LocostUSA.com

I am aware there are some pretty smart people on this board that have a lot of experience in understanding the characteristics of both and wanted to know what is the benefits of one over the other.. I am debating which frame would overall be best.. I dont plan to make the frame sit 2 people due to the goal of keeping it very light.. so which style would you think would be best..

Example R-trike: http://exomotive.com/tr1ke/
MEV tR1ke modified to 1 seater..
Found forum post of someone who made one in Europe 1 seater only and he stated his FINAL WEIGHT was 599lbs and he used factory Yamaha R1 bike frame and swapped the rear tire out with a low profile car tire (semi slick) on motorcycle rim with no modifications needed.. and stated that he cannot spin the rear tires unless he holds the brakes and does it or if the tire is super cold..

If i go the R-trike way.. using a yamaha R1 frame integrated into the trike frame.. i should be able to get around tag issues using the R1 VIN and changing the title from
Year: 10
Make: Yamaha
Model: R1
to
Year: 10
Make: Yamaha
Model: R1 Custom

... i know a friend who has a sand rail that streetable that he used the vw bug VIN and just modded the origional title and been driving it for years this way..

You don't define what characteristics are being used to define 'best' in this specific situation. In other words, what are all of the reasons for looking at such vehicles and how are they prioritized relative to each other.

It sounds like getting a home build or kit car titled may be very difficult where you live? If so this could put the advantage squarely in favor of the trike as the 'best' option, regardless of performance figures. Then again, you may want to check with the clubs you'll be hitting the track with regarding safety regulations and to see if they even allow trikes. A trike may be too much 'car' for most bike clubs and simultaneously too much 'bike' for many/most car clubs. I would also be very surprised if a 3-wheeled vehicle were to out perform an equivalent 4-wheeled vehicle with all else being equal, and even often when it's not equal. So if raw performance numbers are more important than anything else, the 4-wheeled vehicle likely has a distinct advantage for being the 'best' choice. Although, if the track performance involves a lot of higher speed use where aerodynamics plays a more significant role in performance, the no exo-framed vehicle will be the 'best' vehicle for the job.

_________________
-Justin

"Orville Wright did not have a pilots license." - Gordon MacKenzie

I can't answer your technical dilemma. I'll leave that up to the more informed.

As forThis was common back in the day. How far back depends on your state. very few states if any will legally allow this. Most will definitely not today. Texas, definitly not. We just had that discussion a week or two ago. Do your homework real well ahead of time if you plan on streeting this project.

_________________
Chuck.

“Any suspension will work if you don’t let it.” - Colin Chapman

Visit my ongoing MGB Rustoration log: over HERE

Or my Wankel powered Locost log : over HERE

And don't forget my Cushman Truckster resto Locostusa.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=17766

Three-wheeled vehicles can be designed/built to a performance spec comparable to a four-wheeled vehicle.

bnc

storx
that is a loaded question .... answers are pretty much a matter of personal opinion

may check out this video (Morgan 3wheeler vs Seven) ;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=htI3weS49cc

interesting slides ...
however, i think the Morgan is suffering from too much "lean" and may would benefit from experimenting with a swaybar
somehow the slide scenes of the leaning car with the driver hanging off the side make me uncomfortable

(warning; personal opinion ) my feeling is that a 3 wheeler should be a pavement hugging (low CofG) narrow body single seat car ...
if i wanted two seats side by side i would definitely look into building a 4 wheeler instead

_________________
- Stephan -

One real world data point for as apples-to-apples as you can get for a direct 3 vs 4 wheels comparison.

http://www.locostusa.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2346

_________________
-Justin

"Orville Wright did not have a pilots license." - Gordon MacKenzie

Don't forget about these "trike" stability demonstrations:

_________________
-Andrew
Build Log
Youtube

LOL

yeah ... i personally would never consider a regular Trike
however, a Reverse Trike seems to have very different driving dynamics

what attracts me to building a R-T is its simplicity, shortness and light weight
obviously there is no need for a differential as well as a limited slip devise (that alone removes a lot of weight & headache)

it can also be a very cheap and straight forward project if your smart about re-using as much as possible from the donor bike.

_________________
- Stephan -

i like the fact that it simplifies wiring, cause its built into the bike engine, only 3 wires are used for the gauge cluster.. so thats nice only have to extend 3 wires, and the benefit of a sequential transmission..
Also motocycle engines are reasonable to find with low miles.. yes a car engine will last longer if you drove it for years and years.. but who builds a locost or reverse trike and puts 25k miles on it every year... if that is the case.. just replace the motor every few years.. as newer technology fades cheaper by the year..