F3..Here's something different...

[Chupaca]

Now what classification does it have...?? :dontknow:

 

[Bob Denman]

The DMV inspectors just showed up, and they're trying to figure it out right now. :roflblack:

 

[rudym]

quadracycle

http://www.hannigantrikes.com/products/honda-gl1800-quadracycle/

pretty much the idea

hard to license in some states.

 

[siny10309]

why not put matching wheels?!?!?!:gaah:

 

[ARtraveler]

The jury is out--for me. :roflblack::roflblack:

 

[BoilerAnimal]

The verdict is in..........NO! After all, who wants the headache of two Kenda rear tires?:yikes:

 

[blacklightning]

I wonder if the additional wheel in the back will make it more or less stable?

 

[Samson]

Nope

 

[Rogue Hawk]

I don't see the point of this. It just adds weight:dontknow:

 

[Bob Denman]

But it sure is an attention-getter; isn't it? :thumbup:

 

[Firefly]

View attachment 151273 Now what classification does it have...?? :dontknow:

I would classify it as a fugly dork-mobile.

 

[Bob Denman]

I would classify it as a fugly dork-mobile.

I have a question: Is that a legal term; or a technical classification? :dontknow:

 

[Fat Baxter]

If it has four wheels, it's a car and must meet all safety standards (e.g., passenger restraints, crash-worthiness, air bags, etc.). That's why you see a lot of concept quads, but almost no production.

Someone in Europe developed a four-wheel BMW knockoff; expensive as heck, and I don't think you can't ride it it in the US.

Three-wheelers don't need to meet auto safety standards. The three-wheel exception is due to the fact that "three wheels" used to mean sidecar rigs. The Slingshot is pushing the definition.

 

[malibu_dan]

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should...