# In2Go Industries Electric KB3 (High Performance Trike)



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Why a three wheeler? - it ends up bigger and heavier than a four wheeler and nothing like as quick
Why not go for four wheels like a Locost?


----------



## kennybobby (Aug 10, 2012)

Just curious about what motorcycle are you using for the rear, and what car for the front?

Concerning the aerodynamics, did you use any sort of template such as found over on the ecomodding website--they have some wizards over there that eat and breath aero coefficients. If you post a side view they can check how close it matches the ideal template, etc.


----------



## In2GoInd (Oct 25, 2016)

Why a 3 wheeler? (nice name by the way Duncan, my first name too) In the US, anything less than 4 wheels is considered a motorcycle, therefore I can build full built electric road legal vehicles and don't have to meet car crash regulations and install required "standard equipment" like child seat restraints. But 1200 lbs is not heavy by any means, do you agree? I spent a lot of CAD and FEA time ensuring there is only tube where it needs to be to minimize weight. 

But also 3 wheels is less expensive than four when designed with car components, and this trike is all about cost. The Slingshot costs $25k, the T-Rex is $65k. I am not trying to make the fastest thing out there, I want something that is obtainable for all. It will be on y'all to make it the fastest!! When you are going 60 mph in an open cockpit low slung trike and everybody is staring at your ride because it's so unique, I would imagine the last thing you will be thinking about is, "4 wheels could be lighter and faster". 

The donor motorcycle for the prototype is a Kawasaki ninja 600. Though when I finish the swing arm design. A donor motorcycle will not be necessary unless you want to build an gas version. 

As for the front, I designed it to use two Independent front suspension (IFS) setups, the first and lowest price option is a 2003-2006 Ford Crown Victoria front drop out. In the US there are literally millions of these out there in the junk yards. Every police car and taxi used this car. I have found that for $400 you can get modern suspension, rack and pinion steering and front hydraulic brakes all in one nice package, and it all bolts directly to my chassis with a few bolts. Furthermore, I have designed my chassis to work with the Crown Vic steering geometry so that it performs correctly. This means that the car is similar in size to a Crown Vic. This is no "toy" you have to squeeze yourself into. I designed it to comfortably seat 2x 95th percentile American males (like myself). 

I also have a design that's allows people to use the "Mustang II" IFS. These are low price new full suspensions and steering setups that can be purchased online. This option looks to cost about $400 more but allows people, as well as myself, to build with all new components if desired. 

As for the Cd, it was a pure estimation based on similar production cars. Yes I would love to get a better estimation on the drag, but at this point, being already built and designed, I'm more excited about some real world testing!! But I need to get an electric motor in there first, and I wanted y'alls opinion on what motor I should design for, being I have only recently splashed into EVs.


----------



## In2GoInd (Oct 25, 2016)

I actually live close to some wind tunnels and am working through some contacts to get some time in there, but it is not my main focus at the moment.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Hi Duncan!
1200lbs is quite heavy for an IC three wheeler,
My four wheeler is significantly overbuilt and too heavy at 800Kg - it should have been closer to 600kg

IC "versions" - similar cars with bike engines are in the 400 - 500 kg range
You should be able to get down to those numbers or less

http://www.diyelectriccar.com/forum...-dubious-device-44370p2.html?highlight=duncan

Both of the front ends you mention are a bit heavy - overkill! - is there a common small car in the USA you could rob the front end from?
Don't do what I did - I used a Subaru strut suspension set-up works really well but it makes the front ugly


----------



## In2GoInd (Oct 25, 2016)

Thanks. Yeah I totally agree, with higher grade tube, tighter tolerances, lighter duty suspension components, and even sizing down the chassis to a big-go-cart-size chassis like everything else on the market, I could get it down to a much lower weight, but all of these items drive higher cost. Then I'm just another Slingshot that is so overpriced that the average person can't afford or a 275 lb football player built person like myself looks funny in driving on the street. How much do you have total in your project? Time and money? 

Everything was designed and chosen for its price, quality and ease of assembly balance not for how light it is. 

The KB3 is all about low cost, ease of assembly, and fun styling. I can assemble my kit and have it driving in a day, by myself. And it's total cost is $9k. So that's about £7000. 

How about a motor/controller suggestion for a 1200 lb trike?


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

You don't want it to be slow - a sheep in wolves clothing is embarrassing!

Basic options
DC is cheap cheerful and a bit primitive
Using new bits a 9 inch motor - warp9? and a Zeva controller
Using old bits a 9 inch forklift motor (same as a Warp) and an OpenRevolt controller

AC - new bits are expensive and a bit wimpy
Re-purposed Nissan Leaf or Chevy Volt motor and controller

Not convinced about the weight - if I make a Mk2 I will use folded fiberglass honeycomb for the chassis

http://www.autospeed.com/cms/article.html?&A=112925


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

My device has cost me about $8000 + my work


----------



## In2GoInd (Oct 25, 2016)

$8000, Nice work! I think we would get along great and build beautiful stuff if it weren't for the pond separating us. 

Now for the rest of people out there who can't fabricate a chassis, weld, correctly design steering geometry, and pack it all in a decent looking package..... In2Go has a solution . I am planning on designing two more models, both smaller and lighter than the KB3. They would be designed for other target markets and allow for easier entry. 

But now we are gettin to the good stuff: The motor talk. 

This why I came here because I hear and read different things all over the place. 

So a $1800 72v Warp 9 rated at 70 ftlb and 32 hp with a $1200 zeva 600

Would be better than a

HPEV AC 20 72V rated at 70 ft lb and 48 hp with a cutis 1238-6501 for $2900


But I was liking the AC 34, for about $600 more you get 74hp and 107 ftlb using a Curtis 1238-7601, that has similar numbers to the Kawasaki engine I have on the proto, and I can say it's no sheep. I can't imagine what having all that torque down low would feel like, talk about a rocket.


----------



## dcb (Dec 5, 2009)

yah trike plans pop up here fairly regularly.

https://www.google.com/search?q=tri...rome..69i57.8871j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Have you done any market research? I only ask because it seems there are fairly fast electric motorcycles, and rather practical electric cars available for <$10,000 already, and aside from any potential "cool" factor, trikes seem to be the worst of both worlds in many respects. I mean for a DIY I totally get it, but as a marketable thing, not so much. Being able to register as a motorcycle is a nice to have, but even then there are a lot of states where it can still be a hassle if it isn't from an OEM.

And of course there are going to be limitations on a "one size fits all" approach, you might not have thought much about batteries yet (usually they are fairly integrated into the structure of a production EV). Simply putting them up front is going to unload the drive wheel even more and create polar moments, making the squirrelly tadpole even more squirrelly.

Are you *really* enthusiastic about the capabilities of such a machine? Or is that part of the sales job? (and have you really considered the market segment if the latter?) Most DIY EV suppliers have folded, and those that remain are thoroughly entrenched in other markets, i.e. Mining, or finding niche ways to work with salvage EV parts, or are outright selling crap(cough*EPC*cough). And I don't know of any would-be car makers that have succeeded, i.e. all those x-prize folks (where is my edison2? or my aptera?).

Anyway, the list of things to consider is a long one and the number of disciplines many, and I'm not on your payroll, so I'll leave it at that


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Hi Duncan

For a DC motor the power numbers and the voltage are a bit flaky
I have a 10Kw (15Hp) motor in my Device - but I have a 350v 1200amp controller
The controller sets the voltage to provide the current requested - I can put about 180Kw into my motor - which would melt it if it was continuous! but it only takes seconds before I have to back off 
(at the moment I have only applied full power for a second or so as it spins the rear tires and gives me a fright) 

The Zeva can feed 90Kw into the Warp9
150v and 600amps - 120Hp - nearly twice as much as you can get from the Curtis
For performance there will be no comparison!

Note - ignore the motor voltage limits your battery should be as high a voltage as the controller can handle


----------



## In2GoInd (Oct 25, 2016)

Thanks for the feedback and better understanding of the AC and DC motors, what I was needing. That makes more sense of what I have been reading. 

Now, you say it can put max output for a few seconds before things start getting toasty, is that limited by the controller or is it a "lesson in foot control"? 

As for the business, the electric is just one option. Remember, the proto is IC. I just wanted to make an electric version to tap into another market. The people that live near me wouldn't want anything to do with electric being its 30 minutes to town. But, with the price of motors and batteries tumbling, the electric age is about to be among us. Plus with the EPA over here, it costs less for me to build a ready to drive VIN'd vehicles that are powered by an electric motor than a EPA compliant IC engine. But as a kit, Americans can install what ever motor they choose, gas or electric. So it all depends what there cup of tea is. But I feel I can make an electric kit so simple to put together than ANYONE can do it in a week, being I can assemble an IC version with clutches, shift linkages, radiators etc in a day. 

Lastly if all these people have been wanting to build a trike, then that makes me feel even better about the trike, not worse. My kit would serve as a great starting point for all these folks who had aspirations of doing it themselves (likely because of the cost to buy something) and I can probably do it for less money, much less time, and make it look better all at the same time. 


Yes there have been many trikes in the past, through my research my price point is right. Less than half the cost of a Polaris Slingshot, my closest production competition, is a pretty good price point. Being those are selling like crazy over here and are very overpriced for the "toy" they are.

But, I definitely know what you mean, a lot of my competitors have been talking start of production for years, and I have yet to see the first one produced. In2go is ready to go to production now with the IC kit and we are just waiting for the mandatory time period before selling VIN d, ready to drive cars (Feb 2017). As an engineer, I saw a lot that was wrong with the corporate job I worked for oh so long. Sales and Marketing run companies only causes corners to be cut and quality to drop. I am making sure In2Go is engineer ran which will let innovation blossom and quality to remain high. 

As for the battery pack, the main goes in the rear to help put more load on the drive tire, and then I have also allotted room along the bottom of the entire vehicle for a battery pack if people want more range and are ready to spend some money . With the IC motor in the prototype, I am very close to a 50/50 weight distribution so it will take some more balancing when the motor and batteries are chosen.


----------



## ken wont (Jul 6, 2016)

In2GoInd said:


> With the IC motor in the prototype, I am very close to a 50/50 weight distribution so it will take some more balancing when the motor and batteries are chosen.


With three wheels you do not want 50/50! You want 33/33/33.


----------



## In2GoInd (Oct 25, 2016)

Sorry Ken, been in the 4 wheel world too long. I just meant a balanced weight. In fact sparked me to get my real life measurements instead of relying on the CAD data, and I have to say I am rather proud of my real life results compared to the calculated. 

Total weight 1121 lbs (508 kg) with 33/34/33 (Fr Driver 369 lbs/Fr Pass 383 lbs/Rear 369 lbs) balance.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Hi Duncan,

The "few seconds" are because in a very few seconds you will hit the speed limit - and have to back off


----------



## In2GoInd (Oct 25, 2016)

Nice!! So can you overheat the motors/batteries/controller if you aren't careful or does the controller have a way of limiting power if things get warm?


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

I'm using an OpenRevolt Mk2 - which is a superb controller but it doesn't have any of that sort of fancy limiting stuff - the controller is quite capable of turning my motor into a puddle of molten copper

There are ways of limiting - but I haven't bothered!


----------



## In2GoInd (Oct 25, 2016)

So sounds like I need one setup that is nice and reliable that you can't overheat too easily for the "Apple" users out there, then a "open source" model that will let people push the limits of their system.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

The limited unit would be the Zeva, the open Source the Paul & Sabrina OpenReVolt


----------



## jacksdad (Apr 13, 2015)

it seems v heavy to me, my 4 wheel rocket kit is only 600KG and the equivalent MEV designed trike is only 715 Ilbs and remains within cost at $8K:

http://www.doveracing.net/cars/sve-tr1ke

This trike would be a great vehicle for an electric motor and if you used a chain drive could be a direct swap with a little chassis change


----------



## In2GoInd (Oct 25, 2016)

Okay bear with me, I still don't think you're quite grasping the design. 

The KB3 was not designed for rock bottom weight, even though it is bigger and still weighs 200 lbs less than your rocket (not knocking it at all, your build looks right up my alley), it was designed for cost, ease of assembly, and style. As Duncan pointed out, Trikes aren't the best design for high performance, two wheel and 4 wheels often out perform them. But this doesn't mean it's not a blast to drive!! Plus, the exotic styling gets tons of looks and big crowds at shows, let me attest. 

You say the MEV trike cost less than $8000....that's correct for the base level kit that doesn't include seats, brakes or a whole list of items. Looking at their options list, just the seats and brakes alone brings the price up close to $9000 and you haven't even bought a donor Yamaha R1 yet (cheapest one near me is $2100). My complete kit can be built and driving (be it IC) for $9000. The brakes and seats my kit is designed to use total $330, less than the seats alone for the MEV, and work just as well, if not better. This is how I designed the whole trike, finding the most affordable quality parts and making those bolt directly up making the total price low too. 

Looking at the specs of tR1ke, it's quite small, which is how they achieved the low weight. The KB3 is almost 5' (150cm)wide at the shoulder point of the riders, giving it a spacious and comfortable feel. Completely opposite of the big go kart mentality all the MEV cars exhibit. In America, nearly half the cars you share the road with are trucks that would not even slow down if one of these big go karts or even any motorcycle would get in the way. This is why I sold my VTX 1800 and started designing something I felt more secure in, but still have the wind-in-your-face feeling. The KB3 is the same size as a full size Ford sedan, the Crown Vic, so it fits in a little better on the roads over here. 

Also, like you said an electric motor could be swapped "with a little chassis change". While you and I are completely comfortable with that, others might not be. The KB3 is purely bolt together, and simple at that, with less than 100 bolted connections TOTAL!! I really feel anyone can tackle this project the way I have designed it. I came to this forum to get input from the people who knows EVs the best on what motor I should design the kit for so future "XXXdads" may have a simple affordable option if they can't do a swap or build a chassis themselves. 

So if you are about building the ultimate performing EV and are willing to spend a little more money and assembly time/problem solving, a four wheel vehicle, like your rocket, might be a better option. But if you want to build just a cool electric vehicle you can drive around in and show off for the lowest price and least trouble, the KB3 might be a better option. If you want something cool that goes really fast, drop a Hayabusa motor into the IC version of the KB3....but that's another forum.


----------



## jacksdad (Apr 13, 2015)

Ummm yep very interesting and I'm understanding your design more I can certainly understand the interest it generates and something easy to build with 100 bolts feels very appealing to us at the moment.

Is your quoted weight including an allowance for batteries and motor or will they be on top of the 1200 lbs?


----------



## In2GoInd (Oct 25, 2016)

The Internal combustion version weighs in at 1121 lbs with a liquid cooled Kawasaki 600 installed and 5 gallons of fuel. I'd say the motor weighs in at just over a hundred pounds plus all of the then unneeded fluids and components makes an EV ready (without motor and batteries) chassis around 960 lbs. If you live outside the US where 2003-2006 Crown Vic's aren't packed in the junkyards for the donor front end, or just want the weight reduction, the lighter and Internet sourced Mustang II suspension will cost you a little more, but will save an estimated 200+ lbs. making the EV ready chassis ~750 lbs (340 kg).


----------



## In2GoInd (Oct 25, 2016)

Brand new website updated with some photos from a recent shoot is up. 
Go straight to the gallery:
www.in2go.us/gallery

Press Release:
http://in2go.us/new-in2go-electric-three-wheel-car-unveiled/

http://in2go.us/new-reverse-trike-kit-ultimate-3-wheel-car/

One of my favs:


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

I don't know why you think that all three tires should be equally loaded. With the driver and passenger at or rear of the mid-point of the wheelbase, and the drivetrain behind that, typical mid-engine tadpole trikes are rear-heavy. More load on the rear tire than on a single front tire is actually desirable with rear-wheel-drive; drive traction with only one-third of the traction at the only driven tire is not good.

If you doubt that trikes routinely have more load on the rear tire than a single front tire, just look at the front versus rear tire sizes on a Polaris Slingshot, Campagna T-Rex, or even BRP Spyder.

You also get in trouble if you go too far rearward in weight distribution, because all of the roll stiffness is at the front: if the front tires don't carry enough load, the thing lifts the inside front tire in turns and understeers massively. This is why the Slingshot is so stupidly wide - it has lots of front track width to transfer sufficient load laterally. The Slingshot would most certainly be a much better car with two rear tires (and a few people have converted it to a four-wheeler) - it is a three-wheeler to get around regulations, as explained earlier.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

I understand the economic driver for the Crown Vic front end, and the availability driver for the Mustang II-compatible street rod bits. The Crown Vic stuff is even setup for the wide track (compared to vehicle size) that these trikes need.

Unfortunately, the Crown Vic stuff must be far heavier than required for this weight of vehicle. The Mustang II stuff is very outdated, having been designed in about the 1970's.

A somewhat popular source of good suspension systems for a light vehicle is the Mazda Miata MX-5; they come on subframes that kit builders have found easy to bolt up to a tube frames designed for them, although the subframe wouldn't provide enough track width for the trike. Typically the first two generations are used, just because they are available from wreckers or as relatively cheap donor cars (up to 27 years old now). These bits are like race car stuff compared to either Crown Vic or Mustang II parts, and there are performance parts available.

I can't imagine putting in all the work and expense required to build a kit car, and ending up with obsolete suspension parts in what is supposed to be a high-performance vehicle... but maybe that's just me.


----------



## In2GoInd (Oct 25, 2016)

It's all really based on cost. I am working on another design for those who have the money to pay for parts based on performance. 

But, you say the Mustang II suspension is "outdated". In what aspect? The Aftermarket IFS setups use poly bushings rack and pinions, and disk brakes. They actually have pretty decent steering geometry as well, even though I tweaked the control arm locations to increase negative camber. 

Obsolete is one thing these suspension components won't be. The crown vic will be supplying replacements parts for many years and the Mustang II suspension is the most reproduced suspension in world due to its robustness in design, cost, and performance for hot rod builders.


----------



## dain254 (Oct 8, 2015)

I first saw your project on the reverse trike forum a while back. I've abandoned the reverse trike design... the prototype RT that I've built looks/works great but it will always fall short in the handling department as compared to a standard 4 wheeled vehicle. New state legislature has actually now deemed it an "autocycle" to which there are a few new regulations. Personally I feel like it is irresponsible of me to put out a 3 wheeled vehicle that is slightly safer than a motorcycle. 

Moving forward I am planning on creating completed 4 wheeled vehicles and adhering to the custom built vehicle regulations of my state (Iowa). Requirements like seat belts, self cancelling turn signals, mechanical parking brake, and a differential are the only things I can avoid by building a trike.. and again it would be irresponsible to put out a vehicle without those things. 

Regarding the suggestions for electric drive - I have been looking around and have landed on a Motenergy ME1002 and a soliton JR if I can get ahold of one from the manufacturer. I also am picking up a complete Chevy Volt battery on Friday, so I plan on using 2S2P of 2kwh modules to get me moving, Keeping with 24S internally allows usage of a cheap BMS.


----------



## ken wont (Jul 6, 2016)

dain254 said:


> Requirements like seat belts, self cancelling turn signals, mechanical parking brake, and a differential are the only things I can avoid by building a trike..


Bumpers, safety-glass windshield, windshield-wipers, ????


----------



## dain254 (Oct 8, 2015)

ken wont said:


> Bumpers, safety-glass windshield, windshield-wipers, ????


I started off my sentence with "Requirements like", meaning an non comprehensive list. A windshield and wiper IS also required... can even be a manually operated wiper! Bumpers I don't specifically remember what the document stated. I'm sure there are other things I've left out but my basic point being there are a lot more things to make a custom 4 wheeler legal.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

In2GoInd said:


> ... But, you say the Mustang II suspension is "outdated". In what aspect? The Aftermarket IFS setups use poly bushings rack and pinions, and disk brakes. They actually have pretty decent steering geometry as well, even though I tweaked the control arm locations to increase negative camber.


The Mustang II design isn't fundamentally bad at all, but the vintage leads to some characteristics which are unlike anything currently produced:

The hub carrier (or upright) is short, as per traditional practice. Modern double-A-arm suspensions tend to use an extended carrier to place the upper ball joint higher, for desired geometry with less change due to bushing deflection. To be fair, an MX-5 (Miata) upright is also short.
The bearings are traditional unsealed units. While they work fine, they're another maintenance item that hasn't been common on light-duty suspensions designed in the last three decades or so.
The hub design is for low-offset wheels. That's fine, but readily available modern wheels usually have more offset, as required to fit front-wheel-drive hardware (which doesn't matter in the case of this trike) but even routinely used with rear-wheel-drive.
The stock lower arm is in two pieces - not the strongest or stiffest design. The aftermarket lower arms are usually one-piece tubular fabrications, but they have a relatively narrow base compared to stock lower arms of modern suspensions (including the MX-5). The narrow base leads to either excessive angle change with bushing deflection, or very stiff bushings. "Race" cars and kits often use spherical rod ends which minimize bushing deflection issues, but they are not good for street use.
For anyone implementing ABS, or any other vehicle control system (traction control, stability control), there is no provision for a speed sensor in the hub and carrier as there would be in any design from this century.
Yes, Mustang II systems use disk brakes, although presumably with calipers and pads that don't match anything in recent production. I would describe anything with drums as "antique", rather than just "outdated"!  The steering is not much of a concern, since a rack can be adapted to essentially any suspension, regardless of the original steering gear; the only issue is the positioning of the steering arms, which limits the rack position, which in turn raises issues of clearance for the engine (in front-engine vehicles) or the driver's feet (in some forward-seating mid-engined vehicles). There are Model T style suspensions in the front of cars with rack-and-pinion steering.



In2GoInd said:


> Obsolete is one thing these suspension components won't be. The crown vic will be supplying replacements parts for many years and the Mustang II suspension is the most reproduced suspension in world due to its robustness in design, cost, and performance for hot rod builders.


It routinely takes several years to get even a kit car into production, buyers often take years to get them together, and with only occasional use the owner will still have the car around a decade or two after completing it. Using components which were 40+ years old in design and two decades out of production (except in the aftermarket) means buyers will find themselves looking for parts for an antique design later. Realistically, as you have recognized, "Mustang II" parts come only from the street rod aftermarket.

I also wonder if the pricing is realistic. There are no Mustang IIs left to salvage (they were last built in 1978, and were only built for 5 years, although they sold well for that period), although some Pinto parts would work... but there are no Pintos, either. The most basic hot rod Mustang II complete setup I've seen online from street rod component supplierss is about US$1400.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

The elimination of the differential is the only fundamental _mechanical_ advantage of a three-wheeler (if the single wheel is driven - some trikes drive the two-wheeled end). It is avoiding the _regulatory_ requirements which is the advantage for limited production. The Polaris Slingshot is a really obvious example of this: it is pretty well a normal car in a version stripped down and omitting many normal features (like an Ariel Atom or similar), made legally feasible by omitting a rear wheel.

On the other hand, local regulations for three-wheelers vary quite a bit, and can be problematic. A trike homebuilder here in Alberta had quite a time getting around rules written for conventional motorcycles, such as a minimum seat height (much higher than he wanted for his car-like trike) and a requirement to steer with handlebars (although of course he wanted a steering wheel). Rules for manufacturers are generally federal, while rules for what a homebuilder can put on the road are at the provincial or state level.


----------



## dain254 (Oct 8, 2015)

In Iowa the inspection is very quick for reverse trikes - the inspector traveled to my place, made sure signals hi/low beams indicators things like that were in working order, then stamped a vin in the frame and gave me a sheet to obtain a title. In Iowa, the inspector is kind of the "judge" on road worthiness, had some interesting stories about things that people tried to register, but had zero concerns about approving my RT. 

I think the only issue I am going to have with the new design is a safety glass windshield... which reading the rules it needs to be at least 6" high (no wiper required in Iowa). I'm probably going to hide one behind the plexiglass windshield/roof panel and use it as a HUD. Should work nicely!


----------

