Scootz's Trike Build... All Opinions Welcome
scootz - 23/6/10 at 08:58 PM
... as you've probably guessed, I have fallen at the first hurdle and have adopted another project! 
I stumbled across a brand-spanking new Formula Rolon single-seater chassis and body that had found its way into the country as part of an engineering
study. The Engineering chap was finished with it, so I bought it for a very reasonable price.
It arrived last week and I've got to say I'm quite impressed by the build quality. I was worried that it might not be the best, but the
chassis welding, bodywork and components seem every bit as good as some of the european Formula cars I've had.
It did not come with an engine or gearbox, and the rear lends itself well towards grafting the back-end of a bike onto it to create a reverse trike
(and its easier to put through its test!).
It also has a big enough cockpit to take my lardy backside in relative comfort!
This is a pic of a built car...
This is (kind of) what I want to (try and) achieve...
[Edited on 18-7-10 by Fozzie]
tegwin - 23/6/10 at 09:00 PM
oooh! interesting!!
I take it this will be road legal... look forwards to seeing lots of pics in the comming weeks!!!
[Edited on 23/6/10 by tegwin]
scootz - 23/6/10 at 09:08 PM
Will take a bit of time as I have a fair bit of 'stuff' to sell (who me!?) so I can raise funds for the drivetrain.
Not decided what to go for yet... I had initially preferred the thought of a shaftie set-up, but I guess a chain-drive will keep costs more sensible
and allow me more engine choice.
I'm concious of the 'wheel-lifting' issue with some trikes and will work out my COG accordingly, but could do with some advice about
whether a low torque screamer would be safer, or should I go with my preferred option of a lower revving torquey engine?
franky - 23/6/10 at 09:15 PM
ducati 1198 should do the trick
clairetoo - 23/6/10 at 09:16 PM
That is gonna be awesome - I look forward to seeing the finished article 
welderman - 23/6/10 at 09:17 PM
nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo thats got me thinking now damn you 
this was the stage im at as last week, now a wheel might stay off, that 3 wheeler looks awsome
Rescued attachment swifty.jpg
scootz - 23/6/10 at 09:18 PM
Sorry...
JoelP - 23/6/10 at 09:19 PM
it well needs a busa turbo in it.
You're worse than Donut, he cant stop selling projects and you cant stop buying them!
zilspeed - 23/6/10 at 09:21 PM
Scott.
Please don't do it.
The car is meant to be just that.
A car.
With 4 wheels.
F O U R wheels.
Go and see Doug up at westgarage and he'll sort you out with a diff to get a bike engine in there, but don't, please don't, start a
trike project.
As a road vehicle it'll be cack.
And I mean all of the above in the most positive way ever.
I just want you to succeed and end up with a great project.
Flak jacket now on 
Steve Hignett - 23/6/10 at 09:25 PM
AS ABOVE.....
PLEASE don't take a wheel off a vehicle that can go round corners at a pace that will make you smile.................................
I have nothing more to say, just please don't do it...
scootz - 23/6/10 at 09:28 PM
Cheers Zil... I absolutely know where you're coming from.
I'm not going to kid myself that it will be anything other than an uncomfortable-handful to actually drive, but it's a relatively
straightforward and cheap conversion, and should offer a real 'sense of occasion' when playing with.
Most of all though, I can't be bothered with all the palaver for a full IVA test.
dlatch - 23/6/10 at 09:30 PM
without jumping on a bandwagon here i have to say i think the trike idea is not the way to go i personally hate them
but its your money
scootz - 23/6/10 at 09:34 PM
I just fancy something really different and a bit wacky! Even if I kept it with 4 wheels (which will cost a LOT more to do), the on-road driving
experience would still be a nightmare. Anyone who has driven a single-seater ex-Formula car will know where I'm coming from!
No other reason for it... it's just cool (in my bizarre little world!).
scootz - 23/6/10 at 09:36 PM
See... that's cool!
tegwin - 23/6/10 at 09:45 PM
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
See... that's cool!
Would be better if it were slightly longer.. it doesnt look in propotion,...
smart51 - 23/6/10 at 09:45 PM
That is quite cool, except perhaps the very thin roll over hoop.
zilspeed - 23/6/10 at 10:07 PM
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
I just fancy something really different and a bit wacky! Even if I kept it with 4 wheels (which will cost a LOT more to do),
P I S H
In my world, things cost whatever you want them to cost.
There's no way you're going to convert that into a trike without hacking bits off. Once that's done it's ruined forever.
Single seaters have a period where their value drops, then they climb again.
If you leave it with four wheels, it can use bike power smpathetically and still be left relatively intact.
Regarding IVA, couldn't agree more. Neither could I be bothered with that. That's why it would become a track only car for me. Lots of
venues to use it, great craic at them and all the support in the world.
Keep it as a a single seater.
Go on, go on, go on, go on, go on
dhutch - 23/6/10 at 10:33 PM
quote:
Keep it as a a single seater.
Go on, go on, go on, go on, go on
THIS
scootz - 24/6/10 at 06:46 AM
I can't hear Zil... LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA!
WanchaiWarrior - 24/6/10 at 06:46 AM
This one is quite cool as well:
scootz - 24/6/10 at 06:47 AM
Indeed... needs some proper tyres though!
3GEComponents - 24/6/10 at 08:28 AM
I've always liked this one....
http://sub3wheeler.com/
scootz - 24/6/10 at 09:03 AM
And now I have the rear end...
Image deleted by owner
From a 2010 Suzuki B-King!
scootz - 24/6/10 at 12:53 PM
Back to the technical points... front wheel lift when accelerating out of a tight corner. Does the way the engine puts it's power down affect
this? Is a torquey low revving unit more likely to cause this effect than a high revving buzzsaw?
smart51 - 24/6/10 at 01:22 PM
Wheel lift is caused by acceleration force. Hang a plumb line from the centre of gravity point so that it points to a spot on the floor. If this
spot moves outside the triangle that goes round the contact patches of the 3 tyres then you tip over. Cornering makes the plumb line swing to the
side. Accelerating makes it move to the back where the triangle is narrower. If you are right on the edge in cornering then put your foot down, you
cross over the line and your wheel lifts.
The trick is to have the C of G low and close to the front axle (no so close that you tip up under braking!) If your track is wide and wheel base
long plus your CofG is low and forwards, then your trike can both accelerate and corner hard without lifting a wheel.
Cars with low 1st gears and lots of oomph will accelerate the hardest. Keep the long first gear of your donor bike rather than the short final drive
of a BEC if you're unsure. Or do the maths.
scootz - 24/6/10 at 01:38 PM
Thanks for that... I've been reading about the COG aspect for a while now - seems reasonably straightforward. Calculating the COG, however, is a
little... erm... interesting.
JF - 24/6/10 at 10:08 PM
Well the only real way to calculate it is having all the parts and weigh them I guess. And weigh the car as it is now. Then the calculating fun
starts. Which part to go where, and what is the COG doing when you put that part where you want to put it in the first place.
From looking at the plans of the sub3 it seems like the driver is sitting on the fuel tank. Or really it is under it's knees. Probably not the
prefered place for safety... but usefull for the COG.
You'll have a lot less freedom though... as you have a shell to start with. But I'm sure you can make it work, and it really might be one
heck of a fun machine. Although not as quick around the average circuit as it would be with 4 wheels...
Would still love to have a go in such a crazy trike though... and yeah... they're really cool.
PS. please do put it on some car tyres.
scootz - 27/6/10 at 07:13 PM
... and now I have the engine!
2008MY Aprilia RSV-R Factory (V-Twin). 143bhp, Pseudo Slipper-Clutch and Dry-Sump.
[img][/img]
Richard Quinn - 27/6/10 at 08:49 PM
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
... and now I have the engine!
2008MY Aprilia RSV-R Factory (V-Twin). 143bhp, Pseudo Slipper-Clutch and Dry-Sump.
Image deleted by owner
Good choice! Emissions can be a bit of a trauma (dunno whether it's different for BIVA though)
scootz - 5/7/10 at 03:35 PM
Guess you could say I've started!
[img][/img]
scootz - 5/7/10 at 03:36 PM
Front Corner On...
[img][/img]
scootz - 5/7/10 at 03:37 PM
Trying to visualize how I'm going to attach the swing-arm!
[img][/img]
scootz - 5/7/10 at 03:48 PM
And good news on the lighting front... although I will need 2 front 'positional' lights, my car is less than 1700mm wide, so I can use just
use a single Hella Bi-Halogen lamp fitted centrally for dip / main beam!
iank - 5/7/10 at 04:58 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Quinn
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
... and now I have the engine!
2008MY Aprilia RSV-R Factory (V-Twin). 143bhp, Pseudo Slipper-Clutch and Dry-Sump.
Good choice! Emissions can be a bit of a trauma (dunno whether it's different for BIVA though)
It's MSVA (Motorbike SVA) still for trikes which I believe is easier than SVA for emissions.
scootz - 5/7/10 at 04:59 PM
It is indeed... limit of 4.5%.
scootz - 6/7/10 at 11:45 AM
Engine Arrived
[img][/img]
scootz - 6/7/10 at 11:46 AM
[img][/img]
scootz - 6/7/10 at 11:46 AM
[img][/img]
smart51 - 6/7/10 at 12:32 PM
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
And good news on the lighting front... although I will need 2 front 'positional' lights, my car is less than 1700mm wide, so I can use just
use a single Hella Bi-Halogen lamp fitted centrally for dip / main beam!
I think the limit is 1300mm wide for single headlights. Above this you need 2 main and 2 dipped beams. If you like the hella lights, I will have a
set for sale soon. 1 pair of main beam / side lights and one pair of dipped beam.
The vee twin is a nice fit inside the frame and the swing arm looks like it will fit nicely too.
scootz - 6/7/10 at 12:35 PM
That could well be a recent change... my 2007 copy states that more than 1300mm for 2 positional lights, but less than 1700mm for 1 dip / main.
scootz - 6/7/10 at 12:56 PM
SOME WEIGHTS...
Bare / Wet Engine 70kg
Swing-arm, Pivot, Shock, Linkage, Hugger, Rear Caliper, Spindle, Sprocket, Disc, Wheel, Tyre & Chain 40KG
Front Wheels & Tyres 25kg
Fuel Tank 11kg
Seat 4kg
So, 150kg so far...
I'm contemplating doing it as an exo-skeleton (no bodywork)... so things to add to that weight -
Chassis
Front Wishbones, Uprights, Shocks and Hubs
Front Calipers & Discs
Pedal Box
Steering Rack / Column
Airbox, TB's
Regulator, ECU, Loom.
Exhaust (No Cat)
Front Cycle Wings & Stays
Radiator
Oil Cooler
Oil Tank for Dry Sump
Brake / Oil / Fuel / Lines
I'm hoping for 140bhp at the wheels and would love to hit the 500bhp per ton mark... wonder if I'll get it under 280kg!
I have 130kg to work with!
smart51 - 6/7/10 at 01:08 PM
If you want to make a light weight then here are some sample figures:
front uprights, discs and callipers 20kg
chassis and floor 45kg
front suspension and steering 15kg
battery, wiring loom, switches, instruments and lights 15kg
lightweight plastic trailer wings plus stays 5kg
nuts, bolts, clips, ties, glue and miscellaneous sticking together stuff 5kg.
that's 105kg so you've got 20 left. Does your seat weight include harnesses? You'll need mirrors too.
I'm looking at 220kg for my scooter engined 3 wheeled single seater so you've set your self an ambitious target there.
scootz - 6/7/10 at 01:27 PM
Thanks for that!
Peteff - 7/7/10 at 03:13 PM
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
Trying to visualize how I'm going to attach the swing-arm!
I don't think bubble wrap and sellotape will do it
Weld a bar across the back of the chassis and some brackets to bolt the swing arm pivot on. Make sure you can align the engine and rear wheel
sprockets before you commit to where the engine is going.
iank - 7/7/10 at 04:10 PM
Personally I'd build (or have built) a subframe to carry the swing arm and engine, bolting in at any/all the current mounting points for
suspension etc.
That way you can unbolt and put it back to being a 4 wheeler if you need/want to, and can unbolt the thing for any major work with 100%
accessibility.
p.s. if the seller put on the plastic wrap before you inspected it in detail I'd be taking it off and checking for cracks and paint problems.
scootz - 7/7/10 at 04:28 PM
Cheers guys.
PS - The 'wrapping' is from the factory... it's never been used.
hexxi - 9/7/10 at 05:38 AM
Your project looks astonishingly similar to mine! It`s almost identical to my initial design although at this moment it looks somewhat different(2
seats etc). You have the same engine and you are even planning to use the same headlights!
Just a month ago I acquired a MY2001 RSV mille engine. I`m designing the trike with CAD and therefore I`m creating a 3D model of the engine. As I`m
not willing to pay 1000€ for 3D scanning, I`m doing it "manually" instead. I have dismantled some parts like the 1st cylinder and with help
of some basic measuring tools I`m able to model it in CAD with reasonable precision.
I have just started the work and I will probably need some weeks to finish the work but when it`s ready I can give you the model. Please let me know
if you need it.
scootz - 11/7/10 at 09:09 PM
Still thinking about the possibility of using a shaft set-up. Took out a couple of the upper brace-bars on the chassis to see what sort of fit the
RSV engine is if mounted transversely.
Works pretty well... enough space for the exhaust primaries (just!) and I could shorten the wheel-base by quite a bit too.
Not made my mind up on which way I'll go!
[img][/img]
scootz - 11/7/10 at 09:11 PM
This is the shaft set-up I'd use (BMW R1200)...
JF - 12/7/10 at 05:03 PM
Sounds like a really nice project to mate up that BWM swingarm to the mille engine. Might be a bit more difficult to work out your reverse though.
Although it shouldn't be impossible to slip in a MNR box, but that might kill your wheelbase shortening ideas. Might be easier to use a electric
reverse.
scootz - 12/7/10 at 06:32 PM
Measured the Quaife box at 20cm... shouldn't shove things out of proportion too much!
scootz - 12/7/10 at 07:51 PM
Hurrah... and now I have one! BMW shaft drive here I come!
.
..
...
....
.....
......
.......
........
.........
Suzuki B-king rear-end for sale!
scootz - 15/7/10 at 05:16 PM
Hmmm... now wondering if I should just go the whole BMW-hog and get a boxer twin engine!!!
Would be going from 140bhp to 110bhp, but it kind of makes sense! The engines less tall, so lowers the COG.
Any opinions?
Do the BMW Boxer engines respond well to tuning mods?
Are they super heavy (with gearbox)?
All inputs gratefully received!
smart51 - 15/7/10 at 05:37 PM
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
The engines less tall, so lowers the COG.
Which is a good thing, especially at the rear where the effective track is narrow. On the other hand, if it is a much heavier engine, it will pull
the centre of gravity backwards, negating all the gains in lowering it. Find out what one weighs first.
scootz - 15/7/10 at 06:28 PM
I've been looking all afternoon to see what a 'typical' BMW boxer engine weighs without success!
I'll keep plugging away!
Mind you, the gearbox on the Beemer lumps does stick out of the block a bit... pushes the swing-arm further back!
JF - 15/7/10 at 09:50 PM
Well I don't think it will be that much heavier the say the Aprillia engine. Seeing that the RSV Mille and the BWM R1200S only differ about 2kg
in total weight.
You might lose a some horses, but did you look at the torque gain? Especially the R1200RT has a really well pulling engine. Doing 120NM at 6000rpm
against the 101NM at 7250rpm for the aprillia.
Even though your trike will be really light for a car, it will still be quite heavy for a bike. I think those extra NM will make it quicker.
Be aware of the BMW gearboxes though. There have been really lousy series with high repair costs.
scootz - 15/7/10 at 09:56 PM
Thanks for that... I'm giving it serious thought - just trying to find out as much as I can about the BMW units.
Not many for sale just now though... I've U2U's Mal to see if he can help!
scootz - 16/7/10 at 09:30 AM
Definitely morphing into a BMW-thingy! Found a company who is building 'normal' trikes using brand new R1200C's and they have lots of
rear-end bits and other 'stuff' going spare.
I dread to think what this little lot would have cost if I went straight to Mr BMW!
SWINGARM ASSY
Image deleted by owner
REAR CALIPER ASSY
Image deleted by owner
Image deleted by owner
SHOCK ABSORBERS
I bought three of these as they were ridiculously cheap for new parts! I'll fiddle with spring rates and use one at the back and one on either
front corner.
WHEELS
I bought 2 of the R1200C's rear wheels (5.5" rims) to put on the front of my trike. I think they look really nice! I'll just use the
bike tyres that come with them to get it through MSVA, etc. then switch over to car tyres. I'll have a custom 'fat' wheel made for the
back.
Image deleted by owner
FRONT CALIPERS
I've always wanted to use bike calipers on something other than a 'bike'. I'm hoping to keep weight under 300kg, so here's
my chance! Two of the BMW's calipers...
[img][/img]
iank - 16/7/10 at 10:02 AM
Nice, what are you using for a handbrake? Wilwood spot caliper?
scootz - 16/7/10 at 10:03 AM
Probably the Hi-Spec one Ian...
I've had both before and I'd say the Hi Spec variant is worth the extra £20 or so.
kipper - 16/7/10 at 10:25 AM
Hi guys.
on my three wheeler I have used four pot Hispec callipers with the hand brake built in on the two front wheels.
I did try to get a Suzuki Burgman rear calliper, which has a hand brake, to fit the Piaggio scooter rear end I am using but there just was'nt
enough room.
Suzuki calliper for sale if interested.
Regards Kipper.......AKA Denis.
scootz - 16/7/10 at 10:38 AM
I'd thought about doing something similar, but the rear spot caliper should be an easier fit.
scootz - 16/7/10 at 05:22 PM
quote:
Originally posted by JF
Well I don't think it will be that much heavier the say the Aprillia engine. Seeing that the RSV Mille and the BWM R1200S only differ about 2kg
in total weight.
You might lose a some horses, but did you look at the torque gain? Especially the R1200RT has a really well pulling engine. Doing 120NM at 6000rpm
against the 101NM at 7250rpm for the aprillia.
Even though your trike will be really light for a car, it will still be quite heavy for a bike. I think those extra NM will make it quicker.
Be aware of the BMW gearboxes though. There have been really lousy series with high repair costs.
Thanks for that... am I not right in thinking that the weight difference is a bit more than 2kg? I make it a difference of 49kg!
RSVR
180kg
172mph
143bhp
76ft/lbs
R1200RT
229kg
135mph
110bhp
85 ft/lbs
I'm still thinking that the RSVR engine will shove it along the road quicker, but remain open to suggestion...
JF - 16/7/10 at 11:00 PM
No the RT is quite a bit heavier indeed. But I compared the BWM R1200S to the Aprillia. As they are quite similar bikes.
Comparing a mille to a R1200RT is like comparing a seven to your average car.
But since those two bikes are very similar in weight, I suspect the engines might very well be quite similiar in weight. And the R1200 engines are
basically all the same.
But I think a R1200RT egine would suit your trike better then an R1200S.
scootz - 17/7/10 at 09:08 AM
Ah, yes...
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
I... must... learn... to... read... posts... properly!
scootz - 18/7/10 at 01:48 PM
Right... the swingarm is manufactured to the correct offset for the bike (what were they thinking! )
The sprocket on the RSV engine is located pretty far across to the offside of the frame... not a problem as I intend to run a wide back wheel and will
have one made (probably Image) to suit whatever rear-wheel centre-line I require.
This increased offset also has the benefit of bringing the swingarm tighter to the offside frame making the mounting to the spindle pick-up point
straightforward.
However...
I now have a fairly wide gap to be 'bridged' between the nearside spindle pick-up point and the swingarm.
How best to deal with this?
I'm just conscious of the need to keep the back end as strong and as solid as possible.
All suggestions welcomed!
Hope this diagram helps a bit...
[img][/img]
scootz - 18/7/10 at 05:50 PM
Interesting development!!!
I've been offered a full BMW K1200RS bike at a very reasonable price! That would make things a zillion times easier (albeit a zillion times less
interesting!).
Oooooooh... I'm all confuzzled! Means the Aprilia engine, and a couple of the BMW bits I've bought would become redundant, but hey... I
like selling things!
scootz - 18/7/10 at 08:46 PM
Decision made... K1200RS running gear it is! And... shock-horror... NO REVERSE!
Been here a million times before... things get waaaaaay over-ambitious and the project falls flat on its face!
The K1200RS has lots of hard fastening points on it's cast-ali frame, so I'm thinking sub-frame...
Saw this project (Shrike)... gives an idea of where I'm going with the union between bike and single-seater. Unlikely to keep the tank in
it's original position due to concerns over COG, and would probably remove the tail subframe.
More pics LINKY
[Edited on 19/7/10 by scootz]
iank - 18/7/10 at 09:36 PM
kb58 knows the engineer who made the shrike.
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/viewthread.php?tid=21777
scootz - 19/7/10 at 07:38 AM
I've dropped him (Shrike builder) an email to see if he has any of the drawings for his 'headstock to chassis' mounts... could save me
a LOT of time!
zilspeed - 19/7/10 at 10:38 AM
The K is a fair call IMHO, especially if you get swinging arm etc all as one package.
The boxer would not have gone well with the single seater chassis.
Grinnall Scorpion should provide many valid reference points as to how to proceed, seeing as that's a K powered reverse trike.
P.S. Got your previous email, was just chewing over how to suggest a K rather than a boxer. 
scootz - 19/7/10 at 12:09 PM
Did you have a peak at the Shrike link Zil? What did you think of using the bikes chassis as a subframe (particularly the mounting the headstock to
the single seater chassis idea)?
zilspeed - 19/7/10 at 12:53 PM
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
Did you have a peak at the Shrike link Zil? What did you think of using the bikes chassis as a subframe (particularly the mounting the headstock to
the single seater chassis idea)?
Well, it's all down to packaging really isn't it.
If you look at the back of any of the bike engined single seaters, they have way less space between the front of the engine and the buklhead behind
the driver. Most have side exit exhausts too and it all helps to foreshorten the overall wheelbase.
It might be relatively simple to put the car and bike together like this, but it's far from the best solution in this regards.
You really want the engine to be pushed forward as much as you can so that you can keep the wheelbase managable. Having the top yoke still in place
kills this stone dead.
As ever, I think the best way forward is to put the engine exactly where you want it then fabricate to the other known structure - the car chassis.
Keeping the bike frame might be easier, but it's not best, IMHO.
scootz - 19/7/10 at 01:00 PM
Good points Zil... and very well made!
I really want as much weight as low-down in the chassis as I can get it.
The flat nature of the in-line four K engine probably makes the fabrication of engine mounts a tad easier.
I'll give you a shout once the bike has arrived (probably next week) and I have it stripped!
smart51 - 19/7/10 at 01:06 PM
mounting the bike frame to the car frame is a nice simple idea but I would be concerned about weight. Bike frames are designed to support a whole lot
of load through the yoke that would be better distributed about a space frame. This strength over a small yoke length means a substantial structure.
They also are not designed for a lot of lateral force (bikes lean). If it makes the build simple then I don't see why you shouldn't do it
this way though. What would your wheelbase be if you made your car this way? I'd start to scratch my head a bit if it got much more than say
2.5m long. Mine will have a 2.4m wheelbase versus a 1.3m track (tyre centres) which is on the long side of the 1.6:1 rule of thumb. Longer than 1.6
and the car's handling is biased more in favour of straight line stability than cornering nimbleness. Get it too long and it will turn like a
tanker. Too short and it will be twitchy.
[Edited on 19-7-2010 by smart51]
scootz - 19/7/10 at 01:11 PM
Thanks for that Smart... if nothing else, the stripped chassis will be good for taking mounting templates from, etc.
scootz - 19/7/10 at 01:12 PM
Zoiks... K1200 turbo engine!
smart51 - 19/7/10 at 01:48 PM
Put it away! You've got 2 too many engines already.
scootz - 19/7/10 at 01:51 PM
Don't worry - just drooling!
ceebmoj - 22/7/10 at 02:00 PM
hi there,
would you mind passing on the details of the company that sold you the BMW bits and some idea of how mutch that set you back? as I have been looking
at BMW bits for a bit for a trike project.
blake
scootz - 22/7/10 at 02:13 PM
Hello!
I've sent you a mail with all the contact details!
LINKY
Peteff - 22/7/10 at 03:10 PM
How will a fat wheel fit on the single sided swing arm without moving the engine and everything off to one side ? It's just something that's
bugging me or is there an obvious solution I haven't thought of ?
scootz - 22/7/10 at 03:14 PM
Glad you spotted my deliberate mistake Pete... the fat wheel was on the cards when I was using the Aprilia engine as the sprocket output would have
been located much closer to the offside of the vehicle, so would have pushed the swingarm assy over too in order to keep things aligned.
As I'm now using a BMW engine, then the swingarms, etc. will all be located centrally, so will be using the standard wheel.
I'll probably be aiming for 175's on the front and a 195 on the rear now.
hexxi - 29/7/10 at 06:04 AM
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
What would your wheelbase be if you made your car this way? I'd start to scratch my head a bit if it got much more than say 2.5m long. Mine
will have a 2.4m wheelbase versus a 1.3m track (tyre centres) which is on the long side of the 1.6:1 rule of thumb. Longer than 1.6 and the
car's handling is biased more in favour of straight line stability than cornering nimbleness. Get it too long and it will turn like a tanker.
Too short and it will be twitchy.
[Edited on 19-7-2010 by smart51]
How did you come to this 1.6:1 ?
smart51 - 29/7/10 at 07:07 AM
quote:
Originally posted by hexxi
How did you come to this 1.6:1 ?
From years of reading around the subject. Some suspect the neutral figure is the golden ratio (1.61803399) but that's mostly because it is the
answer to everything else. I haven't done an exhaustive study myself but believe that short wheel base cars (Lancia Stratos, Metro 6R4, RS200
etc) turn fast but aren't stable in a straight line. LWB cars like the Mercedes Grosser and any pink hen night car don't turn too well but
go in a straight line very well.
iank - 29/7/10 at 07:57 AM
The 1.6 figure appears along with a list of example cars in Staniforths Race and Rally Car Source Book.
It's a number to use as a starting point if designing a car, not something to treat as a holy grail as there are plenty of other things that
affect turn vs straight line performance (weight distribution and COG for two before getting into how suspension design can affect things).
I do have reservations on how it can be applied to trikes to be honest - for one thing should you measure the centerline of the car or the distance
between a front and the rear wheel for wheel base? (i.e. along the hypotenuse of the triangle) and should you be using average wheel track? - for a
trike the rear track is zero so should you halve the track measurement on the front. Even does it apply at all for trikes? (something like it should
as motorbike also have the same effect based on wheelbase)
Peteff - 29/7/10 at 08:34 AM
1.6:1 is the golden ratio in nature. It is the ratio of the spiral of Nautilus shells and various parts of the human body in relation to others like
the upper arm to forearm etc. Da Vinci used it so it's not a new thing and could be applied to anything in some way.
[Edited on 29/7/10 by Peteff]
scootz - 31/7/10 at 10:31 AM
Donor bike arrived... 98 K1200RS. Looks a lot smarter in the photo than it does in the flesh, but still not too bad at all.
Seems to be some oil escaping from the engine / diff, but who cares at the price I paid! There were bare engines priced higher!
Two hours after arriving and it's been given the Scootz-Treatment!
[img][/img]
scootz - 1/8/10 at 08:04 AM
Ber-luddy hell!
Asked the vendor when I was buying the bike what the engine width was... "measured it - less than 50cm" was the reply.
Perfect... 51cm is the width of the chassis at the rear!
Why did I not take my own measurement before I stripped the bike... it's 56cm! Too wide to work with!
Back to the flipping drawing board... and I guess I'd better open an eBay shop to sell this K1200RS in a zillion pieces!
scootz - 8/8/10 at 12:50 PM
BMW breakers-yard going pretty well! So it's looking like I'll be going back to the traditional swingarm and chain drive set-up!
That being the case, then I definitely want a fat rear wheel! Problem is, the custom 'fat' rear bike wheels tend to be designed for
belt-driven US-bikes and the cost $$$$$$$$$.
Can anyone point me in the direction of any bike wheel experts!?
Alternatively, can any clever LCB'er come up with a suitable spindle design that would allow a normal car wheel with a neutral offset to be used
and still accommodate a sprocket and brake disc carrier on either side!?
smart51 - 8/8/10 at 03:08 PM
Are you sure you can't work with the engine you have. an extra 5cm doesn't sound like much. 25mm either side will only be the widest point
too, not the whole engine. I bet you could come up with a nice solution if you put your mind to it.
scootz - 8/8/10 at 03:22 PM
I probably could, but I'm not too impressed with the BMW set-up...
The engine is bigger and heavier than anticipated and the separate gearbox makes it an uber-looooooooong package!
scootz - 12/8/10 at 07:11 PM
The BMW 'shop' is chugging along nicely! Might even make my money back this time!
This is as far as I've got with the bike-breaking... a mix of rounded bolts and a lack of know-how is preventing the separation of the forks,
frame and swing-arm! Will just have to get the grinder and the big-hammer out!
Probably going to go full-circle and look for another RSV-R engine, but am in no rush to decide on the power-plant. Plenty of other 'stuff'
to be getting on with in the meantime!
scootz - 22/11/10 at 06:20 PM
Not been a lot happening... the arrival of the Procomp kind of took my attention (and pennies) away!
Gave me lots of time to think though and the phrase that kept coming to the fore was KEEP IT SIMPLE AND CHEAP! No shaft drives, no reverse boxes...
just an offset bike engine, a normal chain drive and a great big fat rear tyre (300 or bigger... for no other reason than it looks ).
And despite good advice to the contrary earlier in the thread, I'm going to go for a 'hard-tail' (no swingarm / shock). Firstly, I
don't have the skills to engineer a swingarm and pivot that won't twist like Chubby Checker. Also, the existing chassis lends itself nicely
to a wide-tyred hard-tail with minimal mods. I appreciate it might be a bit skippy over the bumps, but it's a toy and will only get used once in
every second blue-moon! I noticed a few posts questioning whether a hard-tail would be ok for MSVA, and I've checked with VOSA... no
problemo!
The car only came with the offside front suspension (inboard). Again, too costly and complicated to try and replicate it for the other side, so will
plump for some standard locost style wishbones with 'normal' suspension. Not going to start on these until I know the finished length of
the trike as this will influence the track dimension.
T66 - 23/11/10 at 06:35 PM
Ive just noticed your thread Scott.......
Good luck with the madness, its even more "different" than my little Fiat.
Always remember - "Different is good"
tony-devon - 28/11/10 at 10:14 AM
hardtail will be fine, I build and ride them all the time, bikes and trikes, although my trikes are 2 at the back layout
just use a large car back wheel, far cheaper tyres, no worries about killing the tyre in a thousand miles or so as your only running on the centre of
it etc
make your own, or draw up and have an engineering company make the parts for you, to build your own rear hub to suit.
in years gone by when I have built bikes like this, I started off with a thick walled tube, or bored solid bar as the bearing sleeve, and two top hat
shaped parts, both bored to be a tight fit over the main tube, and with flanges to suit the wheel, and the other to suit the brake disc
having them moveable during the initial build means you can adjust positioning and offset etc, then I have just fully welded them in place
never had an issue
never heard of that 1.6 magic number, but this is really odd, I just went through the last 3 trikes I built, and do you know what??
they were near as dammit 1.6 ratio, not for any reason, other than they looked right.
I know its the wrong way round for your taste, but heres my current project, moved on a way from this pic, but not got any recent ones
The Venom Project - 28/11/10 at 12:24 PM
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
... as you've probably guessed, I have fallen at the first hurdle and have adopted another project!
I stumbled across a brand-spanking new Formula Rolon single-seater chassis and body that had found its way into the country as part of an engineering
study. The Engineering chap was finished with it, so I bought it for a very reasonable price.
It arrived last week and I've got to say I'm quite impressed by the build quality. I was worried that it might not be the best, but the
chassis welding, bodywork and components seem every bit as good as some of the european Formula cars I've had.
It did not come with an engine or gearbox, and the rear lends itself well towards grafting the back-end of a bike onto it to create a reverse trike
(and its easier to put through its test!).
It also has a big enough cockpit to take my lardy backside in relative comfort!
This is a pic of a built car...
This is (kind of) what I want to (try and) achieve...
[Edited on 18-7-10 by Fozzie]
God damn I like that Trike in Red, Get it done :-)
Triton - 7/2/11 at 05:24 PM
Any pics on yer trikerage yet Mr Scootz?
scootz - 8/2/11 at 09:45 AM
Lol... it's still just a collection of parts at the mo - chassis... bodywork... engine... steering rack!
I'm trying to get the Procomp ready for the Spring before I get giong again.
Triton - 8/2/11 at 02:52 PM
Okey doke, just looking for inspiration as I'm about the same with mine... I thought maybe if I saw how well others were getting on it would
give me a kick to get cracking, I don't feel so guilty now though....hahahaha
Bit out of touch with things but if you wanted to do a track day or 5 using a trike would it be with cars or bikes?
[Edited on 8/2/11 by Triton]
scootz - 8/2/11 at 04:26 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Triton
Bit out of touch with things but if you wanted to do a track day or 5 using a trike would it be with cars or bikes?
Hmmm... not entirely sure!
