![\"Wizard](\"https:\/\/bikepacking.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/Wizard-Works-Bad-Jelly-Review_LRW_30.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nBehind the Name<\/p>\n Named after Spike Milligan\u2019s 1973 children\u2019s tale Badjelly the Witch, the Wizard Works Badjelly was released in 2025 and replaced the Shazam!, the brand\u2019s previous top-opening handlebar\/saddlebag. The name change stemmed from legal issues, but with some significant upgrades, the Badjelly is unique enough to warrant a fresh name. <\/p>\n In summary, the Badjelly feels like an appropriately curious mashup of traditional style and modern function. Outside, it has all the charm of a classic British saddlebag, with a generous flap, a boxy aesthetic, an earthy color palette, and a dash of the slightly eccentric personality we\u2019ve come to expect from Wizard Works. But some modern magic hides beneath the storybook exterior. A fully seam-taped waterproof liner and a host of thoughtful technical details transform the Badjelly into something a little more adept than its traditional silhouette lets on.<\/p>\n What\u2019s Changed<\/p>\n The Badjelly looks a lot like the Shazam, but there are a couple of significant differences and a few subtle ones. Like the Shazam, the Badjelly uses a roll-top closure and an expandable long flap, but the redesigned body now tapers toward the bag\u2019s front to provide additional clearance for hands and shifters when used with drop bars. It\u2019s only a two-centimeter difference, but it\u2019s notable in the U-formed internal plastic sheet that establishes the bag\u2019s shape. Other updates include two internal drop pockets (one on each side), a bungee cord on top for stashing layers or other essentials, and a new Hypalon-enclosed aluminum attachment bar for looping the included Voil\u00e9 Nano straps. A new webbing strap that routes over the roll-top and beneath the flap helps cinch everything down and keep the load secure.<\/p>\n Another little feature I like (above\/middle) are the strap connectors. Last time I traveled, I tied a piece of paracord to make a shoulder strap and brought it on the flight as my personal item.<\/p>\n Sizing<\/p>\n One of the major changes is in the sizing. Across the board, the Wizard Works Badjelly comes in larger sizes than the Shazam, with deeper, reshaped main compartments that increase carrying capacity across the range. The small grew from 9 to 10 liters, the medium from 14 to 15 liters, and the new large size offers a substantial 19 liters of storage. That brings to mind one of my complaints about this style of bag: they can often be a little too large. For example, although I really liked both of these bags, the old BXB Goldback I had was massive, and the Fab\u2019s Chest (which is oddly the small size) was too big for most of my trips and many of the bikes I ride. Plus, the waxed canvas used in both of these bags makes them a tad too heavy. For the record, they both make smaller versions in lighter X-Pac now. However, the larger sizes weren\u2019t necessarily a downside with the Badjelly, which I\u2019ll explain a little later.<\/p>\n All three sizes of the Wizard Works Badjelly; note that you can tell them apart in all these photos by color: black=small; tan=medium; olive=large.<\/p>\n The size small Badjelly measures 29cm wide x 24cm high x 17cm deep (37cm wide with the side pockets fully loaded) and weighs 705 grams. The medium measures 31 x 29 x 18cm (39cm wide with full side pockets) and weighs 839 grams, while the large measures 36 x 30 x 20cm (44cm wide with full side pockets) and weighs 965 grams. None feel heavy in hand, and the comparable medium size falls squarely in between the 597-gram Swift Zeitgeist and the roughly 1,000-gram small Fab\u2019s Chest (X-Pac version). Note that the Zeitgeist is the only one of the three without a secondary internal liner, which makes it lighter by sacrificing water resistance.<\/p>\n The Three Bears<\/p>\n I tried all three Badjelly sizes. They all have their place. Wizard Works put together a detailed fit guide (https:\/\/www.wizard.works\/product-information\/badjelly-fit-guide\/) that covers various scenarios to help folks decide on the best size for their bike, but the key number is the vertical clearance. The small takes up 26cm of vertical space from the center of the bars, while the medium and large take about 30 and 31, respectively.<\/p>\n The small option seems like it\u2019s best for anyone who wants a more compact bag up front, or for folks running a suspension fork. It holds a surprising amount of gear, but it\u2019s noticeably smaller than the Swift Zeitgeist, which offers 12 liters of storage and requires a claimed clearance requirement of 28cm from the center of the handlebar to the top of the front. On the flip side, the large version feels a little too chunky for me\u2014similar to the Fab\u2019s Chest and the old Goldback. For all those reasons, I used the medium-sized (14L) Badjelly most. <\/p>\n To me, it\u2019s the Goldilocks of the three, with the perfect amount of packing space. It fit all three rigid bikes I used it on, including a relatively low-stack gravel bike with 46cm bars. We also ran it on a mid-stack hardtail (the Wayward) with a 130mm fork. There was a little rub under hard compression on drops and large impacts, but it generally worked well. I still think the small is the better option for bikes with a suspension fork, though.<\/p>\n Wizard Works Badjelly vs. Others<\/p>\n On paper, here\u2019s how the Badjelly stacks up next to a few other bags I\u2019ve used. As mentioned, the medium is the most relevant for comparison, but I also included the small, since there\u2019s some crossover.<\/p>\n Model Volume Main Compartment Width<\/p>\n 11.4\u2033<\/p>\n 29cm<\/p>\n 12.2\u2033<\/p>\n 31cm<\/p>\n 10.5\u2033<\/p>\n 27cm<\/p>\n 12\u2033<\/p>\n 30cm<\/p>\n 11\u2033<\/p>\n 28cm<\/p>\n Main Compartment Depth<\/p>\n 6.7\u2033<\/p>\n 17cm<\/p>\n 7\u2033<\/p>\n 18cm<\/p>\n 9\u2033<\/p>\n 23cm<\/p>\n 7\u2033<\/p>\n 18cm<\/p>\n 8\u2033<\/p>\n 20cm<\/p>\n Vertical Spacing Required<\/p>\n 10\u2033<\/p>\n 26cm<\/p>\n 11.8\u2033<\/p>\n 30cm<\/p>\n 10.5\u2033<\/p>\n 27cm<\/p>\n 11\u2033<\/p>\n 28cm<\/p>\n 10.5\u2033<\/p>\n 27cm<\/p>\n Weight Price As you can see in the comparison chart, Badjelly\u2019s main compartment is a little wider than most, which I think is a worthy upside. With the Fabs Chest and Goldback, I\u2019ve had a hard time squeezing in longer items, such as tents and camp chairs. Note that clearance numbers are from each manufacturer; I think they\u2019re all very close, but the numbers for the Fab\u2019s Chest and BXB Goldback seem a little liberal; the versions I tested were as tall or taller than the medium Badjelly.<\/p>\n The Quest for Waterproofing<\/p>\n The other major upgrade to the Badjelly lies under the hood\u2014or under the flap. When it was released last year, Badjelly ushered in a new era for Wizard Works. The Badjelly, Figwit Cargo Cage Bag, Alakazam Basket Bag, and their new frame bag all became 100% waterproof using seam-taped-in-house liners.<\/p>\n As Nic discovered during his visit to the brand\u2019s London shop<\/a>, waterproofing had been in Wizard Works\u2019s sights from the beginning. When co-founder Harry Major first started making bags in a Vancouver bedroom in 2016, he hoped he could build something lighter and more waterproof than the bags he\u2019d used while cycle touring. The reality proved considerably more difficult. By 2022, though, waterproofing had become the company\u2019s obvious next step. Based in the notoriously wet UK, Wizard Works wanted to better serve its local riding community while preserving the stitched construction and distinctive aesthetic that set its bags apart from the more technical look of welded waterproof bags.<\/p>\n Initially, Wizard Works planned to outsource waterproof liner production to another UK manufacturer. When that partner went out of business\u2014and other potential suppliers raised the same long-term reliability concerns\u2014the team reconsidered. Rather than make waterproofing dependent on another small company, they decided to bring the process in-house. The arrival of a secondhand seam-taping machine finally made that possible. It\u2019s a significant investment for such a small workshop, but one that represents more than a new product feature. Wizard Works can now develop and manufacture waterproof bags on its own terms, while adding another specialist manufacturing skill to the knowledge it is working to keep alive in the UK.<\/p>\n Long story short, Wizard Works uses a seam-taped liner made from 210-denier nylon with a TPU laminate on the back and a C0 DWR (zero toxic fluorocarbons) finish on the front. According to Harry, laminates offer better water resistance than coatings because they\u2019re a continuous \u201cbarrier\u201d sheet attached to the back of the material, as opposed to coatings, which are a liquid painted on the fabric\u2019s backside.<\/p>\n Does it Need to Be Waterproof?<\/p>\n I\u2019ve gone back and forth about which bags need to be waterproof in my bikepacking kit. There\u2019s something to be said for having one or two breathable pieces in the mix. Technical welded-waterproof bags are usually made out of PU-coated materials, which are truly waterproof, but much like a plastic bag, they don\u2019t allow moisture or air to move through them like stitched bags. That\u2019s good in some ways, but it can also result in clammy, moist contents that never dry out when things are packed sweaty or damp. The beauty of bags stitched from cotton duck cloth or Cordura is that they allow some air permeability, so when they\u2019re left in the sun, things inside can dry out to some degree, or at least the bag fabric can dry out and wick the moisture to the outside.<\/p>\n Still, as I mentioned in my intro, having a waterproof front bag has become a priority for my kit. I always use that spot to store my relatively ultralight sleep kit: quilt, pad, and tent\u2014usually alongside a puffy and other layers to fill in the gaps. While some of those things are usually in their own stuff sacks, I\u2019d rather not worry about them getting soaked after a downpour, particularly on a longer tour. I\u2019m all too familiar with the \u201cmid-day yard sale\u201d process of splaying gear out in the sun to dry it out after being soaked to the bone. <\/p>\n In the past, I\u2019ve used multiple dry bags or trash bags as liners in non-waterproof bags. Frankly, I\u2019d much rather stuff things directly into the main bag and not worry about secondary containers for absolutely everything. When I use a more technical welded-waterproof roll, the down quilt gets stuffed directly into it, and it\u2019s comforting to know the bag will keep it from getting drenched. That gets tricky with a top-opening bag, however. Some, like the Fabio\u2019s Chest, are highly water-resistant, but since almost all of them are stitched, they eventually soak through and\/or wick moisture.<\/p>\n On the Trail and to the Market<\/p>\n Fortunately, I haven\u2019t ridden in a big downpour in a while. But I have tested the Badjelly\u2019s waterproof capability in a somewhat controlled environment: with a hose, flat-out drenching the bag. Suffice to say, nothing inside got wet. Plus, going back to my breathability argument, things that are packed into it when damp don\u2019t seem to make the inside of the bag as \u201cclammy\u201d as I\u2019ve experienced with technical welded bags\u2014particularly after being left in the sun. That said, when you roll the top opening on the Badjelly, it allows a little air to escape from the stitch holes in the binding and from the opening since it can\u2019t roll as tightly as a welded, single-layer waterproof fabric bag.<\/p>\n In use, I\u2019ve been really impressed with the BadJelly\u2014clearly, since we recognized it in our Gear of the Year Awards<\/a> at the end of last year. All the proportions of the Badjelly seem spot on, from the length of the roll-top to the volume of the main bag body, and from the size of the side pockets to the bag\u2019s overall shape. I never wanted to change anything about the size, shape, or overall structure of the medium bag. That\u2019s pretty rare. With most bags I try, there\u2019s usually some measurement I wish was slightly longer, wider, deeper, or different in some way. <\/p>\n I wouldn\u2019t call it the most stable bag; careful packing and firmly cinching the straps are key to making it rock solid. But when dialed in\u2014and particularly when supported by a mini-rack\u2014it\u2019s plenty stable for all variety of off-road riding. My one complaint is that Wizard Works didn\u2019t use split-back buckles on the bag, so you can\u2019t move them up and down the webbing ladder to get a better fit with smaller loads. That should be an easy upgrade, however. <\/p>\n As for durability, I don\u2019t have a multi-month saga on the Badjelly, but I\u2019ve used it on many overnighters and have had it on my ATB for countless day rides and market trips, carrying everything from papayas and pineapples to full grocery loads. It\u2019s been a while since I used a bag made from anything other than X-Pac, so I was admittedly concerned with its lightweight Cordura construction. However, it still looks almost brand new with no signs of abrasion or wear. Cordura is generally more durable than X-Pac when it comes to surface abrasion and long-term rough handling, which helps explain it. Plus, it\u2019s waterproof, so that\u2019s one less concern when out on a multi-day trip.<\/p>\n<\/a>
\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a>
\n<\/a><\/p>\n
\nBadjelly (Small)
\nBadjelly (Medium)
\nFabs Chest (Small)
\nSwift Zeitgeist
\nGoldback (11W)<\/p>\n
\n10L
\n15L
\n\u2014
\n12L
\n22L<\/p>\n
\n705g
\n839g
\n~1,000g
\n590g
\n670g<\/p>\n
\n~$277
\n~$290
\n$320
\n$215
\n$255<\/p>\n<\/a>
\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a>
\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a>
\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a>
\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a>
\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a>
\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a>
\n<\/a><\/p>\n