This review compares three competing brands of boat rollers that are similarly priced, these being Seattle Sports, Malone and Codinter. All use identical suction cups that no doubt were sourced from the same manufacturer. They all operate the same and hold equally tight, notwithstanding that one rates the maximum load at 70 pounds and the other two at 220. It seems that the holding power would be the same for all three. The suction cups being identical, the only difference between them is the design of the rollers, the material the rollers are made from, and the quality of the aluminum tubing that attaches the rollers to the suction cups. The Seattle Sports has a wide stance and a low, flat foam roller. Malone and Codinter use hourglass shaped rollers, which I think are better than a flat roller. The Malone roller is made from hard rubber and the Seattle Sports and Codinter rollers are made from the same sturdy foam. The aluminum tubing used by Seattle Sports is the thinnest gauge aluminum tube, the Codinter is intermediate weight/thickness, and the Malone uses a heavy gauge aluminum tubing. All three weights are adequate for the purpose, so I see no benefit to having a heavier gauge rather than a lighter one. The Malone unit is heavy all around, sturdily built. Their roller is hard rubber and it’s heavy and doesn't “give” under the weight of the boat. The Codinter foam roller works well without the heavy weight of the solid rubber, and the foam deforms somewhat under the weight of the boat, which might be a good thing. The hard rubber roller doesn't have as much rolling resistance as the foam, so the boat goes up easier than the foam equivalent, but it it also comes down quicker, which could pose a control issue with a heavy boat. I can't decide which is safer to use, especially if loading the boat in a stiff crosswind. I liked the “feel” of the foam roller and the lighter weight of the foam units as a whole. If you have a vehicle with a “shark fin” roof antenna, you want the roller that gives the best clearance, so the hull doesn't damage the antenna. The Malone gives the highest clearance, followed closely by the Codinter, and the Seattle Sports alffords the least clearance, but it's probably adequate for most vehicles. It’s difficult to get both suction cups securely attached simultaneously. You need two hands to attach each suction cup with all three models, so you need to attach one suction cup, then use both hands on the other. The Malone attached easiest, followed by Codinter (watch how you place the cups, so the charging handles don't hit the rear roof spoiler.) Seattle Sports was easy to attach because the suction cups levers out to the sides, but I don't understand what advantage is served by the wide space between the cups. The rubber roller on the Malone has a chemical smell, like the rubber wheels on new kayak carts. The other two had no offensive smell. If you had to carry the Malone roller inside the vehicle for any length of time, the rubber off-gassing smell might give you a headache. In an ideal world, I'd like the Malone design with the Codinter roller on it. The Malone design allows three positions to adjust to different style vehicles and the Codinter and Seattle Sports allow two adjustment positions. They’re all okay in this respect. With all three brands, the window must be absolutely clean so the suction cups get the best grip on the window. Codinter gives you a microfiber cleaning cloth as a reminder. All three brands leave suction cup marks on the rear window, but the marks are easily removed with window cleaner and leave no permanent marks. In the end, it came to a decision between the Malone and the Codinter, and I chose the Codinter because of the softer foam roller, and because the foam roller didn't smell bad like the rubber roller on the Malone. I returned the Seattle Sports and the Malone. Using any of these rollers didn't seem significantly better than side-loading the boat on an SUV using a simple, rubber-backed bathroom rug, however I kept the Codinter to give me an extra option to rear-load in circumstances where side-loading would be more difficult.
