Steering.

[ianw]

Why do " conventional " outfits always run with leading link forks? Which flop from side to side
Centre hub pivots around a centre point as does equal & unequal wishbone, as F1.
Take the sidecar away & you are left with a solo, so that is the starting point.
Modern solo's don't use leading link forks!
Why don't conventional sidecar outfits use a version of the telescopic fork?

[steve-e]

I've asked this before and what I got in response was that leading links are a lot stronger with the side forces involved. If you see what the vintage bikes do to their forks round corners it does make sense to have something that can deal with the lateral stress better.

[ianw]

Hi Steve, we've been here before. The strength is in the hub of the wheel, not the bottom loop.In theory, the bottom loop has no strength to the forks.
Forks connected direct to the axcel are so much stronger, the side forces that leading or trailing link forks are subject to are bound to flex.

[steve-e]

Hey I didn't say it was right Just what I was told - and years ago I believed what I was told. Now I don't even believe what I say

[ianw]

Where would sidecar people be without steves place?
I came up with an idea & drawing for an alternative to leading link forks many years ago.
The wheel is held between the legs on the axcel but pivots on the centre.

[ianw]

Sorry steve, I didn't finish what I was trying to say last night, had to take the dog out for a walk!
I have 2 ideas of getting rid of leading link forks & the problems that come with them.
1- use a conventional pair of forks, strengthened in the design & a lot shorter, used just as sliders & to hold the wheel. Then use a shock or shocks on the outside. The travel wouldn't be that great when you think about how much travel there is for the wheel in leading link forks.
Solos should run external shocks, thus doing away with all the internal gubbings associated with damping & rebound in conventional forks & have all the necessary adjustments on the shock.
2- use an arm similar to a rear single side swing arm but with the wheel pivoting on the axle, this would do away for the need of a conventional
head stock. The steering mechanism would have to directly connected to the wheel hub as per the ACU regs, which are a mine field but there is a way round that which I'm thinking about, in principle the ACU regs ban centre hub steering.

Just found this to better explain, no wishbone working in an arc as F1,working front to back, but this is true centre hub steering, which is banned.
So the idea is to work on interpretation of the rule.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j ... 2vvOpUs63A

[steve-e]

Sounds like the one Vic Gibson used to run. It was built by a solo chassis firm. Saxon maybe? Had forks but separate shock

[ianw]

I remember Saxon well steve, no longer in business, I've got one of their shocks on the Ducati I'm building.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j ... TKGXlxhcGA

[Yangi]

I'm no engineering expert Ian, but I think what you are suggesting IS currently outside of the Current (old skool) ACU regs for F2 machines?
Did Mr Ireson try something similar with front end many years ago? (when it was allowed before Rules got in the way of True Innovation?)