Messerschmitt

[Sven7]

"The Messerschmitt offered 3- and 4-wheel variants. A side-by-side comparison of both versions would provide good data on the trade-offs of the two configurations."

...And?? Rule 34 must apply here too, right? (That KYM link is golden)

A few years back i asked a friend why the rear track on my A1 VW seems to be narrower than the front. He replied that it had something to do with reducing understeer. Perhaps using a tadpole layout would exaggerate that in the extreme?

[freebeard]

A little Isetta in its DNA?

If you meant Know Your Meme in general there's also:
Urban Dictionary
https://encyclopediadramatica.se/Main_Page
Memebase - All Your Memes Are In Our Base - internet memes - Cheezburger

And of course there exists a XKCD of it.

And... back to our regularly scheduled thread

[bhtooefr]

Downside to reducing rear track is, as you reduce it, you basically reduce the lever the outside rear wheel has on the chassis to hold the inside front down.

Meaning, you don't really gain at the tadpole point at all - it lifts a wheel and loses traction that way.

[freebeard]

RBFuller's theory with the rear steering Dymaxion was that the rear wheel swings out and tracks behind the outside front wheel, kinda like this:


So, maybe three wheels steering and no leaning in corners? Three wheels perpendicular to the road surface *at all times*?

Edit: That snowmobile pic is now my desktop.

[NeilBlanchard]

I think that the best wheel layout is four wheels with the rear track narrowed so that they fit inside the aerodynamic envelope; but they provide much better Cg stability than a reverse (tadpole) trike.

Another subtle but critical piece of engineering that can help a lot is 4 wheel steering. Case in point is the Illuminati Motor Works 'Seven' - it has a long wheelbase and it used the rear suspension from a Honda Prelude that has active rear wheel steering. The 'Seven' was the quickest of all the cars tested at the X-Prize through the double lane change test (aka the moose avoidance test). That speaks volumes, I think.

Four wheel steering might also be more efficient, because it might possibly have better coasting?

[freebeard]

Maybe, but I'd like to see at least one example of a three-wheel-steering vehicle in the "moose avoidance test".

Four wheel steering might also be more efficient, because it might possibly have better coasting?

How could that be possible?

[bhtooefr]

You wouldn't be scrubbing the rear tires in a turn, as they'd either be following the arc of the turn, or they'd be pointed the same direction as the front tires. (Most 4WS systems have a low-speed mode to allow tighter turns, with the rears following the front arc (opposite direction to the front), and a high-speed mode to allow more stable lane changes, with the rears pointing the same direction as the front.)

[freebeard]

OK, I can see that.

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

I think that the best wheel layout is four wheels with the rear track narrowed so that they fit inside the aerodynamic envelope; but they provide much better Cg stability than a reverse (tadpole) trike.

I just re-read this. You may notice that that is the approach of the design in my profile picture. Along with "Make a Kamm-back by truncating the body at the point of separation'.

I might as well throw this in too:


Exactly what I proposed doing with the torsion bar tubes; except I wanted lever action shocks built into the trailing arms

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by freebeard

That's really odd, but might be fun to drive.

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by myself

Or maybe Photoshop a Messerschmitt done in Westergard style—black with a chopped Carson top, dragging it's tail and a little miniature '40 LaSalle grill with Appleton spotlights. That would be sweet.

I see I never posted this, prolly because it doesn't have the Lasalle grille and the Appletons:


And we now know that the optimal drivetrain would be:
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...mgr-29878.html