• Sign Up! To view all forums and unlock additional cool features

    Welcome to the #1 Explorer ST Forum and Explorer ST community dedicated to Explorer ST owners and enthusiasts. Register for an account, it's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the Explorer ST Forum today!


How can I carry 3 kayaks with no roof rails?

Messages
6
Reactions
0
Points
1
Location
NJ
Vehicle
2021 Explorer ST
#1
My 2021 ST (with sunroof) doesn't have roof rails. Wasn't an issue until recently, when we bought 3 kayaks and now I'm struggling with how we can carry them. Has anyone found a good system that can be used without rails? Have you successfully had rails installed? Getting a trailer is not an option.
 

Dale5403

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,974
Reactions
1,988
Points
262
Location
Mondovi, WI, USA
#2
Factory roof rails can be installed with no problems. But it is limited to 75 pounds with with the sunroof. So unless your kayaks are 25 pounds a piece or less I wouldn't recommend it.
 

OP
S
Messages
6
Reactions
0
Points
1
Location
NJ
Vehicle
2021 Explorer ST
Thread Starter #3
Factory roof rails can be installed with no problems. But it is limited to 75 pounds with with the sunroof. So unless your kayaks are 25 pounds a piece or less I wouldn't recommend it.
Only 75lbs if factory installed? They're not attached to the frame?
 

Dale5403

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,974
Reactions
1,988
Points
262
Location
Mondovi, WI, USA
#4
Only 75lbs if factory installed? They're not attached to the frame?
It is roof mounted but if you check the owners manual they give the rating on page 282. Any reason a trailer is not an option? That would be your best bet.
 

OP
S
Messages
6
Reactions
0
Points
1
Location
NJ
Vehicle
2021 Explorer ST
Thread Starter #5
It is roof mounted but if you check the owners manual they give the rating on page 282. Any reason a trailer is not an option? That would be your best bet.
No place to keep it, not worth the price for the use we would get out of it. I'd rather turn in my lease for another ST with rails at that point
 

Dale5403

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,974
Reactions
1,988
Points
262
Location
Mondovi, WI, USA
#6
No place to keep it, not worth the price for the use we would get out of it. I'd rather turn in my lease for another ST with rails at that point
With out the moon roof the rating does go up to 165 pounds. Would that be enough?
 

OP
S
Messages
6
Reactions
0
Points
1
Location
NJ
Vehicle
2021 Explorer ST
Thread Starter #7
With out the moon roof the rating does go up to 165 pounds. Would that be enough?
Yes, we're at 123lbs for all 3. One is a 20lb kids kayak
 

Messages
98
Reactions
44
Points
17
Location
Melbourne, FL, USA
#9
Stick em out the back? You can get one of those hitch mounted extenders if you need some room inside. People usually use them with trucks so I dunno that running around with the hatch open is your cup of tea but it's an option.

IIf the factory rails only hold 75 pounds I'd get a Thule system anyways. That's simply not enough for any real use. Empty cargo boxes weigh almost that much.
 

Cdubya

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,693
Reactions
842
Points
262
Location
NE Ohio
Vehicle
2020 Explorer ST
#10
I wonder if the roof rail specs are born out of structural concern or if they are concerned about top loaded weight being a rollover risk. I would think that it would be safe hauling 3 plastic kayaks that weight 125lb and driving conservatively as appropriate.
 

Messages
98
Reactions
44
Points
17
Location
Melbourne, FL, USA
#11
I wonder if the roof rail specs are born out of structural concern or if they are concerned about top loaded weight being a rollover risk. I would think that it would be safe hauling 3 plastic kayaks that weight 125lb and driving conservatively as appropriate.
So this whole thing got me curious, so I did some researching.

It appears that most of the time, the weight limit is from the crossbars. They build them semi weak because they've specified a weight limit that is overall low, out of concern for top loading.

If you look at what people do on overland builds, etc, more often than not they are retaining the factory rails, but not the cross bars, and if anything, they add more cross rails. I suspect it's a mixture of CYA legally and they have tonrate things with the biggest moron on the planet driving as aggressively as possible now.

I suspect as long as you're not running mountain roads with kayaks on the roof and hitting corners at max speed, you'll be fine.
 

Dale5403

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,974
Reactions
1,988
Points
262
Location
Mondovi, WI, USA
#12
So this whole thing got me curious, so I did some researching.

It appears that most of the time, the weight limit is from the crossbars. They build them semi weak because they've specified a weight limit that is overall low, out of concern for top loading.

If you look at what people do on overland builds, etc, more often than not they are retaining the factory rails, but not the cross bars, and if anything, they add more cross rails. I suspect it's a mixture of CYA legally and they have tonrate things with the biggest moron on the planet driving as aggressively as possible now.

I suspect as long as you're not running mountain roads with kayaks on the roof and hitting corners at max speed, you'll be fine.
Ford must feel that the moon roof affects the strength. Having less steel in the roof makes sense it would change things. They both use the same cross bars so there must be an other reason for the difference. I don't use mine so no experience just stating Fords load limit rating.
 

OP
S
Messages
6
Reactions
0
Points
1
Location
NJ
Vehicle
2021 Explorer ST
Thread Starter #13
That may be an option then. Kind of sucks though.
Yeah it does. I'd miss my sunroof :(
 

Dale5403

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,974
Reactions
1,988
Points
262
Location
Mondovi, WI, USA
#14
I dont have room for a trailer. And instead of spending money on a trailer I'd rather just trade in my lease early for another ST with rails
I seen that in your earlier reply and I'm not arguing that. That's for you to decide. I just think it sucks if you need to trade early to solve this issue. Nice to hear you get another Explorer. Good luck in what ever you decide to do.
 

OP
S
Messages
6
Reactions
0
Points
1
Location
NJ
Vehicle
2021 Explorer ST
Thread Starter #15
Yeah sorry for the double reply. I didn't realize I already responded ‍It's been a busy distracting day :ROFLMAO:
 

Messages
98
Reactions
44
Points
17
Location
Melbourne, FL, USA
#17
Ford must feel that the moon roof affects the strength. Having less steel in the roof makes sense it would change things. They both use the same cross bars so there must be an other reason for the difference. I don't use mine so no experience just stating Fords load limit rating.
Possibly, or the extra weight if the moonroof is already factored in to their top loading calculations. Basically the extra weight up top from the moonroof already is included in the "we thi k the vehicle won't roll over with this much weight on it".

Of note, that applies to all explorers. So a base with whatever the cheapest fleet spec suspension parts they could find is rated the same as a lowered and stiffened ST.

To be honest the whole thing is strange to me. Why build an "suv" with a roof rail that can't really even hold a pair of decent kayaks? What's going to be the point of a timberline model for off road adventures if you can't really use a roof basket or anything like that?
 

Dale5403

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,974
Reactions
1,988
Points
262
Location
Mondovi, WI, USA
#18
Possibly, or the extra weight if the moonroof is already factored in to their top loading calculations. Basically the extra weight up top from the moonroof already is included in the "we thi k the vehicle won't roll over with this much weight on it".

Of note, that applies to all explorers. So a base with whatever the cheapest fleet spec suspension parts they could find is rated the same as a lowered and stiffened ST.

To be honest the whole thing is strange to me. Why build an "suv" with a roof rail that can't really even hold a pair of decent kayaks? What's going to be the point of a timberline model for off road adventures if you can't really use a roof basket or anything like that?
You are not factoring in the steel cross members that have been removed for the moon roof. And why would there be any difference between models? I'm not an engineer but you are not making any valid points.
 

Messages
98
Reactions
44
Points
17
Location
Melbourne, FL, USA
#19
You are not factoring in the steel cross members that have been removed for the moon roof. And why would there be any difference between models? I'm not an engineer but you are not making any valid points.
Crossmembers can be done differently, instead of a bunch of little Crossmembers, you can do a smaller number of larger ones. There's a photo somewhere comparing the Crossmembers on the moonroof vs non moonroof explorers. While yes, the non moonroof cars have a few more smaller Crossmembers where the moonroof would be, but the moonroof models have a large boxed in area around the moonroof with larger Crossmembers. Think of a load beam if you remove a weight bearing wall in your house, you just require a substantially larger beam to support it over the opening vs a larger number of 2x4s.

Keep in mind, Ford has the same roof strength for a moonroof vs non moonroof model. That means their engineers designed and calculated them to have the same roof strength, and the roof can support the whole weight of the car in a rollover. If the roof can support the car, barring some sort of fastener issue (ex, the rails screw into factory installed nutserts that have a pullout force limit), the roof should hold whatever weight you need.

FWIW, I am an engineer. You might not be getting the validity of my points, and that's fine. That said, I think there's still some element of fear about explorers at Ford from the whole rollover thing in the 90s. I wouldn't be surprised if they went intentionally cautiousnfor anything rollover related as a result. Hell, as of a few years ago, uhaul wouldn't even rent trailers to explorers.
 



Top