I just wished the spreader bars broke down into shorter pieces. The thinner, rear bar pieces can also nest within the thicker bars. I think this will make packing the bars so much easier, in the backpack or in bike panniers/bags.
Thoughts?
I just wished the spreader bars broke down into shorter pieces. The thinner, rear bar pieces can also nest within the thicker bars. I think this will make packing the bars so much easier, in the backpack or in bike panniers/bags.
Thoughts?
I found Quest Outfitters. They have DIY tent pole parts and accessories......aluminum poles, inserts, end tips, etc....
I can perhaps just modify the stock spreader bars if their pole diameters match.
Last edited by Carbon; 08-13-2016 at 12:00.
Yep, I use mountainsmith fx trekking poles with warbonnet tips as my spreaders and eliminate the pole weight, and pack space. I used them at 240lbs and now at 220lbs and they have been excellent. There are quite a few threads and videos on them.
Thanks. I also looked at the trekking pole idea but since I also bikepack I need an alternate solution. Breaking the spreader bars into thirds is what I'm looking at so they'll fit nicely inside my panniers.
How about carbonfiber spreader bars? You can buy them in different length. Im thinking about those carbon fiber you can build hexacopter with.
Not sure how having smaller sections will affect strength of spreader. I would ask grizzly Adams or another bridge connoisseur for that type of info.Originally Posted by Carbon
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Thanks.
The stock head end spreader bar has that short middle piece. If anything, I think that is the weakest point in the link. But at 160 lbs I'm not that concerned about breaking the bars into 3 equal lengths.
That's true, it is a very short piece though so it probably is stronger than the other two compression wise. Experiment and see what you come up with!
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Here's a rough, out of scale sketch of what I have in mind. The foot ends of the bar can nest inside the head end bars. This way you end up carrying/stashing 4 total shorter pieces.
From a structural/mechanical standpoint, the concern with poles is buckling (bending sideways, like pushing length-wise on a yardstick). The highest buckling stresses are in the middle, thus it's better to have the joints offset like you've shown.
The unrelated question is: how much of a weight penalty will you be paying for having the extra metal of two joints instead of one?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks