Front Wheel Track

[Joshua Caldwell]

I guess my Grand Prix "widetrack" really is wide after all, I just took it to be bogus advertising hype, 71.6"

Or the way I look at it, just wide enough to take home a 55gal aquarium sitting on the back seat

 

[2.ooohhh]

I guess my Grand Prix "widetrack" really is wide after all, I just took it to be bogus advertising hype, 71.6"

Or the way I look at it, just wide enough to take home a 55gal aquarium sitting on the back seat

Is that front track width or total width?
Edmunds lists a 2004 gran prix at 60.1" front track width, but 71.6" vehicle width.

 

[Folks]

I guess my Grand Prix "widetrack" really is wide after all, I just took it to be bogus advertising hype, 71.6"

Or the way I look at it, just wide enough to take home a 55gal aquarium sitting on the back seat

You sound just like me. Before I bought my element I measured that a 4x8 sheet of plywood would fit. LOL

 

[CheeseheadEarl]

You sound just like me. Before I bought my element I measured that a 4x8 sheet of plywood would fit. LOL

That's why I have a long box PU (among other reasons).

Like to see 16' lumber hanging out the back of an Element.

 

[Hog]

Yup, I took my measuring tape to the dealership when I bought my RAM CV, because they said a sheet of plywood would fit inside, and I wanted to know where they were measuring that, (like halfway up the walls, or above the wheelwells)... but turns out, it is 49" between the wheelwells, and 8ft-1" to the back of the front seats (if I dont push them all the way back, so yes, a full sheet fits inside and the doors close. Between the seats I can fit 10 ft lumber as well and still close the doors, far more than I could ever get in my S10, and its inside and covered as well.

 

[Dustoff]

I'm not sure what you mean by wheel track but I believe Elio Motors says the front wheels are the same distance apart as those in a Ford Taurus. Is that the same as the wheel track? Stability is definitely a major reason. If you look at some of the videos on the Similar Vehicles forum (or something like that name) you will lots of roll overs by 3 wheeled vehicles with poor stability. Thanks to Paul Elio's desire for a 5 Star safety rating equivalent, we have a vehicle with true stability. Z

7/9/14
[Broken External Image]

Elio Motors Hello , the only way to roll an Elio is by reversing at 45mph and performing a sharp turn. It takes more than 0.8Gs to get us into a skid!
2 · 2 hours ago

 

[Snick]

The wide track is necessary for stability and locating the Cg properly to prevent uncontrolled rolling.

I *think* it may also help with the pull rod suspension linkage they've chosen to have this wide geometry. Does anyone know what the effect to the suspension geometry is?

 

[Lil4X]

.8 g is pretty respectable for an "economy" car - especially on narrow, hard-compound, low rolling resistance tires.

 

[Folks]

That's why I have a long box PU (among other reasons).

Like to see 16' lumber hanging out the back of an Element.

No but I built a 12 x 24 workshop by nailing 2 - 12 footers together.

 

[AriLea]

The wide track is necessary for stability and locating the Cg properly to prevent uncontrolled rolling.

I *think* it may also help with the pull rod suspension linkage they've chosen to have this wide geometry. Does anyone know what the effect to the suspension geometry is?

The pull rod design itself would not relate to what we call 'suspension geometry'. The pull rod could affect geometry relating to spring rate compression(but can be designed not to), and that could get involved with roll over if the 'progressive-rate' were too soft. This is normally not as important to rollover as the actual tract width and placement of the CG within the triangle formed by the tire contact to the road. Also a minor effect is the tire pressure/loading. In both cases of softness, the ride would get sort of spungy in a turn where the body leans over, and so then the CG has moved to the outside too. A wider front-end would add to counter that effect.

As you likely remember from the CabinScooters group, truly, the height of the Center of gravity (CG) and it's forward position is the largest factor affecting the choice of width needed to have a desired resistance to rollover. In effect the width chosen is a tradeoff with [fitting on the road and aerodrag] vs [rollover safety]. Their engineering decision would have been based on that and the idea that a 6ft is not too hard to live with. Understand that the narrow rear end is still narrow and allows more freedom in turn than a four wheeler with a square shadow. Avoiding obstacles will be very easy with the Elio.

As an example, the 'indy cycle' reverse trikes often increases lateral stiffness via a solid linkage between left and right, greatly reducing that roll-over softness. This comes at the cost of allowing more bump induced body roll, and therefore less comfort, and added body shake. That vehicle has such low momentum, and that type of driver has low requirement for comfort, therefore that owner base doesn't usually mind those attributes. If you had your kid in back, you likely would. There are other tradeoffs as well. They have a far back position for their CG, so up to a 7ft width is highly desirable. More than that and it's too wide for easy driving. The Aptera also had a very wide width, or something near to that(but not the solid linkage).