By Cartner on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 08:21 am: Edit

I see a lot of pics of the camel trophy racks here but I can't seem to find out anything about them....Who makes them and can you still buy them? are they any good? how much do they weight? I want to know as much as possible, so anything would be good! Are the LR adventure racks better? How much do THEY cost?
thanks

By Bluegill (Bluegill) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 08:32 am: Edit

Camel racks are mounted to internal roll cage. Check out http://dialspace.dial.pipex.com/pdpr/safety/4x4/discovery.html

By Ho Chung (Ho) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 08:43 am: Edit

http://www.discoweb.org/clay
http://www.discoweb.org/nathanhindman


those are the same racks, but gutter mounted.
you can get them from stable energy.

By Kyle on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 08:43 am: Edit

"Expedition" rack....


Kyle

By John Lee on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 08:55 am: Edit

Stable Energies is the only importer of Safety Devices products that I know of. I got my roofrack there. Check out: http://www.stable-energies.com

By Norman Smit (Safarigear) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 08:55 am: Edit

If I may ask - what is it you want from your roofrack, or to put the question another way, what do you think you will be using it for? If you intend using your Land Rover to go into the bush for extended periods of time and want to really load it, the adventure rack leaves a lot to be desired.

A Land Rover Adventure rack isn't designed to carry much (weight is transferred to the vehicle at only the small points where the leg clamps to the gutter), they can't be walked on easily because they are made of tubing with large gaps, they are made of steel that rusts and they cost anything between $850 to $1200, depending on who you talk to. If you want to walk on it or sit up there or sleep up there, you have to go to the trouble of adding expanded metal or wood, which isn't necessarily difficult, but is in my opinion a stopgap solution to a design shortcoming.

The rack we import from South Africa (Hannibal) is made of aluminium, it's been tested to over 3 tons, it has wide aluminium planks or slats that are easy to walk on, it won't rust, it comes in it's natural finish or powder coated, and it's very competitively priced. It's a genuine safari rack, and has been used extensively in that fashion. It also has a gutter rail that runs the full length of the vehicle so that any weight on the rack is transferred evenly along the entire length of the gutters, not just at the clamping points - which is how most of the other racks are designed. It is a flat rack, which has the advantage of making it easier to load. Aesthetically, some will say that it isn't as pretty. Some people use the space between the bottom of our rack and the top of the roofline to mount additional spotlights.

If, however, all you want from the rack is a place to tie a coolerbox and a spare tyre, you can buy something a lot cheaper than either our product or the adventure rack.

By Bluegill (Bluegill) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 09:05 am: Edit

I tried like hell to get some prices from Stable Energies on racks. I eventually gave up after getting bounced around with no answers...

By Ho Chung (Ho) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 09:46 am: Edit

couple comments on the hannibal rack...

there are a few things about this rack that keeps me from even considering it for my use:

-looks: just plain ugly, reminds me of a plumber rack everytime i see it.

-price: it's not any cheaper than the adventure rack, not only that, i dont' see how it should cost more for having square tubing that is just cut at 45 degree angles and welded, and not mandrel bent and miter cut like the safety devices racks.

-finish: plain aluminum... and extra for powdercoating?

By Marc on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 09:48 am: Edit

Norman,

I have been interested in your racks since I read an earlier post along these lines, but have been unable to find any info, and your webpage is not up. Where can I find some info?

-Marc

By Rob Davison (Pokerob) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 09:51 am: Edit

ok safety devises website , all the way at the bottom... it lists Atlantic British as an authorised North America Retailer.

http://www.safetydevices.co.uk/


also i believe the saftye devises rack can withstand more abuse from treebranches and such, than the aluminum safari rack can.

---

Quote:

A Land Rover Adventure rack isn't designed to carry much

---

By John Lee on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 10:12 am: Edit

Bill,

"I tried like hell to get some prices from Stable Energies on racks. I eventually gave up after getting bounced around with no answers..."

Damn. I'm not buddies or anything with these guys (they took six months to deliver my rack because they shipped it by donkey from England), but that wasn't my experience at all. I got a price the day I called them, and the rack I ordered for my D90 isn't common at all in America. When I asked them out of curiosity about the Camel Trophy-style rack for the Disco, they told me $1300 and they said they had two in stock. That was back in February, so prices and circumstances may have changed.

By Cartner on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 10:30 am: Edit

Ok, so your saying that the Adventure rack is strong enough for an expedition? How much does it cost? how much is the safety devices rack? do any of you have them and how do they hold up? This is for a long trip so its important for it to hold up well, and be capable of accepting lights, a floor, jerry cans, and quite a bit of equipment.
Thanks!

By Cartner on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 10:34 am: Edit

Ho, how much was the rack you have? Thats what I think I'm looking for, but I need to know a lot more about it. Are you happy with it? Is it strong enough for a roof tent? Thanks!

By Bluegill (Bluegill) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 10:34 am: Edit

Adventure rack is what, around $1200 new? What's the gutter mounting on the CT vs. the adventure? Is it strongert? (you can't argue against the full-gutter mounting on the Hannibal) All else being equal, I'd go with the CT rack - looks a bit sturdier and higher sides mean you can pack more shit.

By John Lee on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 10:41 am: Edit

I think Rover Connection sells the Adventure rack for $850. You should check to be sure. Also, remember that shipping on the roofracks usually runs from $150 to $200.

I think the full-length gutter mounting on the Hannibals is both ugly and unnecessary. I have yet to see some Disco gutters that were damaged from having too much weight on top of the rack. My feeling is that if you have enough weight on the roofrack to damage the gutters, that's a LOT of weight and you have too much weight up there. I much prefer the elegant look of the clamps on the Safety Devices racks. One of the reasons I chose my rack over others is because of the cool-looking clamps.

By Ho Chung (Ho) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 10:41 am: Edit

bill, check out the adventure rack up close and personal.
you'll see it is plenty strong. seeing is believing.

By Danno on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 10:48 am: Edit

The CT style rack requires you to remove the factory load bars. if you have dual sunroofs, you will also have to modify the CT rack to use the sunroofs.

By Norman Smit (Safarigear) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 11:15 am: Edit

Marc - email me and I'll give you all the information I can. Our email address is [email protected] Our telephone number is on our website - safariequipmentsusa.com

By Kyle on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 11:15 am: Edit

Yeah Norman , I dont mind some plugging going on here but only some good clear honest plugging. It dont matter if someone parked a 3 ton truck on the hannibal as it was sitting on the floor. Did someone load 3 tons on it up on a disco? The adventure and the hannibal both are going to hold the same up on a disco. The rack and its makeup is not going to decide this (With these two) its the roof of the truck and the pillar strength that will decide it.
The racks looks leave something to be desired but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The deck being flat and having a solid floor does make certain things easier then the adventure. Dont do the strength thing here man. Not when comparing it to the adventure anyway..

kyle

By Norman Smit (Safarigear) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 11:48 am: Edit

Kyle, I agree with you fully that having in excess of a 3 ton capacity is irrelevant insofar as loading is concerned. However, it does pertain to the rack's design and build quality. Planks are more rigid and stronger than tubes. Secondly, having the full-length gutter rails may be considered to be overkill, but the fact of the matter is that it does tranfer loads - and more importantly, dynamic forces - more effectively over a larger rather than smaller surface area. The lateral and other dynamic forces transferred by the rack (and cargo) to the gutters can be doubled or even tripled by going over an off centre bump at speeds as low as even 10 kilometres an hour. Hannibal designers believe it is kinder to your vehicle to have this occur over the larger surface area of a full length rail. Heavier loading remains an issue rack design must address in Africa and Australia where there is a whole lot of wide open space far from help and where people do pile more on top than is typically seen in the US.

By Bluegill (Bluegill) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 12:01 pm: Edit

That $1200 includes the dealer's "Scottsdale surcharge"

I've played on top of those adventure racks, they're not going anywhere. However, Hannibal's clamping surface area is more than others' surface area nonetheless. Whether or not you need it is another question. But the uneven floor on the adventure does make it difficult to carry my plumbing supplies

By Kyle on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 12:05 pm: Edit

Well , I hate to go screwin with the "Engineers" again but the hanibal is no stronger in this area. Look at an adventure rack. All of its feet are positioned to hit right at a pillar. The hanibal is a "Universal" type deal and they dont hit right on each pillar. The area between the pillars aint much and therefore that thin strip running along and tying all the feet together isnt sitting on much.Sure its spreading the load but I have no doubt it will bend right along with the gutter. You can have the best foundation in the world on your house but if its sitting on mud its useless. The basket and feet are a universal thing and not made to take advantage of the strong points on the disco or rangie. That makes it weaker then a custom tailored part. The basket itself is very strong , I have no doubt there but it dont really matter . What matters is what its sitting on. I am not bashing the Hannibal rack at all. I think for a sleeping platform its great. Just dont make that comparison to the adventure rack. It will loose...

Kyle

By brian k on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 12:17 pm: Edit

That's a good question - what REALLY should be the max safe load capacity up there? With all that weight being so far away from the axles and screwing with the center of gravity, if someone actually thought they could put a couple tons of crap up there I sure would pity the poor person following him/her.

By Bluegill (Bluegill) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 12:22 pm: Edit

Hmmm...six thousand lbs on top? Hope you're wearing your helmet!

By Engineer Blue on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 12:34 pm: Edit

One bonus is the fact that you could flip your rig and sustain no damage.

By Ho Chung (Ho) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 01:23 pm: Edit

cartner, the one i have is the adventure rack that came with the XD models. it's actually lower than the regular adventure rack because the XDs didn't come with the roof rails.

yes, i am happy with it. VERY happy.
and yes, it's more than strong enough for whatever roof top tent you might be able to fit on top of it.

call around the local dealers, they sometimes have them in stock sitting pretty taking up space, and they'd let you have them for less.

By Norman Smit (Safarigear) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 01:33 pm: Edit

The gutter rail is 20mm tall and 9mm wide and more than a metre and a half long. Welded to three legs per side with three stainless steel clamps, that 'strip' supplies a total surface area of 13.5 square cm per rail.

By Kyle on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 01:48 pm: Edit

Norman , the legs are the strongest and they dont hit on top of the pillars. The adventure has four legs and it hits right on the pillars. The pillars are holding the whole damn thing up. Your comparison is great if you want to compare it to other racks. Just dont compare it to the adventure and say that its stronger and has more load carrying ability. It doesnt.Thats all man....It is however more capable then allot of the other racks out there .As I said before , I dont mind you plugging your stuff here. I think its great . Just be straight forward and accurate about it.

Kyle

By Norman Smit (Safarigear) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 02:05 pm: Edit

You're right. The Hannibal rack doesn't use the legs don't transfer the weight to the pillars. For that matter, neither does the adventure rack. In the case of the Hannibal rack, the legs transfer the weight to the gutter rail, that transfers the weight to the entire gutter. The gutter then transfers that load to the rest of the vehicle, via the pillars. The adventure rack does exactly the same thing via four legs into the gutter albeit over the posts. However, that weight transfer of the adventure rack still needs to take place via the foot of the legs, a much smaller surface area than a rail. This means that the force at that point is greater when loading the adventure rack pound for pound with the same load as the Hannibal or any other rack with a full-length gutter rail.

By peter matusov on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 02:33 pm: Edit

what are you talkin' about here?

what f&*kin 3 tons?

adventure rack or not, if a disco flips over, it flips over, rack flies off, etc. Guess you all saw recent rollover pics at lr-discovery, +former pics of that red disco rolled in moab. by no account is a roof rack a body protector, even if it looks like it is.

the bigger's the rack, the more is the temptation to throw all the shit on it, the more prone is the already tall disco to flip.

i have never thought about it, but if there's a rack with feet positioned right atop of existing body pillars, this is the definite design advantage. not from the point of view of max load, but rather what's gonna happen to that roof after so many thousand miles on the washboard.

peter

By Kyle on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 02:34 pm: Edit

Ok , here we go..... Do you think the legs coming of the bottom of the hannible basket are carrying the majiority of the load? I know damn well they are because they are the only thing going from the basket to the gutter. The point that they contact the gutter will be the point that bares most of the load (Yes even with the strap running down the gutter). The positioning of the hannible legs is wrong for the Rangie and for the Disco. It should have four and they should be placed over the pillars. You cannot argue this man. Its very basic engineering. The Hannible is a very good generic rack. I am not saying that it isnt. I am saying that it WILL NOT carry anymore of a load on top of the Disco then the Adventure does. Thats my whole argument here.. You are not having this debate with someone that uses the rack for an expensive light mount. I use the rack and I load the bitch heavy. I run the trails with the rack loaded and I know how it reacts to this. The adventure will hold much more then you would ever want to drive around with up there. That makes it more then suitable for the task. No its not flat and yes it would be a pain in the ass for a roof top tent but its a good load carrying rack..

Kyle

By John Lee on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 03:06 pm: Edit

Norman,

Any theoretical strength advantage of the Hannibal is a red herring at best. I've seen dozens of heavily loaded Adventure racks and I have yet to see a broken Adventure rack or broken rain gutters on any Disco. Speaking of a three-ton rating for a roof rack is simply absurd. No vehicle could ever hold that much weight on its roof. Discussing the theoretical strength advantage of a Hannibal rack is also absurd when you consider that the primary reason for buying this rack is to fit a roof tent, which takes up enough space on the rack that hardly anything else will fit on the rack.

Much more important to me than the theoretical strength issue is the price issue. The Hannibal roof racks are really expensive for what they are. As Ho pointed out, the Hannibal racks appear to be made of square tubing and constructed with 45-degree welds at the corners. This is a lot cheaper to do than the Safety Devices racks, which are made of round tubing and mandrel bent on the corners and with all joints precision miter cut. The Safety Devices racks are also zinc plated and then powdercoated while the Hannibal racks are bare aluminum.

Hannibal racks are also not custom tailored to each vehicle. The Safety Devices racks are made so as to put the rack's "feet" above the vehicle's pillars and the rack's lines closely match those of the vehicle's roof. The racks fit the vehicles so well they look as though they were fitted by Savile Row tailors.

This is a far cry from the generic look of the Hannibal racks. To my eyes, the Hannibal racks on different vehicles all look identical. The only difference is in how the gutter mounts are located on what appears to be a generic basket. The racks have that sort of modular look about them, with the basket and gutter mounts being identical for all vehicles and the only difference being in where the holes are drilled to mount the gutter mounts to the basket. Thus, it appears to me that the extended gutter rail is serves more to make the generic rack fit different vehicles than it is for enhancing strength.

I know it sounds as though I'm slamming the Hannibal racks, but I'm trying not to. They're good racks. But I think they're not as good as the Safety Devices racks and they don't provide the value that the Safety Devices racks do.

By Norman Smit (Safarigear) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 03:35 pm: Edit

Why should the point where the legs transfer the weight to the gutter rail be the most loaded point? The gutter rail is a beam and acts as one, and once clamped, even more so. As a beam it will transfer weight over a larger surface area meaning a lighter load per square unit of that surface area. Ergo, the pounds per square inch at the point of contact between the small feet of the rack and the gutter will be greater than in the case of racks with full-length rails. This is precisely the same principle as lying down on thin ice rather than walking over it. I'm not saying you can't put a lot of stuff on an adventure rack - but what is Land Rover's recommended maximum load for their rack?

By Craig on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 03:51 pm: Edit

Ok Norman-
Don't laugh-
LR recommendations for load carrying capacity is a function of what load the rain gutters will hold, regardless of style of rack.
get this-
55lbs.
I know that's a ridiculous rating, I imagine it's so low for liability reasons.
Craig

By Cartner on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 04:01 pm: Edit

but back to the camel trophy rack, does it have any inherent disadvantage? Hannibal rack and adventure aside. How much for the Camel Rack from Safety Devices and will it carry the same as either the adventure or Hannibal? It seems your both right in many points. The hannibal maybe able to carry more weight, but why would you want THAT much atop your rover? The adventure looks better, and can probably carry the same, although it is angled, so it might be less usefull as a tent base. Both are obviously well designed in a different way...Thanks!

By kyle on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 05:21 pm: Edit

The expedition rack (Not camel rack) will carry anything you want to put up there and more. All three racks are decent choices for strength. The hannibal is obviously the winner if you want a tent up top.

Kyle

By Kyle on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 05:34 pm: Edit

Norman , you are correct to an extent but picture this. take the Hannibal off and place it on some jack stands that are oriented the same as the pillars on a Disco or Rangie. Those stands will hit on the banding and not under the feet. Then start loading the rack , then load it more and more (Exageration load) until you can see the affects of the feet placement. You will see that the feet will drop lower and the banding will bend upwards. Then unload the rack and place the stands under the feet. Load it back up again and you will se what I mean. Your ice comparison isnt the same thing at all. Everything up top relies on those posts to hold it. Spreading the load acrost the spance between them doesnt matter a whole lot. Then take those stands and put them under the feet of an adventure rack ,load the same wieght on there and you will see that it doesnt really care that you did it. If the hanibal foot placement was used alone as a mounting system it would surely suck. Since thay have the banding there I would say that its load carrying capability measures up to the adventure rack (Real world wieght). It surely isnt any better and thats all I am addressing. You following me here ? I just had a problem with you saying that it was a stronger rack capable of more load carrying.. If they corrected the foot placement on it and added one more they would have corrected a design flaw in my eyes but it still really wouldnt be capable of carrying any more on the truck. The adventure will hold more then you can safely ride around with up there and I think that the safe working load is the cap. Safe meaning that you will turn the damn truck over . Dont ask me how I know these things..

Kyle

By John Lee on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 05:51 pm: Edit

Craig,

"LR recommendations for load carrying capacity is a function of what load the rain gutters will hold, regardless of style of rack. get this-55lbs."

I agree with you that Land Rover's recommended maximum would extra conservative for liability reasons, but I'm curious where you got this 55 lbs. figure.

By Ho Chung (Ho) on Friday, October 05, 2001 - 06:15 pm: Edit

cartner, yes, for whatever safe weight and size cargo you might want to carry up there, adventure, expedition are all strong enough.

personally, i like the "expedition" rack for it has a place for the big hellas... and they are protected by the top portion of the rack.
but i like the adventure rack for it's lower profile.

either way, they are very useful, strong and elegant racks.

By jay caragay (Jcaragay) on Saturday, October 06, 2001 - 12:23 pm: Edit

I'm a little confused with this conversation.

From what absolutely little I know about D1 construction, it seems that the rain gutter is mounted to the roofline of the vehicle and that the weight of any roof rack would be borne by the rain gutters alone.

With that in mind, how does placement of the Adventure rack mounts over the pillars give some sort of strength advantage?

++++++++++++++++
I'll be honest, I have an adventure rack mounted to the top of my D1 not because I am overburdened with gear but because it looks BAD ASS!!!!

By Kyle on Saturday, October 06, 2001 - 03:39 pm: Edit

What holds the gutters and the roof Jay? That shouldnt be too confusing , its not levitating... If you got it cause it looks "Bad ass" then you wont get the conversation..


Kyle

By cartner on Saturday, October 06, 2001 - 05:12 pm: Edit

Ok, so the expedition rack is basically an Adventure rack with higher sides? Thats what I"m looking for I think. I need to be able to carry a lot of bulk, not neccessarily a lot of weight, across country. The expedition looks good to me for taht. HOw much does that cost then? and where? the websites listed don't really show a price.....if you have one, how much was an expedition rack? and from where? (By the way, I did MAR today, and will be there tomorrow, it rules..that is the coolest thing EVER!)

By Craig on Saturday, October 06, 2001 - 06:57 pm: Edit

john-
I read the 55lbs 'bs' in the LandRover Kit Guide at work. I'm from the dealer in Denver. i was following this thread and thought you guys would get a kick out of that.
I've seen both LR Adenventure and Hannibal racks loaded down with enough junk to warp the raingutters.
never liked the way my RR behaved w/ it's 1/2 length rack much less a full length. sold it a few months ago, and it paid for 33's.

weight is the enemy!

Craig

By Kyle on Sunday, October 07, 2001 - 05:23 am: Edit

Yeah Craig , that load rating cracks me up. They obviously are covering their asses there...
Weight adds to the the challenge man...


Kyle

By Rob Davison (Pokerob) on Sunday, October 07, 2001 - 07:03 am: Edit

OK Norman I was thinking of how to do an easy experiment to prove that just because you have a bar going along the gutter that it wouldn't dissipate the weight better. Because in theory it sounds good,,, then I took a look at he rack...

Well, it's obvious. You still have legs coming down in three places. If you want your "spreading the weight out over a larger area to work" then you would need one solid piece of metal arcing over from the rack down to the gutter. That would help to dissipate the weight more evenly. But it would look like hell and the alpine window would be useless.

To prove this I thought up a small scenario...

take large sheet of copper about 1/8" thk (3mm)

And place your Hannibal rack on it. Now run up and jump on it. Take the rack off the copper sheet and inspect the impressions left behind. You will find the deeper dents will be where the 3 legs touch the copper and you will have a not so deep line running down from leg to leg.

This would prove that the bulk of the weight is transmitted buy the legs.

Now jump on just the rear of the rack and then just the front of the rack.. You would find dents extremely deep in the front or rear portion respectively. Depending on where you jumped, and it would actually want to lift front/rear of the rack off the ground when you don't jump right in the center.

so these three scenarios mimic weight of a few hundred pounds being on the roof when you hit a bump. where ever you put the weight the legs still transmit it down to the gutter... so more legs and there placement above the main pillars to the truck make more sense.

rd

By jay caragay (Jcaragay) on Sunday, October 07, 2001 - 07:37 pm: Edit

Kyle-

I guess I'm not yet "getting it".

Your statement makes it seem that the gutters are only attached at the pillar points and, therefore, directly supported by such.

But aren't the gutters attached throughout the length of the roof? Wouldn't this also act as a means of "spreading out" the load?

By Kyle on Monday, October 08, 2001 - 03:13 am: Edit

THe load on what Jay ? What is holding it all up?


Kyle

By volvolover on Monday, October 08, 2001 - 06:26 am: Edit

i've seen a volvo once carrying another volvo on the roof... do they have hannibal racks for volvo?

By Bluegill (Bluegill) on Monday, October 08, 2001 - 07:15 am: Edit

>"One bonus is the fact that you could flip your rig and sustain no damage."

I was being totally facetious here!

Blue

By Warren on Monday, October 08, 2001 - 09:38 am: Edit

If you say a rack can hold 6,000 lbs. then it shouldnt be a problem holding 4,800 lbs, right. Fifty dollars to anyone who can send me a detailed picture of a Discovery with an Adventure Roof Rack, in which the vehicle is turned upside down and there is no damage to the rack or the gutters of the vehicle

By Bluegill (Bluegill) on Monday, October 08, 2001 - 09:55 am: Edit

HELLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOO.....

By peter matusov on Monday, October 08, 2001 - 10:08 am: Edit

Warren,

it will take more than $50 bill

three ton roof rack cracked me up

peter

By Gregg Warnken (Gregg) on Monday, October 08, 2001 - 11:17 am: Edit

RAINGUTTER = WEAKEST LINK. Once you clamp the rack (any rack that mounts to the raingutter), the load is distributed by the raingutter, which does the same thing as the Hannibal rack with the bar along the gutter. Put each rack on a Disco...load 'em up each with 6000 lbs (?!?!?!)...and watch BOTH trucks' raingutters collapse. Doesn't matter how strong each rack is built...or how it is connected. Norman: you listening?

Gregg

By peter matusov on Monday, October 08, 2001 - 01:48 pm: Edit

Gregg,

who cares.
Some day some company will come up with a roof rack made out of railroad surplus, and claim it is load-rated at 50k pounds.

it doesn't matter if the rain gutter folds like rabbit's ears under the load of empty rack - let'em manufacturers make it stronger!

peter

By Ron on Tuesday, October 09, 2001 - 03:45 pm: Edit

What WILL happen is you will crap the pillars. Older RR are famous for it.

Get a little corrosion and load it down and go wheeling and crack. the steel shell is not that strong. Stress fractures do happen.

Occasional on road overloading is ok, but to carry more than 300lbs offroad or for long periods of time is asking for trouble.

Ron