Project 100 (custom enclosed Honda C90 targets 100 mph vmax and 100 km/L FE)

[Frank Lee]

Love your Cub, Ironside. Wish I could see it in person and take it for a spin. That is the bike I've been wanting for such a long time. The U.S. is alone in the world for not having access to Cubs for many decades.

[CFECO]

Originally Posted by visionary

Reply to Godscountry

The weight is higher than I had hoped for, but there are a multitude of reasons. The frame is built from 20x20mm box section mild steel because it approximates the flat-plane design and the section width that a production based composite monocoque would be made from. My initial material order was for 1.5mm wall thickness, but in a later order I allowed 3.0mm to be delivered. This was an error with two consequences, firstly the lighter material was used in the structural construction thus making it less than ideal. Secondly, the heavier material was used to make the less demanding upper sections with a weight penalty and no strength benefit.
However, I still feel that this is only responsible for about 30% of the over target weight. Most is due to the complexity of the design and equipment that I have chosen, and maybe I should just accept that I was too optimistic from the start. Either way, I have now started to focus on the mass of components and have taken steps to reduce weight where it can be easily achieved.

I’ve added a photo of the side braces now that I have taken a plasma cutter to them, its removed a significant amount of weight but I cannot do anything about the box section weight without re-making them from scratch.




As for driving, the extra weight will undoubtedly hurt acceleration but that’s not a major concern. The main purpose of this vehicle is to prove the point about the possibility of doing 100km on 1litre of fuel at 100kmh average speed, from 100cc displacement, outside of that goal I’m not much concerned with poor acceleration. The critical factor in this test will be aerodynamic performance and that’s where I will concentrate my efforts.

I’m already working on a 250cc single cylinder engine version, which will make for a much more usable daily driver. The extra mass will impact much less on an engine with 30hp and a six speed transmission, making it a much more enjoyable vehicle to drive, still not quick but OK, I hope.

The tubing sections could get holes bored in them with a hole saw, not sure how you'd get the pieces out, and it would be a nasty job.

[CFECO]

Oops

[Grant-53]

I realized I never got back to you about the air powered parking lift. I think I didn't know the ground clearance or how to do Google message. A parking brake with disc brakes requires a special caliper. A simple mechanical system may be the way to go.

[visionary]

Back in the game
After a long break I‘m getting back on with the project. I’ve been working seven days a week on my customers’ jobs since late November and today was the first time I’ve touched the machine in nearly 3 months. But while no physical work was possible, you never stop thinking, and I have been busy in that department. Updates to follow soon.

Reply to bobesser
Taking your points one at a time
I do have hopes for future development, but I am reluctant to announce them, since its very easy to look foolish with extravagant claims. But in respect of how to address the weight issues with future version(s), I do have some ideas. I have always imagined that a production version would use a carbon-composite monocoque but it could just as easy be a pressed and folded aluminium design. Much of the upper body could be lighter than I’ve made it and the bodypanels should be thin thermoformed plastic. There is much weight to be saved but I have to face facts, this machine is larger and has more equipment than conventional motorcycles, so a 230-260kg target is where I should be aiming.

You mention the front suspension, but I don’t feel that weight is “wasted” here. However, I am planning a redesign for other reasons. At present the telescopic forks protrude through the upper bodywork since my nose height is so low. In order to keep drag to a minimum I need to use a suspension system that can be enclosed within the bodywork.

Originally Posted by BenjaminT

You should scrap the tele-fork front suspension and research a man named Norman Hossack . You're going to need all the stability you can get on two wheels.

Post 184 Two years ago in a post on this thread

The “Hossak” system looks like the most promising design for my vehicle and I’m already working on my own version.
The climate control question – yes I have a fully considered design but I’m not sure it qualifies as “Climate Control” which I understand to be defined as incorporating air-con. My design uses the engine cooling rad and simple flaps to control the input temperature into the cabin, but is not able to go below ambient. The distribution (of airflow) within the cabin, is again controlled by simple flaps in much the same way as a regular car heater system from the 60’s.

Reply to Grant 53
I was thankful for your help when considering the air-powered parking stands, but I have chosen a different solution. Pneumatics was a viable route, which offered synergies with other systems on the vehicle, however I saw a flaw in my plan.
A pneumatic system will take time to fill before its ready for operation, not a problem for continuous operation but if left for any longer period, say overnight or a longer period parked, then immediate operation my not be possible. I felt that this would be unacceptable to users so I decided upon a system that stores energy for immediate operation – a 12V battery. This is simply a matter of increasing the capacity of the C90 battery to suit more demanding operation. This powers the hydraulic system using two small rams using the same pump and reservoir as the canopy lifting system.
This image shows one stand (there is one each side) in two positions, and it is activated by the rider, seated inside the canopy, from a steering bar mounted switch.

[visionary]

Sizing up the XL1

On a recent trip to the Design Museum, London I was lucky enough to see the Volkswagen XL1. It was nominated for an award and was on display with all a wide variety of other nominees.



I’m a big fan of this vehicle because of its design objective (to travel 100km on one litre of fuel), which is the same as my own target for Project 100. Of course, our budgets are at opposite ends of the scale but I’m still confident that my bike will out-perform this car.

This is the third version prototype of this vehicle, and with each step forward the design team dilutes the original focus with conformity. The original prototype featured tandem seating, and this version with offset side-by-side seating has a much larger frontal area. For this reason, I believe the enclosed recumbent motorcycle will always have the upper hand.

My impression, from seeing this car in the flesh, is of how low the car is – just like an exotic sportscar. Also, the body styling looks remarkably ordinary which makes me feel that they have hit their targets with ease. The sharp edges at the rear indicate how the wake management is a step change from “regular” production cars. I can’t help but wonder how efficient this vehicle could have been if they had kept the low frontal area design.

[MetroMPG]

You lucky dog! I'd love to see one of those in the flesh/metal/carbon fibre.

That car, plus a GM EV1.

Unfortunuately the VW won't be available on this side of the pond.

[godscountry]

How does your bike spec out compared to Allert Jacobs Honda 125,his bike came in about 43 percent heaver with him adding 88 lbs for a total of 319 pounds.He took out the inefficient auto CVT? added a manual 4 speed with a clutch and lowered the over all ratio.also he used llower rolling resistance tires.He claimed 1.1 liter per 100Km or 214 mpg USA. at 55 mph cruise speed.His average is 199 mpg amazing.I hope you pull it off.PS Craig Vetter had thought from his observations that his friend Alan and others Kawasaki twin cylinder 250 cc were more efficient then his single cylinder 17 horsepower Honda Helix,a Ford engineer said the single was much more efficient between the two,and Craigs poor mileage was due to the inefficient CVT transmission the Honda Helix uses..so something for all of us to think about

[Frank Lee]

Allert's bike never had a CVT.

[renault_megane_dci]

Allert got rid of his auto clutch to allow for some clutch slip required in using the much taller ratio.