Hello, Paul!
<nice sunny day here in Bern, after too many cloudy days, but still cold - around freezing>
I enjoyed watching your wooden models, in spite that I know all is just a testing of a shape and position of all mechanics and your body. But, for me nice to see wood between wheels, that is quite a rare sight! Just to make a decision: - central-backbone wooden girder (maybe taller plywood plate, doubled with wooden laths - sandwich construction, maybe with inserted plates of Styrofoam)?
- two parallel sides of wooden girders, as you made on one testing model, or plywood but single piece on each side: crossmembers would do the main reinforcements and some longitudinal and vertical wooden laths for additional stiffness?
- neither plywood monocoque body-shell for Velocar, nor Velocar - this rime?!!!
Even steel or aluminium frames for HP vehicle's chassis could be done without welding: steel/aluminium gussets and bolts!
Early automobiles from pioneer era had wooden chassis made of wooden girders fixed with metal gussets and bolts. Lighter variants had chassis assembled in bicycle's style: metal tubes inserted in joints and brazed... Later: all-metal chassis, jointed with big rivets, mostly - sometimes with big bolts... The same was used in aeroplanes, both of steel and aluminium... Later, with development of welding (gas and electric), bolts and rivets were avoided as constructional fixing system.
Both bolts and metal gussets could be still used on aluminium and steels tubes, rivets I would forget (not know too much about them). Many ultralight aeroplanes for seventies/eighties had such construction (rivets used here and there)… Some decades ago, in Belgrade I was involved in alternative aviation, so learned a lot, forgot a lot, too... (that was illegal, dangerous and relatively expensive hobby)
So, there is a lot of ways to "skin a cat" as American and Australians used to say (we should prefer to skin a rabbit)…
I was watching "Mott & Motofoker" constructs, from the beginning of their experiments. Good to see all: from simple and rude, then sophisticated and practical, also unsuccessful and successful solutions - finishing with nice final result, cute and practical! Could be learn a lot, from their fails and successes! I think that I should not have a need for questions - everything is well presented on films, form early attempts to professionally and commercially successfully product.
Problems for me are to decide:
- what general layout to choose, wheel-base and distance of front wheels (similar to one you planed), position of C.G. (for total weight) and position of pedals?
- position of the rear wheels - quite near one to each other (similar foot-print as 3-wheeler), or at distance of 46cm ~ 1.5 feet (near to full quad)?
- position and type of the seat: upright seating (comfortable as on auto-chair, simpler and lighter) or recumbent as most of you (do not have experience, could not be sure for my possibility for easy seating-in and stepping-out)?
- then to decide should I cannibalise my old quadricycle for components, or make everything from scratch (components that I already have and some that I would buy or construct by myself)?
- If kept old quad, I would reconstructed it in a similar way as your two-connected teenagers MTBs, and similar to my first quadricycle version: wooden frame low between frames), I would test it and give it to my younger step-son (from him I got nice bicycle with 26" wheels, and broken frame)… He is quite heavy and had recently accident with his electric-bike, so he sold it and think not to ride again -he lost self-confidence and trust in Bern's drivers (he wasn't quilty for accident)… Maybe he would be glad to try riding again - in my reconstructed old quad?
Especially, nobody could answer me on my dilemma: should my 20" front-wheels and 26" rear-wheels be safe! Probably - yes, for cruising around (straights, gentle curves and slow around corners), but for sudden change of direction in emergency?
Another dilemma: should I have anergy and power to use it as I planned!
Therefore, as my quadricycle is priority - now, in days of thinking before final sketching, I enjoy in stealing knowledge and experience from you all! Just to accent that your "rambling" is more useful than simple sentences in a style: "That is good - that is not!", "Never do this - always do that!", "That goes together with (something) - that shall not!" (then, I always like to ask: why, how...). Some old-Greece philosophers use such Laconian speak of wisdom (or was recorded much later and now we think it is was great and now funny). However, for their compatriots in that period - that must be pain-in-ass, and mostly useless and boring!
Therefore, Paul and couple more, just follow with your "ramblings"!
Well, now my turn for rumbling in your topic is over!
Ciao,
