In my intro posts I mentioned that I was busy modifying a sidecar, bit of an understatement as this involved cutting it in half along the middle, cutting off the 'boot' shape and then joining it all back together with several other panels added in between the original parts. Why????
        Well it is a Velorex 562 removed from a Jawa combo that I bought and renovated but the lack of power is not my idea of fun on toady's roads, that and the farting about measuring oil into the fuel tank- - - how long ago did filling stations stop having mixer pumps?- - - oh and The Management was not impressed by the oil pong when stationary in a tailwind!
         Anyhow, the said 562 is quite narrow and quite a basic seat so by making it wider I can fit a proper comfy car seat and by raising the back have created a large boot and back support, other improvements are planned but after two weeks in the shed I've got this far,


As you can see, it now looks a bit like a Velorex 700 but is 6" wider ( ok europhiles 150mm!) and has a tilt-forward front so that you don't have to clamber all over the seat to get in or out.

Should any knutter be interested in the (re)construction of this tub, the insert pieces were made in polyester/csm  over the original tub and then glued in place with thickened epoxy/glass strands and  the seams  covered with epoxy/tape on each side, when it's all joined up and the shaping complete I will apply a layer of epoxy/glass 2.2 twill on both sides.

               Trevor

Looking good. It's seems that the back of the sidecar is quite high. This may be due to the perspective that the picture was taken.
Please keep us posted with your progress.

The back looks higher than it actually is due to camera angle, it is taller than original Velorex 562 but much less than the 700. The size and shape was scientifically determined by sitting my wife on a car seat placed between the two halves of the original tub and marking the shape on a sheet of plywood with space to allow for wearing a lid and winter gear. I think that the tub now measures 27" wide and 33" high.
There'll be no progress for a week or so while the recently applied stuff fully cures, then it'll get the sander or it to prepare of a covering layer, also I'm waiting for a sheet of 2mm wax to arrive, this will be pressed firmly over the coaming edges when they are finished so that I can mold the framework for the tilt forward/windscreen portion. This will then leave a 2mm gap to accommodate a sealing and anti-fretting rubber strip.
  In the meantime I can hack the chassis in half to make that wider and also add the bits and pieces like bigger axle, tower support and cross tube to upgrade it to bigger bike standards.
  Also plenty of thinking going on about choice of forks and subframe, anyone got opinions?

 Have been reading Halflives sidecar posts and webpage , so thanks for the drawing of the rear hub adaptor! This will be modified somewhat to fit to a hacked off k75c drumbrake, unless I suddenly come by a very cheap disc brake set up and driveline with all the ancilliary bits'n'bobs that are also needed. Wheels will probably be Smart 15" unless the K Fairy magically produces some Wasp or EML items.

      Trevor

Hi Kando ! And   for another K-sidecar...
Looking at your photo's we are all taken back to the future but hey.. isn't that what sidecar-bikers love most ?  
I like the tilt-forward front, compliments ! (My wife indeed needs acrobatic skills to enter the standard Velorex 562.)
Hope you make good progress ! Keep us posted, lots of pic's please...

Best regards

Jos

Hi Jos, thanks for your interest . the tilt front just has got to be an improvement for anyone, my wife is only 1.5m tall and slim and a horse rider so is pretty agile, but with only a low hand grip in the tub and perhaps wet boots, getting in and out of a 562 even with a footplate on the chassis, was a pain, wobbling around, standing on the seat. 

      A little bit more done while the resin cures, made up a stiffener to go down the middle which replaces the one lost as it was cut in half.



              I'll post some more pics when there's a significant change to the project, I only do anything when I'm enthused about it and then don't stop till I run out of steam or hit a problem that needs thinking about so I'm not good at doing the step by step build log style of post.  Anyway my camera would also end up covered in resin, bits of glass cloth, paints, swarf, dust and any other junk around the work area. Not good and I wouldn't want to spend cash on a replacement, no interest in photography. Oh by the way, folk may have noticed that the date imprint on the pics seems a while ago- -take no notice because I've reset the damn camera several times and for no apparent reason it changes itself, sometimes the day, maybe the month or year. Freaky digital gizmo!

                         Trevor

Hi Trevor. Last week i discovered i have a very good drawing of the adapter on the Dutch version of the K75 page. I also have a picture of a turned down drum from a cast wheel with Smart adapter. I will start a query to find the picture.
Here's the Dutch page with the drawing: http://halflive.hostei.com/halflive/K75_EML/Naafadapter.html

Now for the drum adapter:

Kando wrote:The back looks higher than it actually is due to camera angle, it is taller than original Velorex 562 but much less than the 700. The size and shape was scientifically determined by sitting my wife on a car seat placed between the two halves of the original tub and marking the shape on a sheet of plywood with space to allow for wearing a lid and winter gear. I think that the tub now measures 27" wide and 33" high.

For an idea, here is the original EML with a 6' passenger. Looking at the picture, I am tempted to install a simple headrest as a higher back may produce too much wind resistance. I have the full cover but don't like riding with it as it blocks my rear view on the sidecar side.
You will notice that even if the sidecar has a good original tail/stop light, I installed a good size LED light on the middle high point of the chair. When people are following you, they are intrigued by the chair and this is their focus point. The second stop light is right in their line of sight.

Thanks for the pictures Crazy F, there'll be no restriction of rear view by the sidecar roof, well not of anything that's further away than a yard or two behind the sidecar wheel, nor about wind resistance or drag. In the first case my sight-line will be way above it.
 And in the second my rebuilt Velorex will eventually have the capability to have a fully enclosed glazed cabin- - yes, She's getting a bit softer so will be able to ride in total comfort in Winter (which is a bit damper here than your patch I think) but without that '' help! I'm shut in under a tarpaulin'' feeling that rag tops generate (they also leak) A properly shaped windscreen will deal with the little more drag that might be generated by the raised height, and anyway we don't do fast any more, well not FAST, honest!

Thanks halflive for the picture of the drum with the spokes lopped off, that's pretty much how I've planned it, saw the large bits off, trim it up a bit and then take it to my friend's engineering business fro him to tidy up on and lathe and mill, my lathe is too small for the drum.
 Yes please! A drawing of the drum brake adaptor would save me literally re-inventing the wheel!! I could make that probably as it's not very big, though I'll probably have to grind up the tool to cut the correct counterbore for the bolts.
 Do you know which model of Ka wheel was used? There are quite a lot of different sizes, mounting hole PCD's and so on.

You will find the drawing behind the link i posted in my privies post. Sadly it is a drawing for an adapter for a disk brake. But as you can see you only need to copy the inch thickness of the outer, lh side.
Usually we use the steel front wheels of the Smart Fortwo car. They have a small negative ET value and because of that require a short adapter. All  Fortwo wheels have a 3x112mm bolt pitch. If you want to you can also use the steel rear wheels at the same adapter. They fit but because they are wider they require some more effort to install.

Thanks halflive, I've got the link up and can print the drawing off which will give the L/H side shape to mate and attach to the Smart wheel ( why on earth did I put  Ka wheel earlier- - must have done too much thinking today!)

Presumably then, the stiffening webs that are in the recess of the K75 brake drum need to be machined off as well and the R/H end of the adaptor will be a plain stub to sit in the recess and bear against the bottom of it. Or do you get an extra set of cone washers to leave in the original counterbores and bear up against those? In my opinion this would remove the gap left by empty counterbores  and give a better distribution of the bolt tightening force through to the drive hub.

 It is the cone washers that ensure the 100% positive radial location of the wheel and ensure that the bolt is not subjected to any bending loads, only tension and shear.

 Though for a little extra cost I could get my  friend to machine cones on the R/H end perhaps, because his business also uses CNC machines.

  I'm going to construct a strongly ventilated laminating and sanding booth in one corner of my workshop to make working safer, so when that's done I'll start measuring and make a drawing. I'll scan it and post it here when I've got an adaptor made (and prove it fits!!) I don't know how to 'work' drawing software, I'm old school paper, pencil, ruler and dividers.

 How's your Moturist project coming along?

Kando wrote:Thanks for the pictures Crazy F, there'll be no restriction of rear view by the sidecar roof, well not of anything that's further away than a yard or two behind the sidecar wheel, In the first case my sight-line will be way above it.

My problem with the cover is that my original mirror view is totally obstructed and I have to turn my head if I want to see anything on the back.

Ah! I've just taken another look at your pictures and see that you've got the RT style fairing mounted mirrors, whereas my bike, an 86 K75c is fitted with an aftermarket Sprint ST fairing but retains the handlebar mounted mirrors - long stalk versions too I think- but still give a good view at speed,

Kando wrote:Ah! I've just taken another look at your pictures and see that you've got the RT style fairing mounted mirrors, whereas my bike, an 86 K75c is fitted with an aftermarket Sprint ST fairing but retains the handlebar mounted mirrors - long stalk versions too I think- but still give a good view at speed,

Look what fairing I get on my K75... I love it!

As far as i can see you do not have to remove the stiffening ribs completely. It is just the 6"center that has to be even. The adapter looks as it is about one inch thick with a recess to sink the heads of the four allen bolts. You can re use the tapered washers and fill the rest of the hole with stubs. I do not see the added value, but it would fill the holes in the drum.

Hey, look what i found!

Thanks for putting up the pictures of the drum/smart wheel adaptor halflive, it looks pretty much how I visualized it, but as always a really good picture is worth many words. When I get the major construction work on the tub done I'll start making some swarf, but although I've got a pretty sizeable workshop, there never seems to be enough room with so much machinery, two bikes and stuff going on! I've got a spare wheel to hack to pieces
    Things haven't progressed very quickly due to feeling unwell over the past week so didn't want to be using resin and glass, so I've made a start on a long term aim of this project, namely to be able to fit a fully glazed ''cockpit'' for use in out damp & dismal winters here in lil'ole England, made worse out here in the flatlands of East Anglia when the wind blows in off the North Sea full of mist! I don't plan to form my own canopy because for a one off I'm wouldn't want to use a load of time and effort constructing the gear to do it, so I'm building a wooden mold ,by laminating up pine strips ''bread and butter'' style which is slow but economical which will be planed to shape and then get a screen and top cover formed commercially. At least we still do have some specialist manufacturing in UK!! 


   
  I've put on another two laminations since this picture, need to buy some more wood, and then a cheap electric planer because with the grain directions being all over the place hand planning would not be too easy. The inside will then be reinforced to take the molding loads.

Perhaps I could persuade the family to let me have a chair outfit. My MP3 Piaggio ain't like the K100's. Oh how I miss them...cheers Ajays

Ajays wrote:Perhaps I could persuade the family to let me have a chair outfit. My MP3 Piaggio ain't like the K100's. Oh how I miss them...cheers Ajays

 And here's me thinking that MP3's are 'fings wot yoof kept their I-toons in!'


   Seriously though AJ, I do know what your 3 wheeled device is, though I've never ridden one and since it can't be big enough for  the whole family to get on - -well maybe in Thailand and such places, but not commonly done in safety paranoid UK- - a combo would be a much better proposition!

After a few days off, a bit of shed time today shaping up the wooden plug which will be used to mold the windscreen, canopy and the frames . I used my old steel hand plane to take the corners off the laminations and then a shiny new cheapo(£24.80) electric planer to get some curves, finished off with a 40 grit pad on the sander- - outside!! Too much dust made with that tool to be in the workshop.
 Next will be to get some templates made so that I can get both sides to be more or less the same shape, and sand to a much finer finish.

Well I've not made a lot of progress lately on this project on account of being unwell for a couple of weeks and only able to do a tiny bit at a time, but I hope that matters will improve a bit now. A few days ago I was able to dig out some old K75 bits from my store ,heap of stuff  and have bolted an engine and gearbox into a frame and turned this upsy-down to use as a jig to build the subframe on. The awkward bit with a k75 sidecar on the L/H side for the UK is the exhaust headers--especially#3-- not leaving much space close to the sump, and I don't want to make the tubes too low to reduce ground clearance when I fit smaller wheels, nor do I want to fit long spacers under the gearbox plate, so I'm using a 'joggled' tube.

 Some 32mm x 3.25mm tubing was cut to a guestimated length, bent for the side rails, ( note the high quality engineering drawing chalked on the workshop floor!) a piece of 6mm sheet cut and drilled to match the stand mount holes on the gearbox and four lugs made up from 5mm sheet for the attachment to the 8mm holes in the sump. I just used an ordinary 12T hydraulic jack powered cheapo pipe bender, packed the tube with sand and made a steel sheet sleeve to make the tube a tight fit in the bend former, this resulted in hardly any flattening at the bend.

   Just need to get a fresh bottle of argon for my Tig and I can tack the parts together and do a trial fit on my running K- - though I'll have to string it up to the workshop beams and get the stand off first-- unless I can scrounge an old exhaust to fit on my 'jig'.

Sorry about the duplicate picture in the previous post, I couldn't find out how to remove one of them! Any guidance ??

Kando,

It seems that you have the 4 little tabs that would attach to the sump.
On the EML (which is manufacturer engineered), the front of the support attach to the front right top mount of the engine.

I believe that you should extend your support to get attach to this area too.
Even if you don't attach to the upper frame (under the triple tee) you could tight it to the left side of the front upper engine mount. Believe me, there is a lot of tension on the frame when you start to ride a bit hard.
The 4 tabs to go on the sump are a nice addition giving more strength to the assembly.
Check THIS PAGE FOR ANYMORE IDEAS

Yes Cf, that is indeed  my plan to build it like the EML frame which was the best ever for K bikes, and thanks for the link I'll take a look later, I thought that I'd read just about every web page there is on K-sidecar rigs and making mine as an amalgam of all the best features, - - -standing on the shoulders of giants so to speak!!
      
        This is only the first stage to give some secure location for me to build on and make sure that it will fit , once I have got this base frame okay I will fit a rear cross tube for the rear lower fitting point and one also at the front. Then a pair of down-tubes from the steering head to this front cross tube, and short arms coming rearwards from them to the front engine mounts. A front stay will attach as high as I can make it to these down-tubes. I'll see if I can post a picture of my engineering drawing?/plan??/sketch!

   Trevor

Ah! Thanks to the wonders of digital cameras I can add my scribbled master plan sketch















  Perhaps this shows what I want to achieve better than reading the burble! I'm making it 'ambidextrous' so that should I ever dispose of it, or in the even more unlikely event of the UK getting into line with the rest of the civilised world and driving on the right within my lifetime, it could be changed easily, though I'll probably stand a better chance of learning how to walk on water before that happens!

 Trevor

While I'm waiting for gas I've pulled out a drum brake wheel and put that on the bandsaw which made light work of cutting the rim and spokes away from the hub.



  I'd run out of the cutting fluid that I usually use on aluminium/aluminium and other light alloys, but the WD40 served the purpose just as well and there's not too much clean up to do - -


 
If it's a decent day tomorrow I'll get the hub outside and clean up the cut ends with the disc and belt sander

I disagree with the EML angle of attack.
EML has a very old fashioned approach needing a double cradle frame for every combination. Our bikes are far smarter. The engine is the structural element. You do not need those headstock tubes, all you need is placing the forces from the struts on the engine bolts. You need a stable 12mm hole for the strut on the front engine bolt. 
That would also be great at the rear position but i never mastered it. You want the strut out of the way of your and the passengers feet. The EML solution is not to bad although it has no cross frame support.
EML means something like "made by myself" in Dutch. It is not genuine factory work it is more like a farmers construction. Simple and solid but much to heavy.
I rather look at the Aussies. They build along the lines i described, much simpler and proven strong enough.

The reason for the tubes supporting the headstock is that the K frame is rather light and will twist under heavy cornering or on very rough roads. This causes the frame to break behind the tank. Maybe on a purely road going outfit using the engine mounts is enough.

This one broke the frame just at the back of the tank on the RHS. I replaced the frame and braced the head stem.

Thanks Rokman.

I started to write an answer to the previous post and stopped because I own an EML and people always think that their own bike is the greatest.
I am like you and previously broke an original frame under the headstock. This was on a old Suzuki triple. The frame had been reinforced, but it broke just over the reinforcement.
As a result, I got a chopper with the engine dragging on the ground (The front forks folded up when the tubes sheared).
Our bikes had been designed to run as a stand alone, and BMW would never authorize the addition of a sidecar. In fact, as far as I know, EML is one of the few if not the only one accepted by the TUV in Germany.
The side load/torsion on a rig and a stand alone bike are not comparable. When I see how much pressure I put on the sidecar wheel when I am turning, I always wonder why the bike's frame is not crying(I ride the sidecar pretty hard).
When I decided to get a sidecar again (after 20 years riding solo), the only choice was an EML and it took me almost 10 years to find one.
Yes, there is extra weight with the tubes, but when you have a 150Kg sidecar, who cares about an extra 15Kgs when it gives you security.
EML are built like a tank and made to last like a tank.

Crazy and rocKman  have posted while I was keying this , so at the risk of repeating  a couple of points I'll post it anyway.

         While I really cannot agree with you halflive that EML is of a standard of 'something knocked up by framers'  I agree that most home workshop brewed subframes use the upper engine mount as the front top sidecar attachment point, mainly because it's easy and it is not so easy to attach anything up near the steering head , but the short distance above the bottom attachment provides limited triangulation, and perhaps where roads are mostly straight, flat, smooth that is sufficient, and if it works for them then that's great!   It might be Old Skool thinking to some, but what I want to achieve is based on previous sidecar riding experience on Britain's twisty, frequently  potholed, badly cambered rural roads and that a much better and more stable rig can be achieved by getting a diagonal front stay from as high and as close to the steering head as is possible especially as the steering head on a k75 is not one of the stiffest anyway, so the more that it is integrated into the whole mass of the rig is, in my opinion, the better. Not only that but while it is certainly true that the engine is a load carrying member, the design engineers calculated the structure of the engine and its attachment lugs and bolts based on the loadings expected of a solo motorcycle and not one with the considerable assymetric  loading of a sidecar. The addition of front down tubes and a sump cradle will provide additional load paths to better distribute the extra loadings and forces.
      My approach to all this is based on my work experience as an aircraft engineer, general engineer, prototype builder is that nothing that I've built over the past 50 years has failed structurally though being too weak, so I don't want this to be the first!!

     My sketch in the earlier post is not a definitive working drawing by any means, I doodle my ideas on scraps of paper and then alter them as I go along, though basically I plan to have a front lower point at the engine mount, a front diagonal brace from below the steering head as just mentioned, a lower rear fitting to the gearbox base , a rear diagonal brace to  the rear frame tubes under the seat, and attachment to the left hand gearbox mount point. So that's 5 points which I should be able to triangulate to maintain a stable rig.
     This week end I have been able to cut up a few more pieces of tube, for cross pieces, cut and bent the front down tubes. These were a bit fiddly because of proximity to the upper edge of radiator, so before I weld anything I'll  borrow a spare rad. from a buddy to 'prove' the shape of them. Also spent some time rigging up a good tube cutting jig on my lathe to make good close fitting joints on the tube ends.  I've now got argon, welding wires, a nice new auto helmet and sharpened up some tungstens ready to tig some parts together in the week, Tuesday I hope!

I am in total agreement about the triangulation.
Also, on a EML, the 2 tubes are not welded on the original frame (welding may weaken the structure of the original frame). There is an extra piece sliding into the headstock and screwed on it. The 2 tubes are welded on this piece. The only modification is a longer center tube to tie the upper and lower triple tee.

The down tubes on my scheme are not welded in either - - - - -. I've made 3 saddles that sit under the tube cluster with a plate welded to them and the tubes are (will be) welded and braced to that. The whole down-tube structure is (will be) then retained at the upper end by saddles on the upper face of the tubes with bolts through the plate. Positioning these will be a bit fiddly so as to miss the frame tubes and still allow good tool access.

 There are two reasons for doing this way - - - - first, to weld in this area introduces heat stresses that I have no means to relieve - -  - second, and in some ways a more difficult issue to resolve is the fact that to do so modifies ( in UK Traffic law) the frame and would also raise insurance issues.  I reckon that for a peaceful life a golden rule is never involve, nor tell, nor ask,  Officialdoom , unless it is absolutely unavoidable.

 When I've tacked it all together, I'll post a picture for anyone interested.

           Trevor

Okay, clamped up but not tacked together yet though I've drilled a couple of holes for rosette welds to the center saddle.



I hope to get a rad. tomorrow but if not I'll make a model one up out of cardboard and put that in place to check out the clearance issues. I won't fit the OEM trash screen/fairing to the rad. but instead fix some mesh in a frame to the down tubes. The sump tubes have been bent a bit more to reduce the spacer length required between the plate and gearbox pillars so that the plate will be more or less the same position as the original stand frame.

 


   Slow progress but trying the tortoise approach rather than rushing at it (and then undoing the errors!)

         Trevor

It's good to have some discussion, obviously i do not agree.
At first, EML is not the only one having TuV. EZS, LBS from the Netherlands an a dozen German builders do also get TuV approval. The only one i know of who has a general approval is Tripeq for the Heeler sidecar. Which by the way has a three point attachment, engine load bearing.
EML, in the seventies, was smart enough to copy the BMW frame from thick walled round tubing. At that point in time this was a very smart move. Having their own brand of motorcycle made them a manufacturer and let them build sidecars with the famous TuV recognition. Later on EML build a lot of large touring combinations, but just by adding fitting hardware to the normal motorcycle frame. Just take a look at the 4 fittings attached to a Goldwing. When more modern bikes without a lower frame came to EML they just made their own downframe. Just look at an EML CX500. Massive downtubes and completely unnecessarily. Many have proven you can have a CX sidecar with the engine as load bearing unit.
You can have your doubts about EML's engineering skills. Tubelar wheels that crack, sidecar wheels requiring bearing replacement every 5000km. A steel double sided rear swing arm shedding the LH bearing where the original aluminium single sided swing arm never fails. Not to mention the home made brakes and shocks. 
Enough flaming on EML, Back to the K-series.
I agree on two parts. The steel frame is flimsy. The tubes are as thin as possible to save weight for solo riding. You must make triangles. You have to think triangles while building. 
On the other side what is the purpose of the third headstock bearing? It will only take a load if the original headstock moves. Otherwise it will only rotate along. The downtubes from the third bearing are bend. The original frame is straight.  You can guess which tube will bend and which will break under load. So if the design with the third headstock bearing would work it would not prohibit the original frame to break. The second reason the design is odd is the forward upper strut. You want triangles with even legs. EML has the mounts not on the inner frame tube. If you place the tub where you normally want it, as narrow as possible with room for your leg and the rear case. In that position the strut does make an even triangle but point towards the sky. In other words, it does not evenly spread the force but pushes the (sub)frame upwards. If you want to evenly spread the load you have to lower the upper attachment, hey presto, there is the upper engine mount.
Of course a frame can break, installing with some tension or fatigue can do their job, even without a sidecar. Take the famous pictures of these aussies welding a K100 with two batteries in series in the middle of nowhere. It was broken at the rear engine mount, no subframe in the proximity. 
On the other side look at the British BEARS sidecar championship. The fastest bikes are K100 and at least every other one has just an engine subframe. These guys are riding harder than i ever will on the road. My own K75 with huge EML sidecar has seen a lot of Europe including the horrible roads of London and southern England. For the record, i do not have an EML subframe. 
Yes, the weight. The rule of thumb is a horsepower is about equal to 3 KG. So adding 15 KG of iron slows you down and costs extra fuel. My double adult combination is less than 400 KG and I like to keep it that way. I will try to build my single seater below 350.
I think you heavy metal builders are over guestimating the forces a sidecar delivers to the main frame. 300 KG force is next to nothing for a 12mm bolt. The trick is to evenly distribute the forces. The most devastating force is not the sidecar but the front steering. The front fork bending sideways and when braking even under the bike. The proper way to minimize these forces is reducing the trail and lowering the whole combination with automobile wheels.
And for the record, my occupation is in aircraft maintenance. There is not a corner in a 747 or 737 where i haven't been to do repairs. An aircraft that does not break is too heavy. It is always a balance between structural integrity and weight. Fail save where required, light if possible. I do not see similarity with a sidecar, a combo always must be fail save. I do not do a regular structural inspection which is common practice on an aircraft.
Do as you like, but i do not like to add extra metal without added value.

K100/sidecar frame breakages are a well known phenomenon in Australia for outfits used on outback dirt roads and extra support of the headstem is one way to reduce this. The alternative is to brace the frame further back by welding half tube supports along the frame tubes.

It has nothing to do with triangulation between the sidecar and the bike. The problem is that the headstem can twist under heavy abuse on very poor roads (not the potholed roads around London). Try a few thousand km of corrugated dirt road with the occasional wash away and sand patch. It'll sort out any frame.

So I stand by my original comment, using the upper engine mount without bracing the headstem is fine for a paved road going sidecar.For more arduous duties, headstem bracing is needed. The subframe picks up the centre stand mount on the gearbox, the crash bar mount holes on the motor, the front engine mount, and the headstem. With this the engine is still a stressed member of the subframe, which is a good thing, but headstem twisting is reduced.

This is a very interesting conversation and most of all, this is a Gentleman conversation between two people having opposite opinions.
This is great to hear each side without any flames. .
We love these kind of debates and learn from it.
About TUV, I may be totally wrong, but I read somewhere that in Germany, you can't register a sidecar with a bike having a single swing arm.
I was also reading on a French forum that in France a recent change in the laws requires now to have the sidecar frame welded on the motorcycle frame (No more bolts). this is a bit pushing the security to the extremes. I have seen people looking for old sidecars in order to get an approved registration. Others, register their rig in England and can after legally bring it to France (EU regulation).

Cheers,

Bert

G'day Bert
I think Halflive and myself are looking at this from slightly different points of view. On a paved road or racetrack the forces are reasonably predictable and engineering safety factors can be applied. I am looking at the scenario where I hit a 200mm deep washaway across the road at 100 kmh. In this case I want strong and I want my headstem braced..In fact I want everything braced 

Yes, a good discussion and well worthwhile, there are probably as many 'ideal' rigs as there are sidecar drivers and as there are just about unlimited permutations of bikes and tubs, what works for one may well be not much good elsewhere.

 Obviously in little old Britain we do not have the vast mileage of unpaved road that exists in Australia, rural Russia, China and other vast countries and so my rig is not constructed to deal with those conditions, much as I would love to, I very much doubt that I will ever ride 'The Road of Bones' for example!
     I do know though that handling a rig 'briskly' on some of Britain's twisty, bumpy, rural roads does frequently put an great amount of lateral loading onto the structure and the higher that one can place the front diagonal stay between the bike and sidecar, the more stable and predictable will be the ride/drive. That is the whole point of my constructing a subframe with down tubes, it is less concerned with holding the head onto the rest of the bike ( as would be the case set out by Rockman hitting a washout at speed) than it is with providing a higher point to fit a front diagonal and hence at a greater angle to the front lower brace so that the relationship between bike and sidecar chassis stays stable.

   As regards the weight, if one is in pursuit of ultimate performance, and I have built 2 of my own aeroplanes down to the designer's weight, then yes, old the aviation maxim of adding lightness to gain performance is true, but at the mundane level that our feeble motorcycles operate, and the way we use them, and the little attention that we pay to their operating costs just does not warrant worrying about whether one rig is built 25kg heavier than it could be. Everything will break, at some ultimate loading, but I would rather have the weak link in a motorcycle be, for example, a wheel bearing than a frame or axle.

  Anyway guys, thanks for the continued interest in this build and I really consider everyone's  opinion worthwhile and while I'm most definitely not a committee man, I add all the points of view into the decision making process. I don't know it all ....and never will!

Well not a lot of action in this thread for quite a few weeks but it's not dead yet, just been resting! Anyway because of the cold weather all work on the tub is stopped but I have got this far with the subframe and sidecar chassis----


The chassis is 40x40x3 mm steel box and the subframe is 32x3 mm steel tube (down tubes are 25mm), both Tig welded . There are a pair of 18 mm threaded ball/rose/heim joints joining the two together....................


This allows for toe in and lean adjustment while sidecar wheel lead will be taken care of by making the suspension assembly itself adjustable relative to the frame.

These are some of the unfinished components of the sidecar suspension assembly


the slotted plate when finished will allow fore and aft movement for wheel lead.

All three wheels will eventually be Smart 15" 20.5mm ET type and shod with 135/70's. Keen eyes will have seen that I plan to use a FourTwo rear hub for the sidecar this will allow the provision of drive to the sidecar wheel - - -one day---maybe! Another maybe is the possible fitting of a sway/anti-roll bar which is why I've made the bike end fixed in the fore-aft plane so that I could support the bar end here........

As the rig is set at the moment with standard 18" wheels front and rear, the ground clearance is just over 6"/152mm so with the planned 15" x 135/70s it should be a little over 4"/100mm which is enough for a rig that is to be only a road going tourer and we don't have to contend with Oz style pot-holes or US style snow falls. 
 I hope!

 Cheers Kando ! Great stuff; keep 'm pickies coming !

Jos.

Nice work Kando!
Are you still able to remove the valve cover without removing the subframe?

halflive wrote:Nice work Kando!
Are you still able to remove the valve cover without removing the subframe?

Hi,
              Thanks for the complement halflive! Errr...... I don't know the answer to that, in fact I've never lifted that lid in the 5 years of ownership, but I would doubt that it would lift enough over the cams as there's only a few mm clearance. It's not a huge problem though because although you cannot see it here, the tube between the engine/frame bolts and the sump tubes/down tube assembly is a separate piece and so is removeable. The fitting that retains the front rose/ball/heim joint acts as a spigot into the 'cross tube' beneath the water/oil pump, and there is a connecting rod through to the far side though a similar shouldered spigot, the whole lot then secured by nut and washer.

 So to get the cam lid off just slacken the nuts, remove front joint, undo l/h engine bolt and get the tube out of the way. All the other connections can remain intact. I didn't take many photos as I went along for fear of frightening welders of a nervous disposition

Not such a good day as I had hoped for. I had hoped to borrow a rotary table so that I could machine a recess in the 12mm plate for the location shoulder on the hub which projects though the Smart brake backplate, however it's unavailable for a couple of weeks.

So fire up plan B which is to saw the plate to shape then try to rig it up on the lathe faceplate to turn the recess and ........ then the machine saw is out of action........... .   

Not to be thwarted, it was time to switch to manual...........as you do. Sure saves on workshop heating on a cold February day!



As can be seen by my scribbled machining note, the recess is not very deep but is necessary to positively locate the brake/hub assembly and carry the shear loads.

Now that some new Smart wheels and tyres have arrived... all the way from Germany which had the best price....I have also made a start on my rear wheel adaptor. The supplier that I get my steel from already had some left over slabs and I bought a couple even though they were 20mm greater diameter than I really need and thicker too!. My little 5" centre height lathe was really a bit overwhelmed in getting the diameter down to size and the tool coolant was certainly warmed up.

So now I've got the diameter to fit the drum recess and the major diameter to fit the Smart wheel but it's now stalled until I get a rotary table to set it up to cut the bolt holes.
Still in the meantime I can fit the tyres and rig the bike safely and get the back wheel out. At the moment my K has ropes from the handlebars to a roof timber holding it upright, I'll need some stout blocks under the gearbox before I go further.

  That sounds like my subframe.
I've got the valve cover on the clean side , so no sidecar in the way. But i made the connection from the engine bolt to the diagonal brace to narrow. I can loosen the valve cover but not remove it. Luckily my diagonal is also detachable. I need to loosen it to check the valve clearance. And you have to check once in a while, the rear cylinder seems to get a bit on the hot side and narrows the valve clearance. My advise; check before you install the tub.
By the way, my new subframe is wider around the valve cover

Thanks for the advice to check the clearances, sounds like a good idea especially as I've never done them...though I've not done many miles either! What I will probably do is a major service when all the construction and composite work is over and while the parts are being painted, so that when it all goes back together I should not have to do any deep maintainance for a while.....maybe

 With your sidecar on the right of the bike you don't have the problem of working around the exhaust, though on the other hand I don't have the problem of having to work around the brake lever not only that I don't have to be a contortionist to see the oil level

Not much done for past two  days as I've been in full-on house cook,scivvey, cleaner, bread baker and nurse mode while Mrs. coughed and spluttered her snotty way through boxes of Kleenex( or other brands which are available!) . She's up and about a bit today so managed to get some Shed Time in so a few pieces tacked together and set them up on the chassis to see if I've got things about right, it all looked pretty good and I was particularly happy that the welding had not distorted the housing for the arm roller bearings which fitted in nice and firm after I polished the welding scale from the bore. I wished that I'd made the housing a bit longer which would have been easier to weld around, though then the arm fork would need to be wider and....
Anyway I didn't melt the rim! Skill?? Nah! Luck


Next up will be some gusseting to support the hub mounting plate and a pair of lugs for the shock on the arm and at the top of the tower. After that, fix some guide angles on the underside of the mounting plate and make serrated locking plates for the adjustment slots, fit it all on the chassis and drill some fixing holes,.....and they'll have to be nice and square, spaced properly. Better make a jig first!

I didn't fancy sawing steel and welding parts on the suspension parts 
today, and I really want to get some progress with the rear wheel adaptor, so did a bit of machining instead. Although it has ample power to do the work, the brake drum is 12mm too big to clear the bedways of my small lathe so had a think about doing on the mill. First raided my bar-ends bin and found a slab of alloy to turn up a spacer to fit the register face on the inside of the brake drum, drill some holes in it, and thread them for the wheel bolts, then clamped the assembly down onto the mill table.

My mill is only a hobby size machine it's an old manual Emco FB2, so it was a lot of handwheel winding to carve off the unwanted ribs across the drum. The limited cross travel necessitated slackening the hold-down bolts and rotating the drum 180 degrees. picture shows almost finishing the last segment.

 A friend has offered the loan of his small rotary table tomorrow, so I'll take a ride up to Norwich and collect it for the weekend. I can mount the drum on it and put on a rotational finishing cut to clean up and also trim the cut-off spoke ends. 
 
The second weekend activity will be to get all the holes drilled in the adaptor while I've got the table, I can always finish the turning later to get the wheel mounting face down to the correct thickness.