I think the fwd transaxle from a car would be over built and would contribute to much to the weight category.
I keep thinking about ATV parts and drivetrain bits. The bigger 4x4 ATVs with automatic transmission can go 50-60 mph pretty easily. I would consider a front diff, engine and the transmission/transfer case. You might be able to use the front suspension. Bonus: most of the big ATVs have reverse and are water cooled for a personal heater.
Warren v wrote: The difficulty in using a FWD powertrain is overall height. FWD drivetrains are tall, meaning the driver needs to be more upright, meaning a higher CG, and less stability. Custom long a-arms would help. Does the GRM hivemind know of a FWD donor with a low-packaged drivetrain?
For a FWD trike to work, I think a powertrain with the engine in front of the front axle (Subaru, C900 Saab, Audi's, etc...) could be interesting. But out of all of those, the only one with a "low" CG is the Subaru. And it's engines are not known for their low fuel consumption.
Any other suggestions?
In reply to Warren v:
BRZ? 
More realistic- any Subie engine.
Although, I'm not sure if I would call it that big of penalty. Look at the front of the car you just finished- same kind of idea, and it's not as if it's that tall. Most of the smaller FWD engines that are being suggested are small, and some are even quite short.
Ok- it's not like how low you could be if you were laying right out in front. But this isn't a streamliner we are making- but a commuter. I would think a reasonably comfortable sitting position would be required.
fanfoy wrote:Warren v wrote: The difficulty in using a FWD powertrain is overall height. FWD drivetrains are tall, meaning the driver needs to be more upright, meaning a higher CG, and less stability. Custom long a-arms would help. Does the GRM hivemind know of a FWD donor with a low-packaged drivetrain?For a FWD trike to work, I think a powertrain with the engine in front of the front axle (Subaru, C900 Saab, Audi's, etc...) could be interesting. But out of all of those, the only one with a "low" CG is the Subaru. And it's engines are not known for their low fuel consumption. Any other suggestions?
Mercedes-Benz A-Class would be if you reconfigured the intake
RossD wrote: I think the fwd transaxle from a car would be over built and would contribute to much to the weight category. I keep thinking about ATV parts and drivetrain bits. The bigger 4x4 ATVs with automatic transmission can go 50-60 mph pretty easily. I would consider a front diff, engine and the transmission/transfer case. You might be able to use the front suspension. Bonus: most of the big ATVs have reverse and are water cooled for a personal heater.
For the original thread that is now locked- I thought that car would be perfect with ATV front chassis- all the hard desing work is done.
I'm still struggling with the ability of a Motorcycle based engine vs. a fuel economy car engine. Since we don't have access to the good fuel economy bike engines.. well you get my struggle....
I'm in SF this weekend, these little buggies are all over the place in the tourist areas.
49 cc scooter engine, registered as a scooter. That means you can drive on roads with a speed limit of less than 45. 380 lbs according to Wikipedia.
It's a pretty direct analogue of a scooter. If it rains, you'll get wet. This allows a whole lot of bypassing of difficult stuff (and heavy stuff) like doors and windshield wipers and a lot of sound deadening.
I'm thinking that roll bar is more of an aid to getting in and out than anything else.
Well, Go3wheeler, I was aiming to be constructive, as was everyone else, but apparently that doesn't quite do it for you.
I sketched up my own, and I think it is more up your alley.
Geo Metro 1.0L is probably perfect really. You can't get AC with it but I'd imagine the 4cyl AC would bolt up if you really wanted it. The key thing about the Geo drivetrain is it's hilariously low weight. It's only about 200lbs total. I have one in my shed that is maybe someday possibly going to go into the Subaru 360 shell.
The FWD drivetrain has some advantages in the stability department. You can probably get away with a narrower overall car for a given passenger configuration due to the location of the Engine. The consequence is Braking performance would be dependent on occupant weight. If you had a light passenger load you may end up with an unacceptable amount of front weight transfer resulting in poor braking performance.
I keep thinking that for a true production 3 wheeler it may pay to have a dynamic weight balancing mechanism that moves some ballast fore/aft depending on loading to improve stability and maintain consistent performance despite variable occupant weight. It may not be as big of an issue as I'm imagining though.
I like the look of this atv thing. Just need a quad with a blown motor and a Honda Ruckus (for motor and registration)
just to keep people motivated/interested:
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1081467_80-mpg-elio-three-wheeled-car-to-be-built-at-former-gm-truck-plant
http://www.tuvie.com/clever-3-wheeler-compact-low-emission-vehicle-for-urban-transport/
Warren v wrote: The difficulty in using a FWD powertrain is overall height. FWD drivetrains are tall, meaning the driver needs to be more upright, meaning a higher CG, and less stability. Custom long a-arms would help. Does the GRM hivemind know of a FWD donor with a low-packaged drivetrain?
If the Audi drivetrain is too tall, a FWD Subaru (or a later Subaru with the transmission modified like an 818) would be the ticket here. Or possibly reconfiguring the axles on a VW drivetrain to work with a FWD suspension.
Warren v wrote: Does the GRM hivemind know of a FWD donor with a low-packaged drivetrain?
4cylndrfury wrote: + Swipe a Toyota 4AFE motor and electrics out of a Corolla, as well as the suspension pickups/subframe assembly, steering bits and pedals + Add a teeny turbo. + Graft all of it into a scratch built tube frame cockpit/reverse trike front half. + Rear swingarm donated from an aluminum framed dirtbike gets bolted on. + Plumb some lines for brakes and whatnot + Win at life? 5 speed 93-03 Corollas and their consumables are dirt cheap and available everywhere. Parts are really inexpensive, and widely available.Very fuel efficient, lightweight, compact I4 power-trains that could really benefit from about 5lbs of boost without really needing to tweak much at all in terms of EFI control.
Googling is leaving me fairly dry on dimensions, but I can say that the thing looks tiny in the engine bay of an already small car like a Corolla.
My biggest issue with the open scooters is really comfort. What's the odds of you wanting to drive that all the time? Kind of defeats the purpose of the project if you don't ever use it.
The ones that JoeyM has posted are much more realistic. Especially the green one, since it's a fairly striaght forward body, and it appears to use cut down versions of car stuff.
alfadriver wrote: The ones that JoeyM has posted are much more realistic. Especially the green one, since it's a fairly striaght forward body, and it appears to use cut down versions of car stuff.
The link from above says that they will have a lot of amenities:
Startups making small, economical vehicles come and go, but one company offering a high-efficiency vehicle has big plans, buying a former General Motors assembly plant. Elio Motors is the company behind a three-wheeled car capable of 84 mpg highway, on nothing more complicated than gasoline. Reuters reports the company has bought an old GM plant near Shreveport, Louisiana, and Elio expects to begin production of its fuel-sipping vehicle in mid-2014. It will then begin "significant hiring", building up to a workforce of 1,500 by late 2015. Renovation of the old plant will begin later this year, should the deal go ahead this spring. A small carmaker with big plans is a story we've heard before, and not one that often results in success. Some of Elio's figures are intriguing, however. First is the price, which Elio reports as only $6,800. For that, you get three airbags, power windows and air conditioning, two seats, and a central driving position.
In terms of DIY fabrication (i.e. the opposite of what they're doing) this one has the advantage of being mostly low crown body panels with a one directional curve. (except the roof....that would be a pain in the butt.) The front cycle fenders would be a snap.
None of that matters, though, since most locost guys don't fabricate their own fenders.
[edit: I'm also pretty sure that's an all composite body, so disregard my blabbering about crowns and curves.....metal shaping issues are irrelevant if you're pulling the bodies out of molds.]
alfadriver wrote: My biggest issue with the open scooters is really comfort. What's the odds of you wanting to drive that all the time? Kind of defeats the purpose of the project if you don't ever use it. The ones that JoeyM has posted are much more realistic. Especially the green one, since it's a fairly striaght forward body, and it appears to use cut down versions of car stuff.
We have an entire subforum here devoted to vehicles that not only have no weather protection, but also fall down if left on their own :D I think everyone has a different idea of the goal. An all-weather commuter is different than an easy way to putt around in reasonable weather. I'm pretty sure Californians will have a simpler view of requirements for everyday useability than, say, Michiganers. Adding in four season ability will have a big effect on design.
Something could be gathered from this idea:
http://www.instructables.com/id/Home-made-Utility-Vehicle-AKA-UTV/
PHeller wrote: Something could be gathered from this idea: http://www.instructables.com/id/Home-made-Utility-Vehicle-AKA-UTV/
That's gorgeous!!
alfadriver wrote: My biggest issue with the open scooters is really comfort. What's the odds of you wanting to drive that all the time? Kind of defeats the purpose of the project if you don't ever use it. The ones that JoeyM has posted are much more realistic. Especially the green one, since it's a fairly striaght forward body, and it appears to use cut down versions of car stuff.
The odds of me wanting to drive it all the time...pretty good :) I would drive a Locost or dune buggy year round too.
This is appealing to me on some wavelength but a wood cargo box might be a nice addition.
Keith Tanner wrote: We have an entire subforum here devoted to vehicles that not only have no weather protection, but also fall down if left on their own :D I think everyone has a different idea of the goal. An all-weather commuter is different than an easy way to putt around in reasonable weather. I'm pretty sure Californians will have a simpler view of requirements for everyday useability than, say, Michiganers. Adding in four season ability will have a big effect on design.
True my goals are different which the atv style would be better suited.
My daily drive involves 3miles of washed out dirt roads. Something more off-road and hoonable might be a fun DD (or is it DR Daily Ride?)
The Miata has blown the seals out of 2 v-maxxs this year and is set at what I would call a reasonable height.
I was reading an article on the dynamics of three wheelers and IIRC FWD is preferable in a three wheeler. I was thinking Moto Guzzi V-Twin plus VW Bus transmission.
93EXCivic wrote: I was reading an article on the dynamics of three wheelers and IIRC FWD is preferable in a three wheeler. I was thinking Moto Guzzi V-Twin plus VW Bus transmission.
Does the Moto Guzzi use a divorced transmission? That's one reason why the H-D style engine works well in the new Morgan.
IIRC at least some of them do.
I can't weld. Can I make my entry entirely out of wood? De-splintering the seat is going to be a real pain in the arse...
Edit: leaf springs look a lot like bows, I bet it could be replicated somehow!
In reply to Rufledt:
You can make it from whatever you please.
Apparently the laws of physics don't apply to three-wheeled contraptions.
Rufledt wrote: I can't weld. Can I make my entry entirely out of wood?
sure, that seems to work well
You'll need to log in to post.
