"Mark Leuck" <[email hidden]> wrote>
Quoted message said:"Jeff Wills" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
Quoted message said:"Jon Meinecke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
Quoted message said:[...] The 15 passenger vans
are reportedly more susceptible to roll-over. Adding five
bike to the top, even if it were practical could exacerbate
that problem.
Uh, no... the extended-van rollover susceptibility is *real*, but only
when the 15-passenger vans are loaded to capacity. When the
passenger load is less (the OP said 7 people maximum), they're no more
dangerous than standard-length vans.
Yes, loading is a large issue. SUVs and full size vans are
reportedly more likely in general to be involved in roll-over
accidents than lower profile cars. The fact that they may be
driven by people who don't fully appreciate the handling
differences of such vehicles (particularly in emergency
situations) is a potentially large factor.
So yes, adding 5 bikes may have only an incremental effect
on handling. As I said, "could exacerbate"...
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Also, I can't see 200 pounds of bikes causing more problems
than 200 pounds of passenger.
The laws of physics? %^) Leverage.
Quoted message said:
200 pounds worth of bikes on the roof would cause more problems than 200
pounds of passengers in the cab due to a higher center of gravity although
how much I don't know
As Mark points out, adding weight well above center of gravity
will have a proportionately larger effect than weight closer to the
ground. Our old church vans had luggage racks on the top. The
new ones do not. I suspect this change was at least partially
related to safety concerns.
Quoted message said:
I'd be more concerned about low bridges tho
Yes. And concern for my back for lifting bikes onto
and off of the top.
From my experience with minivans, those bikes on top will have
*certain* effect on fuel economy. Perhaps more than a
lightweight trailer.
Jon Meinecke