Weight Balance?

Weight ratio on a Reverse trike is different than a car. You need more weight up front of a trike. Member Mntech has the best lay out with his Front Wheel Drive trike.

Torque to the 1 wheel overcomes traction. Adding a wider wheel does help some.

Its like an old pickup truck without Positraction. With no weight in the cargo bed you will spin the right rear tire. Add 1,000 pounds to the rear and no spin. But now the truck is heavy and slow plus it loses front steering response.

Check out the Frenchmans 'The Wooden Stash' trike's build. It is a simple single seat frame with good suspension. With a Kawasaki R1 1000cc he can put a hurting on a lot of cars on the racetrack.



www.facebook.com/TWS-Racing-The-Wooden-Stash-525059027571284/

I'd need an electric lift seat just to get out of that TWS trike.

That makes a lot of sense and is very informative.  Thanks!

That's right Andrew, and you have a rear mounted radiator which should help.

But it  can be done by moving the axels if other design considerations allow it.  You can move the front axel forward, but these things already have a wheel base that tends to be long in relation to size.   You can move the  rear axel   forward as well, which I favor, but it will mean a shorter swing arm that introduces it's own set of problems. 
     As far as moving the battery, I have a lithium ion in mine. It only weighs a couple of lbs. and is of the same dimensions as the lead acid was.
I generally had to replace motorcycle batteries ever other year or so.   This can be avoided with trickle charger use in  winter, but it's a pain.
  Even after setting for 10 months during this latest series of mods on my trike,  no external charging, the 5 year old battery  spun  the motor  faster and longer  than a fresh lead acid batter would.  No more lead acids for me.  Costs a hundred bucks or so, but well worth it.

Yes, I believe that if for any reason the voltage drops below a certain level, they are not recoverable. 9 volts for mine? That is a big disadvantage I failed to mention.

Thanks for that link. I remember reading that article when it came out. Shame on Harley for buying them then killing them.

I agree with most everything you stated with a couple of exceptions. I do not see the front driver as a better stopper,  as having more of the weight forward, especially under braking, it will not be able to make as much use of the contact patch at the rear. 
Handling is a subjective term, and if simply defined by which can get around a skid pad or race course faster, it probably is a front driver.
As you correctly stated, a tadpole trike has all of its roll resistance at the front which results in weight transfer to that end providing the most traction, stability and probably the best absolute cornering power with front drive.

However handling can be defined in other ways, such as steering response, and the ability to balance the chassis with the throttle. A front driver, whether with 4 wheels or 3 is a resolute understeerer and applying the throttle in a turn can only widen your line, requiring cranking in more steering lock and slowing steering response. 4 wheeled cars, such as a GTI, can counter this somewhat with stiff anti roll bars at the rear, not an option with a tadpole. 
 
And no, in most cases,  even  moderate cornering cannot  completely unload the inside front wheel.   It depends on CG, track, wheelbase , roll resistance, etc, but on mine even with its relatively narrow track, it  will in most instances, slide before any lifting, it takes deliberate effort to raise that wheel and only possible when accelerating hard out of a tight corner. Given the wider track and slightly greater weight forward on Andrews trike, getting a wheel to lift is virtually impossible, just as I imagine it is on a Trihawk. This has nothing to do with which wheels are being driven, just fore aft weight distribution and the other factors just mentioned.

My own trike is as neutral a handler as any 4 wheeled car I have owned, with a tendency to understeer going into corner, especially tight ones, but the chassis can be weighted just about anyway you like coming out of a corner with steering and throttle. It's capable of a 3 wheel drift if that's your thing, though  much more easily done on low grip surfaces.
Power on rear wheel drifting, though not advisable at higher speeds due to instability, is one of the more fun things you do in any vehicle but not an option with front drive.
   Generalizing bigtime: Front drive tadpoles are safer and get power to the ground more effectively.
Rear drive tadpoles are lighter, simpler, more responsive.

It would be great fun autocrossing against a Trihawk.   Its wide track front drive would no doubt give a stability advantage, but at the same time force wider turns through the cones.
 Not  to say mine would be quicker, but likely more agile, more fun. 
On a wide turn racetrack, I would not be so confident.

Yes, if you don't have sufficient weight forward it will become unacceptably unstable.
I wound up 55/45 more by chance  than design. That is with the current heavier Ca am Spyder parts up front.   With the prior lightweight  ATV front end components, it  had a 3 inch narrower track and 52.5/47.5 weight balance.     This gave me a unique opportunity to see what affects these factors have on a trike.
The old setup was more nimble with more traction, better riding but was noticeably less stable and  badly  underbraked with mere 6" rotors.


With higher power, I would go with more weight out back to get more traction but not without   a wider track to maintain some stability. With less power or with what I have I think 55/45 is as good a compromise as any. 

Something else worth mentioning on this topic; side to side balance is more critical with 3 wheels as opposed to 4. A side by side with driver only will have an advantage in left hand corners and a disadvantage in right hand corners. The smaller and narrower the trike, the greater the difference which can result in wildly inconsistent handling, magnifying stability issues inherent in reverse trikes.   Best strategy for a side by side is jamming rider and passenger together as close to the middle as possible. All the production reverse trikes are done this way, T Rex, Morgan, Vanderhall. Hi performance RTs make more sense as single seaters, though I will not deny what side by side proponents might say, that it's ultimately more fun with a passenger aboard, even if the performance envelope shrinks a bit. Manufactures go where the market is and there seems to be little or no market for single seaters.  Just be aware of the compromises.