# Mount Pannier Rack Slanted Toward Front?



## TomBrooklyn (Mar 15, 2008)

Are pannier racks generally designed to be mounted so the top slants downhill towards the front of the bike (as opposed to making the top level?)

I just aquired a Topeak Super Tourist DX pannier rack in the disk brake version (although I don't have disk brakes, but I didn't know a non-disk brake version was available. Anyway...) 

The mounting instructions indicate to mount the rack so the rear is higher than the front. The exact amount or angle is not indicated. Pictorially, they show the difference between an imaginary horizontal line and a line extended along the top of the rack to be 2" - 3" at a point about even with a vertical line even with the rear edge of the rear tire. 

This model has three support bars that rise from the axle to the rack surface proper, and I do now notice that when the rack is level as I initially mounted it, the the center support strut is angled towards the rear. Perhaps I should make that strut vertical which would have the effect of creating a forward lean of the rack top surface. Would that make sense?

It seems a bit odd in general mount the rack so the top is slanted. My initial instinct was to make it level.


----------



## shudson16 (Mar 20, 2009)

Maybe it needs to be mounted on a slant if using their Quickmount trunk bags? Personally, I'd mount it square with the bike. Mounting it on a tilt would make me think the installer was in a hurry, didn't care or couldn't tell when something was level. My .02.


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

*level*

I'd think level is good. If not level, if you have much weight in the bags, it's going to put more stress on one end. Looks better, too.


----------



## TomBrooklyn (Mar 15, 2008)

shudson16 said:


> Maybe it needs to be mounted on a slant if using their Quickmount trunk bags?


 That had crossed my mind. I'm not using their Quickmount bag. I don't know how that bag holds in place. I had imagined it would have some kind of lock to keep it from sliding back out.


----------



## stinkydub (Aug 5, 2004)

*There's a reason...*

for mounting a pannier so the rear is higher than the front. It tilts the bottom of the pannier back to allow for heel clearance when you pedal. Depending on bike size, foot size, pannier size, rack placement, etc. it can make a difference between hitting your heel or not.

In the first photo below, the back of my shoe has about 1/2" clearance with the pannier during a pedal stroke - if the pannier were level, my heel would hit the bottom corner.

In the second photo below you can see how Ortlieb's attachment (black item running horizontally just below the top of the rack) is placed at an angle on the pannier - that's intentional vs. workmanship. You can adjust how far fore and aft the pannier is placed too.

Hope this helps


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

*backwards?*

Seems to me that if you wanted more heel clearance, you'd raise the front, not the rear, or raise the whole rack or move it back. Lowering the front puts it closer to your heels, doesn't it?



stinkydub said:


> for mounting a pannier so the rear is higher than the front. It tilts the bottom of the pannier back to allow for heel clearance when you pedal. Depending on bike size, foot size, pannier size, rack placement, etc. it can make a difference between hitting your heel or not.
> 
> In the first photo below, the back of my shoe has about 1/2" clearance with the pannier during a pedal stroke.
> 
> ...


----------



## stinkydub (Aug 5, 2004)

*Not necessarily*

It's the bottom of the pannier that your heel will most likely come in contact with. Take a look at the diagram I cobbled below. It illustrates the rotation path my shoe takes and how it interacts with the position of the pannier. If the pannier were level, you'd see that the back of the shoe would hit the bottom of the pannier on the upstroke. If you raised the front of the pannier up, you'd have even more clearance issues. 

All that said, clearance will vary based on a number of factors. If you notice some panniers sit level but they angle the front to provide more heel clearance createing a more triangular design vs. my office bag. See http://www.jandd.com/detail.asp?PRODUCT_ID=FCP


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

*got it*

So you really are moving the bottom/front of the pannier back, not necessarily down. That makes sense.



stinkydub said:


> It's the bottom of the pannier that your heel will most likely come in contact with. Take a look at the diagram I cobbled below. It illustrates the rotation path my shoe takes and how it interacts with the position of the pannier. If the pannier were level, you'd see that the back of the shoe would hit the bottom of the pannier on the upstroke. If you raised the front of the pannier up, you'd have even more clearance issues.


----------



## stinkydub (Aug 5, 2004)

*Yes*

or in this case, rotating it counterclockwise to move the bottom front corner up and back.

However, i'm not sure why TomBrooklyn's rack instructions are suggesting to rotate the rack vs. installing level. Decent panniers are adjustable or shaped as i noted above to allow for rear heel clearance. You can see from the second photo in my first post that my rack is level and my pannier is what's rotated.


----------



## TomBrooklyn (Mar 15, 2008)

Hi. 
Thanks for the photo illustrations stinkydub. Maybe clearance is why they suggest a slanted rack. 

I'm using Nashbar ATB panniers that I bought with the rack and I haven't hit my heel on them. 
http://www.nashbar.com/bikes//Product_10053_10052_165648_-1___
They're a medium or medium-small size pannier I'd guess, and they are cut so they have a slight bevel on the front lower corner for extra foot clearance.


----------

