Fietsvergelijk

Ortlieb Back-Roller Classic vs AGU Clean Single Bike Bag

Comparison 2026Bike Bags

94

Ortlieb Back-Roller Classic

Ortlieb · Achtertas

134.95

VS
76

AGU Clean Single Bike Bag

AGU · Enkele tas

49.95

Our verdict

Based on our weighted scoring, the Ortlieb Back-Roller Classic edges out the AGU Clean Single Bike Bag with an overall score of 94/100 against 76/100. It scores particularly well on waterproofing (100/100) and capacity (90/100), making it the better all-round pick in Bike Bags.

The AGU Clean Single Bike Bag remains a sensible alternative if price is your main concern — it lands at €49.95 versus €134.95.

Waterproofing winner

Ortlieb Back-Roller Classic

12% higher than its rival

Value winner

AGU Clean Single Bike Bag

8% better value for money

Specifications

SpecificationOrtlieb Back-Roller ClassicAGU Clean Single Bike Bag
Price€134.95€49.95+170%
Rating★4.7 (4,200)★4.1 (920)
Overall94/100+24%76/100
Capacity
Volume20 L per tas (set van 2)+18%17 L
Load capacity9 kg per tas
Dimensions42 × 32 × 17 cm+5%40 × 30 × 14 cm
Material
Main materialPU-gecoat Cordura nylonGerecycled PET, PU-coating
WaterproofIP64, gelaste naden + rolsluitingJa, gelaste naden + rolsluiting
Weight930 g per tas550 g+69%
Mount
SystemQL2.1 Quick-Lock

Pros and cons

Ortlieb Back-Roller Classic

Pros

  • 100% waterproof thanks to welded seams and roll closure — proven over years of touring
  • QL2.1 mount: one-handed click-on and click-off, fits any rear rack
  • 20 litres per bag (set of 2 = 40 litres)
  • 5-year warranty, Made in Germany, repair service available

Cons

  • Premium price for a set of two bags
  • Roll closure is less convenient than a zip for grabbing things quickly

AGU Clean Single Bike Bag

Pros

  • Made from recycled PET — a sustainable choice
  • Waterproof with a roll closure at a budget price
  • Lightweight at just 550 grams
  • Reflective logo for extra visibility

Cons

  • Single bag — you'll need two for more capacity
  • Mounting hooks feel less premium than Ortlieb or Vaude

Other comparisons