Polaris slingshot... why are we not talking about this?!?!?!

In reply to stroker:

Pretty much the same thing that happens to any other modern vehicle with stability and traction control systems.

stroker wrote: Rear contact patch the size of your palm. What happens when it rains?

It gets set on spin cycle

I look at this thing from the perspective of someone who has ridden motorcycles since age 4 1/2 and driven cars since age 13. I also look at things from a performance standpoint, particularly handling, since if something won't turn properly it won't be fast.

This thing won't turn properly. It won't do correctly the things a motorcycle or a car will. Due to the inherent lack of stability of a three wheel design on the ragged edge it will not be confidence inspiring and will go oopsy daisy a LOT quicker than the two or for wheel vehicles. The Morgans mentioned earlier do exactly that, and FWIW the three wheeled Morgan was built originally to circumvent high British car taxes, not because there was a performance advantage.

Therefore do not want. I'd take that $20k and build an 818 or an Exocet. Or even upgrade hell out of the Jensenator and buy a nice sportbike to go with it.

It will appeal to a very limited market for sure, particularly with no weather protection.

Yet another with a mistaken perception. "Slingshot is an absolute blast to drive. The specifications I was given claim a skid pad rating just under 1 g. In comparison, a 2014 Corvette Stingray scores a 1.04 g on the pad. Impressive considering the Slingshot is missing a tire." from utvunderground.

Sounds like it turns pretty damn good. Unless from your perspective the new Corvette does not turn properly either.

Curmudgeon wrote: I look at this thing from the perspective of someone who has ridden motorcycles since age 4 1/2 and driven cars since age 13. I also look at things from a performance standpoint, particularly handling, since if something won't turn properly it won't be fast. This thing won't turn properly. It won't do correctly the things a motorcycle or a car will. Due to the inherent lack of stability of a three wheel design on the ragged edge it will not be confidence inspiring and will go oopsy daisy a LOT quicker than the two or for wheel vehicles. The Morgans mentioned earlier do exactly that, and FWIW the three wheeled Morgan was built originally to circumvent high British car taxes, not because there was a performance advantage. Therefore do not want. I'd take that $20k and build an 818 or an Exocet. Or even upgrade hell out of the Jensenator and buy a nice sportbike to go with it. It will appeal to a very limited market for sure, particularly with no weather protection.

I don't care about skidpad numbers, anyone can get lucky once. Trikes of ANY type are not stable at the ragged edge so do not want. Skidpad numbers are small consolation when the thing goes belly up; 'oh, this wasn't supposed to happen because SKIDPAD NUMBERS'!

I can just see trying to push this thing over The Hill at The Bridge at Road Atlanta. It'd get nice and light for a second or so then turn into a tumbleweed.

Curmudgeon wrote: Trikes of ANY type are not stable at the ragged edge

That's a pretty bold over-generalization. Just how much experience do you actually have with the engineering and/or driving of trikes, as the basis for this opinion stated as fact?

When glad that Science is settled. Nothing to see here, let's move on to Global Warming please.

Curmudgeon wrote: Trikes of ANY type are not stable at the ragged edge

you guys are funny.

If you like it, buy it.

If not, don't.

Who cares what other people think? Precption is realty whether you like it or not when it comes to spending a lot of money on stuff.

In reply to alfadriver:

You haven't figured out by now that we'll argue about anything?

I still want a Morgan. Stability concerns be damned.

bigfoot21075 wrote: When glad that Science is settled. Nothing to see here, let's move on to Global Warming please.

Curmudgeon wrote: Trikes of ANY type are not stable at the ragged edge

You didn't know? Global warming is caused by the lack of pirates.

I said at the beginning of my assessment the POV I was taking and I stand by it. You want one, you buy one. More power to you. Me, I'm gonna either have a bike I can lean into a curve or a 4 wheeled car that will help keep the ass end sorta halfway controllable in extreme conditions. Which, if you didn't know, is where a lot of accidents happen.

Curmudgeon wrote:

bigfoot21075 wrote: When glad that Science is settled. Nothing to see here, let's move on to Global Warming please.

Curmudgeon wrote: Trikes of ANY type are not stable at the ragged edge

You didn't know? Global warming is caused by the lack of pirates.

HOLY C**P!!!!!! I should have seen the correlation!

I wonder how hard it would be turn it into a four wheeled machine with a solid rear axle...

Trans_Maro wrote: A lot of us have a lot of time and little money. Hence the "Grassroots" part of the forum. Maybe you would prefer the "Skymall motorsports" forum.

I didn't realize I clicked on the "condescending jerks" subforum

Might've been the tainted water here, but I put in a request for more info at my local dealer.

singleslammer wrote: Let me answer you here unk577 wrote: I have 3 issues. Weight-it isn't light Yeah, it is. It may require a motorcycle license but it drives like a car. I think that under 1700 dry is about as good as you can do in the current age of build construction and safety

It is sold as a trike (motorcycle), thus does not conform to automotive crash test standards. Therefore it is bloody heavy for what it is. I actually was involved in the crash test cert of it a year or so ago and the actual procedure was like a 10mph front impact on a fixed barrier and measure steering column displacement via target tracking with high speed cameras. It was hardly a 35mph NCAP front impact. As I recall it was just a ballast dummy (no instrumentation), and only vehicle Cg and maybe a hand full of other accelerometers were used.

instead of these three wheelers one of these motorcycle companies should just make a 4 wheel cheap caterham competitor.

Like Kawasaki should just make a street/track toy 4 wheeler with a Ninja 1000 engine.

kanaric wrote: instead of these three wheelers one of these motorcycle companies should just make a 4 wheel cheap caterham competitor. Like Kawasaki should just make a street/track toy 4 wheeler with a Ninja 1000 engine.

Maybe someone knows the rules on it better than I do but since a manufacturer can offer a complete car minus drivetrain and the end-user can install the drivetrain and then register the vehicle making it street legal. Could a manufacturer offer a complete vehicle for off highway use and the end-user install lights,fenders etc... and go through the registration process? That or offer a complete 4 wheeled vehicle minus engine and trans then offer the engine and trans separately to be installed by the end-user and then registered? These could be ways to avoid the crash/emissions regulations while offering a light,simple 4 wheeled track and nice weather toy/car.

In reply to dculberson:

Yani wrote:

singleslammer wrote: Let me answer you here unk577 wrote: I have 3 issues. Weight-it isn't light Yeah, it is. It may require a motorcycle license but it drives like a car. I think that under 1700 dry is about as good as you can do in the current age of build construction and safety

It is sold as a trike (motorcycle), thus does not conform to automotive crash test standards. Therefore it is bloody heavy for what it is. I actually was involved in the crash test cert of it a year or so ago and the actual procedure was like a 10mph front impact on a fixed barrier and measure steering column displacement via target tracking with high speed cameras. It was hardly a 35mph NCAP front impact. As I recall it was just a ballast dummy (no instrumentation), and only vehicle Cg and maybe a hand full of other accelerometers were used.

I would say that just because you are not REQUIRED to build a safe vehicle that you should still do your best. I ran into this researching Locosts a few years back. If you want a truly safe (not going to completely collapse in a 25 mph bump) and capable of a variety of impacts, you aren't getting under 1400 lbs without exotic materials. Then Polaris made the decision to put in a regular, off the shelf (read CHEAP) drivetrain that isn't exactly a featherweight. I think they did damn well for the price point. Had it cost 40K or more, I would expect a few hundred less pounds and maybe a little sportier driveline but they made it affordable and easy to maintain. I am still stoked.

Zeitgeist wrote:

kanaric wrote: instead of these three wheelers one of these motorcycle companies should just make a 4 wheel cheap caterham competitor. Like Kawasaki should just make a street/track toy 4 wheeler with a Ninja 1000 engine.

Maybe someone knows the rules on it better than I do but since a manufacturer can offer a complete car minus drivetrain and the end-user can install the drivetrain and then register the vehicle making it street legal. Could a manufacturer offer a complete vehicle for off highway use and the end-user install lights,fenders etc... and go through the registration process? That or offer a complete 4 wheeled vehicle minus engine and trans then offer the engine and trans separately to be installed by the end-user and then registered? These could be ways to avoid the crash/emissions regulations while offering a light,simple 4 wheeled track and nice weather toy/car.

As I recall, option one won't work on a federal (or likely State) level. It would fall into the qualification of a 4 wheeler which isn't street legal most places.

Option 2 works (Superformance anyone?) but that is still too DIY for Polaris to consider. They are too big for this to work as their dealers couldn't legally install the drivetrain (I believe).

The way they did this is about the best way around the laws in the US that a major manufacturer can manage.

We need some exceptions for small manufacturers like the Brits seem to have.

Agreed. Didn't Lotus get some exceptions to ABS and airbags for limited number of vehicles when they first started importing the Elise?

an old college buddy is on the launch team for this thing..

You know, I'd love to see a back to back test with this car and comparable $20K or less "open air" experience roadsters. Especially on a track.

Zeitgeist wrote: Agreed. Didn't Lotus get some exceptions to ABS and airbags for limited number of vehicles when they first started importing the Elise?

They have ABS and airbags. They got an exemption on the bumper-impact requirements - you know - the bit where a 5 mph crash totals the car? I saw (drooled on...) these cars when they wer still being sold new on the lot at the Lotus dealer in NJ - there were labels next to the sticker explaining the exemption and how they didn't quite meet US crash standards for vehicle survivability, although I believe they had to pass occupant tests in order to be sold here at all.

From what I read, the reason they stopped selling them here was the drivetrain they used as a base for EPA compliance (different than DOT safety compliance) was from the MR Spyder and when the supply of that drivetrain dried up, the run was done as costs to use another drivetrain would have been prohibitive.

Turn-key-minus (rolling chassis with no drivetrain) is essentially a kit car in the eyes of the feds and states. The Noble (and whatever it's called now) was/is a good example of this.