Bicycle Rack Mishaps?

In article ,
"NYRides" wrote:

Does anybody know of any statistics regarding bicycles (on or off trunk/hood
racks) falling off automobiles while in transit?

Most responses have been anecdotal rather than statistical. This one is
no different, but it does provide an interesting counterpoint.

My brother was driving at freeway speed with a bike in a Yakima rack on
the roof. The bike detatched and landed in traffic. It was run over and
destroyed by following vehicles before my brother could get it out of
the roadway. On arriving home, my brother found that the rack had not
failed, but the front fork had. One leg of the fork had broken,
evidently due to a flaw in the metal (I think he said it was a big
bubble). The stresses that resulted were too severe, and the bike ripped
itself out of the rack and became airborne for a short while before
landing in the road behind my brother's car.

A bike must be able to take the stress of travel on the roof at your
maximum speed, otherwise it doesn't matter how good your rack is.

Dave

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 14:47:41 GMT, "NYRides"
wrote:
Does anybody know of any statistics regarding bicycles (on or off trunk/hood
racks) falling off automobiles while in transit?

Just one: I bought my first LBS bike, and a trunk rack to go with
it. I let the LBS guy put the rack on the car to show me how, and I
didn't check if everything was tight myself.

Driving home at 60mph, having never ridden the bike outside of a
test ride, I am scared for my expensive investment as I watch it
swing and sway in my rearview. Then, the front of the bike
disappears from my mirror!

I pulled over and saw that the rack was not sufficiently tightened
at it's pivot point, and the arm that held the front bike rotated
down, and the front wheel dragged lightly on the ground. Luckily,
no damage.

Ever after that, I was completely paranoid. I'd tighten the rack as
much as I could, I ran lots of extra straps around the bike, the
rack, and the spoiler on the car, and sometimes even in through the
front of the trunk lid and out through the rear. Since then, I've
gotten a pickup truck where I happily throw the MTB in without
removing the computer or anything, and my road bike gets strapped in
standing up, but it's still faster and more secure than a trunk
rack.

I was always very paranoid about carrying my bikes on a rear rack, and have
since moved them inside the car for all trips. But I still see people
carrying them around on unsteady looking racks that swing back and forth,
jump up and down, etc. I've even seen a lot of makeshift carrying methods,
like bikes stacked on their sides on the roof and tied down with bungies.

What bothers me is people with empty pickup trucks, vans, and full
size SUVs, using trunk racks or hitch racks. If they're not going
to put stuff in there, they'd probably be better served by a smaller
vehicle.

I've always thought there should be laws regarding proper ways to carry
bikes on an automobile, but I wonder if there are any statistics to back
this up.

There are, though they're not specific to bicycle. There's loads of
load control laws, and they're quite widely applicable -- failure to
secure load can mean that a car rolled off a flatbed, a bike that's
loose on it's rack, or napkins flying from a dumptruck full of
garbage.
--
Rick Onanian

"Rick Onanian" wrote in message
...

What bothers me is people with empty pickup trucks, vans, and full
size SUVs, using trunk racks or hitch racks. If they're not going
to put stuff in there, they'd probably be better served by a smaller
vehicle.

Now that's a silly thing to be bothered by. I'm looking forward to getting a
hitch rack for my truck. Partly so I can keep the pedals and barends from
rubbing on the truck bed, causing paint loss on both the bed and the bike
parts. Partly so I can load up the bed of the truck with camping gear and
not have to strap the bikes on top. In an SUV, it's even harder to carry all
of your gear and the bikes if you have to load the bikes inside. Outside
racks also keep the inside of the SUV from being mucked up by the dirt from
the trail. There are lots of reasons to not put a bike into a truck or SUV.

-Buck

"NYRides" wrote in message et...
Does anybody know of any statistics regarding bicycles (on or off trunk/hood
racks) falling off automobiles while in transit?

I was always very paranoid about carrying my bikes on a rear rack, and have
since moved them inside the car for all trips. But I still see people
carrying them around on unsteady looking racks that swing back and forth,
jump up and down, etc. I've even seen a lot of makeshift carrying methods,
like bikes stacked on their sides on the roof and tied down with bungies.

I've always thought there should be laws regarding proper ways to carry
bikes on an automobile, but I wonder if there are any statistics to back
this up.

I had a Road Gear Transport trunk mounted rack on my tercel for a
number of years (before it was stolen). On a trip from New Hampshire
to NYC I had 3 mountain bikes on it with no problem. I didn't like
going faster than 60 or so because the bikes would swing a bit but
never enough to pull over and re-work the bungies.

I was never really fond of having the bikes perpendicular to the
travel direction. Nor did I like them where they could be the point of
contact in a rear end collision. But in the 5 or so years of use the
only damage I encountered was when the tire of a bike was in the
stream of the exhaust pipe and burned the tire to a crisp.

I now have a fold down rear seat so they get to ride inside. I am
looking for a roof mounted rack because if I decide to take more than
a few days worth of gear on a trip it would be a tight squeeze with
the bikes.

Nothing statistical, just anecdotal.

Andy

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 09:26:17 +0000, David Newman wrote:

A bike must be able to take the stress of travel on the roof at your
maximum speed, otherwise it doesn't matter how good your rack is.

While that is true, the stresses the bike are subject to while riding are
much higher than those while on the rack. Yes, in a sharp turn at 90mph
there is a stress on the fork due to the acceleration, the fact that the
bike only weighs 20lbs makes that insignificant.

Your story was about a bike that was failing. Frankly, better for it to
let go on the rack than on a downhill. Also, on my Yakima rack the bike
is secured not just by the fork, but also the rear wheel is tied down. It
shouldn't go flying if the fork fails.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Enron's slogan: Respect, Communication, Integrity, and
_`\(,_ | Excellence.
(_)/ (_) |

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 08:28:25 +0000, Rick Onanian wrote:

What bothers me is people with empty pickup trucks, vans, and full size
SUVs, using trunk racks or hitch racks. If they're not going to put stuff
in there, they'd probably be better served by a smaller vehicle.

I've puzzled about this, too. I've seen a number of big 'ol SUVs pulling
a trailer, in which was a small load of stuff -- which would easily have
fit inside. I presume they don't want to scuff the leather interior with
their shingles or whatever. But then, why buy a truck if you aren't going
to use it?

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Accept risk. Accept responsibility. Put a lawyer out of
_`\(,_ | business.
(_)/ (_) |

David Newman wrote in message .. .
In article ,
"NYRides" wrote:


Most responses have been anecdotal rather than statistical. This one is
no different, but it does provide an interesting counterpoint.

Probably the only source for statistics are the rack manufacturers, and
I doubt they will release them for public consumption.

My brother was driving at freeway speed with a bike in a Yakima rack on
the roof. The bike detatched and landed in traffic. It was run over and
destroyed by following vehicles before my brother could get it out of
the roadway. On arriving home, my brother found that the rack had not
failed, but the front fork had. One leg of the fork had broken,
evidently due to a flaw in the metal (I think he said it was a big
bubble). The stresses that resulted were too severe, and the bike ripped
itself out of the rack and became airborne for a short while before
landing in the road behind my brother's car.

A bike must be able to take the stress of travel on the roof at your
maximum speed, otherwise it doesn't matter how good your rack is.

If the fork failed under these conditions it was likely compromised
and should not have been ridden, either.

A friend had a different experience. One of the clamps holding the roof
rack failed and that led to the whole rack failing and flying off the roof
and landing on the freeway. Fortunately the wind direction carried the
rack and two bikes so it landed (upright) on the left shoulder. Both bikes
had some damage. The manufacturer replaced the rack and paid 1/2 the damage
to the bikes and the car. They only offered 1/2 as they claimed the rack
had been mounted 1/16" off the recommended mounting position. How they
can determine from a twisted piece of metal that it was off by 1/16" is
beyond me, but it begs the question: if the mounting position is so sensitive
that a 1/16" difference means failure or not then is the system safe?

- rick

"Rick Onanian" wrote in message
...

What bothers me is people with empty pickup trucks, vans, and full
size SUVs, using trunk racks or hitch racks. If they're not going
to put stuff in there, they'd probably be better served by a smaller
vehicle.

Yeah, no kidding. I used to laugh to myself at the huge SUVs arriving at the
trailhead with bikes on racks -- when they could easily have been put inside the
vehicles. Even worse was watching people try to put bikes back on top of these
behemoths, occasionally dropping them, and ruining their expensive SUV's paint.
Worse than that, most of these people lived less than 10 miles away!

I have racks, but I almost always put my bike inside the car. The only time I
use the rack is when I have to carry more than one bike, and they won't fit
inside.

I've always thought there should be laws regarding proper ways to carry
bikes on an automobile, but I wonder if there are any statistics to back
this up.

There are, though they're not specific to bicycle. There's loads of
load control laws, and they're quite widely applicable -- failure to
secure load can mean that a car rolled off a flatbed, a bike that's
loose on it's rack, or napkins flying from a dumptruck full of
garbage.

Such laws are widely ignored anyway. I've lost a few windshields to flying
gravel, from uncovered trucks. Debris is one of the major causes of accidents
and backups on southern CA freeways. I used to see ladders, mattresses,
plywood, cans of paint, bags of cement, bricks, boxes, etc. on the freeway every
day. Never any bikes, though.

The most common bike rack mishap seems to be driving into the garage with bikes
on the rack. Almost every rider I know has a story of someone they know who has
done this.

Matt O.

David Newman wrote:

My brother was driving at freeway speed with a bike in a Yakima rack on
the roof. The bike detatched and landed in traffic.

...my brother found that the rack had not
failed, but the front fork had.

Since I fly down mountain roads at close to freeway speeds on my bike,
this possibility is not a comforting thought.

Are there any statistics or anectodes of road bike fork failure at
high speed? (I'm aware of the Missy Giove's QR failure this last
summer).

RFM

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 08:42:26 +0000, Rick Warner wrote:

was off by 1/16" is beyond me, but it begs the question: if the mounting
position is so sensitive that a 1/16" difference means failure or not then
is the system safe?

Of course you know the answers to this. Yes, that would mean that the
rack wasn't safe, but no, 1/16" cannot matter that much, it's just the
excuse they are using to avoid liability, because of course they cannot
tell whether or not the mounting was "off" by 1/16"

I noted that Yakima was very specific in the mounting points of their roof
racks for roofs w/o factory rails. Now we know why. I'm also glad that I
now have factory rails on my car.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | More people object to wearing fur than leather because it is
_`\(,_ | safer to harrass rich white women than motorcycle gangs.
(_)/ (_) |