Nay,
Welcome to the board. I think you'll find the 80 an enjoyable replacement to your XJ and a great all rounder that will let you hit the trails as well as carry the family.
Regarding the Teds question, the answer is likely yes. The farther you put mass above the CG the more dramatically you impact rollover. In a typical rollover situation, there is some type of maneuvering involved, which simply means the effect of a roof load is magnified by inertia. 200lbs 3 feet above the CG may well have a far greater impact on the "dynamic CG" (includes handling input) than 800lbs at the CG. I don't have the figs in front of me but recall the CG on the 80 is around the height of the shifter selector on the center console.
Roof loads have a tremendous impact on handling while driving on roads, which obviously must be done to get to the trail. I'm an advocate of being prepared for the unexpected, which includes someone blowing a stop sign in front of you as you trundle along at 65, a deer, or a kid chasing a ball. So I prefer keeping only light stuff up on the roof. The photos 80s with full length racks that are fully laden with spares, fuel, tire/rim, recovery tools, and camping gear are way cool. I love to look at them and dream about my own overland expedition ambitions. But I would never operate my 80 like that on the road or even on a dirt road at speed.
For me, the Thule system allows me to carry a LOT of stuff without the huge weight of a traditional rask with a floor, tube surrounds and longitudinal frames. It's more flexible from the standpoint of things I'm more apt to carry like a windsurfer, bikes, skis, a kayak, lumber from Home Depot and the weather sealed roof box. To each their own of course, but I think the full traditional rack's appeal has been diminished by the appearance and refinement of the cross member rack systems like Thule and others.
DougM
Welcome to the board. I think you'll find the 80 an enjoyable replacement to your XJ and a great all rounder that will let you hit the trails as well as carry the family.
Regarding the Teds question, the answer is likely yes. The farther you put mass above the CG the more dramatically you impact rollover. In a typical rollover situation, there is some type of maneuvering involved, which simply means the effect of a roof load is magnified by inertia. 200lbs 3 feet above the CG may well have a far greater impact on the "dynamic CG" (includes handling input) than 800lbs at the CG. I don't have the figs in front of me but recall the CG on the 80 is around the height of the shifter selector on the center console.
Roof loads have a tremendous impact on handling while driving on roads, which obviously must be done to get to the trail. I'm an advocate of being prepared for the unexpected, which includes someone blowing a stop sign in front of you as you trundle along at 65, a deer, or a kid chasing a ball. So I prefer keeping only light stuff up on the roof. The photos 80s with full length racks that are fully laden with spares, fuel, tire/rim, recovery tools, and camping gear are way cool. I love to look at them and dream about my own overland expedition ambitions. But I would never operate my 80 like that on the road or even on a dirt road at speed.
For me, the Thule system allows me to carry a LOT of stuff without the huge weight of a traditional rask with a floor, tube surrounds and longitudinal frames. It's more flexible from the standpoint of things I'm more apt to carry like a windsurfer, bikes, skis, a kayak, lumber from Home Depot and the weather sealed roof box. To each their own of course, but I think the full traditional rack's appeal has been diminished by the appearance and refinement of the cross member rack systems like Thule and others.
DougM
