I am just trying to point out why there are two opinions on it for those who dont understand the origins of this split in philosophy. It may help other people reading this debate why you as a Norwegian are inherently inclined to belong to the "Hard boxes can do everything" school of thought and why you seem to believe that there is no need to consider anything but hard boxes.

I didnt say the Teutonic philosophy is worse, but I do think the debate and thought we put into the choice of bags is healthier in the english speaking world BECAUSE there is debate about it. And because people on forums like this say that "sure you can take hard boxes, if you are sticking to graded dirt roads and asphalt, but if you are try to do a more challenging riding program, then soft bags are better" or something to that effect. Rather than just talking about whether Hepco and Becker is better than Tesch or Zega.

I actually suspect the reason is the opposite. Its all done the same way in the Germanic countries - big bikes and hard boxes - precisely because everyone else there does it that way - therefore by not thinking about it and simply going the same direction as everyone else, they ARE using everyone elses opinions as their own, and thus using all the other Germanic bikers to validate their own choices. So in fact they DO need to validate their choices by choosing what everyone else chooses: big bike + metal boxes.

I hope I will one day meet a German touring around the world off road, on a light bike (sub 150 kgs) with soft bags, as it will force me to rethink. But that day has not come.

I will say it again for clarity because you seem to love taking me out of context ... you can take any bike around the world. You can take any luggage around the world ... if you are sticking to roads you will see in a world atlas. If you want to do 3000 km off piste in Mongolia on a 220 kg bike, with 20 kgs of boxes and rack (most aluminium boxes weight between 4 and 6 kgs each - 3 boxes plus heavy steel rack = 20 kgs), and 25 kgs of fuel, then you are probably not going to enjoy it as much as a guy on a bike half the weight, with gear that hea has bothered to think about. If you want to across Russia on the highway, or up and down the Americas on any road that appears in a world atlas, with maximum confort, carrying maximum amout of gear, then take any bike and any luggage. It doesnt really matter. Goldwing, Harley, KTM Adventure, HP2.... whatever.

If you want to be more adventurous, then you DO need to think a lot more about every choice you make. You DO need to think about what size and weight of bike is more suitable. You DO need to think about the reliability of the machine you propose to take. There is no point some guy taking his favourite WR450 around the world if he needs a full engine rebuild every 150 hours is it?

Like every Norwegian, you are probably a die-hard nationalist, so I will will give you a Norwegian example ... Amundsen was successful while Scott was not, because he DID think about the suitability of every detail regarding his trip, while Scott went along with the default settings for polar exploration. If they were going for a race to Tierra del Fuego, all the choices of equipment would not have been critical (but careful thinking can make life easier). If you are going to the South Pole, then you DO need to think about every detail. And you DO need to care.

And for people who are new to this game, then that decision making process WILL involve listening to other peoples opinions.

__________________