|
|
Post by DaveJ98092 on May 27, 2015 18:53:19 GMT -5
Just looking for some info before I start amassing my parts and gluing metal together. My build will be single seat wide but maybe tandem seat long. So if you have a working or near working reverse trike please let me know.
1. What is the front track of your reverse trike? I know wider is better to a point.
2. Equal length control arms or not?
3. Handlebar or steering wheel?
4. C0ckpit fully inclosed, partial or full open? I ride in the rain and snow so leaning toward semi inclosed.
|
|
|
|
Post by mtntech on May 30, 2015 12:53:04 GMT -5
I would reconsider single seating. And fore and aft seating makes it too long. Best is side by side seating and you can go as wide as 80-81" on the front no problem. Unequal length A arms with the shorter on top of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by exlbuilder on Sept 4, 2015 19:16:38 GMT -5
I think that the choice for a two seater was pretty easy for me ..if you want to be a single man then start working long hours in the garage on a project that only you will use and you will only need a single seat....  The choice for side by side is made by looking at your female companion ....cute ....then side by side...not so....tandem... Seriously I think that a lot of partners do not want to be behind you for the trip. When we were picking out a project she wanted to be beside me and not behind ( she had lots of reasons, mostly visibility). For me, the common goal of having a machine for the both of us to enjoy makes the spending of time and resources easier. Also she enjoys helping out.... This way the machine moves ahead without friction. The Xzilarator was also chosen for another weird reason, we live in Ontario, Canada. They do not allow enclosed motorcycles right now. There are only two provinces in Canada that do not allow three wheeled enclosed trikes. The law basically states that you have to SIT ASTRIDE a three wheeler so bikes like the Can-Am Spyder are ok however we can not register a Polaris Slingshot. We feel that the law is going to change within two years maybe sooner as the traffic down south in the Toronto area is reaching maximum capacity and several small car (enclosed three wheelers) are already talking to law makers to allow these vehicles in Ontario. There is a potential 6 million people to sell to and the companies are pushing hard to get their products in to Ontario. Since the 80's I have loved the Tri-Magnum, Morgan and other three wheelers however I have not been in a position to build. So we are going to build the forward frame to the point where it will be finished and hang it up in the rafters waiting for the law to change. In the meantime I will send another email to the minister asking for a rule change....Meanwhile the wife and I will continue to drive the goldwing as is. The one problem with this build is the length of the unit,it is 112 inches long and a tandem would be a school bus...however I like the design as it allows the "simple joining " of the Goldwing and the fact it is two wide... Good luck with your decision |
|
|
|
Post by rv3maker on Oct 3, 2015 0:03:08 GMT -5
I would build a two seater or a single seater. I have the plans for the xilerator and the indycycle. I was going to get started on the indycycle . . .but I got to thinking about the issues I have from custom making recumbent trike bicycles and why I fear riding them on the highway. It is the fear of someone not seeing me and running me off the road.
If you translate that to motorcycles and motorized trike designs, then you have to think a bit about "crashability" and what happens if someone doesn't see you turning or at a stop . . . ? In a two seat trike . . a rear impact may send the doner bike through the body and seating area and hurt you (messed up shoulder/ribs?) but in a single seat design like the indycycle . . . .that 700-1000lb doner bike is coming right through your spine and neck/head . . ! That is the only reason why i have not started my indycycle build . . .it makes me d**n nervous!
I am trying to figure out if I do a customer design build for a two seater or an offset single seater based on the indycycle design.
Thoughts?
Edit: My doner bike is a 2002 Yamaha FZ1000
Rob
rv3maker
|
|
2rike
Full Member
Posts: 184 
|
Post by 2rike on Oct 3, 2015 12:48:53 GMT -5
Good choice of doner bike. very powerfull for the weight and a six speed box!
As for the chassis design for a trike, build a roll cage you would be happy to have a crash in, and then you have a starting point for a trike chassis
|
|
|
|
Post by DaveJ98092 on Oct 3, 2015 14:23:17 GMT -5
Good choice of donor bike. Very powerful for the weight and a six speed box! As for the chassis design for a trike, build a roll cage you would be happy to have a crash in, and then you have a starting point for a trike chassis. Funny but true. If the first thing higher than the nose and roll cage is your head, go back to engineering it. You can also add a few steel braces between the engine and C0CKPIT to deflect the engine down in a crash from behind. I am more worried about sliding UNDER a vehicle with nothing in front of my face to stop the vehicle's bumper from smashing my pumpkin head. |
|
2rike
Full Member
Posts: 184
|
Post by 2rike on Oct 3, 2015 14:36:27 GMT -5
These are the Dimensions
of my 2rike if it helps
Wheel base : 2.300mm
Width: 1.840mm
Length: 3.200mm
Height: 1.170mm
Weight: 360Kgs (Hopefully when complete)
|
|
|
|
Post by mtntech on Oct 8, 2015 9:38:22 GMT -5
Just looking for some info before I start amassing my parts and gluing metal together. My build will be single seat wide but maybe tandem seat long. So if you have a working or near working reverse trike please let me know. 1. What is the front track of your reverse trike? I know wider is better to a point. 2. Equal length control arms or not? 3. Handlebar or steering wheel? 4. C0ckpit fully inclosed, partial or full open? I ride in the rain and snow so leaning toward semi inclosed. Dave, here you go. A well proportioned, well balanced 2 wheel drive RT.   |
|
|
|
Post by DaveJ98092 on Nov 13, 2015 1:38:23 GMT -5
Just an update. Partially due to my accident 4/17/15, I had to retire from work on 11/07/2015 due to not being able to do the job 100%. I was a Telephone Repair/Installer and was required to climb telephone poles up to 40 feet at times. So in retirement I will have time to start figuring out a build.
If anyone has a set of unused plans they want to sell.... On paper please, I am not CAD minded. Andrew's CAD drawings are so nice looking on paper but I can not get my head around how CAD works. I may take a Intro to CAD class in Jan 16 and see if I can figure it out.
|
|
dain
Junior Member
Posts: 63
|
Post by dain on Nov 13, 2015 9:12:44 GMT -5
CAD is a great tool to be able to use - there is A LOT of material online to help you learn, but an actual class would certainly be the best! In my experience I'd recommend finding a class that teaches you Solidworks. Autodesk Inventor is similar with respect to user friendly but not as powerful. Creo (Pro/E) is very powerful but horribly counter intuitive.
As for all of the opinions on having 1 or 2 seats - it all depends on the goal of the vehicle. If the goal is to build a vehicle for commuting.. efficiency.. or flat out performance a single seat is the way to go. If cruising around for fun is the goal, it's always more fun to bring a passenger!
|
|
|
|
Post by Liteway on Nov 13, 2015 9:32:53 GMT -5
Dain
"As for all of the opinions on having 1 or 2 seats - it all depends on the goal of the vehicle. If the goal is to build a vehicle for commuting.. efficiency.. or flat out performance a single seat is the way to go. If cruising around for fun is the goal, it's always more fun to bring a passenger"
Exactly.
But just to stir the puddin if I wanted side by side seating, I'd buy an old Miata and Modify the hell out of it. You would probably wind up with a something much more comfortable, usable, registerable and insurable. The sky is the limit with mods and you could build to any performance level or personal expression you can afford. No need to fear the weather. .
A trike is a bigger attention gitter, if that's your bag.
There is no single seat equivalent so you have to make your own. It offers gains in efficiency and compactness not obtainable in a side by side.
Ok, I'm braced. Let me have it.
|
|
dain
Junior Member
Posts: 63
|
Post by dain on Nov 13, 2015 11:20:41 GMT -5
triplethreat - Funny you mention a Miata... I built a 2-seat - and I did start with an old Miata (but just the K member, steering, and front suspension) LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by Liteway on Nov 23, 2015 13:20:49 GMT -5
Dave, here you go. A well proportioned, well balanced 2 wheel drive RT. [/quote] Cool Mtntech. Big honkin turbo motor, front wheel drive, top mounted radiator. No paint on the frame, stainless? Unconventional. Can you give us an idea how it's working out for you? Any body work planned? Looks like you are enjoying yourself. Car Show? |
|
|
|
Post by mtntech on Nov 24, 2015 1:14:08 GMT -5
Triplethreat, It's basically a proof of concept vehicle . It is unconventional, and reception has been very positive. Have over 1100 miles on it and am quite happy so far, but I will make a few changes. The tranny will be changed for an S2000 tranny. Right now it's a TKO600. Engine is a 2 liter Honda that will be turboed next year. I chose an automotive powerplant because I find that bike engines lack the torque I desired. Also too noisy.The FWD does a great job of putting the power to the ground. The frame is mild steel. I live in Central Oregon where corrosion is not much of an issue. Bodywork is in progress. I have taken it to a few shows. It weighs 1500lbs as you see it but could easily be at least 150 lbs. lighter.
|
|
dain
Junior Member
Posts: 63
|
Post by dain on Nov 24, 2015 14:17:12 GMT -5
I don't understand what you have done that could be Patented. You have essentially taken the engine weight off of your drive wheels and put it behind you where in a crash kinetic energy will work against you big time smashing the occupants into whatever object was impacted. I only bring this up because when I read or hear someone say "Patent Pending" I only hear it in a kocky tone.
|
|
|
|
Post by mtntech on Nov 24, 2015 21:11:21 GMT -5
I don't understand what you have done that could be Patented. You have essentially taken the engine weight off of your drive wheels and put it behind you where in a crash kinetic energy will work against you big time smashing the occupants into whatever object was impacted. I only bring this up because when I read or hear someone say "Patent Pending" I only hear it in a kocky tone. I have removed the PP. Happy now? I will not bother explaining it to you. It has been deemed allowable by the USPTO and we are moving forward. Perhaps you should bring up your engine placement concerns with Ferrari, Lamborghini, Honda, Toyota, GM, Porsche, Lancia, Fiat and the multitude of other manufacturers that use a placement that concerns you! |
|
dain
Junior Member
Posts: 63
|
Post by dain on Nov 24, 2015 22:04:08 GMT -5
I reread my post and it probably came off more rude than I intended, so for that I apologize. That being said, the majority of the vehicle manufactureres you mention may have a rear (porsche) or mid engine setup - but the driving wheels are always in back and maybe also have awd. There is also a significant front crumple zone in each. My comment was a genuine concern for safety of the vehicle. Im sure whatever acronym place you had inspect the vehicle checked it was road worthy, but inspectors arent engineers. No Im not happy you removed your patent pending - I simply asked what you are tryong to patent, as a professional engineer I have knowledge and experience with the process and could likely save you some hassle. You are welcome to get your panties in a bunch and reply with some 14yo girl facebook status garbage like your last post, but I would prefer you take my concern as a professional.
|
|
|
|
Post by mtntech on Nov 27, 2015 12:25:41 GMT -5
I understand. The engineering community often comes across that way. From that came the dreaded 6 words......I'm an engineer, I can help. Don't get me wrong. Engineering is a noble profession. That being said, the vehicle is a proof of concept prototype....built to test the concept. It does not have a crumple zone, or airbags, ABS, stability control, traction control etc. A powerplant does not need to be over or very close to the drive wheels to be optimally placed. You must take the total package into account. What I have built is very well balanced as far as weight distribution is concerned. The CofG is also spot on, and the CofG height is nice and low. It puts the power to the road much better than a single wheel drive trike. The only thing better would be AWD.
|
|
2rike
Full Member
Posts: 184
|
Post by 2rike on Nov 27, 2015 14:53:35 GMT -5
Hello mtnteck, I like the layout of your RT, one question I have is how did you turn the direction of rotation of the propshaft round so that you didn't have five reverse gears and one forward? My 2rike RT has a balance point front to back just ahead of the roll bar behind the seats , do you know where the point of balance is between the front and back of your trik e is? You can see the point of balance when I lift it up on to the work stands with the block and tackle, Is the similar to other people's? |
|
|
|
Post by mtntech on Nov 27, 2015 20:32:29 GMT -5
2rike, I have admiring your panel progress (bucks,molds,panels). Wish you lived around the corner from me. Keep up the good work! To answer your questions, if you use a rear wheel drive differential it needs to be flipped upside down. My C of G is right at the lowest point of the seat, basically where the vehicle "feels" the weight of the occupants. C of G height is nice and low at 17". Width at the front (track) is 81".
|
|
