Cycle carrier .

[mjr]

Have I misunderstood. You get the same consumption whether or not you have a bike on the roof?

You've not misunderstood. He can keep adding cross-sectional area to his vehicle without increasing the fuel needed to move it. Either it's powered by cold fusion or his mpg measurement device is a bit insensitive.

 

[Drago]

Yep, there probably is a difference, but it isn't notable enough for either Ford or Kia fuel computers to taste it. Definitely not enough that the fuel saved would buy a towbar.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

Yep, there probably is a difference, but it isn't notable enough for either Ford or Kia fuel computers to taste it. Definitely not enough that the fuel saved would buy a towbar.

My brother in law has a 16 plate (I think)) Sportage & he notices a difference in consumption when he has his bike on the roof, maybe he needs to take it back to Kia & advise them it's faulty.

 

[youngoldbloke]

If you are not-tall, carry one of these

 

[Drago]

My brother in law has a 16 plate (I think)) Sportage & he notices a difference in consumption when he has his bike on the roof, maybe he needs to take it back to Kia & advise them it's faulty.

No difference noted on our 66 plate Spurty diseasel. As aforementioned, I don't doubt it's there, it's just not significant enough to observe. I'd have to do a lot more mileage for it to become apparent.

 

[Milkfloat]

To buck the Thule trend, I use £15 eBay specials. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Cycle-Ca...-Rack-for-Car-Roof-Bars-Lockable/302748685588

I only use them a couple of times a year and needing 4 of them could not justify the Thule outlay. They work, although a bit fiddly to setup initially.

 

[I like Skol]

The only time I drive with bikes on the roof are long motorway drives of several hundred miles, so that gives a chance for the consumption figures to really bite. A number of hours at 60pmh with a bike on the roof is very different to the same without in my car.

THIS^^^^^

I get hammered when doing 70mph with 4 bikes on roof (and the fact that this is also accompanied in most cases by the addition of riders for the bikes, and often the luggage for a weeks holiday, a double whammy fuel hit!)

The penalty is much less significant when travelling at slower speeds on shorter journeys and in stop start conditions where other factors besides wind resistance play a bigger part in contributing to the fuel consumption. As in all situations of this kind, the saying YMMV is entirely relevant as there are so many variable factors at play.

 

[Drago]

I virtually never drive at 70, bikes on the roof or not.

 

[mjr]

If you are not-tall, carry one of these

View attachment 414264

Check the load capacity, though. Many are up to 150kg or more, but some of the cheap shops are selling ones only marked for 100kg and I wouldn't even trust them with anything close to that once you're swinging a touring bike around. Having it collapse under you would be bad enough and having that happen while you've a bike above the car roof would be worse.

 

[youngoldbloke]

Check the load capacity, though. Many are up to 150kg or more, but some of the cheap shops are selling ones only marked for 100kg and I wouldn't even trust them with anything close to that once you're swinging a touring bike around. Having it collapse under you would be bad enough and having that happen while you've a bike above the car roof would be worse.

The one I use has been fine, but then being not-tall I'm also not-heavy, and neither is my bike. I think mine came from Lidl, or Aldi.

 

[Trigger369]

Thanks for all the comments folks. I don't think I would have a problem lifting a bike on to the roof of the car I'm fairly capable .
I said to the wife last night I was asking here about the roof carrier. She went a bit daft , no way she says .im not driving about with a bike on the roof .it will look stupid and too high . Personally I think she's right it will be high as the cars a Tuscon but I've seen plenty of high cars with them on . I can't justify the money for a tow bar being fitted as it wouldn't be used so only other option would be a rear mounted carrier. I would probably spend the same money on a rear mounted carrier and roof bars and a mount . So it might come down to which is less hassle to fit the bike on? Still think roof mounted as I probably would use the roof bars for other things .

 

[vickster]

Big car, stick bike in the boot. Leave the kids behind

 

[I like Skol]

Thanks for all the comments folks. I don't think I would have a problem lifting a bike on to the roof of the car I'm fairly capable .
I said to the wife last night I was asking here about the roof carrier. She went a bit daft , no way she says .im not driving about with a bike on the roof .it will look stupid and too high . Personally I think she's right it will be high as the cars a Tuscon but I've seen plenty of high cars with them on . I can't justify the money for a tow bar being fitted as it wouldn't be used so only other option would be a rear mounted carrier. I would probably spend the same money on a rear mounted carrier and roof bars and a mount . So it might come down to which is less hassle to fit the bike on? Still think roof mounted as I probably would use the roof bars for other things .

Do you want to get in the boot when the bikes are being carried?

If the bikes are on the roof then all car access is normal, take your pick.

 

[DCBassman]

If you are not-tall, carry one of these

View attachment 414264

I do.

 

[I like Skol]

I virtually never drive at 70, bikes on the roof or not.

More of an 80 or 90 guy? I get the cut of your jib!