Forum search & shortcuts

A quick poll - Carr...
 

[Closed] A quick poll - Carrying bikes on cars

Posts: 23384
Full Member
Topic starter
 
[#2246523]

Please help out with an office debate.

a) Roof mounted

b) Tailgate rack mounted

c) Towing ball mounted.

Pros and cons please.

I'm going for a) Access to boot, no overhang, doesn't "bounce" like a strap mounted tail gate rack and good rear visibility.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:41 pm
Posts: 271
Free Member
 

C. I like being able to see them, and the fact that the rack is actuall clamped to something.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:43 pm
 ben
Posts: 81
Free Member
 

A. Out of the way, still have access to the boot.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:45 pm
Posts: 9110
Free Member
 

No chance. Always in the boot.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:46 pm
Posts: 251
Full Member
 

c) - I've come too close to height restrictors in car parks with option a) to make me comfortable with it as a long term solution.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:47 pm
Posts: 23384
Full Member
Topic starter
 

In the boot is not an option.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:47 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

a)


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:49 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

On roof for me, no problem what so ever use quality rack and you'll be fine.

I've used Thule ones for years carrying bikes all over the place and no issues.

I would prefer a tow bar mounted rack but as I have a company car they won't let me fit one so on top they go.

As andrewh I would love a van to use for biking but that would be a luxury that's miles off


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:49 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:49 pm
Posts: 4972
Full Member
 

a, out of the way , quick n easy and still get in the boot .
c, never , prob the most common road accident is a rear ender .


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:51 pm
Posts: 2862
Full Member
 

C. much more stable and safe. Plus I can still get in the boot too.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:52 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Until we got the 110, on the roof of the BM.

So easy to fit and nice and secure too.
No issues with not seeing the bike - we have a panoramic (glass) sunroof!


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:53 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

a)

Did

b)

for many a year

recently got

a)

and soooo much easier and quicker


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:54 pm
Posts: 5942
Full Member
 

prob the most common road accident is a rear ender

= New bike!

C for me, but in reality always in the boot.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:54 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

a) For reasons stated above.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:54 pm
Posts: 11619
Full Member
 

A as I don't have a towball and I have found it to be more secure than a boot-mounted rack.

Prefer the bike inside though but this isn't really practical in my car if more than 2 people and 2 bikes need to go.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:56 pm
Posts: 8915
Free Member
 

A for me too. The only downside I have found is the decrease in fuel economy.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 2:58 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

C. I've used Thule models for a few years with no problems and they can tilt for boot access.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:00 pm
Posts: 9110
Free Member
 

I'm going for a) Access to boot, no overhang, doesn't "bounce" like a strap mounted tail gate rack and good rear visibility.

More wind resitance/drag, worse fuel ecomonomy. On wet weather days you may as well just blast all your bearings with a jet wash until they have no grease left. Momentary lapse on concentration with overhead barriers/trees/multi-storeys. Bikes still on display when parked.

Any rear-mounted system all of the above (although drag less bad and a bit more room for overhead stuff) plus danger from rear-end shunt/ parking prang.

If you are sure the boot really isn't an option get a roof box instead of a bike rack, put the stuff from the boot in their and put the bike in the boot.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:00 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

A). Seen bikes fall off rear mounted cariers due to straps coming un-done. Not good.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:01 pm
 mc2
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

A) for me too but would rather have C) if I didn't have a company car.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:02 pm
Posts: 2
Full Member
 

In the boot for me.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:03 pm
Posts: 17863
Full Member
 

Always used d) - bike in car, until my current car was sold to me with roof bars. Bought some roof carriers (a) and off I went. Wahoo!

- Soon found that taking the carriers on & off was a pfaff & I didn't want to leave them on, as fuel economy matters when doing 600 miles + per week.
- Also found that parts of my bike I'd never had an issue with before started showing signs of corrosion - QR skewers, stem bolts etc. I guess from being stuck in the full blast of the elements at 70mph.
- Fuel economy also suffered. Normal run to Bristol for weekend at sister's - average fuel economy nudging 60mpg. Holiday in Cornwall with both bikes on roof, fuel economy down to about 46mpg....

So, went back to d) - putting bike in car, unless I have to take mine & her indoors, then the carriers go back on.

I think with my next car I'd be tempted to get a tow ball & one of those carriers that either slides or drops out of the way to allow boot access.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:05 pm
Posts: 2197
Free Member
 

C but in the boot soon as the salt spray experienced by the toball mount rack is seriously trashing my bike 👿


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:06 pm
Posts: 7637
Full Member
 

A) Pros: Nice and secure, access to boot
Cons: Fuel economy, esp when "pressing on" I got 19mpg on the way back from Drumlanrig one day 😯


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:12 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I've had roof mounted carriers for around three years. Done a lot of UK driving and trips to and from Les Gets/Morzine. The fuel economy thing is an issue but if there's you and a few mates going out generally we split the fuel costs anyway. My Oct Est does around 47-49 mpg, with 3 bikes on the roof with people and kit it does 39-40 mpg so not the end of the world.

Getting back from a ride and putting the bikes straight on the roof and out of ther way is a good feature too, yes the car sometimes gets a bit dirty but even I (and anyone who knows me will maybe be shocked by this) don't mind this.

Security is an issue, but to be honest I don't feel safe leaving my bike anywhere, so I don't. Someone stays with the car if we go anywhere or its 'in sight'.

There is always the 'hit low things issue'. But i've seen enough people reverse into things/cars/people with toe bar mounted racks to realise that it just takes some considered driving to avoid this.

They all have there plus and minus points, but i'm pleased with what i got.

Hope this helps


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:15 pm
Posts: 2481
Free Member
 

Option C, plus I can access the boot.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:20 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

C


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:21 pm
Posts: 3854
Full Member
 

C. Most secure and highly visible. With tilt so you can get into the boot.
B. Cars aren't designed for B plus you usually cover the lights>
A. Although rear enders are the most common accident (hence risk with C), I've known too many people hit height restrictors. At least with a rear end accident you'll get money for the bikes.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:22 pm
Posts: 0
 

Can I vote for any as long as we made it! If I had to choose I would say tow ball though.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:25 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

A for me: Had Heckler and BigHit on roof with front wheels off mounted using 20mm forkup device.

Like the idea of C but not sure what the pendulum effect is on Subaru with big bikes and big consideration it was twice as expensive.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:26 pm
 j_me
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Option A
Don't have a tow ball, don't trust boot racks.
Would rather stick a manky bike on the roof than in the boot.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:28 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

b) always on the car. OK only because I don't really use the boot. Would like a better quality carrier tho - e.g. Saris Bones. I cable lock bike to the rear towing loop with a padlock. Use straps with a "cotton reel" that fits inside the tailgate, rather than the dodgy metal hooks that clamp over the edge (and can fall off). Very secure.

I have a solution for a) but the fuel consumption is high and my roof bars don't grip the gutters securely enough for my liking. Bars & carriers are also a pain in the butt to remove. No easy way to secure apart from looping a cable lock through multiple bikes together when parked.

c) is a great option, but more expensive


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:29 pm
Posts: 0
 

C-- same reasons as others have posted. I have a Raxter Racks 4- bike version and a Honda Ridgeline truck. I wanted a Twinny Load rack but came across this one for a good deal. Sure, I can get hit from the rear by another driver (a good chance of that happening here in the USA) but that's okay because they'll just buy me a new bike.

Hitch mounted also allows me to have full unrestricted access to the truck bed. If I need to tow something, I have a set up that allows me to mount the bikes in the bed while the trailer is hooked up or I can slide 'em in the back of the truck cab, if there's not 4-5 people with me.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:29 pm
Posts: 4405
Free Member
 

The only thing that puts me off C is its not viable to leave it on all the time (I think)


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:30 pm
Posts: 251
Full Member
 

[i]not sure what the pendulum effect is on Subaru with big bikes[/i]

as long as you don't exceed the 'nose weight' limit of the towball you'll be fine.

Having towed 1300kg of caravan all over the country puting 70kg of rack and bikes on the back isn't a great concern...


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:30 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I nearly always carried mine in the boot when I had a hatchback but the current car doesn't have room and the only real place for them is on the roof. The Thule holders I'm using seem very good and more secure than the tailgate mount I've used in the past.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:31 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

c (I've carried four adult bikes on the rack with no major handling problem (diesel focus estate)(and yes I did check weights!)
plus points: ease of loading bikes, stable, seems to have less effect on mpg than roof, I regard the rack as an extra crumple zone with extra visibility-enhancing lights on it

minus points for: expensive if you have tilt to get at the boot but I just get access through the car by tilting the seats instead


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:33 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

1, In the van

2, In the car boot/backseats

3, Rack on the back (tailgate mounted)


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:36 pm
Posts: 4405
Free Member
 

One problem with roof racks apart from fuel consumption is that dirt falls onto your car.

However a roof rack can be used for many other applications


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:39 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

One problem with roof racks apart from fuel consumption is that dirt falls onto your car

This is an annoyance, not a problem.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:42 pm
Posts: 3127
Full Member
 

C for me. I've tried every other method and now will only use towbar mounted racks when with the car.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:44 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

A roof mounted rack; BUT this is very much a second preference to having bike in back of estate car be bike whole or partially disassembled , ie front wheel off

As for dirt falling on car; depends on your car upkeep, a wash a year is OK and if it rains enough teh dirt washes off teh roof 🙂


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:49 pm
Posts: 95
Free Member
 

used to be b. but I never felt secure with this method, then I got a. and used for a while until I dropped one. I aslo felt a bit restricted with the height.

Now d. in the car everytime.


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 3:51 pm
Posts: 0
 

[i]The only thing that puts me off C is its not viable to leave it on all the time (I think)[/i]

The only time I take my hitch rack off is when I'm towing a trailer, which is only a few days a year. My rack folds up pretty tight to the truck.

See here for pics.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/49552511@N00/sets/72157625513819518/


 
Posted : 02/12/2010 4:01 pm
Page 1 / 2