It's all very well to say such things 'hard panniers broke my leg', however, when you consider the machinery they are covering (that spinning cheese-grater and amputation chain) then, being hurt by a box is going to be a better outcome than getting your leg/arm/head (I don't know have you seen how some folk crash!) stuck in the moving parts - isn't it ?

It's a balance of risk, correctly loaded, a metal pannier is not going to burst open in most cases, but the flipside is it has to be packed very firmly and therefore it can become heavy. On the other side soft luggage can be a complete liability if it is not packed correctly. It is, or can be lighter if you are riding certain terrain.

It all comes down to your own ability, assesment of the risks and where you are going.

Personally, I would preffer to come off a bike 10 time a day and be able to crawl from under it, that get pinned once. You can always rest if you wave the choice.

Then again you could argue that with soft luggage you are predisposed to have less accidents and therfore less likely to hurt yourself.

The point I'm tring to make it there are many factors that would cause you to choose your luggage - not least you ability to ride the bike and the level of safety equipment you wear.

I can't understand why this is such an emotive issue, in the end, just like your choice of bike, luggage is a choice of what best suits an individual

This thread reads to me like 'I take soft becasue it allows me to controll my weight', where 'hard luggage is more spacious and as we all know we expand to fill all available space' So it's not a case of hard v's soft, it's a case of heavy v's light.....