What is wrong with this picture?

[Drew]

It's definitely a bike with the two extra wheels. There is no drive to the outer two wheels so they are being used as stabilizers.
I have seen similar setups where the extra wheels are fixed solid and the bike is like a trike and remains upright when riding.
This one is a great concept as it allows leaning and can be ridden like a normal bike. Great for someone who has a medical condition or injury and cannot ride a normal bike.

Did you watch the video? It is not a four wheeled machine at all. You can see daylight between the outside wheels all the way to the front wheel.

[Robbo]

Did you watch the video? It is not a four wheeled machine at all. You can see daylight between the outside wheels all the way to the front wheel.

Yep Drew, i did watch the video and if you pause it around the 0:42 you can see the front and the rear wheel of the bike. Also if you study carefully the two outrigger wheels there is no drive mechanism to them and the bike is certainly not front wheel drive.

[Robbo]

The concept of adding two rear wheels as outriggers is quite popular in the States, where they call it a trike kit, although technically you still have four wheels. The outer wheels are bolted on and the drive is delivered through the normal motorcycle rear wheel. The whole setup can be added or removed quite easily. I like the concept of the one we are discussing and think it's a very clever design that allows the bike to be ridden as a bike should.

[Big Dave]

Hardly conclusive but looks like trike to me

[Motu]

I'm on the 4 wheel motorcycle side, you can see the rear wheel, and unless it's got hydrostatic drive there is no drive to the outside wheels, also no path for the drive force into the frame. But cool, very cool.

[Tazz]

Yep Drew, i did watch the video and if you pause it around the 0:42 you can see the front and the rear wheel of the bike. Also if you study carefully the two outrigger wheels there is no drive mechanism to them and the bike is certainly not front wheel drive.

That's a shadow to my eye. If you go one second more you see nothing? And again at 57 seconds?

At the risk of sounding stupid (wouldn't be the first time and it sounds like you know a lot more than me about these things), in my mind the back wouldn't be squatting down the way it is if there was indeed still a wheel in the middle?

Cool setup either way. With 4 wheels would it be classed as a car?

P.S. BigAl - You need a better camera =P

[BigAl]

I'll go back to the original clearer footage and try to get a conclusive rear shot and post up tomorrow guys.

[BigAl]

P.S. BigAl - You need a better camera =P

yeah still saving for a GoPro

[swbarnett]

...and can be ridden like a normal bike.

Try lane splittting ...

[Robbo]

Try lane splittting ...

LOL. Yep, except for lane splitting.

[Robbo]

[QUOTE=Tazz;1130633457]

Cool setup either way. With 4 wheels would it be classed as a car?


Interesting call Tazz, if you could class it as a car because of having four wheels i wonder if you could register it as such.
Be a lot cheaper than bike rego.

[slofox]

When I get senile (prolly next week) I'll look at one of those...

[cynna]

[QUOTE=Robbo;1130633477]

Cool setup either way. With 4 wheels would it be classed as a car?


Interesting call Tazz, if you could class it as a car because of having four wheels i wonder if you could register it as such.
Be a lot cheaper than bike rego.

think the car/bike reg has to to do with size rather then number of wheels - most v8 trikes are classed as cars and most bikes converted to trikes are reg as bikes

spyders must be classed as bikes as they still have to wear a helmet

[jim.cox]

Try lane splittting ...

And they're not so great at avoiding potholes...

[Drew]

spyders must be classed as bikes as they still have to wear a helmet

Na, Spyders are registered as cars. I think I recall beign told that if you fit seat belts you don't need to wear a helmet, but that could be entirely incorrect.