Buying a small second hand Van

Life Cars & Motorcycles
21

[quote=“redwagon”][quote=“Ducked”] I’ve never seen ANY tadpole configuration 3-wheelers here, (they’re probably not dangerous enough) so neither have the cops, and I don’t think they’ll like it.

But havn’t we had this discussion before? Maybe I’ve been here too long.[/quote]

It might even be worth building such a thing just to precipitate a crackdown on the usual Ah Huangs that operate three-wheelers without any legal accountability.[/quote]

Err…If you don’t mind me saying so, that’s a bit schizoid, man. I’m not a psychologist, but seems to me if you try and be a loophole loving, auto-anarchist freedom fighter and a social control freak at the same time you might bust something.

Maybe you’ve been here too long :slight_smile:

22

[quote=“Ducked”][quote=“redwagon”][quote=“Ducked”] I’ve never seen ANY tadpole configuration 3-wheelers here, (they’re probably not dangerous enough) so neither have the cops, and I don’t think they’ll like it.

But havn’t we had this discussion before? Maybe I’ve been here too long.[/quote]

It might even be worth building such a thing just to precipitate a crackdown on the usual Ah Huangs that operate three-wheelers without any legal accountability.[/quote]

Err…If you don’t mind me saying so, that’s a bit schizoid, man. I’m not a psychologist, but seems to me if you try and be a loophole loving, auto-anarchist freedom fighter and a social control freak at the same time you might bust something.

Maybe you’ve been here too long :slight_smile:[/quote]
Haha. You think too much! :wink:

What I mean is, if I had the time to work on this I’d do it for s&g. If I got to drive it unmolested it’d be great. If I started a crackdown or a revision to close that loophole, that’d also be an acceptable outcome.

And, that ‘something’ you refer to has been maybe not quite bust, but certainly operating in strange and unexpected ways for quite some years now. :wink:

23

I knew what you meant.

Continuing the rather off topic 3-wheeler sub topic, I might have miss-used the term “tadpole configuration”, since Wikipedia refers to it as a “trike in reverse”. If they mean that literally, it implies that steering is by the rear wheel. Apart from forklifts (which I think usually have two rear wheels but close together so effectively one) and maybe some road rollers I can’t think of anything using that configuration so it may be especially unstabe at speed.

Pity because otherwise the cops might think you just happened to be always reversing your bog standard blue trike (at 180kph) when they saw you.

24

[quote=“Ducked”]
Pity because otherwise the cops might think you just happened to be always reversing your bog standard blue trike (at 180kph) when they saw you.[/quote]
Perfect. I’m sure the fact that the seat and steering wheel would be facing the ‘wrong’ direction wouldn’t even occur to them.

These are some guys who’s style I’m sure you’ll appreciate…

youtube.com/watch?v=WlC93lTEwBQ

Yeah yeah, wtlw can diaf.

25

[quote=“redwagon”][quote=“Ducked”]
Pity because otherwise the cops might think you just happened to be always reversing your bog standard blue trike (at 180kph) when they saw you.[/quote]
Perfect. I’m sure the fact that the seat and steering wheel would be facing the ‘wrong’ direction wouldn’t even occur to them.

[/quote]

Well, you could fake that, just in case you encounter a switched-on cop. Motorcycle handlebars and a polystyrene peasant looking over his/her shoulder while youre hunkered down in the Recaros up front (“back”) amoung the cargo.

Every Pole I’ve ever met has been mad.

Seriously though, are there any true “trikes in reverse”, and if not, why not? I’d have thought it’d be more stable, though the reversed steering linkage would be a little more complex.

26

[quote=“Ducked”]
Seriously though, are there any true “trikes in reverse”, and if not, why not? I’d have thought it’d be more stable, though the reversed steering linkage would be a little more complex.[/quote]
Why? Surely having the the front wheels doing the steering has them operating at a far lower slip andle, thus allowing them to provide more traction, and therefore a higher contribution to overall platform stability while cornering. I haven’t given much thought to rear-wheel steering before, so I could be completely wrong on this.
Front-wheel steering with the rear just following along is basically the same as a FWD, 4-wheel set up. You’d induce more body roll in the rear due to there being only a single fulcrum, but then you’d have vastly reduced body weight which should more than than offset that. Basically I’m thinking of a Morgan type thing with a typical transverse FWD powertrain in it.

27

[quote=“redwagon”][quote=“Ducked”]
Seriously though, are there any true “trikes in reverse”, and if not, why not? I’d have thought it’d be more stable, though the reversed steering linkage would be a little more complex.[/quote]
Why? Surely having the the front wheels doing the steering has them operating at a far lower slip andle, thus allowing them to provide more traction, and therefore a higher contribution to overall platform stability while cornering. I haven’t given much thought to rear-wheel steering before, so I could be completely wrong on this.
Front-wheel steering with the rear just following along is basically the same as a FWD, 4-wheel set up. You’d induce more body roll in the rear due to there being only a single fulcrum, but then you’d have vastly reduced body weight which should more than than offset that. Basically I’m thinking of a Morgan type thing with a typical transverse FWD powertrain in it.[/quote]

Meant more stable than a conventional trike, which I understand flip on braking turns. Your design is the obvious one to use if you’re recycling car bits, though I think some of the “tadpole” (if thats correct term, not sure now) kit cars use RWD because they can use a motorcycle drive train with that layout.

Steering on two wheels is intuitively superior to steering on one, but in the UK there have been quite a few trikes steering with the front wheel only (Bond, Reliant) which is inherently crap.

In contrast, I’ve never heard of ANY reverse trikes steering with the rear wheel only, so I wondered why.

The only actual reason to prefer it over your layout would be to minimise the apparent difference from a “standard” blue triuck/truckcycle (take your pick), and that maybe isn’t a very good reason.

28

[quote=“Ducked”]
Meant more stable than a conventional trike…[/quote]
Ah yes, but almost anything is more stable than a conventional trike eh? The Reliants and Bonds spring immediately to mind. Every one of those things I’ve ever seen showed signs of having been tipped on it’s side at least once. Hell, a drunken one-legged Scot is less likely to fall over in a turn.

That reminds me. I once knew a guy who put a Kawasaki H2 motor in a Reliant. :astonished: :loco:

29

[quote=“redwagon”][quote=“Ducked”]
Meant more stable than a conventional trike…[/quote]
Ah yes, but almost anything is more stable than a conventional trike eh? The Reliants and Bonds spring immediately to mind. Every one of those things I’ve ever seen showed signs of having been tipped on it’s side at least once. Hell, a drunken one-legged Scot is less likely to fall over in a turn.

That reminds me. I once knew a guy who put a Kawasaki H2 motor in a Reliant. :astonished: :loco:[/quote]

I’m getting to like this trike in reverse idea, though the fact that (AFAIK) there aren’t any implementations of it suggests there must be serious snags. I’ll have a poke around on’t web when I’ve finished my current proof-reading job.

I’m thinking maybe two steering positions, like IIRC some WWII scout cars (Dingo?) had, for beating a rapid retreat. You could drive it as a conventional trike for stealth in urban areas when the speeds are likely to be lower, and “go tadpole” out in the sticks. Oil injection to provide the expected 2-stroke smokescreen?

IIRC one of the early Bond microcars had no reverse gear and just reversed the engine, so it had the full gearbox range available both ways, but I THINK it was a 2-stroke, which might be easier to reverse.

Is it practical to do that with a 4-stroke?

If not one would be restricted to (rather low) reverse gear for the conventional trike operation, which would be stealthy but frustrating.

Edit: Thats nonsense of course. Got confused. A “conventional” LBT-based truckcycle transmission (I’m assuming that’s where the bits come from, since I can’t think of any other contemporary source of a small RWD transmission) will have its forward gears available for conventional trike operation, and only reverse available for “tadpole” operation. That’s no good, too slow.

Havn’t found much on rear steering tadpoles. A Wikipedia trike article suggests it increases the turning circle and you need a steering damper, but seems to confirm its more stable (than a conventional trike). It also mentions that the SST land speed record vehicle is effectively a rear-steering tadpole trike, though that’s a rather specialised application.

Some guy writing on recumbent bicycle design dismisses them as a gimmic that “steers like a forklift”, though he doesn’t bother to explain whats wrong with that.

And thats it. Not much to go on.

DAF 33 : Not a trike, of course, but because of its CVT scooter-style tranmission it too apparently had full speed available in both directions. Described as very hard to control in high speed reverse, with a pronounced tendency to spin.