View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
madspaniard
Joined: 23 May 2005 Posts: 380
|
Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
slayer666 wrote: | Another alternative to the Thule box is to use the $125 DaKine wave sailquiver bag. It fits 6 half masts in the bottom section which has a pass-thru for the straps - Inside the top part I get 3 sails easily (4.2 to 5.3) + narrow boom + harness, etc.. Add the Yakima rubber straps I am ready to go in 10 minutes. |
I have the DaKine wave sailquiver bag too. The two main problemas are 1) security of the gear when car is left unattended 2) when full of sails, the empty part of top part tends to flap around when driving. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
SWE106
Joined: 14 Feb 2005 Posts: 264 Location: San Mateo
|
Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
madspaniard wrote: | r_g_armstrong wrote: | SWE106, how do you fit masts inside a roof top box? I've don't think that I've seen a cargo box long enough for masts. |
My box (Yakima) fits a 400 mast and smaller.
If I'm not wrong I remember seeing SWE's retrofitted box on the beach. He drilled a 2" (or similar) hole in the lower back side of the box and glued (with epoxy) a piece of black-painted PVC pipe with an end cap so that the section of the mast that would stick out the box can now slide into the PVC section. |
Thanks brah! Yes, that is exactly what I did. The 2 pipes (one for the top and one for the base of my 430 mast) stick ~3-4 inches out and are fitted on the outside of the rear, so my hatcback trunk can open without a problem. I have patented the whole construction...so no copycats allowed... hahaha |
|
Back to top |
|
|
SWE106
Joined: 14 Feb 2005 Posts: 264 Location: San Mateo
|
Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 12:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
mac wrote: | Rebecca--you have to take what Isobars types with a grain of salt--he's from the right wing, global warming is a hoax madrassa. Diesel is not without issues--the fine particulate in diesel emissions is the largest cancer threat in the air in urban areas. With that said, the current modern diesels that meet the European standards, or the pending US EPA standards essentially solve the problem with good technology. So buy a new, state of the art model and keep it tuned. |
True and false. Yes, the modern diesels are much, and i mean MUCH cleaner compared to the older tuftufs. Why? Higher fuel quality (lower sulphur content, etc), better and much more efficient combustion of the fuel inside the engine AND amazing end-of-pipe cleaning technologies: e.g. super efficient particluate filters; >99.98% capture efficiency of small particulates.
No, diesels emissions are not the largest cancer threat in the air of urban areas. They certainly contribute, but current research shows that other air pollutants related to automotive traffic, such as brakepadwear (e.g. silicates), catalytic converter emissions (platinum, vanadium, etc) and other unknown substances from tirewire (a tire consists of MANY different substance, especially heavy metals) among others are in fact more related to human health effects, such as cardiovascular diseases and cancer than tail-pipe emissions are. In addition, we have very little knowledge about all other chemical exposures INDOORS (remember we spend >90% of our time on this planet indoors!) and their effects on our health, as well as other outside sources. Also, smoking is still the #1 cancer threat regarding inhalation (1 in 5 americans smoke...hmmm). Hence, diesel emissions from old tuftufs are certainly on the radar screen, but pertinantly NOT the main cancer cause in urban air. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lutehowland
Joined: 06 Oct 2015 Posts: 39
|
Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
RE: dakine quiver bag
I have a hard time passing the straps thru the bag when it's full of masts and sails. This really slows down attaching it to roof rack.
Is there a trick to somehow clipping it to the roof rack? I've looked into carabiners, but they're too small for the roof rack bar. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
madspaniard
Joined: 23 May 2005 Posts: 380
|
Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 2:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
lutehowland wrote: |
Is there a trick to somehow clipping it to the roof rack? I've looked into carabiners, but they're too small for the roof rack bar. |
I usually pass the straps through the bag after the masts are in and before I put the sails inside the upper part. I would never clip the bag to the roof rack, I don't think it would be safe, the bag can tear apart on the road. Having the straps going around the width of the masts makes the whole thing more sound. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lutehowland
Joined: 06 Oct 2015 Posts: 39
|
Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
madspaniard wrote: | lutehowland wrote: |
Is there a trick to somehow clipping it to the roof rack? I've looked into carabiners, but they're too small for the roof rack bar. |
I usually pass the straps through the bag after the masts are in and before I put the sails inside the upper part. I would never clip the bag to the roof rack, I don't think it would be safe, the bag can tear apart on the road. Having the straps going around the width of the masts makes the whole thing more sound. |
No, what I've been trying to do is to leave the straps threaded through the bag even when I take it off the roof. I may try to use a second, shorter strap that would attach to the strap that goes through the bag. Anything to avoid having to thread the long straps thru the bag itself. It doesn't sound like much, but it takes me at least as long to deal with as the difference between rigging a cam and a no-cam sails, and people agonize plenty over that difference
My biggest sail barely fits in the bag and it's difficult to take it out of the bag and then put it back in everytime I attach the bag to the rack. If I used only a single sail, then it wouldn't be a big deal at all... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
slidersf
Joined: 22 Apr 2000 Posts: 21
|
Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From my experience, I would expect 38-40 MPG with racks, depending on the amount of gear and how heavy your foot is.
I won't bother ranting about the benefits of the car - either you get it or you don't.
I'll say this, though. I haven't spoken with a Prius owner who hasn't loved the thing. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rigatoni
Joined: 25 Feb 1999 Posts: 498
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If anyone cares, Subaru is coming out with a diesel version of their Outback next year. It seems like a good car for carrying gear as well as the 4wd for hitting Tahoe. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tenspeedo
Joined: 23 Jan 2004 Posts: 1
|
Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2008 1:16 pm Post subject: Toyota Prius |
|
|
Going the speed limit with cruise control and the tires w/ 36-35 lbs you could get 52-54 m.p.g. With empty racks take away 5 m.p.g. But you could only use them when you go out, then take them out. A Prius would really make sense if you could drive it at least 30,000 m a year, hopefully this car could take 200.000 miles no problem.... we will see. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
carl
Joined: 25 Feb 1997 Posts: 2674 Location: SF bay area
|
Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2008 2:02 pm Post subject: Re: Toyota Prius |
|
|
tenspeedo wrote: | Going the speed limit with cruise control and the tires w/ 36-35 lbs you could get 52-54 m.p.g. With empty racks take away 5 m.p.g. But you could only use them when you go out, then take them out. A Prius would really make sense if you could drive it at least 30,000 m a year, hopefully this car could take 200.000 miles no problem.... we will see. |
Tenspeedo,
You're comment of getting much better than the 2008 EPA estimate of 45 hwy/48 city ("52-54mpg, empty rack 5mpg less"),
Is that based on your own experience with your car???? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You can attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
|
|
|