anarcycle

Has anyone explored the idea of bicycle-cars??

https://www.rhoadescar.com/jumplobb.htm

Not sure if it would go against any CM ethic, but it seems like a good idea for multiple riders.
I wonder if it could be DIY'd, as this is not a cheap ploy to get people to buy a new bike-car!!


best.

HereNT

I saw a dude driving a homemade one on the sidewalk a couple years back. There's some people that go crazy making frankenbikes out here, and I've seen similar ones at the Mayday festival.

spambait11

No, no, no.

You mean velomobile:

Go-One
Mango, Quest, etc.
Cab-Bike
Alleweder

(Still saving for one....Got to find a better job....)

meb

Velomobiles have bodies.
The Rhoades Car does not have a body so it isn't a Velomobile.
The Rhoades Car is a quadrabent.
Put a body on the Rhoades Car then you have a Velomobile.

anarcycle

What I'm thinking of is a Multi-Person Bicycle
that goes FAST, like 30-60mph//40-60kph
One thing Rhoades has going for it is
a) It has 36 speeds (does that mean it goes 3x the speed of a normal 10 speed??)
b) It like the Velomobiles have optional electricial help.

If there would be some way to make a two-four person Recumbent bike with 36 speeds that somehow has a human-powered moter (some physics principle which allows the force of multiple persons to be combined).

That would be rad.

Thanks for the Velomobiles. Adding an optional or fixed "roof" is also something I'm into.

dfulton

Check this trike:

https://www.fitnesslynn.com/rag2004/rag04am.jpg

Darren

bentrox!

Multi-person bikes can't be speedy but they do like fun.

meb

Some Rhoades Car models are multi person, some models are single person.
Bicycle definition requires two wheel one in front of another.
Quadracycles are four wheeled pedaled vehichles.
Since the Rhoades has the rider(s) in a recumbent position, it is a quadrabent.
Base models are single speed, they have 6 speeds and 36 speeds as factory options, electric models are a factory option.

36 speeds means closer ratio selection and a little more top end and bottom end.
You still need overcome rolling resistance and aerodynamic resistance.
Regarding the multi rider Rhoades models, side by side sociable rider configuration is less aerodynamic than inline tandem configuration, a 2 person Rhoades car will be slower than a 10 speed tandem recumbent.
The Rhoades car will be more stable at low speed than a bike.
Roofs similar to the trike pic posted by Darren are available as an option.
You could make your own body if you wanted a velomobile.
4 wheel electric drive takes you out of the legal definition of an electric bike which would restrict your travel as a bike.
It might qualify as a neighborhood electric vehicle (NEV), but there are additional safety equipment requirements in that category over a bicycle requirements.
It clearly lacks as standard equipment safety equipment required on mopeds.

spambait11

Yeah, I know what a quadrabent is. I was just trying to turn anarcycle on to velomobiles!

There are places that sell kits which turn two EZ-1's into a quadrabent - here, for example. You could always take the kit off and then you'd have two EZ-1's.

Another issue, though, with the side-by-sides: they seem kind of wide for the bike lanes in many communities (at least for mine). You might want to check out the bike lanes in yours first.

meb

Width issues may vary based on your location.
Here in metro DC, it's not a serious problem. I'm aware of a single bike trail access tunnel that is only 48" wide (Crystal City to Mt. Vernon Trail) and suspect some bridges I haven't measured in Rock Creek part might present an issue for a single lane 48" wide single person/50" wide multiperson Rhoades car. Most 2 lane VA/MD bike trails are 10-12 ft. wide around here, a little narrower in DC. Might be too wide for many sidewalks.

Side by side quadrabents have only mildly more serious problems than what 28-36" wide recumbent trikes need deal with. A local avid rider of a 32" wide Terra Trike complains of not getting his trike in places a bike can access, but I don't have significant problems with my 36" wide trike.

I guess passing slower traffic on crowded bike trails would be more limitting.

Cadillac

On our trails there are posts placed where the trail intersects a road (i.e., access points). When I am riding my DF tandem with my wife, I need to come to a complete stop, my stoker dismounts, and I swing the backend around and walk through the entrance. It is a nuisance, but it prevents motorcycle (and car) access to the trails.

With quadracycle, it might be impossible to access the trail unless the cycle could be lifted over the posts.

I really don't see a pedal-powered quadracycle competing with automobile traffic in our city. I doubt if such a cycle could manage city speeds of 30-40 mph (50-70 km/h) even with four serious riders. The problem, of course, is that as a commuter a quadracycle would have at least one mediocre rider. At times, too, a full complement of four riders might not be filled. Certainly one rider could not make the unit perform at such needed speeds.

As soon as you add electric power (and heavy batteries) or a small internal combustion engine, your quad is in a different category. Most gasoline-powered lawnmower engines are worse polluters than automobiles.

Someone above suggested that an inline tandem would be a better unit for aerodynamics. Can you see a 4-seater inline recumbent for commuting?

Smart cars (hybrids of IC engines, electric motors, fuel cells) need one more addition to be truly pollutant free: pedals.

anarcycle

Inline two-person recumbent
SpeedMachine

I'm wondering if you could add a 36 gear to this or if adding one would make the speed machine go even faster.

Arnold Layne

Check out the Twike:
https://www.electricbike.com/NewsEven...ightypedal.htm
I think they're kinda neat. Not completely human powered, though.

Guest

If those are the same ones I'm thinking of, we have those in Chicago on the lakefront. They aren't very fast at all- and they can be pretty cumbersome at times. Fun if you have kids, though.

Koffee

anarcycle

Twikes seems a little too hi-tech for me as well. I don't like things I can't feasibly re-create. Plus it's only 25% human powered. Neet for show, but i wouldn't want to live there. I'm still wondering about the multiplication of human power. If they've made multi-person vehicles, why can't they go faster?? Too much wind or weight resistance?? I'm thinking of the pully effect, being able to lift hundreds of pounds with one simple and ordinary tug.

dfulton

Anarcycle,

Here is a link to the ihpva newsletter archive. If you look through the index, you'll find several technical discussions on the subject, going back 25 years.

https://humanpower.ligfiets.net/html/

But, you basically answered your own question; the extra weight and drag nullify the extra power gains. Some early streamliners had 3 or more riders, but after windtunnel testing, and much later computer modeling, they figured out the extra length and weight was a no-gainer. After two riders (back to back in the racing streamliners, for optimal shape), you don't get any additional benefit. Adding additional riders isn't a multiplier, just an adder, unfortunately you add on both sides of the power equation. There have also been multiple efforts to get more output from each rider, such as linear drives, hand and foot cranks, etc. But they usually come up short because the extra drive components add weight and lose efficiency, or it spikes the rider’s output, basically burning out the engine sooner. It is interesting going through the archive though; it has been about a 1-mph improvement over the years since this effort started. About 50 mph was the max for the original streamliners, now it is 81 mph. 30 mph gain over 30 years of effort. FWIW, the theoretical limit for a human powered vehicle is about 120 mph, so there is still some room for improvement.

Darren

deathintransit

Odd numbers of wheels totally bothers me. Those velomobiles seem like the would be fun to get going really fast and throw them into a hard turn to roll it. Like an SUV.

anarcycle would probably dig minneapolis's diy bike community.

anarcycle

thanks for everyone for your responses. They have helped me out immensly.
now I just have to decide which one to build!!!
best.

dfulton

Why does three wheels bother you? Three can corner as stable as four, if the geometry is correct. Here is a discussion about three wheel cars by a designer who has done many:

https://www.rqriley.com/3-wheel.html

There is a guy in Denver who has done a lean-steer trike (S'TRIKE) that just SMOKES around corners:

https://www.rohorn.com/

Darren

meb

When the effective center of gravity gets outside the triangle formed by the contact patches the three wheeler will roll. When the effective center of gravity gets outside the rectangle formed by the contact patches the four wheeler wheeler will roll.

Under cornering or braking the quad is generally going keep the effective cg inside the polygon at higher speeds than the trike. Since the effective width as seen by the triangle at the static cg is generally about half on a trike that of quad, you would have a rollover threshold somewhere around half the cornering g of a quad. So all other things being equal, trikes tend to roll easier than quads.

For human powered vehicles, the modest improvement in cornering stability is not usually worth the extra weight and rolling resistance of that extra wheel, so trikes are much more prevalent than quads.

Returning to Death’s odd vs. even wheel concern.
The determinant is quantity of corners (and more specifically the trackwidth at the cg), not the odd vs. even number of wheels that death is averse to.

A 5 wheeler should be more stable than a quad and a seven wheeler even more so.