Mark's/M18 failures?

[Lungimsam]

How has your Marks or M18 front rack held up over the years? Do the tang bolts loosen, or has everything stayed put for you?

.

[Pondero]

My Mark's rack has had continuous use with light loads (tool rolls and/or sleeping bag) for about 7-8 years. It has been solid with zero maintenance or issues. I ought to get another.

Chris Johnson
Sanger, Texas

[Liesl]

i've had a marks rack on and off the the back of my first generation saluki for many years. I find it stable and highly adjustable. It has supported a variety of loads carried in an old baggins hoss with Minnesota winter riding thrown in for good measure . Never any issues.

Perhaps of related interest, my nitto mini front rack has been on the front of the saluki since the original build by Riv. Mostly carrying a li'l loafer but sometimes a wald/shop sack combo. Same for the custom. Solid as a rock for me.

[James Warren]

Great

On Jun 27, 2015, at 7:31 PM, Lungimsam wrote:

How has your Marks or M18 front rack held up over the years? Do the tang bolts loosen, or has everything stayed put for you?

.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

James Warren

jimcw...@earthlink.net

- 700x33

[Cyclofiend Jim]

I put my Mark's Rack on the Hilsen in 2008. Just removed it earlier this spring as I was moving things around and felt like it.  It has never been anything other than rock solid. 

NItto Front on the QB - ditto.

- J

[DS]

I've never had any issues with light to heavy loads, though I did have someone from Rivendell see my Mark's rack with a basket and Shopsack with probably 5-10 lbs of stuff in it and they quickly came over and gave me an irish strap to put over the handlebars and through the rack to keep the rack upright in case the tange fails under the weight. I didn't ask too many questions but my guess is they've seen a rack or two fail and they were just being cautious. Now I use the irish strap every time I have something over 4 or 5 lbs on there.

[Lungimsam]

Maybe spot welding the tang for and aft of the bolts would work, once you got it centered where you need it on your bike.

I was also recommended to use a strap by an RBW employee. That's not confidence building.

What puzzles me is the M18 is rated at a 17lb load the Marks is only 4 lbs. But they look like the same rack structurally, except the Marks has the tab in the front and an extra set of eyelets. 

[Garth]

   Just disregard the "rating"  . . . . as noted  . . . . if anything it can be more stable with the same strength with  5 mount points .


As expected, my rack has been perfect.  The bolts have are the non loosening type, with nylon in them .  The stays can be cold set bent as needed also. 

[Ron Mc]

No offense, but I think the title of this thread is misleading - I've never heard of a Nitto rack failure.  

[Lungimsam]

I was told by RBW that using the 4 strut method brings the rating up to about 6lbs, only, and put an irish strap on it.

[Lungimsam]

Yes, the title could have been more clear. Sorry about that. Specifically I meant to ask if the sliding tang is a design safety vulnerability.

I really want to get a canti brake bike for my next bike to avoid this and have a rigid, non-adjustable strutted rack to avoid any rotate-able bolt-on stuff for this reason, also better fender and brake clearance.

[Matthew J]

> I really want to get a canti brake bike for my next bike to avoid this and have a rigid, non-adjustable strutted rack to avoid any rotate-able bolt-on stuff for this reason, also better fender and brake clearance.

If you are thinking custom, you should also consider braze on centerpulls for the sane reasons.  Especially now with Compass joining Paul on the high end.

[Lungimsam]

I'm thinking cantis, so there is nothing but air between the tire and fork crown, in which to mount fenders as high as possible, and to be able to mount a rack through the fork crown without having to bend a tang over/under sidepull/centerpull calipers.

[Chris Chen]

I've seen three break, but whether the fault lies with Nitto or the user is up in the air.

I've broken an R-14 rack, but it was overloaded and I was running through some really nasty stuff.

I've never seen a Mark's rack break. I've seen two of 32-F break where it goes through the bridge of the work.

btw safety tethers are always a good idea on stuff that's moving :)

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

"I want the kind of six pack you can't drink." -- Micah

[Northof49ncold]

I just had a Nitto M18 fork crown strut/tang break while I was riding with a 15lb dry bag on the rig and it wasn't pretty. Luckily I was only going about 2mph or it would've been lights out, likely permanently. The strut was originally bent to align with the fork crown hole when installed and obviously flexed under the weight load. It did take about 1200 miles for it to happen but when it did -- KAPOWWW! -- it was instantaneous and sent the load flying in front of the front wheel (I had the stays supported on the fork dropout eyelets so the rack pivoted all the way forward). I went down so fast I never knew what hit me. I shudder to think what would have happened if I'd been sailing downhill at 30mph at the time!! Full disclosure: I bought the M18 from Ben's Cycle who blissfully give the load rating as 8kg = 18lbs, hence my conservative load of 15lbs over bumpy terrain. Nitto's 2015 catalog, however, gives the maximum payload as 5 (FIVE) kg = 11lbs. So i was actually running the rack four pounds over its limit all those miles. Did I trust that strut/tang from the start? Nope. It looked like a weak way to connect the rack but I reckoned it would give me some warning before failing. I would definitely use straps wrapped on each side of the handlebar stem as a safety back-up in future. Instead, I'm going to be using a VO porteur rack which is rated at 50lbs (rather generous payload which should be halved using stock connections). But guess what? That rack also uses that flimsy, good-for-nothing fork crown strut/tang in a 3-point connection. Absolute junk! The way to get around that major failing is to shell out for the Surly Rear Rack Upper Kit which can be used on each side of the fork as a stabilizer and safety catch: http://surlybikes.com/parts/small_parts/rear_rack_upper_kit. If you don't have fork eyelets, simply use p-clamps for the fork connection instead. After what happened to me, I'll likely also use handlebar straps. Be careful out there and don't believe everything you read about recommended weight loads or failure rates!

[dstein]

Very unfortunate to hear and glad you're ok. That definitely makes me nervous. When you say fork crown strut/tang, are you referring to the 2 struts that connect to the top of the fork crown like here or the single (flimsier) tange that connects to the centerpull brake bolt like this. 

Are using fork crown bolts any more stable than the single centerpull bolt?

[Lungimsam]

Where did it break? Pics?

[Patrick Moore]

I'm glad you're safe!

On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 1:37 PM, 'Northof49ncold' via RBW Owners Bunch <rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

I just had a Nitto M18 fork crown strut/tang break while I was riding with a 15lb dry bag on the rig and it wasn't pretty. Luckily I was only going about 2mph or it would've been lights out, likely permanently. The strut was originally bent to align with the fork crown hole when installed and obviously flexed under the weight load. It did take about 1200 miles for it to happen but when it did -- KAPOWWW! -- it was instantaneous and sent the load flying in front of the front wheel (I had the stays supported on the fork dropout eyelets so the rack pivoted all the way forward). I went down so fast I never knew what hit me. I shudder to think what would have happened if I'd been sailing downhill at 30mph at the time!! Full disclosure: I bought the M18 from Ben's Cycle who blissfully give the load rating as 8kg = 18lbs, hence my conservative load of 15lbs over bumpy terrain. Nitto's 2015 catalog, however, gives the maximum payload as 5 (FIVE) kg = 11lbs. So i was actually running the rack four pounds over its limit all those miles. Did I trust that strut/tang from the start? Nope. It looked like a weak way to connect the rack but I reckoned it would give me some warning before failing. I would definitely use straps wrapped on each side of the handlebar stem as a safety back-up in future. Instead, I'm going to be using a VO porteur rack which is rated at 50lbs (rather generous payload which should be halved using stock connections). But guess what? That rack also uses that flimsy, good-for-nothing fork crown strut/tang in a 3-point connection. Absolute junk! The way to get around that major failing is to shell out for the Surly Rear Rack Upper Kit which can be used on each side of the fork as a stabilizer and safety catch: http://surlybikes.com/parts/small_parts/rear_rack_upper_kit. If you don't have fork eyelets, simply use p-clamps for the fork connection instead. After what happened to me, I'll likely also use handlebar straps. Be careful out there and don't believe everything you read about recommended weight loads or failure rates!

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, and letters that get interviews.

By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching.

Other professional writing services.

http://www.resumespecialties.com/

www.linkedin.com/in/patrickmooreresumespec/

Patrick Moore

Alburquerque, Nouvelle Mexique,  Vereinigte Staaten

****************************************************************************************

The point which is the pivot of the norm is the motionless center of a circumference on the contours of which all conditions, distinctions, and individualities revolve. Chuang Tzu

Stat crux dum volvitur orbis. (The cross stands motionless while the world revolves.) Carthusian motto

It is we who change; He remains the same. Eckhart

Kinei hos eromenon. (It moves [all things] as the beloved.) Aristotle

[Garth]

You may consider the Some porteur deluxe version which has fork blade attachments in addition to the other 3 points.

[Northof49ncold]

On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 3:56:14 PM UTC-6, dstein wrote:

Very unfortunate to hear and glad you're ok. That definitely makes me nervous. When you say fork crown strut/tang, are you referring to the 2 struts that connect to the top of the fork crown like here or the single (flimsier) tange that connects to the centerpull brake bolt like this. 

Are using fork crown bolts any more stable than the single centerpull bolt?

I'm referring to the single flat tang -- the flimsy one with the channel in it http://www.rivbike.com/product-p/rh1-20219.htm -- that runs from the rack to the fork crown hole. The VO Porteur rack uses the same lame 3-point connection (a similar tang with holes in it as well as the two dropout eyelet connectors). Ocean Air has their act together and mentioned the problem in this post: http://oceanaircycles.com/2013/10/18/upper-porteur-mounting/ . That's the best way to handle the problem but the other way is to rig p-clamps to each side of the fork instead (a little lower down) somewhat like the "updated" factory set-up on the Soma Deluxe Porteur Rack: http://ep.yimg.com/ay/yhst-3773699254952/soma-porteur-rack-stainless-steel-8.gif . Click on that photo for detail and you'll see the same tang design as the M18 or VO Porteur. If that sucker breaks due to flex, guess where that rack would be going without the side fork  "interface" to hold onto it? Yup, straight foward! According to a source at VO, he's only seen two breakages in 5 years -- almost certainly due to the bending involved in aligning the tang to connect with the fork crown hole. Two incidents are two too many but I'm sure there are others that haven't been reported. Have at look at the illustrative photo in this blog post to see the contortions sometime necessary to get things aligned: http://velo-orange.blogspot.ca/2014/02/porteur-rack-versatility.html (sixth photo down, click on it for detail). Once bent like that -- and my M18 tang also needed to be bent some -- the tang/strut section right behind the two rack bolts is where the flexing and stress occurs. That's where my tang broke. With only a little prodding on my part, VO updated their Porteur Rack page to include links to both the Surly rack kit and the p-clamps: http://store.velo-orange.com/index.php/vo-porteur-rack.html . Apparently this fix was mentioned earlier this year in a blog post: http://velo-orange.blogspot.ca/2016/04/buy-cheap-stuff-go-camping-mount-racks.html . Now get this -- the VO Porteur Rack is rated as holding a maximum payload of 50lbs!! I wouldn't trust it with a 15lb dry bag if a single (heavily bent) tang was holding things together as per normal. Keep in mind that the generous/obscene rating is for the standard rack with no extra beef-up using the Surly kit and the p-clamps or direct fork eyelet connections. I think the main problem here is that most riders simply don't use their bikes enough to have things go tits up. Here's a classic example: http://velo-orange.blogspot.ca/2016/05/raw-camargue-shredeur-mtb-history.html . Note that the hotdog riding/"having fun" on that bike has got an empty front rack. Try doing the same thing with a loaded (50lbs?!)  Porteur rack and carry on for 1000 miles over bumpy trails (or bumpy pavement for that matter). Oh, be sure to check your life insurance coverage before doing so. Cass Gilbert of Whileoutriding -- who actually rides his bikes a great deal -- had a Porteur rack installed and pointed out the shaky nature of the 3-pointed beast: http://www.whileoutriding.com/gear-reviews/gear/review-velo-orange-porteur-rack . Nice looks but no brawn.

No pics, Lungimsam. I have the rack still mounted with straps wrapped around my dry bag and handlebars and will be using the broken rig for relatively-safe nearby steep hill climbs with little speed involved. I've been training for a trip down the GDMBR and have to use what I  have until a replacement VO Porteur rack shows up with the Surly rack kit and some p-clamps. I have a Revelate Designs harness but the 15lbs is near its limit and I find the harness crowds the bars too much since I have a couple of feedbags there as well. I actually like the feel of the front load a little lower and a rack does that.

Keep safe out there! I'm still a little shaken up after realizing what could have happened at a greater speed....

[Joe Bernard]

I think one of the problems here is that the Mark's Rack was originally designed to support a porteur bag with a handlebar attachment. My very vague memory is that Riv was selling Berthoud bags then; my Romulus had that rack supporting one. The rack has also been presented as a saddlebag support for the rear. Somehow over the years it turned into a thing people attach baskets to, hence the admonition to use Irish Straps around the bars. That rack was not designed to support loads without reinforcement from the bars or saddle.

[Brad]

Thanks for all that info Northof49cold. I'm a chronic rack overloader. I figured that if I broke a rack, I'd get a new one. I hadn't considered how dangerous the failure might be. I'm off to add a strap to the Nitto Mini/basket combo on my Quickbeam. My other bike has a Haulin Colin rack with Swift bag and Berthoud decaleur. It didn't occur to me that the decaleur also serves as a safety device in case of rack failure, but I guess that's an added bonus.

Brad P.

Queens

[Lungimsam]

I have a decaleur with Berthoud on M18 and I was wondering if decaleur and bag would hold rack up if the tang broke. The tombstone would havd to push the bag so far forward to get out from under it but the bag top stays on place with decaler so i would hope the rack would not rotate forward. Nevertheless, I like to check my attachment points every so often.

[Ron Mc]

5 years on this setup with an M18 and no worries

diving board to brake bolt, long stays to dropout bosses, Berthoud decaleur, fender mount to diving board bolt

Half a year and a couple of thousand miles on this, Marks rack without diving board, Nitto rod bolts to Tubus LM-1 clamps on fork crown and to canti bolts

No issues with this - and it's absolutely rock solid, but it doesn't carry near the load of the rando bag above.  I only use this one for a small trunk to stuff layers and weather shells.  

Nothing (except the steel diving board) is bend in either setup, and every component is naturally relaxed if the bolts were loosened.  

Someone has described the Nitto rod bolts as "friction", but they're a lot more secure than that, they are a swage of the aluminum rod into steel.  

[Evan Baird]

That's why this exists.

[Bill M.]

I agree that the diving board is the weak point of the M18.  I used my M18 for a while on the rear of a bike as a support for a Carradice Camper.  It was actually a great fit, but the diving board eventually bent under a load of groceries and allowed the rack to start rubbing the tire.  A little force bent it back enough to get me home.  I now use panniers on a Tubus Ergo low-rider to carry heavier loads on that bike.  My Camper is sitting idle for lack of a better support solution. 

I'm not sure that I would trust the Mark's rack to work better for that application, but in that case I might expect the mounting bolts to rotate under load rather than the struts bending.  

Bill

Stockton, CA

[Northof49ncold]

The photos -- and I'm not sure how these will turn out as I haven't tried this before...

Again, these are for a tang that was bent enough to align the rack bolts with the fork crown hole. Go back to the link I provide to the Porteur Versatility blog for the standard on contorted tangs. Ron Mc's photos show a tang that is as flat as a, um, "diving board". Two ends of the spectrum. I doubt his rando bag is topping 5 kilos either but that's just a guess. The Tubus LM-1 fork doohickies look very useful if you don't have 2.25" tires to contend with -- as well as the mud that squeezes between the air space that's leftover twixt said fat tire and fork. Ben's Cycle told me that they arrived at the 8kg payload rating from Nitto's online website. Strange because the last two annual catalogs from the firm clearly state a maximum load of FIVE kg.

I certainly can't be the only one this has happened to.

.

[Ron Mc]

the "diving board" broke at the bend

[Ron Mc]

I have pristine unused, unbend diving board that came with my marks rack, if you need it. 

[Northof49ncold]

On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 12:01:31 PM UTC-6, Ron Mc wrote:

I have pristine unused, unbend diving board that came with my marks rack, if you need it. 

Thanks for the offer Ron! I also appreciate you posting your set-ups because I had never seen the Tubus fork mount adapter before. At the moment, I'm dealing with Ben's Cycle to a) get their listed maximum payload reduced from 18lbs to 11lbs -- that seven pounds makes a HUGE difference -- so someone doesn't get killed in action and b) get a diving board replacement under warranty from Nitto. I'll let everyone here know how things work out. I know Riv sells the diving board but they also charge a minimum shipping charge of $35 to Canada -- or at least they did the last time I ordered from them. At any rate, the M18 is going to be replaced by a beefed up VO Porteur rack with the Surly upper rack kit teamed up with p-clamps. And, yes, I'll be adding a strap this time on top of that bit of insurance.

What I would really like to see is Rivendell adding a proviso at the bottom of this page http://www.rivbike.com/Racks-s/114.htm clearly stating the need for a safety strap "just in case". I find it galling that a couple of posters on this thread have mentioned Riv staff grabbing Irish straps as safeguards for customers on the floor but they don't make that knowledge public via the website. Shame on 'em!

[Philip Kim]

They post a weight limit though

[Bill Lindsay]

Northof49ncold,

Rivendell Bicycle Works sells the Mark's Rack.  Here is a link to the page.  

http://www.rivbike.com/product-p/r1.htm

The Mark's Rack page has 5 photos of the Mark's Rack.  4 of those 5 photos show the rack installed on the bicycle.  All 4 of those photos show the rack set up with triangulated double struts (which is not possible with an M18) and a Manny Strap installed.  On that page, Rivendell says the rack is rated to carry 4.4lbs.  

Why are you shaming Rivendell Bicycle Works again?

Bill Lindsay

El Cerrito CA

[Northof49ncold]

On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 12:59:12 PM UTC-6, Philip Kim wrote:

They post a weight limit though

Yes, but they don't carry the M18 only the Mark's -- and looking at the photos of that rack that they provide online it does show a safety strap yet  no mention of what it's for there or in the humongous"Warning" section. Likely due to possible liability claims I'm guessing.

[ian m]

It's in the first paragraph of the description. Can't force people to read or pay attention though

[René Sterental]

Check mate!

On Tuesday, June 21, 2016, ian m <darkg...@gmail.com> wrote:

It's in the first paragraph of the description. Can't force people to read or pay attention though

[Philip Kim]

true

[Joe Bernard]

Wait, we're talking about a rack Riv doesn't sell, and complaining that they don't put stuff in the description that is clearly in the description?? I give up, I'm going to go ride my bike. With a Nitto rack from Rivendell that was accurately explained and I properly mounted. Toodles!

[Ron Mc]

I think it's fair to report a diving board failure - honestly, I would thought the steel would bend fine.  I agree the Mark's rack should be sturdier with an extra set of stays.  The static load these racks will support is 10 times the dynamic load they will safely support, which is why they seem to be rated for very low loads.  

[Scott Henry]

I'm still not sure on the complaining of 'could have died'.     Seriously?  

A rack breaks, which they do, and it drops down to the tire, you go over the handlebars.   Much like cyclists have been doing for years.    It's kinda like a front fender collapsing from a stick or even a dirty Cinzano team member jamming a silca into your spokes.   

Ride a bike and you will go down.   Sometimes slowly and softly but sometimes its bloody and spectacular.

Sorry someone fell over but this was a customer installed rack in which the customer bent a piece of steel to make it fit.   This is the Riv list in which people extoll on the virtues of steels' failure mode.   How long has this tang been cracked and weakened and ignored?

Buy a new tang, or better yet, go to the hardware store and make a new one.  Then ride the bike.

Scott

On Tuesday, June 21, 2016, Joe Bernard <joer...@gmail.com> wrote:

Wait, we're talking about a rack Riv doesn't sell, and complaining that they don't put stuff in the description that is clearly in the description?? I give up, I'm going to go ride my bike. With a Nitto rack from Rivendell that was accurately explained and I properly mounted. Toodles!

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
Cheers,
Scott Henry
Dayton, OH

[Northof49ncold]

On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 1:03:07 PM UTC-6, Bill Lindsay wrote:

Northof49ncold,

Rivendell Bicycle Works sells the Mark's Rack.  Here is a link to the page.  

http://www.rivbike.com/product-p/r1.htm

The Mark's Rack page has 5 photos of the Mark's Rack.  4 of those 5 photos show the rack installed on the bicycle.  All 4 of those photos show the rack set up with triangulated double struts (which is not possible with an M18) and a Manny Strap installed.  On that page, Rivendell says the rack is rated to carry 4.4lbs.  

Why are you shaming Rivendell Bicycle Works again?

Bill Lindsay

El Cerrito CA

Sorry, I missed the tether suggestion in the Mark description. However, the sizeable pre-order warning section should also include a mention of a safety tether (with a pointer to the photos in the Mark's rack section).

[Northof49ncold]

On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 1:48:09 PM UTC-6, Skenry wrote:

I'm still not sure on the complaining of 'could have died'.     Seriously?  

A rack breaks, which they do, and it drops down to the tire, you go over the handlebars.   Much like cyclists have been doing for years.    It's kinda like a front fender collapsing from a stick or even a dirty Cinzano team member jamming a silca into your spokes.   

Ride a bike and you will go down.   Sometimes slowly and softly but sometimes its bloody and spectacular.

Sorry someone fell over but this was a customer installed rack in which the customer bent a piece of steel to make it fit.   This is the Riv list in which people extoll on the virtues of steels' failure mode.   How long has this tang been cracked and weakened and ignored?

Buy a new tang, or better yet, go to the hardware store and make a new one.  Then ride the bike.

Scott

I really am trying to get out the door! But....when I fell it was in a six lane intersection with traffic turning on me. I understand your point but when a load of xxlbs hits the front tire, it ain't quite the same as a stick in the spokes. Now back to the bike and end of public service announcement. I'm hoping that someone finds the info and photos useful.

[Northof49ncold]

On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 1:34:33 PM UTC-6, Joe Bernard wrote:

Wait, we're talking about a rack Riv doesn't sell, and complaining that they don't put stuff in the description that is clearly in the description?? I give up, I'm going to go ride my bike. With a Nitto rack from Rivendell that was accurately explained and I properly mounted. Toodles!

Good one, Joe. Yes, I am somewhat distracted because I'm dismantling the front end of my bike in my exposed backyard before a storm hits here.  I posted the photos ASAP as a warning to others while dismantling that bike for your enlightenment (and obvious entertainment). My posts seem to be time-delayed because I'm a new poster here so bear with me yet again. Is there or is there not any mention of tethers in the "Read this before proceeding" section of the rack page? I don't see anything -- but, yes, I am distracted so maybe I missed it again. (I'd like to get back to my bike before it gets rained on.) A poster on this thread mentioned two 32F's breaking. Are they not sold by Rivendell? Are they illustrated with a tether strap in their description? If you went directly from reading the huge warning section on that rack page to the 32F offering and hit the order button (because your friend had one and you wanted one) could it be possible that you might miss that tether strap suggestion? That safety info should be upfront with the rest of the warning spiel. Does that not make sense? Now I really have to get back to my bike before it rains....

[Northof49ncold]

One last thing: I forgot to thank Evan Baird for his post on the Manny strap. However his second photo -- with the safety info -- should have been attached instead of the repeat he provided. I've dug that photo out of the archives for your further enlightenment/entertainment. My hope is that folks looking for info on Nitto M18 racks, especially failures, might come across this thread as I did (they are headlined in the title, after all) and learn something from it. In one of the older Riv Readers, Grant wrote a piece up on Secof (spelling?) front brake cable catchers that were part of a safety push after a rider's front cable broke unexpectedly, dropped and caught onto his tire knobs and stopped him dead in his tracks. Well, not quite dead -- he ended up as a quadrapalegic and won a resulting  lawsuit (if memory of that article's contents serves me correctly). The bike industry remade the front brake cable design so the same thing couldn't happen again. I believe there's a lesson in there somewhere for front rack makers that use a bendable/breakable tang in a 3-point connection. A strap should be a mandatory accessory with that kind of rack (with instructions) as happened here: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rbw-owners-bunch/zmJGzKSVOvc . As far as Grant's "check every other day" for fatigue cracks etc, I might make the observation that some of these racks are mounted over fat tires (2 inches and above) and, at the best of times, do not make examination easy -- especially if you're touring in muddy conditions over great chunks of land (think GDMBR). Some of us cable tie coroplast fenders/platforms over these tang-connected racks which make visuals even tougher. Ocean Air -- dstein offered up one of their solutions in photo form upthread -- recognized this as a safety issue and I'd like to see more of the industry addressing it. You sell an M18 -- or a Mark's or a Porteur -- then add a safety strap with it at a minimum.

Now, back to your regular programming....

[John]

Let's be fair. The photos of the Mark's Rack with the red strap are relatively new, as is the warning to use one. If people need to bend the metal strip connecting the rack to the crown, the result will be varying degrees of metal fatigue, so there should also be a warning not to bend it too much (how much is too much?) & check it to make sure this connector remains healthy.

So...use a strap, maybe two straps, know the weight of your load, and if you already have a medium Wald Basket (1 lb.) & a medium Shop Sack (1 lb.) on the rack, you have room for 2.4 lb.'s, or less than three pints of milk, before you exceed Rivendell's maximum recommended load for your Mark's rack. There you go, easy peasy!

Rivendell sold my wife a new Betty Foy with a Mark's rack without a strap, or any warning to use one.

I think there is room for Rivendell to do a wee bit better.

John

[Mark in Beacon]

North wrote:
"I find it galling that a couple of posters on this thread have mentioned Riv staff grabbing Irish straps as safeguards for customers on the floor but they don't make that knowledge public via the website. Shame on 'em!"

Welcome to RBW Owners Bunch!

I'm sure you're a nice guy and the concern you show for the public safety is commendable. But as a new poster, your tone might be overly... what, strident, maybe? Maybe we can channel that Ralph Nader in you a bit and all say hello before ripping into the galling nature of Rivendell's alleged behavior. Especially considering you did not buy the rack from Rivendell--not least because they don't sell that rack.
It sounds to me like your gripe is really with Ben's Cycles, who you claim advertised a false load capacity for the rack that you purchased from them, causing you to run it at overcapacity for 1200 miles or so, when it then failed and caused you to crash. Those appear to be the facts. It strikes me as a little boorish to pop in and start ragging on Rivendell based on that. A heads-up regarding your experience, sure, duly noted.

Other than posting one of those scrolling, flashing, 90s style messages across the front page of its website, I have to say that Rivendell appears to be rather conscientious about how to install and use the racks that they sell.

From the Riv site, rack section, bottom (the top of the page states: Don't buy a rack from us until you read the warning on the bottom of the page.)
**ALWAYS use these rack with a tether btw the tall tongue-loop and the handlebar. They're strong little racks, but people do dumb things, and the tether is a safety measure. Make the tether out of cord or any adjustable strap.

Along with lots of other recommendations and warnings.

Maybe some of this is fairly recent update, as John claims. But maybe that's because something came to their attention and they addressed it. To me, based on the "people do dumb things" they may have seen something...dumb. In any case, Rivendell doesn't strike me as a company that would go out of its way not to warn people about a safety issue. And I have been a customer for many years now.

You sound like a not dumb guy who knows quite a lot, so it's doubtful that your bolts were too loose or too tight, or you bent the tang too many times, or failed to check tightness occasionally. But still, you mention big 2"tires and wilderness trails and something called GDMBR which sounds super gnarly, and tying fenders of coroplast over the rack making inspection difficult, and mud and such. It almost makes me think you need a different, more super gnarly rack to suit your needs. My Surly 8-pack on my Clementine (which, like your rack, Rivendell also doesn't sell) isn't going anywhere off the front any time soon. It's probably overkill for holding my basket. But I'm a low maintenance kind of guy and this makes it so I don't have to fret about it all that much. The proper tool for the job, as they say.

BTW, the subject of the thread is tang bolts coming loose.

There is also the sad fact that the quality of iron ore available to steel makers is on the decline globally, due in large part to the massive demand created by China in the last decade.

[Northof49ncold]

On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 6:02:43 PM UTC-6, Mark in Beacon wrote:

Welcome to RBW Owners Bunch!

You sound like a not dumb guy  [Not true -- or I wouldn't have ended up on my butt in six lanes of traffic .. or keep missing those Riv strap warnings.]

BTW, the subject of the thread is tang bolts coming loose  [Actually "Mark's/M18 Failures?" Which brought me here although the tang bolts figure in there. Other posters mentioned breakages long before me]

Putting the Ralph Nader persona aside for a second, thanks for the welcome. I have nothing but the utmost respect for Grant and Riv (regardless of my rant) but find it strange that a wee little outfit like Ocean Air Cycles in Ventura CA recognized this obvious weakness years ago and addressed it with fork crown mounts ie a 4-point connection.  I noticed Surly's 8 and 24 pack racks -- 4-pointers again -- but was concerned about actually mounting it on a non-Surly fork that doesn't have matching eyelets, especially on the crown. How did you rig it on your Clementine? Does that bike have fork and crown eyelets?

On the subject of Ben's Cycle, they sent me a screen grab off Nitto's website that states 8kg. Yet the Nitto catalog of this year and last clearly states 5kg. So although I'd like to point the finger in their direction, I can't (but am trying since they should know the catalog specs, too). What they should be doing -- and this goes for other vendors online and in brick -- is handing out a strap with any tang-connected front rack that they sell (along with Manny-like instructions).  I would just like the industry to own up to the perils of a 3-point mount and state the maximum payloads that work in the real world. Riv does that but doesn't go the one step further and adopt a 4-point mount like Ocean Air uses. Likely due to a small market, aesthetics etc.

I guess I'm being strident again so I'll shut up.

[Tim Butterfield]

I'm wondering something about the tongue-loop tether strap.  On the Mark's rack page, the red strap is looped from the tongue over the handlebar.  Wouldn't turning the handlebar add tension towards fatiguing the rack mount, but in the opposite direction of a load?  Would tension on the strap impede turning the handlebars? I can see this varying with different stem lengths.  Or, is the loop supposed to be loose enough to still easily turn the bars?  If so, would there then be sufficient tension to support the rack?

I had an alternative strap mechanism in mind not connected to the handlebars.  Why not use a strap behind the head tube (above the top tube) instead of over the handlebars?  The strap could loop from one side of the rack tongue, behind the head tube, around the other side of the rack tongue, and back behind the head tube.

Thoughts?

BTW, this tether issue is making me reconsider getting a Mark's.  Maybe I'd be better off just getting a Klick Fix bar bag for when I want to add a small front load.

Tim

[David Stein]

It is strange to me that the Hunqapillar and the Appaloosa both have fork crown mounts but there are no pictures or mention of them being used for a rack mount anywhere on the website. Not very smart people like me don't even realize they're there (until recently!). Though my hunq came installed with the 32f front rack which uses something that looks more substantial than the tange piece. 

I remember asking someone at rivendell about whether the 4 struts connected to the same brazeon on the fork made it any stronger or could support a higher weight limit and the politically correct answer I got was to go by the weight rating no matter how many struts, but people push it a lot more. 

It was at a later point that someone gave me an irish strap. I think for a company it gets into thorny legal issues if you start officially  recommending fixes like the irish strap on the website, it could easily give a false sense of confidence about how much weight you can put on there and actually does nothing to prevent the rack from failing, just (hopefully) keeps it from falling forward and causing a crash. I would assume that legally its best to just state the recommended weight limit from the manufacturer. 

But ultimately, I do agree that a 4 point mount recommendation would go a long way, you can still overstate the manufacturer weight limit. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/sSpQmwXA4kA/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.

[Mark in Beacon]

I really don't know the history of the Ocean Air/Mark's rack, but they currently sell (out of stock) the Mark's rack in both "factory configured" and "rambler mount," so your work there is not yet done. Just from reading the post linked to in the product description, it seems they made the mods because they have the fork crown mounts on the Rambler they sell, and they like the rack and wanted to customize it for their bike. Hard to be certain from photo shown, but it also would appear that the Paul Racer brakes that their bikes come with could be running some interference with the standard "factory configured" mounting. But it sounds like you may have found more of a back story there.

If you read the thread, the original poster admitted the title of the thread was misleading.

Yes, the Clementine has fork and crown eyelets, though the struts needed some bending.

I've also had a Mark's rack for I guess about ten years, moving it as needed from bike to bike, front to back. Currently it supports a bag in front of my Kuwahara. Not visible in the pic I could find, but the bag straps are looped over the handlebar, and the bag is zip-tied to the rack in two spots, which should keep catastrophe at a minimum. It also probably depends on where on the wheel the arc of the rack would fall--if the rack is mounted very high, with struts to the fender, I imagine the possibility of a total front wheel lock is greater. Not that you would want to calculate that and consider it a safety check! (I include the photo of the bag on the Nishiki's Pletscher rack to demonstrate that perhaps I am more cavalier about racks than some--though that is a rear set-up).

There are gazillions of front racks sold with similar 3-point diving board attachment systems. For instance, this aluminum rack rated at 22 pounds from REI:

https://www.rei.com/product/852184/racktime-top-it-front-bike-rack

Here is what REI says about racks:

https://www.rei.com/learn/expert-advice/bike-bags-racks.html

 Note the safety instructions (ie, none whatsoever). I would hazard a guess that REI sells a few more three-point attachment racks with "junk" diving boards that Rivendell. Not sure if they have a forum you can join. Hope your new rack configuration works well.

On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 12:40:42 AM UTC-4, Northof49ncold wrote:

BTW, the subject of the thread is tang bolts coming loose  [Actually "Mark's/M18 Failures?" Which brought me here although the tang bolts figure in there. Other posters mentioned breakages long before me]

 I have nothing but the utmost respect for Grant and Riv (regardless of my rant) but find it strange that a wee little outfit like Ocean Air Cycles in Ventura CA recognized this obvious weakness years ago and addressed it with fork crown mounts ie a 4-point connection.  I noticed Surly's 8 and 24 pack racks -- 4-pointers again -- but was concerned about actually mounting it on a non-Surly fork that doesn't have matching eyelets, especially on the crown. How did you rig it on your Clementine? Does that bike have fork and crown eyelets?

[Ron Mc]

there are actually no modifications to the mark's rack.  They just use the rear rod bolts for mounting stays to the fork crowns.  Same thing I did with Tubus LM-1 clamps on my CX frame.  I did a little hand-waving engineering, or really, hand-wriggle testing - as expected, the M18 on diving board, long front stays and fender mount is not terribly rigid, and the component primarily loaded is the diving board.  My marks rack mounted with four short stays is rock solid.  

[Jeff Lesperance]

I think this is all a good reminder that you have to check your stuff every now ant then. Safety warnings and weight limits are just words on a page. There are things on our bikes that are worth inspecting every now and then, just for general wear and tear, where a large amount of wear and tear could lead to a failure mode that represents a minor annoyance, all the way up to potential grave injury. Front racks are one of those things, but there's other things too. Bolts can come loose sometimes. Even if your rack is bolted to your frame or fork with 4 distinct mount points, one or two loose bolts can teach you real quick about rapid unscheduled dismounts.

-Jeff

Silver Spring, MD 

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 7:38 AM, Ron Mc <bulld...@gmail.com> wrote:

there are actually no modifications to the mark's rack.  They just use the rear rod bolts for mounting stays to the fork crowns.  Same thing I did with Tubus LM-1 clamps on my CX frame.  I did a little hand-waving engineering, or really, hand-wriggle testing - as expected, the M18 on diving board, long front stays and fender mount is not terribly rigid, and the component primarily loaded is the diving board.  My marks rack mounted with four short stays is rock solid.  

--

[Mark in Beacon]

I was using the terminology on Ocean Air. On the product page, they say:

For a modest up charge, we can modify the rack so that it will bolt right up to your Rambler. And it links to a page showing them bending the rear struts into a shape that allows them to attach to the fork crown. They bend them dramatically enough that I would call it a modification as well.

The Viner attachment solution is pretty ingenious.

I agree with Jeff, it's a good heads-up. Check Your Stuff. I just think it was presented in a way that had an air of chastisement and blame about it that was unwarranted--ATMO, obviously.

[Ron Mc]

thanks Mark, it was no accident.  I spent 6 months deciding how to put a front bag on the bike and considered every possibility I could turn up - Ostrich bag with bar clamp, Thule rack, OMM Sherpa.  Again, this is a frame with no bosses for anything - not even a fork crown brake-bolt hole.  

(I even called Bruce Gordon to chat about custom, but his discussion went first to new fork).

The big racks were more than I wanted and I just didn't like the idea of a bag up high on the bars on this tall frame - take advantage of the low space.  

But if I was off-roading with a load, I think the OMM Sherpa, though particularly not eye-appealing, looks overqualified for the job.  

The front bag is removed for the summer now - when I really need it is winter, as I said before, a place to stuff layers and weather shells.  My saddle bag is more than half full with all my roadside, including a spare Barlow (I know others don't always do this, but to me, it's just mindless - if it comes up, I'm ready and will get home).  Ely (Ruthworks) made the trunk bag and did go through an iteration on the straps, but we got that rock-solid).  

[Ron Mc]

ps - really like the front rack setup on your Clementine photo - that looks plenty qualified for the job.  

On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 6:16:18 AM UTC-5, Mark in Beacon wrote: