Why do cyclists prefer messenger bags over backpacks?

Question

Ok, I know form sometimes follows function - and things can be even more funnily irrational when fashion and trends come into play - but what's the lure of the cyclist's messenger bag? I see them everywhere, and can't help but imagine them to be a big pain in the lopsided way they hang on a single shoulder, not to mention the strap-over-the-head maneauver required to take one off, becoming even more awkward in tight quarters like say a small cafe. But there they are, ever popular.

People who enjoy using them tend to be quite passionate about them - and I doubt it's limited to just the style of the bag. Having little experience riding with backpacks or messenger bags, I ask, why do you choose to ride with one over the other?

Answer 1

I spent the last two years as a backcountry ranger, in Northern California. There, I wore a backpack almost every day. Now I am a bicycle commuter in Sacramento and I choose panniers first, a messenger bag second, and the backpack a distant third.

There are three reasons why the backpack is my last choice in this list.

1. Any bag I carry ends up being full. I don't know how that works, but my bag is always full of something. A full backpack rides higher on my back than a messenger bag. This raises my center of gravity and throws me off balance more easily.

2. It doesn't matter how gently I ride or what the temperature is, by the time I get to work I am soaked with sweat. With a backpack, I sweat even more because there is less airflow between my back and the bag. The messenger bag, which rides lower, covers less of my back and I sweat a little less. Or maybe I just dry out quicker.

3. Backpacks with hipbelts and sternum straps are designed to move weight off of one's shoulders and onto the hips and torso. This works great if you are in an upright, walking position. When I'm in the drops on my roadbike, a hipbelt is nothing more than a hinderance and a backpack-sternum-strap, though more useful, sometimes tends to choke me. Weight is again transferred to my shoulders and back, which causes me some degree of pain after a while. Messenger bags--at least those that are well designed--have a strap which rides diagonnally across the sternum and which functions better in the riding position to transfer weight to the torso.

Panniers are my first choice, though, because they better solve all of these problems. They are completely off of my back and pretty low on the bike. For longer rides and for my daily commute, I generally use panniers.

Not all of my bikes have a rack, though. I have ridden my bike from Sacramento-to-the Bay Area wearing a messenger bag. I wouldn't have tried it with a backpack.

Answer 2

The primary reason why bike messengers use messenger bags is that you don't have to take them off to load or unload them. If you're continually picking things up and dropping things off all day, you don't want to be faffing about taking a backpack on and off all the time.

A secondary reason is that the flat rectangular shape of a messenger bag is more suited to the kind of things that messengers tend to be carrying (e.g. documents).

As to why the rest of us non-bike messenger types use them, there's no question that fashion is a large part. We all want to pretend we're one of those messenger free spirit types, rather than stuck in an office all day ;-)

But as well as being perceived as more cool, messenger bags are good for carrying laptops due to their flat rectangular shape. Backpacks that are designed for cycling don't tend to be as suitable for full size laptops - for example, my Deuter rucksack is fantastic for mountain biking, but my 13" laptop is quite a squeeze to fit in. (Of course there are cycling backpacks designed to take laptops, but they're not widely used from what I've seen).

Personally I'm lucky in that most days in the city I'm riding a Brompton folding bike, and I use a messenger bag that clips to the frame when I'm riding:

It's perfect for a laptop, and as well as getting the weight off my back it also carries it low on the bike at the front, which doesn't mess up the handling.

On those days when I don't have the Brompton, I'm doing a bike / train / bike journey and as the bike legs are short - and during the day I may well have to go to a client on public transport - I use a different messenger style bag. But I definitely wouldn't want to use a messenger bag for a long journey, my preference would be to have the luggage on the bike, or to use a backpack.

(As an aside to the point about messenger style bags being easy to load and unload, interestingly a lot of photographers - who are also taking things in and out of the bag all day - are moving to sling bags, which can easily be swung around for access, and don't have to be taken on and off for access. It's not something you think about until you're using a bag, but being able to access it without needing to take it off is important if you're in and out of it all day).

Answer 3

There are a few reasons I prefer a messenger bag or backpack over panniers:

• A bag on your back is easy to carry around off your bike. If you're using a bike as your primary mode of transportation and making multiple stops, it can be inconvenient to secure your panniers without detaching them and carrying them. I can get off my bike and go to a concert or other social event while still wearing my messenger bag, it kind of sucks hauling around a pannier off the bike. (I've had pretty good luck with a convertible pannier / backpack though).
• Security is easy with a messenger bag. It's always on you, so you don't have to worry about locking it up with your bike.
• Accessability is easier. I can swing my bag around to the front and grab things out of it easily. I might need to get off my bike to access my panniers.
• It's a platform for lights. I have a rear blinky and front flasher on my bag. When I switch bikes, I don't have to worry about switching my lights.
• Panniers affect bike handling. I find that your bike itself can be a bit less responsive when it's loaded. It's harder to 'throw it around' and do quick acceleration when the bags are rack mounted. I find that even with a pretty full messenger bag, I can still mash the pedals, cut hard turns, make 'twitchy' moves & turns, it's easier to bunny hop, and I can skid stop on a fixed gear easier without things on my frame.
• No pedal strike issues, pannier's dragging when cutting turns hard, or issues with knocking panniers in to bollards & posts on trails.

There are definitely places where panniers excel over messenger bags. Especially if you're not dealing with a lot of urban riding, doing long tours, or carrying a lot of weight. Neither is better all the time, it all depends on your needs and riding style.

Answer 4

I actually always wear a backpack. I would like to get packs to put on the back of my bike. But I only have one bike and it's carbon so I will not add any pack frame to it.

I did, however try my friend's messenger bag one time and it left a bruise the size of a softball on my back.

I think messenger bags could be good if you have only a lunch a jacket and a notebook. But I have to carry a laptop and textbooks to school so my pack usually weighs about 25-30lbf, and I commute 25 miles a day. When I put all of my gear into the messenger bag the bag kept on slipping off my back the whole time. And, like I said, it left a nasty bruise.

My back does get sweaty from backpacks, but I like them because you can secure them to you with the chest strap, and hip strap. (Sometimes when crouching over the hip strap doesn't do anything, but the chest strap is always nice to keep the pack stable.)

So, bottom line, I prefer backpacks. But I can see, if you aren't carrying heavy items that a messenger bag may be preferable.

Answer 5

I personally only use a backpack, but most of my riding is off road recreational, not commuting. I have never see a messenger bag or panniers when out on technical single tracks. Every MTBer I know or have seen either has a backpack or nothing. With a good backpack, when out on a ride, I don't even know its there most of the time, however I sometimes go to the corner shop for milk etc, and just grab the closest backpack - things like the kids school bags are horrible in comparison, I would never use one for a serious ride.

Most of the disadvantages of backpacks mentioned here are dealt with buy purchasing a high quality cycle specific bag. This includes

• Mesh ventilation for back to help stop sweating.
• Hip straps rising higher at the front than a normal backpack
• Top of pack profile allows full range of movement with helmet on and head up.
• Bulk of volume low and close to back.

The major disadvantage of a backpack over a messenger bag is the need to take it off to get into it.

Answer 6

I'll add to the already, good reasons for using a messenger bag.

• Backpacks, I've found, can sometimes stick up too high, making it difficult to raise your head; especially if you have an aggressive riding position (which most real messengers have)
• Properly packed, a messenger bag can be every bit as comfortable as a backpack. The myth that the single strap causes back issues is false and I haven't found any research to prove otherwise.

Answer 7

I agree with most of the comments about messenger bags being better for riding. However... I find it very odd no one has mentioned yet that if you ride wearing a full face helmet (like a downhill or motorcycle helmet) it is always hitting the top of your backpack which it actually dangerous and motion/sight limiting. A messenger bag with the thick strap and stabilizer strap of some sort allows free motion of your head. Plus less sweat (sweat is bad on a bike stuck in traffic) and I in general carry about 30-35 pounds in mine without shoulder pain like I would get with a backpack.

Answer 8

I think for many of today's commuters, it's about fashion. The messenger bag may be a better choice for the frequent stopper. Perhaps, stopping, entering a business and needing quick access to the bag, then moving on to other errands. However, just my opinion, riding from point A to B and later, returning from B to A, with no stops along the way, a backpack is a better choice.

Answer 9

I just wanted to mention that using a messenger bag is great in terms of security as well. It keeps your belongings close to your body where they can be closely monitored. This is great for cities where crime might be an issue. Rucksacks and Panniers can leave you vulnerable to theft, with your things out of your sight. If you're in the UK, Chapman Bags makes very durable messenger bags: http://chapmanbags.com

Answer 10

I think its largely a style and personal preference thing, as well as carrying capacity these days. I find it a lot easier to find a reasonable sized messenger bag which can fit some books as well as my computer and a change of clothes than a decent sized backpack these days due to the monstrosity of those laptop compartments among other things.

The riding style and conditions also come into play. Since a backpack has 2 (or possibly 3 straps if you have a chest strap), it doesn't move much when riding around (and I would be inclined to think that it balances the pressure on the straps better than a messenger bag - certainly, when I switched from backpack to messenger bag, I found it uncomfortable at first). A messenger bag can move to some degree (which is useful, if you're say a bike courier), but if you're riding on snow/ice (say, you're a winter commuter), a messenger bag can be a bit of a liability due to the mobility. There are "cross straps" that Timbuk2 sells for their bags which cinch the bag down to your body, which are useful for reducing this movement, but it is a bit more than a backpack even so. [The extreme version of this would be a messenger bag Camelbak, which probably wouldn't work for mountain biking well. ]

Answer 11

I personally prefer messenger bags. They are generally light weight, lie close to your body, and provide easy access to all materials. For example, Timbuk2's newer bags have a lightweight design, secure Velcro, and a Napoleon pocket for easy access to small envelopes and documents.

The one strap messenger bags have been in use for decades. There are pictures of bike messengers from the 1940's using the one strapped messenger bags. The designs have changed for a greater social appeal, but the same sturdy, secure, and efficient principals still apply.

Hope that helps!

Answer 12

I prefer messenger bags. I currently use the Mission Workshop Rummy. The strap is extremely comfortable (it must riding 30 miles per day) and I can fit more into this bag than most backpacks that are out there. I've had the same issue with a much sweatier back with a backpack than i have with my messenger. As for as it hanging to the side, a real messenger bag rides center of the back and a little lower than a backpack. My messenger is also water proof unlike many of the backpacks available.

Answer 13

Noone's suggested neither as a practical answer.

Personally I keep spare clothes and shoes at work. My tools stay on the bike's frame, as does water. If I'm carrying anything its generally small enough to take in a jersey pocket.

So I say No to both backpacks and messenger bags.

If I have to move something larger, I will use my bike trailer and tow it with my MTB. I've moved a lawnmower and chainsaw this way. Or I can put a pannier on the MTB but it gives horrible heel strike problems, so I prefer not to do that.

Answer 14

There are several reasons.

Firstly, while walking it's slightly more comfortable to carry a lot of weight on a backpack than on a messenger bag, when cycling it's always good idea to put the heaviest items into the bike, not on the cyclist, on panniers. So if a cyclist uses a backpack, it would probably be used to carry only lightweight items. Messenger bags are comfortable for lightweight items, too, only the weight limit for them being comfortable is slightly lower that it's for backpacks.

Secondly, the big issue: sweat. Always when riding bike with a backpack, my back becomes very sweaty. It becomes very sweaty when using cotton clothing, but it also becomes sweaty when using sports clothing. This is the dealbreaker. Messenger bags allow lot of airflow, so your back generally doesn't become sweaty with messenger bags, at least in the case when the bag is small and lightweight.

I always use Marimekko Urbaani messenger bag when cycling (and also when not cycling). I have found that I can put my wallet (and perhaps mobile phone and keys if not in a pocket) into the front flap, a patch/tool kit (in a leather case) into one of its main bag front pockets, a mini pump into another of its main bag front pockets, and then have the large main compartment free for whatever shopping I might do, or whatever large items I want to carry. Even a 13" laptop fits in there.

I can of course imagine that a messenger bag that's nearly as large as a backpack and fully loaded with heavy items could make your back sweaty. But my Marimekko Urbaani never does that, it's small enough to allow airflow around it.

Answer 15

When I did commute I would use a Kelty backpack. I was never concerned with the sweaty back thing because I was lucky enough to have showers and a locker at work. If I needed to stay clean the sweaty back would be a real concern of mine and then I would opt for panniers.

The messenger bag thing is such a fad. Don't buy into it. It is not functional like a backpack or panniers. The people who use them want people to see them. It's a fashion statement on par with skinny jeans and thin mustaches.