|
|
|
|
|
|
by trothamel
2233 days ago
|
|
|
I don't know why you're downvoted - I might disagree with part of what you wrote, but it's a reasonable point. I will suggest that motorcycles are inherently more dangerous. A car has four points of contact, so like a table, there's some inherent stability to it. A motorcycle's two points of contact means that stability has to be in some sense active, which seems problematic. |
|
|
They are so stable in fact, that at high speeds one needs to use a technique called counter-steering in order to induce a gyroscopic and geometric reaction that sends the motorcycle into the required position. This technique is also used by some bicycle riders, to a smaller extent and also partly subconsciously.
Motorcycles are very stable. In comparison, the steering and suspension dynamics of four wheeled vehicles have to be very finely tuned in order to avoid feedback effects, instabilities, and this tuning has to be balanced with phenomenons such as oversteer and understeer. Overconstraining is also the cost for many issues, as is the consumer demand for bad form factors that lead to loss of control, rolls, and sometimes even death-wobbles.
Tricycles, such as this one, at least aren't overconstrained, but they are a lot less stable as they have neither the inherent reactive stability of bicycles nor the balanced resistance to torque while maintaining stability. This is further compounded by demand for non-optimal geometries, such as the one in the article, that lead to even less stability. This obviously doesn't apply to vehicles such as the Yamaha Nikken.