15 Awesome Three Wheeled Vehicles 

Envy...

We had one, I wish I still had it, but the car flipped over, it seems they were known for flipping! No roll bar or seat belts!

Actually the Bond bug fared better than that...some 2200+ cars were made not 200

The small cars would be a good idea, as long as they only operate in a vehicle environment where ALL vehicles are small and light. Imagine a truck squashing the small car and occupants. Or even a full size SUV creaming the small car.

I have a Spyder F3 and I love slinging it around corners!

Yup. I've a ryker rally. You'll fly off the bike before it tips. Love it.

Ditto on the tilties

. 1 l

Yup. Did that. Got the receipt. Kept the video. 😀

Not to mention that it is a very safe vehicle to drive, due to the carbon fiber hexagon material used for the outer shell which is claimed to be 7× stronger than steel and significantly lighter weight.

@@newnamwen8009 I'll believe it when I see the crash test results. The vehicle has no crumple zones and the energy will transfer to the occupants.

Thank you.

I happened to look at one Here in Eugene Oregon and as a motorcycle enthusiast, I was very impressed with the Arcimoto build quality.

Where ?

@@stevewilliams2498 on the BBC in Britain

Thank you! Saved me from saying the exact same thing!

@@chriszenier826 Not worries i annoys me allot when people who have never driven these cars, act like they know what they are talking about..

Ok ikjkkkkkp BBB but 😮😮 don’t want you paddle aadbadbvvbo

@@x66Hawk66xsame.beautiful car. So cool

Thats telling it how it is.

Tuttle!

Elio and Aptera. Just put out a vehicle already. It's been years. I am just going to build my own. It will be faster.

Colin Chapman doodled an F1 three wheeler and spoke about cornering not creating the issue of a lifting inside wheel when that was central. I recall someone else built such a race car to research the possibilities of that design. It had a wide F1-type rear tyre. I also recall that the lap record holder at an English club circuit was a ‘30s Morgan trike, ahead of a Sierra Cosworth; and it was in the corners that the Morgan had the advantage. One wheel T the front, steering, wouldn’t be my choice.

I have.

There's someone in my neighborhood who has a three wheeled vehicle.

Person near me has a Reliant Robin!

I been on a 3 wheeled quad

Mr. Bean would often make one tip. I don't get why they exist.

Was thinking the same thing. I have a ryker rally and it blows all these away. Not to mention it's much cheaper.

Yeah, he spent most of his time just making fun of each entry on the list.

Electameccannica bought up almost all of the sparrows and used them as the basis for the design of the Solo.

I had a Berkeley T60, a lot of fun.

You sound vey authoritative, but you overstate your case against the reverse delta. By putting center of mass forward you ensure that, in a sharp turn, the rear will lose traction before the inside front wheel will lift. These designs have been tested and proven. BTW, Did you ever ride a three wheel ATV? They were notoriously unstable.

Two wheels up front is the best aerodynamic shape. That's why wings aren't thickest in the back. Two in front is also more stable in turns and braking, as most force moves forward. 1 in front and 2 in back can work, but it's extremely tricky in anything but straight line. Any turns push CG outbound of the front wheel. They're good in straight lines though, drag racing and Salt Flats.

@@onebylandtwoifbysearunifby5475 Planes are different, you want a light tail, for responsive rudder control and because you have a heavy engine in front. With 3 wheeled ground vehicles, the CG is more important than with 4. You need to have it close to the geometric center of the triangle. Having two wheels in front the CG is under the drivers knees, so you are prone to have a tail heavy over steering vehicle. One front wheel leaves you with only one wheel for steering, that means if that looses traction, you have no steering, so no warning like with two front wheels. I have owned a delta trike (with one front wheel) and it had a low CG at the right placement and I could do controlled drifts on 3 wheels. It handled perfectly. Benefit was that the pointy shape made the steering stiff up at higher speeds, just the same way as adaptive power steering gets less responsive. Aerodynamically this is the better shape, if the vehicle can be kept slender with the passenger behind you.

@@Tore_Lund The best aerodynamic shape for efficiency is a wide front and a thin rear, "teardrop". 2 in front is better there because the vehicle can gradually taper. Aptera has an extremely low Cd of 0.13, for example. Another is NACA aerofoil, which is THE most aerodynamic shape. Two wheels up front is more stable in turns and under braking. Yes, you want your CG 2/3 of the way forward, or 66/33 weight distribution. This is not too hard since you can put your motors and batteries up front. The lateral weight transfer is better spread between 2 wheels. Handling is better as a result. This is why all major production companies like VW have used 2 in front for 3 wheel designs. Peugeot built their 3 wheel Cup race car this way also. Braking sends most force up front. This is a problem when you rely on 1 wheel with little weight on it to stop a vehicle with 2/3 of the weight behind it. This cannot be designed around, you always want most of your weight biased between the 2 wheel section. Straight line stability is just fine with 1 wheel up front and 2 in back. Land speed record vehicles and drag racing cars can use this approach, they don't need good braking or fuel efficiency. For commuter cars, if the CG is towards the back by 2/3 as you say, you can do OK. But that means you need a rear engine, which puts the weight away from the steering and braking wheels. Front wheel drive in a 2 up one back design is hard to beat. However, it's all in the design. Poorly designed vehicles won't handle well regardless of arrangement. Either platform can work, and each has their strengths. It may even come down to personal preference.

You hit the nail on the head with this comment. The reliant did observe it's centre of gravity, very well. I have not gone as far as to full on drift my reliant but I have had is sliding a few times.