Kunden-Statements

From:   
olav.callesen@hagenuk.de (Olav Callesen)
To:        Novosport@aol.com (Albert, Ulrich)

Moin Hr.
Albert,

here is a
short listing of the weights of the Novosport tailbox versus the things it
replaced.

For this
investigation I unscrewed everything no longer needed, and put everything
individually on the kitchenscale, tolerance being 2gr. 

Although the
weight is almost equalled to the large sport box (sport 2800gr or tour 3000gr),
one has created however only the basics, however still no real storeroom. 
For day – tours one requires at least a Lenkertasche and a drinkbottle:

With 3.460 gr
the weight of a large sport – box (2.800 gr) or a large tour – box (3.000) is
overstepped clearly, (exactly around 660gr and/or 460gr) whereby to here however
only an obstruction – volume of 6 liters for luggage and 0,75 liters for drinks
is available. For larger tours with more luggage one requires additional bags
and drinkbottles:

With 6.391gr
is the weight a large sport – @@o. Tour – trunk around more than the double
overstepped, whereby the @@Stauvolumen corresponds to with 71 liters just that
of the sport – trunk (70 liter). The tour – trunk has against it still 10 liters
of volume more.

 Result:

We proceed on
the assumption, which the porter with @@Seitenstreben,just as the Low-Rider,
which are assembled @@Flaschenhalter and the mudguard always, builds for who the
stuff already constantly from and again @@dran if he/it has times more and times
fewer luggage thereby ? I in any case not.
Who therefore only a short distance drives and takes along thereby purely @@garnichts,
it drags with a large trunk approx. 20 to 200 grams more weight with itself
around as with the porter „@@Ger�hr“. The aerodynamic advantage of a
large trunk (min 10%, sooner 15% @@Speed) might equalize that indeed Again.
Who however something would like to take along, and be it only a @@Lenkertasche
and A @@Trinkflasche for a @@Tagestour, it drives with surely a pound Fewer
weight through the landscape, and can use in addition the aerodynamic advantage
of the trunk.
Who more @@Stauraum needs, it can save with a large trunk clearly more than the
half of the weight, which he/it requires to provision of the volume with porters
and pockets. In numbers: 2,8 to 3,0 kg for a large trunk, plus the aerodynamic
advantage, instead of 6,4 kg for „@@Ger�hr“. At all them Now @@halt
have called: I know, I know, it @@gibtleichtere pockets, easier bottles – holder
and bottles, easier mudguards, u.s.w.
I have however now times these, and easy would have to buy I. So @@what! Why the
money do not invest then immediately in a trunk. I do not want to hold back the
fairness more half the disadvantages of a trunk:
You/They are loud, one can not take off them/it/her simply so and take along in
the hotel, and if the wheel collapses, then @@zerkratzen them/it/her. Besides is
conclusion, if the trunk is full, for one can not indefinitely @@draufstapeln,
or @@dranschnallen like at Packtaschen.
Nevertheless: The advantage at weight and aerodynamics is not to be contested,
and to equalize hardly through somewhat differently. I in any case will add me
not only an one large sport -trunk, separating in addition also still a Uni-Disc
pane raise.   

@@By so,
@@Olav. —

Here a small statement the Kundenreaktionen…

Theme: Tail boxes
contra textile bags for luggage