looking for ski/bike roof rack help

[Monique Y. Herm]

So, I got this new WRX wagon a couple of weeks ago. I have a
good idea of what I want to do, but not how to do it.
Yakima's website has a cool selection tool, but I want to
make sure I buy exactly what I need and no more -- these
parts are expensive!

I already have a Yakima big powderhound, which is a six-wide
ski rack. What I'd like to do is get extra-wide crossbars
and put a steelhead bike mount on either side of the ski
rack. (To save money, I could possibly steal the bike mounts
from Eric's car.) And, of course, it all needs lock cores.

The car came from the factory with standard-length crossbars
already attached to the rails.

So, here are my questions:

1) I've heard that the spoiler on the hatch door can
interfere with the rack when you lift the door. Anyone
have experience/advice about that? Will I be able to get
into the back of my car with a rack on the top? With
stuff on the rack?

2) How long should my crossbars be to be roomy enough for
the ski rack and two bike mounts? Yakima lists 48", 58",
66", and 78" crossbars. I seem to remember Eric saying
something about how his fairing attachment gets in the
way of putting all three on the shortest bars; I don't
know yet if I'll want a fairing.

3) Should I mount the Yakima crossbars on top of the
existing crossbars, or should I remove the existing
crossbars? It seems awfully kludgy to have two layers
of crossbars, but apparently some people use it that
way. I've been told the factory crossbars are pretty
easy to remove.

4) (Related to three.) Yakima's site seems to indicate that
all their clips mount into the door frame, which I'd like
to avoid if at all possible. I mean, I already have the
rails -- why should I have to stick things in the door?
Anyone have any arrangements that don't require clipping
into the door?

5) (Also related to three, I think.) I'd like an arrangement
where the rack is deep enough to accomodate ski bindings
on the bottom as well as the top. How do I best go about
doing that?

6) Anything I haven't thought of?

I apologize for posting rather than going through the trial
and error myself. I know that these are awfully specific
questions. I guess I'm hoping that someone has had need for
this exact setup and can share their insight.

--
monique

 

[Penny S]

Monique Y. Herman ran this through spell check:> I apologize
for posting rather than going through the trial and error
> myself. I know that these are awfully specific questions.
> I guess I'm hoping that someone has had need for this
> exact setup and can share their insight.

who's your local Yakima dealer? I go to the mgear.com store,
and we look uup the model and parts I have/need, and then we
double check everyting out in the parking lot.

penny

 

[Monique Y. Herm]

On 2004-03-13, Penny S penned:
> Monique Y. Herman ran this through spell check:> I
> apologize for posting rather than going through the trial
> and error
>> myself. I know that these are awfully specific questions.
>> I guess I'm hoping that someone has had need for this
>> exact setup and can share their insight.
>
>
> who's your local Yakima dealer? I go to the mgear.com
> store, and we look uup the model and parts I have/need,
> and then we double check everyting out in the parking lot.
>

I know the REI in Boulder carries Yakima, but I don't really
think of them as that kind of service. OTOH, I get the
member's refund at the end of the year ...

It looks like there are about 400,000 places in the area
that sell Yakima. One of them probably has the kind of
service you're describing.

No mgear.com, though. Looks like you have the good luck to
live near their only bricks-n-mortar store.

--
monique

 

[Shawn Curry]

Monique Y. Herman wrote:

> So, I got this new WRX wagon a couple of weeks ago. I have
> a good idea of what I want to do, but not how to do it.
> Yakima's website has a cool selection tool, but I want to
> make sure I buy exactly what I need and no more -- these
> parts are expensive!
>

>snip

>
> 2) How long should my crossbars be to be roomy enough for
> the ski rack and two bike mounts? Yakima lists 48",
> 58", 66", and 78" crossbars. I seem to remember Eric
> saying something about how his fairing attachment gets
> in the way of putting all three on the shortest bars; I
> don't know yet if I'll want a fairing.

See if you can fit everything on the 48". You'll be banging
your head with the 58" or longer. May be worth it.

>
> 3) Should I mount the Yakima crossbars on top of the
> existing crossbars, or should I remove the existing
> crossbars? It seems awfully kludgy to have two layers
> of crossbars, but apparently some people use it that
> way. I've been told the factory crossbars are pretty
> easy to remove.

I took the factory rack crossbars off of my Legacy. Looks
better (boy that's relative, considering its a maroon Legacy-
I got it cheap) Easy to do.
>
> 4) (Related to three.) Yakima's site seems to indicate
> that all their clips mount into the door frame, which
> I'd like to avoid if at all possible. I mean, I already
> have the rails -- why should I have to stick things in
> the door? Anyone have any arrangements that don't
> require clipping into the door?

Check if the "Lowrider" towers fit your factory rack-fits
Legacys (including 2004 I checked their site).
>
> 5) (Also related to three, I think.) I'd like an
> arrangement where the rack is deep enough to accomodate
> ski bindings on the bottom as well as the top. How do I
> best go about doing that?

Low rider plus factory rack still jacks things up a lot. I
think Yak makes lifters for their racks too.
>
> 6) Anything I haven't thought of?

Mightymounts hook directly to the factory rack.

>
> I apologize for posting rather than going through the
> trial and error myself. I know that these are awfully
> specific questions. I guess I'm hoping that someone has
> had need for this exact setup and can share their insight.

 

[Monique Y. Herm]

On 2004-03-13, Doki penned:
>
>
> Why not just take the wheels off and chuck the bikes in
> the boot (trunk)? Bike racks do very bad things to your
> cars aerodynamics, and it's not like the back of a
> Subaru's small. I get my bike the back of a Ka, which is
> unimaginably small for an American . The other option
> would be to get a tow bar mounted bike rack. Obviously
> that'll get in the way of the hatch, but you don't have
> the problem of getting a bike on top of the car.

What's a Ka?

Sure, there's room in the trunk, but I'd rather not run the
risk of getting bike grease ground into a brand-new
interior, and I also am not sure about how to stack bikes
such that the pedals, gears, chain, etc don't interact in
possibly unfortunate ways. I like being able to throw the
bike in the back, but I also like the option of *not* doing
so. In any case, I want a ski rack anyway so that I can take
four people at once, so I might as well do the bike mounts
as well. Getting the bike onto the roof won't be a problem
-- I've been managing to get my bike onto my s.o.'s Dodge
Intrepid (talk about a huge American car!) without too much
trouble, once I figured out the proper grip.

I really don't like rear racks -- they get in the way of the
trunk/hatch, as you said. They also don't necessarily fit
all bike models (my s.o.'s Y-frame, for example, is
problematic), and I've heard it's a lot harder to lock the
bikes down than it is to do so on a roof rack.

--
monique

 

[Corvus Corvax]

"Doki" <[email protected]> wrote
>
> I get my bike the back of a Ka, which is unimaginably
> small for an American .

Wow. Is it a folder? ;-)

I rented a Ka for a week in Scotland. I was amazed that the
thing could comfortably fit a 6'2" driver. The real comedy
came from distinguishing the difference between "Ka" and
"car" when spoken in a heavy Scot accent:

"So you drove a Ka here?"

"Um, of course. The little Ford out back."

"No, I mean a 'Ka' car"

"A ka ka?"

And so on. They quickly decided I was nice enough, but
obviously mildly retarded.

CC

 

[Doki]

Corvus Corvax wrote:
> "Doki" <[email protected]> wrote
>>
>> I get my bike the back of a Ka, which is unimaginably
>> small for an American .
>
> Wow. Is it a folder? ;-)

Fold the back seats of the car down, off with both wheels
and because of the mudguard, the seatpost. It's a bit of a
job, but no more than setting up a bike rack on the back
of the car.

> I rented a Ka for a week in Scotland. I was amazed that
> the thing could comfortably fit a 6'2" driver. The real
> comedy came from distinguishing the difference between
> "Ka" and "car" when spoken in a heavy Scot accent:

They'll do 110 on the speedo if you try hard enough too. If
you go round corners quickly and keep up your momentum you
can worry a BMW 330 .

> "So you drove a Ka here?"
>
> "Um, of course. The little Ford out back."
>
> "No, I mean a 'Ka' car"
>
> "A ka ka?"
>
> And so on. They quickly decided I was nice enough, but
> obviously mildly retarded.

Yep. Ford started out selling it as the Ka, but now they've
decided it's really pronounced K.A. .

 

[Doki]

Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> On 2004-03-13, Doki penned:
>>
>>
>> Why not just take the wheels off and chuck the bikes in
>> the boot (trunk)? Bike racks do very bad things to your
>> cars aerodynamics, and it's not like the back of a
>> Subaru's small. I get my bike the back of a Ka, which is
>> unimaginably small for an American . The other option
>> would be to get a tow bar mounted bike rack. Obviously
>> that'll get in the way of the hatch, but you don't have
>> the problem of getting a bike on top of the car.
>
> What's a Ka?

A pretty small Ford. 1.3L engine (79 cubic inches ),
weighs less than a tonne and it was the first "new edge"
Ford, it's probably still pretty odd looking even though
you've got the Focus over there. Look here for a picture:
www.zemancar.cz/images/ ford-ka.jpg.

> Sure, there's room in the trunk, but I'd rather not run
> the risk of getting bike grease ground into a brand-new
> interior, and I also am not sure about how to stack bikes
> such that the pedals, gears, chain, etc don't interact in
> possibly unfortunate ways.

If you can, get hold of a load box for the back, which will
stop you ruining the carpets etc.

> I like being able to throw the bike in the back, but I
> also like the option of *not* doing so. In any case, I
> want a ski rack anyway so that I can take four people at
> once, so I might as well do the bike mounts as well.
> Getting the bike onto the roof won't be a problem -- I've
> been managing to get my bike onto my s.o.'s Dodge
> Intrepid (talk about a huge American car!) without too
> much trouble, once I figured out the proper grip.

Fair enough. If you're driving a couple of hundred miles
you'll save a worthwhile amount of petrol or raise your top
speed by 20 or 30mph. I'd go for the extra speed .

> I really don't like rear racks -- they get in the way of
> the trunk/hatch, as you said. They also don't necessarily
> fit all bike models (my s.o.'s Y-frame, for example, is
> problematic), and I've heard it's a lot harder to lock the
> bikes down than it is to do so on a roof rack.

I reckon they're a pain in the **** too.

 

[Penny S]

Monique Y. Herman ran this through spell check:
> On 2004-03-13, Doki penned:
>
> I really don't like rear racks -- they get in the way of
> the trunk/hatch, as you said. They also don't necessarily
> fit all bike models (my s.o.'s Y-frame, for example, is
> problematic), and I've heard it's a lot harder to lock the
> bikes down than it is to do so on a roof rack.

I have both roof and rear racks.

I love the rear rack. I got it for $12 at a yard sale. I can
have it on the car, bikes loaded and bungeed in about 3
minutes, with no climbing and lifting. For close to town
rides, I think it's the answer.

Now, If I know I'm going to need to lock them, or I'm
driving more thant 10 miles, I deal with the roof rack.

Another advantage of a rear rack is that you can pull
into the garage without worrying about tearing the rack
off the car.

Penny

 

[Chris]

"Monique Y. Herman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> So, I got this new WRX wagon a couple of weeks ago. I have
> a good idea of what I want to do, but not how to do it.
> Yakima's website has a cool selection tool, but I want to
> make sure I buy exactly what I need and no more -- these
> parts are expensive!
>

> monique
>

If you're stuck on the Steelhead, get it, but I have to
vouch for the Raptor. Fits every downtube ever, and you
can leave the front wheel on...better for interior
cleanliness, and I just have a thing about fork mounts
(even though riding forces are the same on dropouts, I
just don't like it).

And, Penny was right: head to a store and look through the
Yakima fit guide, or, even better, talk to an experienced
salesdude/dudette. They always offer some advice/experience/clearance-
priced alternatives that make things work out real smooth.

So why the WRX? It's lots of fun, but when I went to get
one, I ended up with an Outback Wagon w/ Audio Package. Same
price, and it was bigger, which I like, and didn't feel as
"immature" inside as the WRX did (the extra insurance cost
of a turbo weighed on me, but not much). Yup, a 23-year-old
college guy opting out of a WRX. Go figure. Also, I threw
two Raptors on top the day I got the car. Then I put
stickers on the Raptor channels. Nice.

If you end up using the factory crossbars and need the
plastic adaptors that allow Yakima stuff to mount
(MightyMounts, I believe) I think I have like 5 or 6
floating around. Let me know, I'll send 'em to you.

Chris

 

[Corvus Corvax]

"Penny S" <[email protected]> wrote
>
> I love the rear rack. I got it for $12 at a yard sale. I
> can have it on the car, bikes loaded and bungeed in about
> 3 minutes, with no climbing and lifting.

Penny, dear, if you have to "climb" to put a bike on top
of your car,

CC

 

[Penny S]

Corvus Corvax ran this through spell check:
> "Penny S" <[email protected]> wrote
>>
>> I love the rear rack. I got it for $12 at a yard sale. I
>> can have it on the car, bikes loaded and bungeed in about
>> 3 minutes, with no climbing and lifting.
>
> Penny, dear, if you have to "climb" to put a bike on top
> of your car,

>
> CC

that would be hubby's exploder. I am assuming that when I
get the bike holder set up on the roof of the Subaru, that
should be manageable. at least I hope so. ;-)

Penny

 

[Penny S]

Corvus Corvax ran this through spell check:
> "Penny S" <[email protected]> wrote
>>
>> I love the rear rack. I got it for $12 at a yard sale. I
>> can have it on the car, bikes loaded and bungeed in about
>> 3 minutes, with no climbing and lifting.
>
> Penny, dear, if you have to "climb" to put a bike on top
> of your car,

>
> CC

penny

 

[Monique Y. Herm]

On 2004-03-14, Chris penned:
>
> "Monique Y. Herman" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message news:[email protected]...
>> So, I got this new WRX wagon a couple of weeks ago. I
>> have a good idea of what I want to do, but not how to do
>> it. Yakima's website has a cool selection tool, but I
>> want to make sure I buy exactly what I need and no more
>> -- these parts are expensive!
>>
>
>> monique
>>
>
> If you're stuck on the Steelhead, get it, but I have to
> vouch for the Raptor. Fits every downtube ever, and you
> can leave the front wheel on...better for interior
> cleanliness, and I just have a thing about fork mounts
> (even though riding forces are the same on dropouts, I
> just don't like it).

Doesn't fit Eric's Y-frame =/ Also, I'm wondering about how
much climbing I'd have to do to lock that thing properly.

One of the nice things about the Steelhead is that we
already have two on Eric's car; we could save money by just
moving them over.

Your suggestion prompted me to poke through the Yakima
offerings. I'm trying to figure out what the difference is
between the Viper and the Steelhead.

> And, Penny was right: head to a store and look through the
> Yakima fit guide, or, even better, talk to an experienced
> salesdude/dudette. They always offer some advice/experience/clearance-
> priced alternatives that make things work out real smooth.

Yeah; I just need a find a place I can trust first =)

> So why the WRX? It's lots of fun, but when I went to get
> one, I ended up with an Outback Wagon w/ Audio Package.
> Same price, and it was bigger, which I like, and didn't
> feel as "immature" inside as the WRX did (the extra
> insurance cost of a turbo weighed on me, but not much).
> Yup, a 23-year-old college guy opting out of a WRX. Go
> figure. Also, I threw two Raptors on top the day I got the
> car. Then I put stickers on the Raptor channels. Nice.

Stickers?

Hrm, why the WRX? A few things. It's super-fun. I've been
driving small cars for years, so while I definitely wanted
more room, I didn't want anything that felt big. The WRX
has a small-car feel to it and is pretty easy to park in
those tight Boulder spots. And I just plain like the look
of it better than the outback wagon. It was definitely an
emotional thing, guided by certain more practical desires
like trunk space and AWD and the capability of mounting
roof racks.

I'm not sure what you mean by the interior of the WRX
feeling "immature"; can you give me some examples? Maybe
it's just because my previous cars were a Probe and then a
Celica convertible. I traded in the fully-optioned
convertible, so I guess I should be missing something, but
I'm not. I have tons of headroom and visibility. The audio
controls are pretty easy. The only thing I'm hating is the
cupholders -- there's one that gets in the way of the stereo
and is completely ineffective at keeping my mochas from
spilling all over when driving over a speed bump; the other
one is right where my elbow needs to be when I shift.

Insurance was higher for me, but not ungodly. I also have
the advantage of the drop you get at 25, and I expect my
insurance to go down a bit more once I'm married at the end
of the month.

> If you end up using the factory crossbars and need the
> plastic adaptors that allow Yakima stuff to mount
> (MightyMounts, I believe) I think I have like 5 or 6
> floating around. Let me know, I'll send 'em to you.

Well, thank you very much! I'll have to figure it out. I'm
definitely not buying anything till I see where the county
taxes and the honeymoon expenses leave me.

--
monique

 

[Monique Y. Herm]

On 2004-03-14, Doki penned:
>
>
> Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>> What's a Ka?
>
> A pretty small Ford. 1.3L engine (79 cubic inches ),
> weighs less than a tonne and it was the first "new edge"
> Ford, it's probably still pretty odd looking even though
> you've got the Focus over there. Look here for a picture:
> www.zemancar.cz/images/ford-ka.jpg.

Cute! I don't think it's odd looking. It looks nice.

>> Sure, there's room in the trunk, but I'd rather not run
>> the risk of getting bike grease ground into a brand-new
>> interior, and I also am not sure about how to stack bikes
>> such that the pedals, gears, chain, etc don't interact in
>> possibly unfortunate ways.
>
> If you can, get hold of a load box for the back, which
> will stop you ruining the carpets etc.

I have that, but it doesn't help the backs of the seats,
which need to be folded down to make room for the bike. I am
planning on acquiring a tarp, though.

> Fair enough. If you're driving a couple of hundred miles
> you'll save a worthwhile amount of petrol or raise your
> top speed by 20 or 30mph. I'd go for the extra speed .

I don't need to be *anywhere* near this car's top speed.
Also, while I do care about fuel efficiency to some extent,
I'm under the impression that gas prices are much cheaper
here than in Europe. I'm paying under $2 for a gallon of
premium gas.

--
monique

 

[Doki]

Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> On 2004-03-14, Doki penned:
>>
>>
>> Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>>> What's a Ka?
>>
>> A pretty small Ford. 1.3L engine (79 cubic inches ),
>> weighs less than a tonne and it was the first "new edge"
>> Ford, it's probably still pretty odd looking even though
>> you've got the Focus over there. Look here for a picture:
>> www.zemancar.cz/images/ford-ka.jpg.
>
> Cute! I don't think it's odd looking. It looks nice.

So do, fortuneately. They looked very odd when they first
started making them in 96 though .

>> Fair enough. If you're driving a couple of hundred miles
>> you'll save a worthwhile amount of petrol or raise your
>> top speed by 20 or 30mph. I'd go for the extra speed .
>
> I don't need to be *anywhere* near this car's top speed.

I'd certainly enjoy going places at the car's top speed,
even if I didn't need to . They do 150 or so don't they?

> Also, while I do care about fuel efficiency to some
> extent, I'm under the impression that gas prices are much
> cheaper here than in Europe. I'm paying under $2 for a
> gallon of premium gas.

I'm paying something like $1 a litre, 4.4 litres to an
imperial gallon. I think US gallons are different. It won't
make much difference if you're driving around town, but if
you're driving at 60mph upwards it'll hit it a lot more. Not
got any figures but I imagine you'd be able to look them up
if you're bothered.

 

[P E T E F A G E]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 21:27:40 -0000, "Doki" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Why not just take the wheels off and chuck the bikes in the
>boot (trunk)? Bike racks do very bad things to your cars
>aerodynamics,

That is really dependent upon the aerodynamics of the
vehicle.

Roof racks don't have to have that great an impact, let
alone do "very bad things" to a vehicle's aerodynamics.

 

[Bomba]

On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 10:58:25 -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote:

> I don't need to be *anywhere* near this car's top speed.
> Also, while I do care about fuel efficiency to some
> extent, I'm under the impression that gas prices are much
> cheaper here than in Europe. I'm paying under $2 for a
> gallon of premium gas.

Another thing we get ripped off on...

Taking UK petrol price at 80p/l (low average), that equates
to about $6 per gallon. Even in Luxembourg, which has the
cheapest petrol prices in Western Europe, we still pay $4
per gallon.

 

[Monique Y. Herm]

On 2004-03-15, bomba penned:
> On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 10:58:25 -0700, Monique Y.
> Herman wrote:
>
>> I don't need to be *anywhere* near this car's top speed.
>> Also, while I do care about fuel efficiency to some
>> extent, I'm under the impression that gas prices are much
>> cheaper here than in Europe. I'm paying under $2 for a
>> gallon of premium gas.
>
> Another thing we get ripped off on...
>
> Taking UK petrol price at 80p/l (low average), that
> equates to about $6 per gallon. Even in Luxembourg, which
> has the cheapest petrol prices in Western Europe, we still
> pay $4 per gallon.

I just filled up. It was like $1.88 for premium gas. If
I'd gone for the regular gas it would've been more like
$1.60, I think.

--
monique

 

[S O R N I]

Monique Y. Herman wrote:

> I just filled up. It was like $1.88 for premium gas. If
> I'd gone for the regular gas it would've been more like
> $1.60, I think.

On behalf of Southern Californians, BITE US! (San Diego is
over $2.10 for Regular.)

Bill "of course, it IS sunny and 63 out" S.