Roof Rack dilemna

[SeaRubi]

My opinion on physics is that they are real.

read his other posts. and he's also advocating for 120lb or less load. in reality that knocks out 4 jerry cans of gas.

Scott, I think you've spent too much time in those Jeeps and 'yotas ... :elkgrin:

(ducks, runs!)

 

[007]

read his other posts.

I read everyone's postings.

I brought attention to that particular post so people wouldn't make the same mistake I did and mount the RTT too high or wish they hadn't bought one.

I had heard the same warning but thought it wouldn't be that bad, sure I wouldn't do it to my race car but a truck is all ready top heavy so whats a little more?

Well it totally changed the dynamics and I scraped the tubing I bent for the rack and now I'm redesigning it to sit lower so that my capabilities aren't sacrificed nearly as much.

The whole point of spending $4,000 on suspension and tires was to maximize the off-road capabilities of the truck.

But then, my RTT comes along and perches itself on top of what essentially used to be a very poised class 7 baja wannabe, and proclaims it to be a wallowing pig intent on high fiving every tree branch in the Helena national forest.

I just don't want people to make the same mistake I did. Try not to mess up your handling, that simple.

 

[R_Lefebvre]

That's why I'm against roof racks in the first place. There's 100+ pounds up there to start with, before you've even put anything on it.

I allow, however, for people who are mainly travelling dirt roads, and not 3+ trails. Yes, weight up high is bad even on flat ground, because of emergency manoevers and such. But even with a few hundred pounds up there, we still aren't the tippiest things on the road. (see: double decker buses, etc.)

 

[Redline]

I've been considering a RTT recently for when I can't or don't want to take my trailer with me. This means trails that are a bit more challenging, though doesn't necessarily mean ‘hard core’.

However my car is relatively low and quite stable. AND, as R Lefebvre says here, my idea/goal IF I do go the RTT route is to ONLY have a RTT up top, using the factory roof-rack with new cross-bars. The only added weight being the tent, not a roof-rack and tent.

That's why I'm against roof racks in the first place. There's 100+ pounds up there to start with, before you've even put anything on it.

I allow, however, for people who are mainly travelling dirt roads, and not 3+ trails. Yes, weight up high is bad even on flat ground, because of emergency manoevers and such. But even with a few hundred pounds up there, we still aren't the tippiest things on the road. (see: double decker buses, etc.)

 

[salve7]

How about one of these http://www.sylvansport.com/ . I saw them at a swap meet and they look functional and comfortable in a light package.

 

[Redline]

Interesting and looks light weight, but for 6K I think I would much prefer an Adventure Trailers Chaser (shell).

How about one of these http://www.sylvansport.com/ . I saw them at a swap meet and they look functional and comfortable in a light package.

 

[Snagger]

Qouted because everyone should read this post until they can recite it.

That makes you both biggotted fools. As I have repeatedly said, there are too many variables for a one-shoe-fits-all solution. I suppose you two think LR were incompetent in choosing their vehicles and equipment on the Camel Trophy and G4 events? I'm apparently incompetent because I take my family with me, which requires more kit and also allows less internal carriage (as with every other vehicle on the trip I did last year)...

 

[benlittle]

Ok, lets run with this one a bit.

It's not obvious from the photos you posted exactly where you're storing your sleeping bag, pad/mattress and tent. I'm assuming you'd do the logical thing and put them on the roof since they are bulky, and light. I'm not sure if you've actually looked at this, but 4 sleeping bags, pads, and a family tent also take up a crapload of room on the roof (or anywhere you care to put them). My warm sleeping bags take up about a 2'x2' footprint each. The Tent is about 12x36, and the sleeping roll... 12x24 at best. So that's 9 sq.ft. for 1 person, 15 for 2, and 27 sq. ft. of rack footprint space for 4 people. A small rooftop tent (4x4 folded) takes up 16 sq. ft of space, and a large (70"x48" folded) takes up about 24 sq. ft. When you consider most people fold up their sleeping bags in the tent, and there's no need to bring mattresses... the RTT doesn't really take up much room at all. It's a pretty easy to justify luxury.

Even in a best case scenario using my compact bags as an example they pack down to about 12x18. So at best you could get down to 17 sq. ft for 4 people.

The 4 foot length of an RTT leaves a lot of room at the front for your fuel and other parts, the only thing really that might get bumped is the spare tire. That could be easily accomodated on the back bumper if you wanted. And the GRP boards go on the sides anyway.

The only real disadvantage to the RTT is the weight of the thing. But at 110 pounds, it's not actually that much more than that spare tire is (assuming mounted).

As for the trucks in the picture... you're right, the first truck would be giving up a lot, since he's obviously got everything he needs right in the truck. But... there's only one person in that truck. If there were 2, or heaven forbid, 4 people in that truck... he's not going to have an empty roof anyway, now is he?

The second truck, it's hard to tell, but the back half of that rack looks empty. But let's assume it's full of Pelican cases. If he puts an RTT up top, that will remove his tent, pads, and sleeping bags from inside the truck. Now some of the displaced Pelican cases can go in the truck.

Then you go on to try and justify the fridge (or cooler!), and anybody who has done any non-vehicle-dependent travel is going to chime in and say that just for the 40lb weight of the fridge alone you could have 80 dried meals. There is no real justification carrying a fridge. It's absolutely a luxury, one which you have managed to justify for yourself.

People go canoeing or backpacking for a week at a time, easy, with only the stuff they can carry on their backs. Everything else is a luxury. Trying to say that one person's luxury is justifiable and another person's is not is pure hubris.

Edit: The only serious drawback to the RTT I can see is that if you have to bail on the truck, you can't take your tent and bags with you. But then, when I see neatly stacked Pelican cases with gear in it, and a fridge... Well, you only have 2 hands. Let me know how it works out for you.

Hmmm... My sleeping gear takes up exactly one pelican 1650. Two 3in self inflating ground pads, two 800 fill down bags in compression stuff sacks and a The North Face tent.

I have done far more non vehicle dependant travel than vehicle dependant. I will say that a fridge is an absolute must. Not a luxury. It's a must. IF I were doing some full on expedition then yes, dried Mountain House style food would be my choice. The fact of the matter is that getting out in my vehicle and cooking is a major part of the experience and a fridge makes that possible. Just like Backpacking with dried food is part of the experience.

RTT protecting from animals? What kind of animals? I see the need in Africa but unless you're camping in some bear park in Yellowstone... baaah!!

That's why I'm against roof racks in the first place. There's 100+ pounds up there to start with, before you've even put anything on it.

I allow, however, for people who are mainly travelling dirt roads, and not 3+ trails. Yes, weight up high is bad even on flat ground, because of emergency manoevers and such. But even with a few hundred pounds up there, we still aren't the tippiest things on the road. (see: double decker buses, etc.)

LOL, I'd rather have a roof rack tipping me over on a trail than a large trailer PULLING me down a hill.

 

[SeaRubi]

"
I have done far more non vehicle dependant travel than vehicle dependant. I will say that a fridge is an absolute must. Not a luxury. It's a must."


WHUT-EVAR

this is just stupid. you obviously haven't done any serious backpacking. : rolleyes:

 

[Scott Brady]

That makes you both biggotted fools

I guess they spell bigoted different across the pond

You can make whatever argument you would like, but it is a fact that any weight placed on the roof is a compromise to performance in technical terrain. If it is a compromise you are willing to make, than that is your choice. I have made that compromise in the past too.

As far as us being fools on the subject of roof loads, I would be absolutely fascinated to hear any possible argument you might make to the contrary. . . Maybe my understanding of physics is a little rusty?:ylsmoke:

 

[Scott Brady]

That makes you both biggotted fools.

WHUT-EVAR

this is just stupid

I should have realized it sooner. . . New Years + Alcohol = Internet Ranting :elkgrin:

Happy New Years.

 

[benlittle]

"
I have done far more non vehicle dependant travel than vehicle dependant. I will say that a fridge is an absolute must. Not a luxury. It's a must."


WHUT-EVAR

this is just stupid. you obviously haven't done any serious backpacking. : rolleyes:

Really? How do YOU keep food cold for more than a couple days without a fridge? An ice chest? Yummy... Water filled bags of food!! It's luxury and a must.

Nope, never done any real backpacking. You're right. How silly of me to say I've done any backpacking at all.

Big Horn Crags

Kings Peak via Red Castle

The Cirque of The Towers

Tetons via Alaska Basin

Freeze dried peas, corn, instant rice with fresh trout.

 

[Scott Brady]

I am with Ben on this one. A fridge rocks.

 

[Snagger]

I guess they spell bigoted different across the pond

You can make whatever argument you would like, but it is a fact that any weight placed on the roof is a compromise to performance in technical terrain. If it is a compromise you are willing to make, than that is your choice. I have made that compromise in the past too.

As far as us being fools on the subject of roof loads, I would be absolutely fascinated to hear any possible argument you might make to the contrary. . . Maybe my understanding of physics is a little rusty?:ylsmoke:

I'm not arguing with the physics of heavy weights on the roof - we all know that roof loads drastically reduce side slope capability and increase cornering roll, which could be too risky in some circumstances. Even without pushing limits, they make driving more uncomfortable. And then there is the overhead clearance problem, getting under low branches, bridges or vehicle restriction posts (we get a lot of that in Eurpoe to keep the pikeys out of decent places). But, if you're camping with a family, there is little choice - it's rack or trailer, which has a different set of advantages and disadvantages.

My point, yet again, is that you can't say that using roof racks, or even RTTs, is a bad choice. In some situations, yes it would be, but in others it may be the wisest thing to do. You have to look at the trekkers, the vehicle, the terrain, the rest of their equipment and needs, any restrictions or additional costs on vehicle height or trailers, the weather and so on. You refuse to do that, citing a blanket "if it doesn't all fit in the car, you have the wrong car or too much kit" philosphy which is as wrong as it is beligerent.

By the way, you should know that criticising someone's bad typing is the sign of a weak argument, especially if it's done in a sarcastic way at the beginning of your post. Apple may make good computer operating systems, but their notebook keyboards are awful, but if you think that vindicates your arrogance, then more fool you.

 

[BIGdaddy]

bigdaddy + Mrs. Bigdaddy + 3 wee bigdaddy-ets

=

roof rack.


roofracks are a great piece of equipment.

"I'd rather have a roofrack making me tippy than a trailer pulling me down the hill"

...haha, aint that the truth. Love that quote.

Happy new year, brothers.