Author [ES] [CA] [PL] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [DK] [NO] [GR] [TR] Topic: Rotopax...  (Read 1081 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline CaptainTrips

  • Explorer God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4870
  • Bike: '13 Explorer
  • City / Town: Vancouver(ish)
  • Country: CA
Re: Rotopax...
« Reply #10 on: May 22, 2020, 05:29:59 PM »
One of the reasons that I did not want to mount the Rotopax mounting hardware is that it is very heavy.
"The test of the machine is the satisfaction it gives you. There isn't any other test."   --   Robert M. Pirsig

Offline Hawk281

  • Explorer Pro
  • ***
  • Posts: 225
  • Bike: tiger 1200 2018
  • City / Town: Thousand Oaks, Ca
  • Country: USA
Re: Rotopax...
« Reply #11 on: May 22, 2020, 06:38:05 PM »
Just saying, adding a couple of pounds to this bike (Tiger 1200) isn't going to make a whole lot of difference. That being said, going from Give Hard bags to soft bags saved almost 15 pounds, plus less wind resistance. And in respect to an earlier post, I dont like using a top hard bag, always felt it added more weight (not overall weight) up high.

Offline CaptainTrips

  • Explorer God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4870
  • Bike: '13 Explorer
  • City / Town: Vancouver(ish)
  • Country: CA
Re: Rotopax...
« Reply #12 on: May 22, 2020, 08:45:52 PM »
*Originally Posted by Hawk281 [+]
Just saying, adding a couple of pounds to this bike (Tiger 1200) isn't going to make a whole lot of difference. That being said, going from Give Hard bags to soft bags saved almost 15 pounds, plus less wind resistance. And in respect to an earlier post, I dont like using a top hard bag, always felt it added more weight (not overall weight) up high.
It is weight in the wrong place.
"The test of the machine is the satisfaction it gives you. There isn't any other test."   --   Robert M. Pirsig

Offline mike2411

  • Explorer Pro
  • ***
  • Topic Author
  • Posts: 111
  • Bike: 2019 Tiger 1200 XCa
  • City / Town: Ojai
  • Country: United States
Re: Rotopax...
« Reply #13 on: May 22, 2020, 09:25:02 PM »
I've thought about the possible "issues" at-hand with mounting on the sides of panniers. I was originally going to put the large GIVI panniers on my Tiger when I bought it, which would have added more weight and width to the bike, but fortunately went with the bags that were offered after talking with another Tiger owner and am happy I did (amazing how much can be packed into the Triumph branded GIVI cases). The extra size/weight savings made by going with the standard bags is why I want to mount them outside. The width of my bike, bags with rotopax mounted, would be about the same as it would be if I had put larger bags on the bike. Granted, the fuel "sloshes" around and that could create a moment I'm not prepared for, but I'm thinking it won't be "much" different than packing a large pannier on both sides of the bike. I could be wrong but that's how I see it. I think the bigger issue is making sure the weight is as balanced as possible..??
"You don't stop riding when you get old, you get old when you stop riding."

Offline CaptainTrips

  • Explorer God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4870
  • Bike: '13 Explorer
  • City / Town: Vancouver(ish)
  • Country: CA
Re: Rotopax...
« Reply #14 on: May 23, 2020, 02:37:32 AM »
The fuel does not slosh around. I stand the Rotopax on end when I fill it, and I fill it to the max to avoid air in the container. Air expands when it gets hot and could cause a leak when the pack is lying down. I've never had mine leak, which is good. They do seal well.

I never notice any balance issues when I have my Rotopax on the left side only. I like to think that it balances out the muffler on the other side.  :016:
« Last Edit: May 23, 2020, 02:40:06 AM by CaptainTrips »
"The test of the machine is the satisfaction it gives you. There isn't any other test."   --   Robert M. Pirsig

Offline mike2411

  • Explorer Pro
  • ***
  • Topic Author
  • Posts: 111
  • Bike: 2019 Tiger 1200 XCa
  • City / Town: Ojai
  • Country: United States
Re: Rotopax...
« Reply #15 on: May 23, 2020, 03:36:30 AM »
That's good to know...thanks!
"You don't stop riding when you get old, you get old when you stop riding."

Offline Crosshairs

  • Explorer Pro
  • ***
  • Posts: 278
  • Bike: Tiger 1200
  • City / Town: OCEANPORT
  • Country: United States
Re: Rotopax...
« Reply #16 on: May 23, 2020, 02:31:09 PM »
*Originally Posted by CaptainTrips [+]
One of the reasons that I did not want to mount the Rotopax mounting hardware is that it is very heavy.

Very heavy ? .. my bracket and mount are less than 2 pounds... which mounting hardware are you referring to?

Offline CaptainTrips

  • Explorer God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4870
  • Bike: '13 Explorer
  • City / Town: Vancouver(ish)
  • Country: CA
Re: Rotopax...
« Reply #17 on: May 23, 2020, 05:32:11 PM »
*Originally Posted by Crosshairs [+]
Very heavy ? .. my bracket and mount are less than 2 pounds... which mounting hardware are you referring to?
Rotopax bracket, threaded rod, keyed locking handle. I was surprised at how heavy the package was when I picked it up. That's not including fasteners. OK, "relatively heavy" or "struck me as heavy" or "I thought it was heavy". How's that?
"The test of the machine is the satisfaction it gives you. There isn't any other test."   --   Robert M. Pirsig

Offline Crosshairs

  • Explorer Pro
  • ***
  • Posts: 278
  • Bike: Tiger 1200
  • City / Town: OCEANPORT
  • Country: United States
Re: Rotopax...
« Reply #18 on: May 24, 2020, 12:03:54 PM »
*Originally Posted by CaptainTrips [+]
Rotopax bracket, threaded rod, keyed locking handle. I was surprised at how heavy the package was when I picked it up. That's not including fasteners. OK, "relatively heavy" or "struck me as heavy" or "I thought it was heavy". How's that?

At least that's more accurate....   ...Im not so sure 2 lbs is what anyone would call " very heavy". ..more likely its right up there with "not even noticeable" to your average person.

Offline CaptainTrips

  • Explorer God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4870
  • Bike: '13 Explorer
  • City / Town: Vancouver(ish)
  • Country: CA
Re: Rotopax...
« Reply #19 on: May 24, 2020, 04:56:42 PM »
*Originally Posted by Crosshairs [+]
At least that's more accurate....   ...Im not so sure 2 lbs is what anyone would call " very heavy". ..more likely its right up there with "not even noticeable" to your average person.
Ok, so a gallon of gas is 6 lbs, plus 1 lb for the Rotopax container plus 2 lbs for the mounting hardware equals about 10 lbs times two equals 20 lbs for two gallons.
"The test of the machine is the satisfaction it gives you. There isn't any other test."   --   Robert M. Pirsig

 


Recent Topics