Roof Rack or Cargo box?

Well, I got the answer to the bowed rack question and I'm not sure I'm
all that happy with the answer.

However, on the plus side, this rep did say to forget the idea of the
shorter box and go with either their Cascade 1700 or Evolution 1800
($379 versus $469).

Both seem up to the job and both seem simple enough to remove if
desired. Of course the rep touted the aerodynamic design of the
Evolution as being wind-tunnel tested but then when I said, "So then
how much does it actually impact the gas mileage?" the response was
that they don't have that data which then leads me to believe the data
must not be that impressive or else they would have it. My guess is it
does make a difference but not a noticeable one.

On the curved bar issue, her comment was that it doesn't matter, that
the ridges under the box help alleviate that and that the factory rack
will nearly flatten under load. I'm picturing all this outward
pressure under load and that seems a bit scary.

We have a dealer here that carries Thule, Yakima and Barrecrafters
including having most of them in stock and, better yet, they do free
installation so their offer I think I'll take. They basically said,
"Drive on in here and we'll go over the models hands-on in the store,
take it out to the van and see if it really would benefit from a
better rack." Sounds good to me.

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:56:43 -0400, Rich Heimlich
wrote:

Well, I got the answer to the bowed rack question and I'm not sure I'm
all that happy with the answer.

However, on the plus side, this rep did say to forget the idea of the
shorter box and go with either their Cascade 1700 or Evolution 1800
($379 versus $469).

Both seem up to the job and both seem simple enough to remove if
desired. Of course the rep touted the aerodynamic design of the
Evolution as being wind-tunnel tested but then when I said, "So then
how much does it actually impact the gas mileage?" the response was
that they don't have that data which then leads me to believe the data
must not be that impressive or else they would have it. My guess is it
does make a difference but not a noticeable one.

On the curved bar issue, her comment was that it doesn't matter, that
the ridges under the box help alleviate that and that the factory rack
will nearly flatten under load. I'm picturing all this outward
pressure under load and that seems a bit scary.

We have a dealer here that carries Thule, Yakima and Barrecrafters
including having most of them in stock and, better yet, they do free
installation so their offer I think I'll take. They basically said,
"Drive on in here and we'll go over the models hands-on in the store,
take it out to the van and see if it really would benefit from a
better rack." Sounds good to me.

Y'know, if you're dropping that much on the box, would the additional
cost to get the Thule or Yak crossbars and feet be that high? It
might be worth it; I know from experience that the Thule bars can
carry a LOT of weight, presumably much more than the van
manufacturer's rack.

bw

"Rich Heimlich" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:56:14 -0500, bdubya
wrote:

Did they explain the "wind problem"? I have a hard time picturing it

They talked about it potentially having a "flutter" problem and since
it will be extended past the front, we can't use their "ferring" (not
sure that's how you spell it) to help it out.

They call it flutter and I call it wobble. What ever it's called, when
you're traveling 700 miles and you realize you have a flutter problem and
many, many miles left to travel - you begin to wonder just how long the
stock rack can flutter before the whole damn thing fails and you lose your
box and everything it in on the interstate, thus causing a horrific accident
and loss of life. That was not a good feeling and I upgraded as soon as I
got home. Now, I don't have a size problem as my 1800 fits easily over the
top of my Expedition in a very nice spot - back enough to be out of the wind
and forward enough to not hit the back door when it's all the up. Note that
this sweet spot was not attainable with the stock rack as the front bar was
not adjustable. However, even if I had the box too far forward now - it
would still not flutter with the upgraded rack system. It was not the box
that fluttered, it was the cheap stock rack bars - they are weak.

Your experience may differ.
--
Marty

Rich Heimlich wrote:
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:59:31 -0700, lal_truckee
wrote:


180cm is awfully short. What are you going to do when ski lengths swing
back to longer in a couple of years?


Well, I know that the skis I just bought this year are not going to
get replaced simply because current thinking might change back to
longer skis.

It's not that - it's that these boxes are an investment that will last
longer than your car, and certainly longer than your next two-three
pairs of skis; skis last about 100 days rule of thumb, so as you ski
more you might find you need new skis every couple of years just because
they're breaking down - then you are somewhat dependent on the
variations in design philosophy. BTW, box cross-section will influence
how they drive - length will not, except in some extreme cross-wind
situations.

I'll ski on these until I feel like I'm being held back
by them.

I hope it doesn't discourage you, but given your self-described
experience level you should feel like you're being held back along about
January 2. Improvement comes fast as you start to lay miles down.


My Thule box takes longer skis - up to my downhill race 215cm and the


Which one do you have? I mentioned the 1800 and the rep basically
talked me out of it saying it's really too tall and bulky.

Don't remember. It's black. Does that help? chagrin

"AstroPax" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:04:51 -0500, bdubya
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:58:17 -0400, Rich Heimlich
wrote:

(snipped)

What started out as a perceived purchase of about $150 has turned into
a major investment.

You get used to that after a while. Welcome to the world of skiing.

You think skiing is bad? Try photography!

A co-worker is into photography. He buys a new camera without wife
approval - it's fairly expensive, but he got a good deal. She's really
****ed about the cash for the new camera. Next thing I know, their building
a new home. There was NO discussion of a new home before the whole camera
incident. So, he got his $1000 camera, she gets her $300K+++ new home. The
best part is, they work together - same building, same floor. He gets away
with nothing! We make sure of it. :-)
--
Marty

"Rich Heimlich" wrote in message
...
Well, one thing more I need to call these guys about. Both claim that
their boxes will work just fine on the factory rack but I don't get
it. Unless my vision is completely hosed, the factory rack crossbeams
are NOT flat--they're curved (higher at the center than at the ends).
I can certainly imagine that the clamps could reach down to the lower
portion of the crossbars but wouldn't that essentially put a lot of
strain on the center of the box itself? Most factory racks I've seen
on any vehicle are curved this way.

Yes it will work - but not as well as the upgrade to 1/4" (I think it's
1/4") thick flat square bars from Thule or whatever system you go with. My
stock bars are also curved and have a wing shape, which worked fine with the
Thule clamp system. However, these stock bowed wing shaped bars are thin
and flimsy. If you cannot get your box in the "perfect" spot over you van,
you will experience that flutter. You do not want flutter.
--
Marty

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 10:56:55 -0500, "Marty" wrote:

would still not flutter with the upgraded rack system. It was not the box
that fluttered, it was the cheap stock rack bars - they are weak.

Your experience may differ.

I'm getting mixed info on the Expedition. What I found says it
supports up to 50 pounds. If that's accurate, I may be okay, but I'm
likely not about to risk it.

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:58:19 -0700, lal_truckee
wrote:

they're breaking down - then you are somewhat dependent on the
variations in design philosophy. BTW, box cross-section will influence
how they drive - length will not, except in some extreme cross-wind
situations.

Good point. I've decided to push for a 90"+ box.

I hope it doesn't discourage you, but given your self-described
experience level you should feel like you're being held back along about
January 2. Improvement comes fast as you start to lay miles down.

Rats! I like my skis (K2 Axis-X)

Don't remember. It's black. Does that help? chagrin

hahah. Not really.

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:54:38 -0500, bdubya
wrote:

Y'know, if you're dropping that much on the box, would the additional
cost to get the Thule or Yak crossbars and feet be that high? It

I would have thought not, but it costs about $200 more.

might be worth it; I know from experience that the Thule bars can
carry a LOT of weight, presumably much more than the van
manufacturer's rack.

I'm very much leaning towards not risking it and just getting the
3rd-party rack.

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 16:16:43 -0400, Rich Heimlich
wrote:

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:54:38 -0500, bdubya
wrote:

Y'know, if you're dropping that much on the box, would the additional
cost to get the Thule or Yak crossbars and feet be that high? It

I would have thought not, but it costs about $200 more.

might be worth it; I know from experience that the Thule bars can
carry a LOT of weight, presumably much more than the van
manufacturer's rack.

I'm very much leaning towards not risking it and just getting the
3rd-party rack.

I would strongly recommend it. This thread's getting a little
tangled, but you're looking at the Expedition, with a rack rated for
50 lbs, and "wobble" is a concern? DEFINITELY get the crossbars to
match your box. With those same Thule bars I mentioned, I used to
strap a 12' windsurfer and associated gear onto the car and travel 300
miles at speeds in the 75-85 MPH range, and the whole package
(considerably less higher drag than the box) didn't budge at all.

I always thought those factory roof racks were more of a decorative
item anyway.

bw