wrote:
On Nov 26, 7:12 pm, Tim Wescott wrote:

On 11/26/2010 08:38 PM, Jordan wrote:


On 11/27/2010 6:24 AM, Tim Wescott wrote:

Every time I see one of those I start totting up the manufacturing cost
of a differential vs. two undriven wheels in front, and I wonder _why_
they went and made the damn things that way.

I think the Reliant started as a commercial type vehicle, so load
carrying capacity dictated an axle and two wheels at the rear. The
Messerschmidt 3-wheeler on the other hand, grew out of an invalid car -
transport for post-WW2 German injured servicemen. Both were built to a
low price initially, so losing a wheel made sense then.
Apart from handling problems, having 3 tracks makes avoiding potholes
etc difficult. Like Morgan did, a move to 4 wheels and only 2 tracks is
the right way, but driven within their limitations, 3 wheelers look like
fun.

In a lot of jurisdictions a 3 wheeler counts as a motorcycle, even if it
is functionally more like a car. So there's advantages of taxes and
relaxed regulations.

I hadn't considered the pothole angle.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Serviceshttp://www.wescottdesign.com

Do you need to implement control loops in software?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" was written for you.
See details athttp://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html


Morgan's making 3 wheelers again.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/...-60-years.html
Karl

Seems they may be making what the Seattle based company
http://cycle-car.com/index.htm has been building under license in the US.