Posted by clare on March 21, 2009, 2:47 pm
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 20:52:58 GMT, "vaughn"
>> On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 12:48:05 +0000, Eeyore
>>
>> 3 wheelers are inherently more stable as the suspension does not
>> require any compliance to keep all wheels on the ground - like a
>> tripod.
>You can't really talk about stability without mentioning what type of
>stability you are talking about. According to this SAE paper that compared
>3 and 4 wheel conficurations, you get one answer for lateral stability, and
>another, very different, answer for rollover stability. Sorry, only the
>absttact seems to be available on the web.
>http://www.sae.org/technical/papers/820139
>There are many dead and maimed farmers that learned the hard way about
>three-wheel roll problems when their tractors rolled over...and they learned
>it at dead slow speeds!
>> Low unsprung weight and low roll center are also easy to achieve,
>> which both help handling.
>Yes, but this is independent of 3 or 4 wheel configuration. Either of them
>may be built high or low. How many 3-wheeled race cars have we seen over
>the years?
>Vaughn
Last first - Morgans WERE raced - very agressively in fact, for
decades.
As for the tractors, they are very high ungainly things by their very
nature, and have the 2 wheels at the wrong end.
And many tractor operators have been killed and injured with
wide-stance 4 wheel tractors as well. Almost lost my dad to a wide
stance Kubota about 6 years ago. Rolled it right over, and when it
stopped moving he clambered out and have it a little shove and it was
back on 4 wheels. He was sore for months - and this was a pretty big
Kubota
Posted by vaughn on March 21, 2009, 3:26 pm
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 20:52:58 GMT, "vaughn"
>How many 3-wheeled race cars have we seen over
>>the years?
>>
>...- Morgans WERE raced - very agressively in fact, for
> decades.
EVERYTHING gets raced at one time or another, and my statement above was
crafted to allow for that.
My point was, we don't see many 3-wheeled race cars. Since cost is often
no object in the racing world, if 3-wheels were an advantage over 4, then
3-wheeled contenders would have evolved over the years and somebody would be
making and racing them today.
Vaughn
Posted by Eeyore on March 21, 2009, 8:45 pm
vaughn wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 20:52:58 GMT, "vaughn"
> >How many 3-wheeled race cars have we seen over
> >>the years?
> >>
> >...- Morgans WERE raced - very agressively in fact, for
> > decades.
3 wheelers ? They certainly don't make any now.
> EVERYTHING gets raced at one time or another, and my statement above was
> crafted to allow for that.
> My point was, we don't see many 3-wheeled race cars. Since cost is often
> no object in the racing world, if 3-wheels were an advantage over 4, then
> 3-wheeled contenders would have evolved over the years and somebody would be
> making and racing them today.
Precisely so.
In fact the only change from a 4 wheel vehicle was the SIX wheel Tyrell.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ScheckterJody1976-07-31Tyrrell-FordP34.jpg
Graham
Posted by Lord Gow333, Dirk Benedict's n on March 25, 2009, 1:59 am
> vaughn wrote:
>> > On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 20:52:58 GMT, "vaughn"
>>
>> >How many 3-wheeled race cars have we seen over
>> >>the years?
>> >>
>> >...- Morgans WERE raced - very agressively in fact, for
>> > decades.
> 3 wheelers ? They certainly don't make any now.
>> EVERYTHING gets raced at one time or another, and my statement above
>> was
>> crafted to allow for that.
>>
>> My point was, we don't see many 3-wheeled race cars. Since cost is
>> often
>> no object in the racing world, if 3-wheels were an advantage over 4, then
>> 3-wheeled contenders would have evolved over the years and somebody would
>> be
>> making and racing them today.
> Precisely so.
> In fact the only change from a 4 wheel vehicle was the SIX wheel Tyrell.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ScheckterJody1976-07-31Tyrrell-FordP34.jpg
Cute. We can throw tractors into the mix again with this:
http://www.fwi.co.uk/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID804950
LG
--
"Keep it simple. If it takes a genius to understand it, it will never work."
- Clarence Leonard "Kelly" Johnson
Posted by Alistair Gunn on March 26, 2009, 2:20 pm
Eeyore twisted the electrons to say:
> In fact the only change from a 4 wheel vehicle was the SIX wheel Tyrell.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ScheckterJody1976-07-31Tyrrell-FordP34.jpg
There's also the March 6 wheeler from the same time period :-
<http://www.geocities.com/simontmallett/240march1.html>
... of course looking at F1 for ideas to what makes a good technology is
not necesarily a good idea as a lot of stuff (four wheel drive, oval
pistons, diesel power, traction control, active suspension) is banned.
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...
XML site map
>>
>> 3 wheelers are inherently more stable as the suspension does not
>> require any compliance to keep all wheels on the ground - like a
>> tripod.
>You can't really talk about stability without mentioning what type of
>stability you are talking about. According to this SAE paper that compared
>3 and 4 wheel conficurations, you get one answer for lateral stability, and
>another, very different, answer for rollover stability. Sorry, only the
>absttact seems to be available on the web.
>http://www.sae.org/technical/papers/820139
>There are many dead and maimed farmers that learned the hard way about
>three-wheel roll problems when their tractors rolled over...and they learned
>it at dead slow speeds!
>> Low unsprung weight and low roll center are also easy to achieve,
>> which both help handling.
>Yes, but this is independent of 3 or 4 wheel configuration. Either of them
>may be built high or low. How many 3-wheeled race cars have we seen over
>the years?
>Vaughn