Has anyone else noticed that the roof rails fitted to the estate are wider at the front (40 inches) than at the back, (37 inches) inside measurement, ie, not parallel. I bought a set of Paddy Hopkirk bars advertised for the mark 11 but find that the front bar has to be fitted about a third back from the front of the rail. Seem odd.:confused:

Two cars on my drive - Octy 2 and Suzuki GV. Both of them have roof bars which are not parrallel. Probably something to do with the design of the car - roof tapers?

Yes the roof tapers, also the cross bars do not need to be fitted in any one position surely they are width adjustable? All Paddy Hopkirk bars I ever sold had the bar clamp on a slide in the bar......

Yes - I was surprised when I bought bars for mine. I bought standard rectangular section Atera bars which are adjustable. It nearly caught me out because the bars are supplied with some rubber seals which need to be cut to length which fit in the slot under the bars.

..........and what a whistling you get if you don't fit those seals into your bars!

Hi. The widest width that these Paddy Hopkirk bars will accept is 39 inches, The reason I raise the query is that a friend with a Octavia 1 estate dosn't have this problem, his rails are parallel. Seems strange to alter it.

Octavia 1 roof rails are definitely wider at the front than at the rear! I have no ideas how your friend has parallel bars because the roof gets narrower toward the rear. I am looking down onto my Mk1 2002 estate now (from upstairs window) and it is quite markedly tapered. When I fit my Paddy Hopkirk bars the rear one has a distinctly longer overhang on the rear bar than the front, especially if you move the fornt one to the first third of the rail.