Some Detailed Pics of the 'GM Lean Machine' Tilting Trike

[Coyote X]

I ran across this site and it has some good detail on the pictures if you zoom in on them you can just about see entirely how it was built.

TTW - GM Lean Machine

It looks a lot simpler than the carver and would probably be much easier to make at home. Use something like a sport atv with a 650cc or so engine as the back end and make the front end out of mild steel tube with that center pivot shaft made out of structural steel.

All of you guys thinking of making trikes ever consider something like this? The tilt and steering could even be hydraulically controlled using something as simple as an arduino to control the tilt and wheel steering based on speed. Or it could simply have steering like a motorcycle with the front wheel set up so it can still be counter steered in a turn.




GM calculated that,' steady-state fuel consumption of more than 200 highway mpg, with an EPA combined highway/city rating of 150 mpg ( Road and Track 1/1983 ).

here is an article on how a tilting trike handles: Three-Wheel Vehicle Handling Characteristics

[captainslug]

There's also the BMW "CLEVER", which was designed specifically for fuel-efficiency.

Was originally going to be capable of 188mpg, but is now more likely to hit 98mpg with a 230cc engine. The difference being that it's currently designed to run on natural gas.

http://otocar.net/2008/08/19/bmw-clever-concept/

[Coyote X]

I guess I should add the prototype built and shown in those pictures has no automatic control of the tilt. It is driven just like a motorcycle by countersteering in a curve and the angle is handled by the driver. I assume it has a lock or parking system of some sort to keep it from falling over when going really slow but I can't find out any information about how it was made.

[captainslug]

And then there's going back to two wheels, and adding an adaptive counter-balancing system.

http://www.monotracer.com/

[Frank Lee]

otherwise known as deployable outriggers.

[MazdaMatt]

Am i reading correctly? 1983, 200mpg?

Now... i'm no aeronaught, but isn't the body on backwards? Shouldn't the driver be facing the big round back?

[basslover911]

Originally Posted by MazdaMatt

Am i reading correctly? 1983, 200mpg?

Now... i'm no aeronaught, but isn't the body on backwards? Shouldn't the driver be facing the big round back?

True, and then their mpg figures would jump even higher... plus handling would be better (better to have 2 wheels in front and one in the back- if forgot what the name of that configuration was- i know one is tadpole but I get them confused all the time).

[Frank Lee]

You guys think you can improve on .15 CD?

http://www.maxmatic.com/Graphics/TTW...t_lenmchn2.jpg

I saw it in real life at Epcot Center decades ago. Reeeaaaall cool!

[solarguy]

Thanks for the spec sheet Frank,

They list the horse power as 38, and it has an automatic transmission. 38 seems very high. Even 25 would be spritely and get better fuel economy. And who in the world would want a slush-box for a tranny if it's a high performance vehicle, OR a fuel econo job. Manual all the way. Maybe the auto tranny was just easier for the prototype than working out a long "backwards" linkage to a manual.

Finest regards,

troy

[Hasbro]

I posted this on another forum. Pretty interesting and along the same lines.

:: View topic - Tilting vehicle suspension