Full Catalog 3 Wheelers Thread

[AriLea]

Just adding in this sociable seating concept art from Vanderhall, with a removable top, as a proposed update for the Indio

 

[Mark BEX]

Just adding in this sociable seating concept art from Vanderhall, with a removable top, as a proposed update for the Indio

Anymore views on that, can't find anything on the internet ..

 

[AriLea]

Anymore views on that, can't find anything on the internet ..

It is a good looking beast isn't it? It maybe be just dreamweaving 'yah know?'.
Being a small company and all that, we may not hear anything about it then 'bang' there it is.... or not.

My guess is that a fan produced it. Then vanderhall left it out there as click-bate. Car companies do that shit all the time.

It is not all that difficult a structural change from thier current. So yup, they could, if they would.

 

[RSchneider]

It is a good looking beast isn't it? It maybe be just dreamweaving 'yah know?'.
Being a small company and all that, we may not hear anything about it then 'bang' there it is.... or not.

My guess is that a fan produced it. Then vanderhall left it out there as click-bate. Car companies do that shit all the time.

It is not all that difficult a structural change from thier current. So yup, they could, if they would.

Doesn't matter. It would cost too much. Plus, Vanderhall owners are dying due to design issues. First is, the rear tire losing traction and people getting killed.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/baron-budd-representing-family-wrongful-151800848.html

 

[AriLea]

Doesn't matter. It would cost too much. Plus, Vanderhall owners are dying due to design issues. First is, the rear tire losing traction and people getting killed.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/baron-budd-representing-family-wrongful-151800848.html

Well, that description in the text does NOT seem to have technical merrit. They are just assuming fault to the maker since they have not identified a reason for the accident.

The ABS applies to braking dynamics, and they don't say he was braking.
The electronic stability control applies to when accelerating, or if there is a possiblity of hydroplaining or some other sideforce dynamics such as avoiding an object or side winds, and none of those were identified. Does the Vehicle like to spin like a VW bug at speed? Not likely since it is FWD, and weight is forward.

So it looks like they just want to assign blame based on the missing systems. Maybe some detail is left out of the text?
Like water on the road, driver accelerating or slowing or something. Possibly a high speed issue? A strong tail wind?

Those systems do not mater or come into play just gliding straight down the roadway under steady power. The driver actions could be unknown or hidden. Or the roadway not level?

Missing those situations, only the rear tire being super lightly loaded matched with a tendancy toward aerodynamic spin, could be the problem (like the VW bug). And in that case, yes Vanderhall could be at fault. But then you would have to prove that. ABS and Traction control would not apply to this last case, but maybe limited slip could? Limited Slip is not considered a safety system however.

My best guess is that the rear was lightly loaded, and the driver actually touched his brakes. That could happen on a stright flat roadway. I saw a Bronco do that once, and it spun like a top in heavy traffic and never hit anything, thank god! In that case his CG was too high with after market lifts. ABS and Traction Control would not have helped.

If the Vanderhall likes to lift during high speed travel, well that could be a problem, but with an open top and likely turbulent high pressure air up there, that isn't very likely. High pressure air under the body, yeah, that could do it. ABS and TC would not help in that case as well.

unless; Did the rear start to float and then he touched his brakes? They need to say so. It is oly a 1500lb car. All vanderhall needs to say is he was going too fast, and then they would have to prove he wasn't. The fix for vanderhall? , a spoiler.

 

[ehwatt]

Well, that description in the text does NOT seem to have technical merrit. They are just assuming fault to the maker since they have not identified a reason for the accident.

The ABS applies to braking dynamics, and they don't say he was braking.
The electronic stability control applies to when accelerating, or if there is a possiblity of hydroplaining or some other sideforce dynamics such as avoiding an object or side winds, and none of those were identified. Does the Vehicle like to spin like a VW bug at speed? Not likely since it is FWD, and weight is forward.

So it looks like they just want to assign blame based on the missing systems. Maybe some detail is left out of the text?
Like water on the road, driver accelerating or slowing or something. Possibly a high speed issue? A strong tail wind?

Those systems do not mater or come into play just gliding straight down the roadway under steady power. The driver actions could be unknown or hidden. Or the roadway not level?

Missing those situations, only the rear tire being super lightly loaded matched with a tendancy toward aerodynamic spin, could be the problem (like the VW bug). And in that case, yes Vanderhall could be at fault. But then you would have to prove that. ABS and Traction control would not apply to this last case, but maybe limited slip could? Limited Slip is not considered a safety system however.

My best guess is that the rear was lightly loaded, and the driver actually touched his brakes. That could happen on a stright flat roadway. I saw a Bronco do that once, and it spun like a top in heavy traffic and never hit anything, thank god! In that case his CG was too high with after market lifts. ABS and Traction Control would not have helped.

If the Vanderhall likes to lift during high speed travel, well that could be a problem, but with an open top and likely turbulent high pressure air up there, that isn't very likely. High pressure air under the body, yeah, that could do it. ABS and TC would not help in that case as well.

unless; Did the rear start to float and then he touched his brakes? They need to say so. It is oly a 1500lb car. All vanderhall needs to say is he was going too fast, and then they would have to prove he wasn't. The fix for vanderhall? , a spoiler.

Very likely to be another case of a loose steering wheel nut.

 

[RSchneider]

The electronic stability control applies to when accelerating, or if there is a possiblity of hydroplaining or some other sideforce dynamics such as avoiding an object or side winds

I'll teach you:
ABS: Braking
TC: Accelerating
Stability Control: Controlling rotational axis of the vehicle

Cars today (not talking about a VW BUG but something built in the last 30 years) utilize a three axis accelerometer. It controlls the three systems I mentioned above. For the automotive industry, they use the simple right hand rule. Thumb is the Z axis, index is Y and middle finger is X. The accelerometer just like they use in aircraft. It tells you what should happen as opposed to what is not.

So, what this lawsuit is about is that they could have put on stability control yet did not. Technology is there and has been for many years. With other three wheelers (except polaris), unless they go with the Elio plan, they will open themselves up to this type of litigation over and over again. Here is an example at the IIHS rest track when the stability control was turned off.

You might not agree but at the end of the day, this is not what the three wheeler industry needs to have out there.

 

[AriLea]

I'll teach you:
ABS: Braking
TC: Accelerating
Stability Control: Controlling rotational axis of the vehicle

Cars today (not talking about a VW BUG but something built in the last 30 years) utilize a three axis accelerometer. It controlls the three systems I mentioned above. For the automotive industry, they use the simple right hand rule. Thumb is the Z axis, index is Y and middle finger is X. The accelerometer just like they use in aircraft. It tells you what should happen as opposed to what is not.

So, what this lawsuit is about is that they could have put on stability control yet did not. Technology is there and has been for many years. With other three wheelers (except polaris), unless they go with the Elio plan, they will open themselves up to this type of litigation over and over again. Here is an example at the IIHS rest track when the stability control was turned off.

You might not agree but at the end of the day, this is not what the three wheeler industry needs to have out there.

Nice, very pertinent and poinent video, except, this is a rear drive vehicle test. Not applicable to a FWD. There were no aerodynamic issues in your video, just traction control at the rear.

And that vehicle has the CG too far forward for the power required in that instance. Im not even surpised about this, just that they would put the CG so far forward and try and fix it with TC. The Can Am has this fix, but it is known to fail coming out of a particular tunnel in Howaii when raining on just that side of the hill.

So the other case with RWD, if the CG is back enough to avoid this loss of traction, if/when too much power is applied, there is the case when the front end lifts to intiate a wheelie. The vehicle will flip like a flap-jack, and killed the driver in one case (a Trimagnum @1300cc). TC or other power limitation (1cc/per/1lb is likely too much) is the fix here as well. (TC would have to sense a high lifting at the front end.)

CG to the rear also has issues in aerodynamics at high speed.

This video is perfect to show why I advocate FWD in an RT. Thank you sooo much!

In a FWD, this would not have happend in this synario. And the Vaderhall is FWD. They would need a situation with more contending dynamics to develop any issues. That ususally only results in some tire slippage(and power reduction to the opposite), or left-right rocking at the very worst. Prior to a roll due to traction loss would be some rocking, or at least one weight transfer side to side.

With FWD, the worst time for a spin and roll might be on braking if the CG moves too far forward or a patch of ice or water is encountered just at that point. If the rear tire hydroplained, that might do it. (TC would not fix it in this case)

Maybe you need a class on FWD dynamics? More likely the people in the law suit need to know it, or are hoping that the joury will not. Vanderhall WILL bring it up. There must be some other input to cause this event. Quite possible that input would not be fixed with TC or ABS.

I will have to make a more important point. The industry has put this tech to use to make up for various design flaws and dynamic challenges. They now seem addited to it, legally and otherwise. But this is an invisible tech one short circuit from faliure. Is this what I can expect when driving my sedan and one pin connection gets rusty, or fluid somewhere is a little too low? Fortunately I'm driving FWD, and not an SUV with Firestone tires.

The Explorer was redesigned for the 2002 model year. The tire pressure was raised to 30 psi, it was widened by 2.5 inches, the suspension was lowered, and independent rear suspension and electronic stability control were added. LINK

 

[RSchneider]

No mention of RC. Interesting.

 

[Sonoran Sam]

Here is an example at the IIHS rest track when the stability control was turned off.

Would this be similar to a (2 wheel) motorcycle involved in a "high side" crash??