3-Wheeled Vehicles

[graham]

In the U.S. a 3-wheeled car is considered a motorcycle from a government safety requirements point of view. So car companies who wish to not spend the tens of millions of dollars required to do government safety crash testing sometimes make 3-wheeled cars to get around that requirement.

Therefore when the public sees a 3-wheeled vehicle here, the perception is that it is less safe than its 4-wheeled cousin.

That is not to say that you could not make a safe 3-wheeled car, but the "dead end" comment comes from the requirement that a car company convince the public that their car is safe when they skimped on crash testing.

 

[voyager]

.... and you would call the Smart ForTwo, Tesla is working on, a safer choice?

Well, next time a big truck pops up in your rear mirror, remember the SEV does make for a safer mode of transportation.

 

[Kevin Harney]

YES.... It HAS passed crash testing and even did so pretty much with flying colors !!! I would put the Smart ForTwo up against a motorcycle ANY DAY !!!

 

[voyager]

The SEV was never conceived to bypass the more strict safety regulations for automobiles. It's meant to be way safer than any other small car, including the Smart For2. I will not get into all details as far as the construction, but I can tell you this: a cigar-like shape with arch-shaped struts is inherently stronger (the ol' Romans already knew) than a box shape. I noticed that my suggestion has been demoted to a sub-forum... I appreciate the comments though.

 

[doug]

Not demoted. Just that it had more to do with this existing 3-wheeled vehicle thread than it had to do with "Tesla in deal with Daimler".

 

[voyager]

Not demoted. Just that it had more to do with this existing 3-wheeled vehicle thread than it had to do with "Tesla in deal with Daimler".

I understand, but would've appreciated the exposure in a direct comparison with the Smart For2. Besides, the Smart car is a Daimler project, while my idea may develop into a pure Tesla project, theoretically. That's all. I do know my place however, as a junior contributor. :redface:

PS: shouldn't you go to bed, Doug?

 

[voyager]

Btw, I have been reading all comments here. Some of the very familiar arguments and aspects seem to be mixed up. Structural rigidity and a three-wheel platform are two separate things.

I don't believe in tilting three-wheelers with the (steered) single wheel upfront; if you want tilt, get a motorcycle (I have). Besides, the narrow front end severely diminishes the driver's safety perception... So, reverse the setup, make it feel car-like when you're driving!

The Space-Efficient Vehicle actually has a semi-three wheel platform; there are two wheels clustered closely around the swing arm. It'll prevent aquaplaning and will counter side sweeping or over steer... A run flat of one of the rear wheels will not keep you from pursuing your course! Oh yes.

The SEV has (1) large diameter rims, 19 inch. Together with (2) a low center of gravity (battery pack) that's lower than the wheel centers, (3) FWD, (4) active damping to keep body roll in check, and (5) rear wheels that 'co-steer' with the front wheels (speeds above 35 mph), it would make for very stable and predictable handling.

There are more safety features, I won't get into. Have I finally convinced all you good people? Alright, tell it on the mountain that there may well be a new kid in town if you want to.

 

[JRP3]

It's not so much a safety issue, it's a marketability and usefulness issue.
The narrow rear means less usable space, no way around that, plus it looks weird to many, and 3 wheels are inherently less stable than 4. All the things you claim make the SEV stronger can be done to a 4 wheeled vehicle with better results.
The Smart is not an ideal platform for an EV but it's being used since it already exists.
Yes Martin was forced out of Tesla, because he was trying to keep costs down to make a more affordable vehicle, which Musk rejected. I doubt Musk would be any more interested in a 3 wheeled vehicle, when 4 wheeled vehicles will undoubtedly sell better, and be better.

 

[voyager]

The same thing can be said about the little Smart car. Why make 'm that small if you can make 'm somewhat bigger? A SWB four-wheeler is inherently less stable than a three-wheeler.

Yeah, the ForTwo already exists. So, why go through the trouble? Point is that Tesla was one of the first companies that went through the trouble of stating their electric case. If it were numbers that Tesla was after, then they'd probably sell something else...

But hey, if you don't like your mode of transportation to radically deviate from your neighbors' or don't like the SEV's particular design, that's okay. It has more boot space than your beloved ForTwo, I can tell you that.

 

[JRP3]

I never said I loved the Smart, and I already said it's not an ideal EV platform. None of that does anything to make the SEV a more marketable vehicle. You've latched on to this comparison that Tesla should make the SEV instead of the Smart as if there are no other better options. Frankly Tesla is not making the Smart, they are providing components, which provides income for them so they can continue to build their sedan. Tesla will not make a three wheeled vehicle, period, but continue to push for it if you must.

 

[voyager]

I'm making a suggestion. I'm not trying to sell Tesla anything it doesn't want. Shouldn't it be the question why you are trying so hard to scrutinize some of the positive comments that were made before as far as three-wheelers concerned? Almost sounds like you're working for the company, and know more of what they're thinking. Well, that's fine with me. Don't take this wrong. I still appreciate the concern.

 

[graham]

*sigh* This seems like the beginning of an argument for arguments sake.

Tesla has stated they will never make a 3-wheeled car. Trying to convince them the merits of doing so on this board is pointless.

Many on this board have considered the Aptera and the VentureOne... er... Persu which are 3 wheeled. There are certainly advantages of 3-wheels, but also some disadvantages which are worth acknowledging too.

Statements questioning peoples motives is overly antagonistic at this stage. Let's keep it civil. Please assume that in general on this board people pointing out disadvantages of a product are not because they are "working for the man" or have some hidden agenda.

 

[JRP3]

Obviously I have a hidden agenda when it comes to the number of wheels on a vehicle. Look at my avatar....must...promote...more...wheels

 

[voyager]

I see. Didn't wanna antagonize.

 

[TEG]

T-Rex -> Silence -> Surge...
Campagna -> EBW-> OptaMotive...

OptaMotive: Home
OptaMotive Surge
Campagna- Fun, Style, Performance
Silence Inc.

 

[voyager]

Riddle me this... What's your message? Hey TEG, yeah I know about the T-Rex. Fine piece of performance machinery, but hardly the energy-efficient slick machine the SEV tries to be.

 

[TEG]

Forum topic=3 wheeled vehicles.
Message = News = Another electric T-rex variant showed up.
( I think "OptaMotive Surge" is a relatively new development. )

I wasn't trying to compare it to anything, or make any comment about "SEV".

 

[voyager]

Oh boy, I guess I need to soften my words. The Dutch can be direct. T-Rex will undoubtedly be more fun. Thanx TEG.

 

[vfx]

Abg

ABG

BMW considering range of two-, three- and four-wheelers for Project i

BMW Clever Concept

 

[graham]

From vfx' link:

Back in the summer of 2007, BMW and the University of Bath put their combined heads together and designed a vehicle called the Compact Low Emission Vehicle for Urban Transportation, or Clever for short.

Doesn't that spell Clevfut? Perhaps that is German for Clever! :smile: