View Single Post
Old 02-06-2014, 04:25 PM   #40 (permalink)
Frank Lee
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Viking View Post
The OP stated he wanted to build a reverse trike that could carry two people at speeds up to 60mph.

I was just pointing out that the chain and sprockets will wear a lot faster with the added load (compared to just the bike). Also adding the body work will make it more complex compared to just servicing the chain on normal bike.
Therefore they will need a heck of lot more maintenance than shaft drive and why I would look for a shaft drive bike to base it on.
Is that so...
Quote:
Originally Posted by OP
My project is a small reverse trike for 1 person for highway travel, probably using a 125 to 250 cc engine and weighing between 300 and 500 lbs, cruising typically at 55mph, and getting over 125mpg I expect.
One person only.
Trike estimated to add 75 lbs.- a good deal less than a passenger.
Divide the weight between three instead of two wheels AND put proprtionally more on the front and voila! less weight on the back wheel.
We don't know if the body covers the chain, or if it wouldn't have a simple access panel.
I've got chain drive bikes and none of them have needed replacement chains/sprockets anywhere near that often.
OP wants efficiency and chain drive is far more efficient.
Belt drive is probably better yet.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with drum brakes either.
__________________


  Reply With Quote