"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