than the top deck of the rack to hang panniers, while still having to trunk bag on top at the same time. Like this one on my old Cube
    830126-H-008.jpg
 

Ravi Kempaiah

Well-Known Member
I prefer #2 as it resembles the lines of the Delight rack and seems more harmonious with the lines of the bike, also the deck extends further back. That said #1, while the lines are not well integrated with the lines of the bike, looks like it might be structurally stronger.

Two items which would be nice to see on either one

  1. ring with an inner hook at 12 o'clock to secure a naked bungee loop or one with a hook from the panier
  2. lower pannier rails, 2-3cm wider than the top deck of the rack to hang panniers, while still having to trunk bag on top at the same time. Like this one on my old CubeView attachment 51610

You beat me to it. I was thinking of Cube's design when I was drawing lower rails. Cube's rear rack is perhaps the most robust design for a hardtail bike. It could easily handle 100 lbs if the rear axle/wheel is capable.
By the time, few sample racks are formed, it will be closer to Cube's design. Thanks for reminding me of that.

1588709089705.png
 

Bicyclista

Active Member
Nice job, Ravi!

This appears to be a cantilever design, right? A stronger design would be one supported by the axle itself, a la Old Man Mountain. I have an Old Man Mountain rack on my full suspension Haibike e-mountain bike, and it is VERY sturdy. I carry delicate photo equipment in my well-padded panniers, including long telephoto lenses. Did you consider an axle-supported rack? (As a retired architect I am interested in structural design decisions.)
 

steve mercier

Well-Known Member
Nice job, Ravi!

This appears to be a cantilever design, right? A stronger design would be one supported by the axle itself, a la Old Man Mountain. I have an Old Man Mountain rack on my full suspension Haibike e-mountain bike, and it is VERY sturdy. I carry delicate photo equipment in my well-padded panniers, including long telephoto lenses. Did you consider an axle-supported rack? (As a retired architect I am interested in structural design decisions.)
This brings up a question. Which is better , a rack that offers more support or a rack that benefits from the rear suspension? I am not sure. The answer should be predicated on this being your one and only bike.
 

Bicyclista

Active Member
This brings up a question. Which is better , a rack that offers more support or a rack that benefits from the rear suspension? I am not sure. The answer should be predicated on this being your one and only bike.
My Old Man Mountain rack offers both. It's not an either or question. As I said, the OMM rack is mounted on a Haibike FULL SUSPENSION mountain bike. The rack moves as one unit with the rear wheel assembly. In addition to being attached to both sides of the axle, it is also attached to the left and right swing arms of the suspension.

I am NOT saying one is better than the other. There are probably good reasons why Ravi decided to go the cantilever route.