Gutters surviving 420kg?

Hello.

This goes out to all the people, who mounted racks to gutters in the past, loaded them properly and left tarmac.

I visited my Gren once again today. This time with the gutter mounts I chose to build my rack for our RTT and maybe some other goodies in the future.

In order to keep flexibility and being able to fix things with standard material available in most places, I chose to build around these mounts:

DOT Gutter Mounts









( I did not really tighten them today)

What I observed before and unfortunately kept observing today with these mounts on my Gren: the gutters flex quite a bit.

The question I seek to have answered by folks with gutter mount experience: is this ok to load with 400kg camping with a family in a RTT?
My German engineering DNA is freaking out on me being able to move the gutter up and down few mm without much force.

Quoting the Grenadier handbook: „CAUTION: Only INEOS original Roof Rack / Roof Bars are allowed to fix on drain gutter. Pay load must allocate equally and pay load center of gravity should be as low as possible.“, I wonder, if the mounts they sell are distributing the weight differently?!
Is the metal piece in the gutter maybe not only a 4-5mm piece pushing the weight at the very outer line of the gutter, but coming with a 90 degree bend / piece attached moving the force closer to the vehicle?

The mounts I bought have a 160mm x 4mm foot each and therefore seem wider than the Rhino and much wider than the Frontrunner one.

The only parameter the full Rhino rack adds to length of the mounts and overall weight (rack plus luggage) is the fact that all mounts on one side are connected by the huge metal piece. That keeps a single mount pushing down independently. But buying the Ineos cross bars, would also leave me with the 150/420 kg weight limits, so I cannot see why my feet plus 40x40 or 40x80 alloy profiles shall be different in terms of weight distribution.

I plan to reach out to Ineos in this once again, but wanted to collect your swarm intelligence and experience to understand, if I am simply too worried or not.

Thanks

Timo

I agree to your concerns.

The arguments seem to be on the Ineos side in that the reinforcement distributes the load equally to all brackets on each side.

However, the 160 mm width of your brackets seem a lot to me and should mitigate the flexing.

I would take exact measurements of the Ineos/Rhino rack feet. And perhaps a good and full length inox inlay in the gutter, be it flat or angled, will yield more strength. It should rest on an elastic lining, e.g. hard rubber, to protect the gutter and smooth out force spikes that are inevitable when metal rests on metal in a sand and gravel contaminated environment.

The Ineos mounts appear to have a significantly larger footprint in the gutter, but perhaps more significantly the clamping force is applied to the horizontal element, whilst yours appear to be on the vertical element.

No way would I put 400kg up there without a properly designed spine mounting designed for rails.
I trust Rhino are doing this with a 3/4 design as they have with the full rack.

I’m also concerned about those bolts not being flush with the mounting bracket. I don’t think they’d handle rough roads before they either lossened, or worse, bent.

I’ve never used gutter mounted brackets for off road conditions before (just more sturdy roof mounts), but looking at the IG, and having felt how much flex they have, I’d really want some sort of reinforced bar along the ridge to provide some sort of additional structure and strength there.

I need to have a good look at the mounting on the Rhinorack before I commit to it.

bigleonski said:

I’m also concerned about those bolts not being flush with the mounting bracket. I don’t think they’d handle rough roads before they either lossened, or worse, bent.

Click to expand...

Yes that struck me too. It looks to need a spacer plate the thickness of the gutter lip, or marginally smaller, to get it sit parallel.

The slotted holes also mean any loss of clamping will allow a relatively large vertical load movement on bumpy roads with the possibility of the rack jumping out of the gutter.

My rack has the clamping bolts vertical, the Ineos rack seems to have them inclined at an angle just off vertical.

DCPU said:

Yes that struck me too. It looks to need a spacer plate the thickness of the gutter lip, or marginally smaller, to get it sit parallel.

The slotted holes also mean any loss of clamping will allow a relatively large vertical load movement on bumpy roads with the possibility of the rack jumping out of the gutter.

My rack has the clamping bolts vertical, the Ineos rack seems to have them inclined at an angle just off vertical.

Click to expand...

This is not about the bolts. I can put a spacer and as I said, I did not fully aligned and tighten it as as did not have the crossbars.

The visit was about measuring distance of the platform to the roof.

One can manage all that, but those flex gutters stopping and catching 150kg driving and hosting 400kg over night?

I do not want to believe my 10year old Citroen family car managed something the Gren can not!?

bigleonski said:

I’m also concerned about those bolts not being flush with the mounting bracket. I don’t think they’d handle rough roads before they either lossened, or worse, bent.

I’ve never used gutter mounted brackets for off road conditions before (just more sturdy roof mounts), but looking at the IG, and having felt how much flex they have, I’d really want some sort of reinforced bar along the ridge to provide some sort of additional structure and strength there.

I need to have a good look at the mounting on the Rhinorack before I commit to it.

Click to expand...

My concerns exactly...the fitting below purely shows how simple things can be and work.​

​

Smittybilt Rain Gutter Clamps HDS-6​

5 out of 5 stars ( 2 )

Part Number: SMT-HDS-6

The base of the fitting is going to sit back closer to the roof meeting the gutter for strength and the outside fitting is really holding it in the gutter...this is a pretty good example of one but I know there are more...really square on...not too many angles

Max said:

My concerns exactly...the fitting below purely shows how simple things can be and work.​

​

Smittybilt Rain Gutter Clamps HDS-6​

5 out of 5 stars ( 2 )

Part Number: SMT-HDS-6

The base of the fitting is going to sit back closer to the roof meeting the gutter for strength and the outside fitting is really holding it in the gutter...this is a pretty good example of one but I know there are more...really square on...not too many angles

Click to expand...

Maybe my English is too bad, but what you guys discuss is something completely different and does not put any confidence in the strength of the gutter, no?

Also the Smittybilt ones apply all the force at the very outer piece of the gutter and do that on a much shorter foot. So do the Frontrunner ones.

So it is that we better take those handles into the setup as BSI does? Shall we rest the setup on those plastic / rubber rails on the roof?

How come nobody is discussing this as we all pay loads of money for something that is promised to be a solid work horse?

das mo said:

Maybe my English sucks, but what you guys discuss is something completely different and does not put any confidence in the strength of the gutter, no?

Also the Smittybilt ones apply all the force at the very outer piece of the gutter and do that on a much shorter foot. So do the Frontrunner ones.

So it is that we better take those handles into the setup as BSI does? Shall we rest the setup on those plastic / rubber rails on the roof?

How come nobody is discussing this as we all pay loads of money for something that is promised to be a solid work horse?

Click to expand...

Sorry Das Mo. Yes my comment at least was just on how your pictures are, as presented.

The issue I have with the photo of the mount you have taken, and the picture of the brackets you have posted from the internet is the fittings to the gutter more than anything. I would want something that is moulded / shaped to the same format as the IG gutter, and therefore providing a strong and well secured anchor for the rack.

And yes, I have an underlying concern about mounting something that potentially holds 150kg / 400kg on those gutters (that I think need to be much stronger than they are) without some additional bracing along the length of the rail.

I’m not sure how that can be achieved, or if my concerns are unfounded.

I think for normal tarmac travel and light offroad they will hold up, but for day in day out rough travel I have as I said concerns.

I suppose they used these in Namibia so I’d really love to know if they just used them as is or if there was additional bracing etc.

Did that clarify my comment and address what you were looking for feedback wise?

I'm a bit confused regarding the roof loading: it says 420kg (static) and 150kg dynamic.
The roof has strips designed to support the "roof load".
My question is whether the roof loading (static and dynamic) is designed to accommodate a "distributed" load across the entire roof plus gutters, or by the gutters alone. Either way, I've not seen any designs which might satisfy both sets of criteria and I share concerns of @bigleonski

Thanks @bigleonski.

Somebody out there must know.

Fall back is to order those Rhino crossbars from Ineos and make it a warranty claim if things go south.

Hope we solve this before many of us hopefully hit road and dirt this summer.

Tazzieman said:

No way would I put 400kg up there without a properly designed spine mounting designed for rails.
I trust Rhino are doing this with a 3/4 design as they have with the full rack.

Click to expand...

I am not going to use the Rhino but making your own system is a bit crazy to me.
You could void your warranty, insurance and legal rights.
In Australia third party insurance covers you for up to $20 Million................provided everything on your vehicle is legal.

DenisM said:

I'm a bit confused regarding the roof loading: it says 420kg (static) and 150kg dynamic.
The roof has strips designed to support the "roof load".
My question is whether the roof loading (static and dynamic) is designed to accommodate a "distributed" load across the entire roof plus gutters, or by the gutters alone.

Click to expand...

Isn't it either?

The roof itself has the 150kg load rating, presumably as any load has assumed to be dynamic and "distributed".

The static rating is given for the roofrack, which is gutter mounted. In the accessories brochure it's presented a little differently. The rack is listed as having a weight of 60kg; and then the Payload (DYNAMIC/STATIC) is stated as: 90kg / 360kg.

DCPU said:

Isn't it either?

The roof itself has the 150kg load rating, presumably as any load has assumed to be dynamic and "distributed".

The static rating is given for the roofrack, which is gutter mounted. In the accessories brochure it's presented a little differently. The rack is listed as having a weight of 60kg; and then the Payload (DYNAMIC/STATIC) is stated as: 90kg / 360kg.

Click to expand...

And buying the Rhino Crossbars from Ineos, that have less weight than the full rack, one would be allowed to load more than those 90kg. All gutter mounted. Therefore not solving my issue at all. Every solution that builds on those gutters only, concerns me as of now.

I asked Ineos few weeks back on how I have to understand the role of rails, bars and gutters in their 150kg equation and if the weight limit can be reached by only building on one of them or e.g. needs to use at least 2, like gutter plus rails. Got no answer yet.

They have made it fairly simple
However you put something up top it can be 150kg dynamic (while the vehicle is moving) and 420kg Static (while the vehicle is stationary and relatively flat) .
As the Rhino rack has been eating junk food it takes up 60kg of both those numbers.
Leaving 90kg dynamic and 360kg static.
If you just strap something down to the roof without any rack you will have the full 150kg and 420kg available.

DaveB said:

They have made it fairly simple
However you put something up top it can be 150kg dynamic (while the vehicle is moving) and 420kg Static (while the vehicle is stationary and relatively flat) .
As the Rhino rack has been eating junk food it takes up 60kg of both those numbers.
Leaving 90kg dynamic and 360kg static.
If you just strap something down to the roof without any rack you will have the full 150kg and 420kg available.
View attachment 7811885
View attachment 7811884

Click to expand...

I take it your jesting Dave with your last sentence ?
Good luck to anybody who wants to lash 150kg directly onto the roof then drive out into the bush down some corrugated roads

DaveB said:

They have made it fairly simple
However you put something up top it can be 150kg dynamic (while the vehicle is moving) and 420kg Static (while the vehicle is stationary and relatively flat) .
As the Rhino rack has been eating junk food it takes up 60kg of both those numbers.
Leaving 90kg dynamic and 360kg static.
If you just strap something down to the roof without any rack you will have the full 150kg and 420kg available.
View attachment 7811885
View attachment 7811884

Click to expand...

That is not true. Brochure clearly states 100kg when putting straight on the rails.



Still crazy.

But no other numbers listed for the crossbars than the 150/420, which still keeps my initial question unanswered: Does someone out there trust the gutters to survive that?

Logsplitter said:

I take it your jesting Dave with your last sentence ?
Good luck to anybody who wants to lash 150kg directly onto the roof then drive out into the bush down some corrugated roads

Click to expand...

I wouldn't do it but, it is designed for it.
You can load directly onto these rubber strips and lash down to the rails on the side
Pretty sure @DCPU put up patent drawings about a year ago showing their load rating
Personally I would limit myself to a SUP or kayak carrier done that way but not 150KG

DaveB said:

I wouldn't do it but, it is designed for it.
You can load directly onto these rubber strips and lash down to the rails on the side
Pretty sure @DCPU put up patent drawings about a year ago showing their load rating
Personally I would limit myself to a SUP or kayak carrier done that way but not 150KG


View attachment 7811899View attachment 7811900

Click to expand...

I get what you’re saying and I was being light hearted however if people take those figure’s literally and go off road they’re going to get an unpleasant surprise and a very noisy journey. Those roof protection strips whatever they are will help for sure though. I think loading directly onto the roof is fine for a trip to the DIY store to pick a few sheets of ply up for instance but not off-road use. Very happy to be corrected if anybody wants to try it but my theory is if you want to carry heavy loads use a roof rack even though the roof rack itself maybe heavy.