Roof Cargo Carriers
05-24-2004, 03:32 PM
#21
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Roof Cargo Carriers
On Mon, 24 May 2004 16:31:25 GMT, "Norm & Debbie"
<nwpars@insightbb.com> wrote:
>Thanks John! Are roof cargo carriers and expedition racks that same? I
>have looked at some aluminum types. What do you think about them? It is
>not a trail only rig.
I think there is some confusion in terminology. I see a cargo carrier
as being a temporary rack, like the Yakima Loadwarrior or Megawarrior.
They aren't intended to be permanent, tho many people leave them
attached all the time. They clamp to crossbars, often to the factory
(weak) rack itself. They tend to be smaller than an expedition rack
with a load rating of maybe a couple of hundred pounds. The cargo
racks aren't really intended to carry tires, cans of gas and other
really heavy stuff.
Expedition racks are serious hardware which often extend the full
length of the roof and from gutter to gutter. Some are rated at 300 or
even 500 pounds capacity, tho the vehicle suspension and terrain
really determines that limit.
An aluminum expedition rack would help a little in terms of
top-heaviness - maybe 30 or 40 pounds - but by the time you get it
loaded, you won't see any significant difference. The finish would be
more durable, but the wind resistance is going to remain.
Oh, one other thing. Any heavy load on the roof drastically increases
the risk of rollover. SUVs are inherently more susceptible to this due
to their high stance. If you miss a turn or are lax and let the truck
drift off the road and clip a guard rail, the truck trips over its
tires and rolls rather than spinning out. The extra stuff up top means
you have to be very vigilent about curves and unfamiliar roads.
Emergency maeuvers are also affected, so you need to take extra care
in traffic.
My own opinion is that an expedition rack and lots of gear does NOT
belong on a truck primarily driven by the wife. I may be willing to
take the risks, but I certainly don't expect my other half to do so,
unless she specifically asks.
I hope this helped. I know this is a Jeep-only newsgroup, but one
reason I sold my XJ for another make was to go to a bigger vehicle
that had better cargo capacity, partly so I didn't have to throw
everything up top. (I still want a Rubicon Unlimited tho....)
John Davies
http://home.comcast.net/~johnedavies/
'96 Lexus LX450
'00 Audi A4 1.8T quattro
Spokane WA USA
<nwpars@insightbb.com> wrote:
>Thanks John! Are roof cargo carriers and expedition racks that same? I
>have looked at some aluminum types. What do you think about them? It is
>not a trail only rig.
I think there is some confusion in terminology. I see a cargo carrier
as being a temporary rack, like the Yakima Loadwarrior or Megawarrior.
They aren't intended to be permanent, tho many people leave them
attached all the time. They clamp to crossbars, often to the factory
(weak) rack itself. They tend to be smaller than an expedition rack
with a load rating of maybe a couple of hundred pounds. The cargo
racks aren't really intended to carry tires, cans of gas and other
really heavy stuff.
Expedition racks are serious hardware which often extend the full
length of the roof and from gutter to gutter. Some are rated at 300 or
even 500 pounds capacity, tho the vehicle suspension and terrain
really determines that limit.
An aluminum expedition rack would help a little in terms of
top-heaviness - maybe 30 or 40 pounds - but by the time you get it
loaded, you won't see any significant difference. The finish would be
more durable, but the wind resistance is going to remain.
Oh, one other thing. Any heavy load on the roof drastically increases
the risk of rollover. SUVs are inherently more susceptible to this due
to their high stance. If you miss a turn or are lax and let the truck
drift off the road and clip a guard rail, the truck trips over its
tires and rolls rather than spinning out. The extra stuff up top means
you have to be very vigilent about curves and unfamiliar roads.
Emergency maeuvers are also affected, so you need to take extra care
in traffic.
My own opinion is that an expedition rack and lots of gear does NOT
belong on a truck primarily driven by the wife. I may be willing to
take the risks, but I certainly don't expect my other half to do so,
unless she specifically asks.
I hope this helped. I know this is a Jeep-only newsgroup, but one
reason I sold my XJ for another make was to go to a bigger vehicle
that had better cargo capacity, partly so I didn't have to throw
everything up top. (I still want a Rubicon Unlimited tho....)
John Davies
http://home.comcast.net/~johnedavies/
'96 Lexus LX450
'00 Audi A4 1.8T quattro
Spokane WA USA
05-24-2004, 03:38 PM
#22
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Roof Cargo Carriers
John, thanks again! You've cleared up some questions for me. This would be
a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
out of the vehicle.
Norm
"John Davies" <saab95aerowagon@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aci4b0102lcj1esjjhduf4e5ihmkts4qr2@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 24 May 2004 16:31:25 GMT, "Norm & Debbie"
> <nwpars@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
> >Thanks John! Are roof cargo carriers and expedition racks that same? I
> >have looked at some aluminum types. What do you think about them? It is
> >not a trail only rig.
>
> I think there is some confusion in terminology. I see a cargo carrier
> as being a temporary rack, like the Yakima Loadwarrior or Megawarrior.
> They aren't intended to be permanent, tho many people leave them
> attached all the time. They clamp to crossbars, often to the factory
> (weak) rack itself. They tend to be smaller than an expedition rack
> with a load rating of maybe a couple of hundred pounds. The cargo
> racks aren't really intended to carry tires, cans of gas and other
> really heavy stuff.
>
> Expedition racks are serious hardware which often extend the full
> length of the roof and from gutter to gutter. Some are rated at 300 or
> even 500 pounds capacity, tho the vehicle suspension and terrain
> really determines that limit.
>
> An aluminum expedition rack would help a little in terms of
> top-heaviness - maybe 30 or 40 pounds - but by the time you get it
> loaded, you won't see any significant difference. The finish would be
> more durable, but the wind resistance is going to remain.
>
> Oh, one other thing. Any heavy load on the roof drastically increases
> the risk of rollover. SUVs are inherently more susceptible to this due
> to their high stance. If you miss a turn or are lax and let the truck
> drift off the road and clip a guard rail, the truck trips over its
> tires and rolls rather than spinning out. The extra stuff up top means
> you have to be very vigilent about curves and unfamiliar roads.
> Emergency maeuvers are also affected, so you need to take extra care
> in traffic.
>
> My own opinion is that an expedition rack and lots of gear does NOT
> belong on a truck primarily driven by the wife. I may be willing to
> take the risks, but I certainly don't expect my other half to do so,
> unless she specifically asks.
>
> I hope this helped. I know this is a Jeep-only newsgroup, but one
> reason I sold my XJ for another make was to go to a bigger vehicle
> that had better cargo capacity, partly so I didn't have to throw
> everything up top. (I still want a Rubicon Unlimited tho....)
>
>
>
>
> John Davies
> http://home.comcast.net/~johnedavies/
> '96 Lexus LX450
> '00 Audi A4 1.8T quattro
> Spokane WA USA
a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
out of the vehicle.
Norm
"John Davies" <saab95aerowagon@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aci4b0102lcj1esjjhduf4e5ihmkts4qr2@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 24 May 2004 16:31:25 GMT, "Norm & Debbie"
> <nwpars@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
> >Thanks John! Are roof cargo carriers and expedition racks that same? I
> >have looked at some aluminum types. What do you think about them? It is
> >not a trail only rig.
>
> I think there is some confusion in terminology. I see a cargo carrier
> as being a temporary rack, like the Yakima Loadwarrior or Megawarrior.
> They aren't intended to be permanent, tho many people leave them
> attached all the time. They clamp to crossbars, often to the factory
> (weak) rack itself. They tend to be smaller than an expedition rack
> with a load rating of maybe a couple of hundred pounds. The cargo
> racks aren't really intended to carry tires, cans of gas and other
> really heavy stuff.
>
> Expedition racks are serious hardware which often extend the full
> length of the roof and from gutter to gutter. Some are rated at 300 or
> even 500 pounds capacity, tho the vehicle suspension and terrain
> really determines that limit.
>
> An aluminum expedition rack would help a little in terms of
> top-heaviness - maybe 30 or 40 pounds - but by the time you get it
> loaded, you won't see any significant difference. The finish would be
> more durable, but the wind resistance is going to remain.
>
> Oh, one other thing. Any heavy load on the roof drastically increases
> the risk of rollover. SUVs are inherently more susceptible to this due
> to their high stance. If you miss a turn or are lax and let the truck
> drift off the road and clip a guard rail, the truck trips over its
> tires and rolls rather than spinning out. The extra stuff up top means
> you have to be very vigilent about curves and unfamiliar roads.
> Emergency maeuvers are also affected, so you need to take extra care
> in traffic.
>
> My own opinion is that an expedition rack and lots of gear does NOT
> belong on a truck primarily driven by the wife. I may be willing to
> take the risks, but I certainly don't expect my other half to do so,
> unless she specifically asks.
>
> I hope this helped. I know this is a Jeep-only newsgroup, but one
> reason I sold my XJ for another make was to go to a bigger vehicle
> that had better cargo capacity, partly so I didn't have to throw
> everything up top. (I still want a Rubicon Unlimited tho....)
>
>
>
>
> John Davies
> http://home.comcast.net/~johnedavies/
> '96 Lexus LX450
> '00 Audi A4 1.8T quattro
> Spokane WA USA
05-24-2004, 03:38 PM
#23
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Roof Cargo Carriers
John, thanks again! You've cleared up some questions for me. This would be
a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
out of the vehicle.
Norm
"John Davies" <saab95aerowagon@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aci4b0102lcj1esjjhduf4e5ihmkts4qr2@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 24 May 2004 16:31:25 GMT, "Norm & Debbie"
> <nwpars@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
> >Thanks John! Are roof cargo carriers and expedition racks that same? I
> >have looked at some aluminum types. What do you think about them? It is
> >not a trail only rig.
>
> I think there is some confusion in terminology. I see a cargo carrier
> as being a temporary rack, like the Yakima Loadwarrior or Megawarrior.
> They aren't intended to be permanent, tho many people leave them
> attached all the time. They clamp to crossbars, often to the factory
> (weak) rack itself. They tend to be smaller than an expedition rack
> with a load rating of maybe a couple of hundred pounds. The cargo
> racks aren't really intended to carry tires, cans of gas and other
> really heavy stuff.
>
> Expedition racks are serious hardware which often extend the full
> length of the roof and from gutter to gutter. Some are rated at 300 or
> even 500 pounds capacity, tho the vehicle suspension and terrain
> really determines that limit.
>
> An aluminum expedition rack would help a little in terms of
> top-heaviness - maybe 30 or 40 pounds - but by the time you get it
> loaded, you won't see any significant difference. The finish would be
> more durable, but the wind resistance is going to remain.
>
> Oh, one other thing. Any heavy load on the roof drastically increases
> the risk of rollover. SUVs are inherently more susceptible to this due
> to their high stance. If you miss a turn or are lax and let the truck
> drift off the road and clip a guard rail, the truck trips over its
> tires and rolls rather than spinning out. The extra stuff up top means
> you have to be very vigilent about curves and unfamiliar roads.
> Emergency maeuvers are also affected, so you need to take extra care
> in traffic.
>
> My own opinion is that an expedition rack and lots of gear does NOT
> belong on a truck primarily driven by the wife. I may be willing to
> take the risks, but I certainly don't expect my other half to do so,
> unless she specifically asks.
>
> I hope this helped. I know this is a Jeep-only newsgroup, but one
> reason I sold my XJ for another make was to go to a bigger vehicle
> that had better cargo capacity, partly so I didn't have to throw
> everything up top. (I still want a Rubicon Unlimited tho....)
>
>
>
>
> John Davies
> http://home.comcast.net/~johnedavies/
> '96 Lexus LX450
> '00 Audi A4 1.8T quattro
> Spokane WA USA
a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
out of the vehicle.
Norm
"John Davies" <saab95aerowagon@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aci4b0102lcj1esjjhduf4e5ihmkts4qr2@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 24 May 2004 16:31:25 GMT, "Norm & Debbie"
> <nwpars@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
> >Thanks John! Are roof cargo carriers and expedition racks that same? I
> >have looked at some aluminum types. What do you think about them? It is
> >not a trail only rig.
>
> I think there is some confusion in terminology. I see a cargo carrier
> as being a temporary rack, like the Yakima Loadwarrior or Megawarrior.
> They aren't intended to be permanent, tho many people leave them
> attached all the time. They clamp to crossbars, often to the factory
> (weak) rack itself. They tend to be smaller than an expedition rack
> with a load rating of maybe a couple of hundred pounds. The cargo
> racks aren't really intended to carry tires, cans of gas and other
> really heavy stuff.
>
> Expedition racks are serious hardware which often extend the full
> length of the roof and from gutter to gutter. Some are rated at 300 or
> even 500 pounds capacity, tho the vehicle suspension and terrain
> really determines that limit.
>
> An aluminum expedition rack would help a little in terms of
> top-heaviness - maybe 30 or 40 pounds - but by the time you get it
> loaded, you won't see any significant difference. The finish would be
> more durable, but the wind resistance is going to remain.
>
> Oh, one other thing. Any heavy load on the roof drastically increases
> the risk of rollover. SUVs are inherently more susceptible to this due
> to their high stance. If you miss a turn or are lax and let the truck
> drift off the road and clip a guard rail, the truck trips over its
> tires and rolls rather than spinning out. The extra stuff up top means
> you have to be very vigilent about curves and unfamiliar roads.
> Emergency maeuvers are also affected, so you need to take extra care
> in traffic.
>
> My own opinion is that an expedition rack and lots of gear does NOT
> belong on a truck primarily driven by the wife. I may be willing to
> take the risks, but I certainly don't expect my other half to do so,
> unless she specifically asks.
>
> I hope this helped. I know this is a Jeep-only newsgroup, but one
> reason I sold my XJ for another make was to go to a bigger vehicle
> that had better cargo capacity, partly so I didn't have to throw
> everything up top. (I still want a Rubicon Unlimited tho....)
>
>
>
>
> John Davies
> http://home.comcast.net/~johnedavies/
> '96 Lexus LX450
> '00 Audi A4 1.8T quattro
> Spokane WA USA
05-24-2004, 03:38 PM
#24
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Roof Cargo Carriers
John, thanks again! You've cleared up some questions for me. This would be
a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
out of the vehicle.
Norm
"John Davies" <saab95aerowagon@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aci4b0102lcj1esjjhduf4e5ihmkts4qr2@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 24 May 2004 16:31:25 GMT, "Norm & Debbie"
> <nwpars@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
> >Thanks John! Are roof cargo carriers and expedition racks that same? I
> >have looked at some aluminum types. What do you think about them? It is
> >not a trail only rig.
>
> I think there is some confusion in terminology. I see a cargo carrier
> as being a temporary rack, like the Yakima Loadwarrior or Megawarrior.
> They aren't intended to be permanent, tho many people leave them
> attached all the time. They clamp to crossbars, often to the factory
> (weak) rack itself. They tend to be smaller than an expedition rack
> with a load rating of maybe a couple of hundred pounds. The cargo
> racks aren't really intended to carry tires, cans of gas and other
> really heavy stuff.
>
> Expedition racks are serious hardware which often extend the full
> length of the roof and from gutter to gutter. Some are rated at 300 or
> even 500 pounds capacity, tho the vehicle suspension and terrain
> really determines that limit.
>
> An aluminum expedition rack would help a little in terms of
> top-heaviness - maybe 30 or 40 pounds - but by the time you get it
> loaded, you won't see any significant difference. The finish would be
> more durable, but the wind resistance is going to remain.
>
> Oh, one other thing. Any heavy load on the roof drastically increases
> the risk of rollover. SUVs are inherently more susceptible to this due
> to their high stance. If you miss a turn or are lax and let the truck
> drift off the road and clip a guard rail, the truck trips over its
> tires and rolls rather than spinning out. The extra stuff up top means
> you have to be very vigilent about curves and unfamiliar roads.
> Emergency maeuvers are also affected, so you need to take extra care
> in traffic.
>
> My own opinion is that an expedition rack and lots of gear does NOT
> belong on a truck primarily driven by the wife. I may be willing to
> take the risks, but I certainly don't expect my other half to do so,
> unless she specifically asks.
>
> I hope this helped. I know this is a Jeep-only newsgroup, but one
> reason I sold my XJ for another make was to go to a bigger vehicle
> that had better cargo capacity, partly so I didn't have to throw
> everything up top. (I still want a Rubicon Unlimited tho....)
>
>
>
>
> John Davies
> http://home.comcast.net/~johnedavies/
> '96 Lexus LX450
> '00 Audi A4 1.8T quattro
> Spokane WA USA
a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
out of the vehicle.
Norm
"John Davies" <saab95aerowagon@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aci4b0102lcj1esjjhduf4e5ihmkts4qr2@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 24 May 2004 16:31:25 GMT, "Norm & Debbie"
> <nwpars@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
> >Thanks John! Are roof cargo carriers and expedition racks that same? I
> >have looked at some aluminum types. What do you think about them? It is
> >not a trail only rig.
>
> I think there is some confusion in terminology. I see a cargo carrier
> as being a temporary rack, like the Yakima Loadwarrior or Megawarrior.
> They aren't intended to be permanent, tho many people leave them
> attached all the time. They clamp to crossbars, often to the factory
> (weak) rack itself. They tend to be smaller than an expedition rack
> with a load rating of maybe a couple of hundred pounds. The cargo
> racks aren't really intended to carry tires, cans of gas and other
> really heavy stuff.
>
> Expedition racks are serious hardware which often extend the full
> length of the roof and from gutter to gutter. Some are rated at 300 or
> even 500 pounds capacity, tho the vehicle suspension and terrain
> really determines that limit.
>
> An aluminum expedition rack would help a little in terms of
> top-heaviness - maybe 30 or 40 pounds - but by the time you get it
> loaded, you won't see any significant difference. The finish would be
> more durable, but the wind resistance is going to remain.
>
> Oh, one other thing. Any heavy load on the roof drastically increases
> the risk of rollover. SUVs are inherently more susceptible to this due
> to their high stance. If you miss a turn or are lax and let the truck
> drift off the road and clip a guard rail, the truck trips over its
> tires and rolls rather than spinning out. The extra stuff up top means
> you have to be very vigilent about curves and unfamiliar roads.
> Emergency maeuvers are also affected, so you need to take extra care
> in traffic.
>
> My own opinion is that an expedition rack and lots of gear does NOT
> belong on a truck primarily driven by the wife. I may be willing to
> take the risks, but I certainly don't expect my other half to do so,
> unless she specifically asks.
>
> I hope this helped. I know this is a Jeep-only newsgroup, but one
> reason I sold my XJ for another make was to go to a bigger vehicle
> that had better cargo capacity, partly so I didn't have to throw
> everything up top. (I still want a Rubicon Unlimited tho....)
>
>
>
>
> John Davies
> http://home.comcast.net/~johnedavies/
> '96 Lexus LX450
> '00 Audi A4 1.8T quattro
> Spokane WA USA
05-24-2004, 03:38 PM
#25
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Roof Cargo Carriers
John, thanks again! You've cleared up some questions for me. This would be
a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
out of the vehicle.
Norm
"John Davies" <saab95aerowagon@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aci4b0102lcj1esjjhduf4e5ihmkts4qr2@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 24 May 2004 16:31:25 GMT, "Norm & Debbie"
> <nwpars@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
> >Thanks John! Are roof cargo carriers and expedition racks that same? I
> >have looked at some aluminum types. What do you think about them? It is
> >not a trail only rig.
>
> I think there is some confusion in terminology. I see a cargo carrier
> as being a temporary rack, like the Yakima Loadwarrior or Megawarrior.
> They aren't intended to be permanent, tho many people leave them
> attached all the time. They clamp to crossbars, often to the factory
> (weak) rack itself. They tend to be smaller than an expedition rack
> with a load rating of maybe a couple of hundred pounds. The cargo
> racks aren't really intended to carry tires, cans of gas and other
> really heavy stuff.
>
> Expedition racks are serious hardware which often extend the full
> length of the roof and from gutter to gutter. Some are rated at 300 or
> even 500 pounds capacity, tho the vehicle suspension and terrain
> really determines that limit.
>
> An aluminum expedition rack would help a little in terms of
> top-heaviness - maybe 30 or 40 pounds - but by the time you get it
> loaded, you won't see any significant difference. The finish would be
> more durable, but the wind resistance is going to remain.
>
> Oh, one other thing. Any heavy load on the roof drastically increases
> the risk of rollover. SUVs are inherently more susceptible to this due
> to their high stance. If you miss a turn or are lax and let the truck
> drift off the road and clip a guard rail, the truck trips over its
> tires and rolls rather than spinning out. The extra stuff up top means
> you have to be very vigilent about curves and unfamiliar roads.
> Emergency maeuvers are also affected, so you need to take extra care
> in traffic.
>
> My own opinion is that an expedition rack and lots of gear does NOT
> belong on a truck primarily driven by the wife. I may be willing to
> take the risks, but I certainly don't expect my other half to do so,
> unless she specifically asks.
>
> I hope this helped. I know this is a Jeep-only newsgroup, but one
> reason I sold my XJ for another make was to go to a bigger vehicle
> that had better cargo capacity, partly so I didn't have to throw
> everything up top. (I still want a Rubicon Unlimited tho....)
>
>
>
>
> John Davies
> http://home.comcast.net/~johnedavies/
> '96 Lexus LX450
> '00 Audi A4 1.8T quattro
> Spokane WA USA
a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
out of the vehicle.
Norm
"John Davies" <saab95aerowagon@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aci4b0102lcj1esjjhduf4e5ihmkts4qr2@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 24 May 2004 16:31:25 GMT, "Norm & Debbie"
> <nwpars@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
> >Thanks John! Are roof cargo carriers and expedition racks that same? I
> >have looked at some aluminum types. What do you think about them? It is
> >not a trail only rig.
>
> I think there is some confusion in terminology. I see a cargo carrier
> as being a temporary rack, like the Yakima Loadwarrior or Megawarrior.
> They aren't intended to be permanent, tho many people leave them
> attached all the time. They clamp to crossbars, often to the factory
> (weak) rack itself. They tend to be smaller than an expedition rack
> with a load rating of maybe a couple of hundred pounds. The cargo
> racks aren't really intended to carry tires, cans of gas and other
> really heavy stuff.
>
> Expedition racks are serious hardware which often extend the full
> length of the roof and from gutter to gutter. Some are rated at 300 or
> even 500 pounds capacity, tho the vehicle suspension and terrain
> really determines that limit.
>
> An aluminum expedition rack would help a little in terms of
> top-heaviness - maybe 30 or 40 pounds - but by the time you get it
> loaded, you won't see any significant difference. The finish would be
> more durable, but the wind resistance is going to remain.
>
> Oh, one other thing. Any heavy load on the roof drastically increases
> the risk of rollover. SUVs are inherently more susceptible to this due
> to their high stance. If you miss a turn or are lax and let the truck
> drift off the road and clip a guard rail, the truck trips over its
> tires and rolls rather than spinning out. The extra stuff up top means
> you have to be very vigilent about curves and unfamiliar roads.
> Emergency maeuvers are also affected, so you need to take extra care
> in traffic.
>
> My own opinion is that an expedition rack and lots of gear does NOT
> belong on a truck primarily driven by the wife. I may be willing to
> take the risks, but I certainly don't expect my other half to do so,
> unless she specifically asks.
>
> I hope this helped. I know this is a Jeep-only newsgroup, but one
> reason I sold my XJ for another make was to go to a bigger vehicle
> that had better cargo capacity, partly so I didn't have to throw
> everything up top. (I still want a Rubicon Unlimited tho....)
>
>
>
>
> John Davies
> http://home.comcast.net/~johnedavies/
> '96 Lexus LX450
> '00 Audi A4 1.8T quattro
> Spokane WA USA
05-24-2004, 04:31 PM
#26
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Roof Cargo Carriers
Remember anything you put up there will weigh five times more in
stored kinetic energy, than inside, screwing up your center of gravity:
http://members.***.net/hedstroms/roll5.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Norm & Debbie wrote:
>
> John, thanks again! You've cleared up some questions for me. This would be
> a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
> Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
> out of the vehicle.
>
> Norm
stored kinetic energy, than inside, screwing up your center of gravity:
http://members.***.net/hedstroms/roll5.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Norm & Debbie wrote:
>
> John, thanks again! You've cleared up some questions for me. This would be
> a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
> Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
> out of the vehicle.
>
> Norm
05-24-2004, 04:31 PM
#27
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Roof Cargo Carriers
Remember anything you put up there will weigh five times more in
stored kinetic energy, than inside, screwing up your center of gravity:
http://members.***.net/hedstroms/roll5.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Norm & Debbie wrote:
>
> John, thanks again! You've cleared up some questions for me. This would be
> a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
> Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
> out of the vehicle.
>
> Norm
stored kinetic energy, than inside, screwing up your center of gravity:
http://members.***.net/hedstroms/roll5.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Norm & Debbie wrote:
>
> John, thanks again! You've cleared up some questions for me. This would be
> a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
> Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
> out of the vehicle.
>
> Norm
05-24-2004, 04:31 PM
#28
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Roof Cargo Carriers
Remember anything you put up there will weigh five times more in
stored kinetic energy, than inside, screwing up your center of gravity:
http://members.***.net/hedstroms/roll5.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Norm & Debbie wrote:
>
> John, thanks again! You've cleared up some questions for me. This would be
> a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
> Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
> out of the vehicle.
>
> Norm
stored kinetic energy, than inside, screwing up your center of gravity:
http://members.***.net/hedstroms/roll5.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Norm & Debbie wrote:
>
> John, thanks again! You've cleared up some questions for me. This would be
> a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
> Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
> out of the vehicle.
>
> Norm
05-24-2004, 04:31 PM
#29
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Roof Cargo Carriers
Remember anything you put up there will weigh five times more in
stored kinetic energy, than inside, screwing up your center of gravity:
http://members.***.net/hedstroms/roll5.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Norm & Debbie wrote:
>
> John, thanks again! You've cleared up some questions for me. This would be
> a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
> Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
> out of the vehicle.
>
> Norm
stored kinetic energy, than inside, screwing up your center of gravity:
http://members.***.net/hedstroms/roll5.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Norm & Debbie wrote:
>
> John, thanks again! You've cleared up some questions for me. This would be
> a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
> Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to get
> out of the vehicle.
>
> Norm
05-24-2004, 05:40 PM
#30
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Roof Cargo Carriers
But, due to lack of a trunk, you can't stash your potential projectiles for
safe keeping (or safety in case of crash)...I'd rather it on the roof so
that it flies off and hits the ****** that cut me off! ;)
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:40B25BA0.1D622C4F@***.net...
> Remember anything you put up there will weigh five times more in
> stored kinetic energy, than inside, screwing up your center of gravity:
> http://members.***.net/hedstroms/roll5.jpg
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Norm & Debbie wrote:
> >
> > John, thanks again! You've cleared up some questions for me. This
would be
> > a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
> > Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to
get
> > out of the vehicle.
> >
> > Norm
safe keeping (or safety in case of crash)...I'd rather it on the roof so
that it flies off and hits the ****** that cut me off! ;)
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:40B25BA0.1D622C4F@***.net...
> Remember anything you put up there will weigh five times more in
> stored kinetic energy, than inside, screwing up your center of gravity:
> http://members.***.net/hedstroms/roll5.jpg
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Norm & Debbie wrote:
> >
> > John, thanks again! You've cleared up some questions for me. This
would be
> > a permanent installation that would supplant the factory roo rack.
> > Primarily we would haul the spare tire (31x10.50x15) & wheel on it to
get
> > out of the vehicle.
> >
> > Norm