Total Motorcycle Community Forums

Not a motorcycle. A motortricycle. I won't even bother to vote. Sorry.

I'd consider it if it had some sort of leaning mechanism, like an MP3 (which would be an interesting thing to put on the cool wall, come to think of it). But as it is, it really seems to be only for riders who, uh, have a condition or something. It's a jetski for the road, and is thus fairly pointless.



I just remembered, I've got a friend who's 80 and still rides, but is considering one of these since his legs aren't as strong as they used to be. So in that sense, if it keeps you riding if you're old or (as mentioned) have lost balance, or lost a foot or whatever, then . . . naaah, it still isn't cool. Cool props though to riders who look for every available option (including the Can-Am) so they can keep riding.

jstark47 wrote:

waterbuffalo750 wrote:If you need the 3rd wheel for some reason, a side car is a way cooler option.

Agreed.

I wonder though, how this stacks up in the coolness ratings against a more traditional motorcycle-based trike? I'm not much of one for trikes, so I can't say...

I'm with you guys on this one. I'd like to take it for a test ride just to see out it handles. I'm starting to see a few of them on the road now. As far as comparing it to other trikes it just might be cool and it definitely is different!

I must admit that when I first saw one a couple years ago I was convinced that BRP had hit a foul ball way off into the stands. Three wheelers have never been as popular as two wheelers, be they sidecar rigs or traditional trikes, but for someone to come up with and actually put into production a setup like the Spyder must have involved a lot of consumption of illegal substances and unlimited access to corporate finances because somebody had some dirt on somebody else and was blackmailing them. It's the only logical explanation as to why the Spyder exists.

Having two wheels up front and one drive out back is a concept that has met with limited success in the automotive world (the Morgan, for example), but it makes no sense to make the cross over into motorcycle territory. This arrangement results in a front-heavy vehicle with limited traction in pretty much all road and weather conditions. Useless in the winter - the drive tire has to plow its way through undisturbed snow, while the front tires are not quite wide enough to ride within the ruts created by cars. Not good in the rain - the lane position puts the drive tire right in the oil slicked, debris filled area of the lane between the paths cleared by 4-wheeler tires. Not good in emergency braking or steering manouevers, as the rear tire loses traction due to the weight transfers involved in sudden moves and overloads the steering tires. The whole design just does not make sense from a motorcycling point of view.

But for some reason, Bombardier almost defiantly went ahead with creating the Spyder anyway. And damned if they haven’t become a big seller, which confused the heck out of me at first. But the closer I looked at it, the more it began to almost make sense; the “returning rider” seems to be the market demographic they were aiming for, people who don’t want to do the sidecar thing because they wrongly assume it’s too dangerous (sidecars have long suffered from this errant belief) and don’t want to do the traditional trike thing because they’re too unstable (more errant beliefs). Two wheels out front just seems to be more stable to people who have no concept about Physics and motorcycle dynamics in general, so I must tip my hat to BRP for pulling this one off with success.

But I voted “Cool” because of the way BRP pulled this off, specifically because of the technology they packed into it. Traction Control, Stability Control, ABS, Dynamic Power Steering, available semi-automatic transmission... these are all features you’d expect to see in a car, not a three wheeler. And regardless that all these features were built into the Spyder to solve the inherent flaws of the two wheel front/one wheel rear setup, I have to admire the end result. It is a user friendly, safe and (supposedly) fun vehicle to drive, whether one is a novice, returning rider, or experienced road veteran. But there will never be one in my garage, because I am too much of a traditionalist when it comes to motorcycles – and to me, this is most emphatically NOT a motorcycle. I would rather bolt up a sidecar to an existing bike or invest in a trike conversion than spend my money on a three wheeled open cockpit car like the Spyder. Fun to drive, most probably, but it is NOT a motorcycle. Were it not for all the technology, I would have given it a “Fail”.

Technology or no technology, this for me is a fail.

In Canada I've seen a few on the road and to me they look so funny. There was one here in the UK parked on the grass in front of a motorcycle shop that we had rode too. Me thinks it might stay there a while!

Gummiente wrote:I must admit that when I first saw one a couple years ago I was convinced that BRP had hit a foul ball way off into the stands. Three wheelers have never been as popular as two wheelers, be they sidecar rigs or traditional trikes, but for someone to come up with and actually put into production a setup like the Spyder must have involved a lot of consumption of illegal substances and unlimited access to corporate finances because somebody had some dirt on somebody else and was blackmailing them. It's the only logical explanation as to why the Spyder exists.

Having two wheels up front and one drive out back is a concept that has met with limited success in the automotive world (the Morgan, for example), but it makes no sense to make the cross over into motorcycle territory. This arrangement results in a front-heavy vehicle with limited traction in pretty much all road and weather conditions. Useless in the winter - the drive tire has to plow its way through undisturbed snow, while the front tires are not quite wide enough to ride within the ruts created by cars. Not good in the rain - the lane position puts the drive tire right in the oil slicked, debris filled area of the lane between the paths cleared by 4-wheeler tires. Not good in emergency braking or steering manouevers, as the rear tire loses traction due to the weight transfers involved in sudden moves and overloads the steering tires. The whole design just does not make sense from a motorcycling point of view.

But for some reason, Bombardier almost defiantly went ahead with creating the Spyder anyway. And damned if they haven’t become a big seller, which confused the heck out of me at first. But the closer I looked at it, the more it began to almost make sense; the “returning rider” seems to be the market demographic they were aiming for, people who don’t want to do the sidecar thing because they wrongly assume it’s too dangerous (sidecars have long suffered from this errant belief) and don’t want to do the traditional trike thing because they’re too unstable (more errant beliefs). Two wheels out front just seems to be more stable to people who have no concept about Physics and motorcycle dynamics in general, so I must tip my hat to BRP for pulling this one off with success.

But I voted “Cool” because of the way BRP pulled this off, specifically because of the technology they packed into it. Traction Control, Stability Control, ABS, Dynamic Power Steering, available semi-automatic transmission... these are all features you’d expect to see in a car, not a three wheeler. And regardless that all these features were built into the Spyder to solve the inherent flaws of the two wheel front/one wheel rear setup, I have to admire the end result. It is a user friendly, safe and (supposedly) fun vehicle to drive, whether one is a novice, returning rider, or experienced road veteran. But there will never be one in my garage, because I am too much of a traditionalist when it comes to motorcycles – and to me, this is most emphatically NOT a motorcycle. I would rather bolt up a sidecar to an existing bike or invest in a trike conversion than spend my money on a three wheeled open cockpit car like the Spyder. Fun to drive, most probably, but it is NOT a motorcycle. Were it not for all the technology, I would have given it a “Fail”.

Well said!

Wow, quite the discussion and debate on the Can-Am Spyder! I knew it would be controversial but who would have guessed it was this controversial!

For me, I voted Uncool.

I really think it's too big, heavy and bulky to be a true motorcycle myself, but it is classified as one by the Government so someone thought it was there.

I really think the term "Reverse Trike" fits best for it rather than motorbike. I am surprised how much technology, R&D and thought BRP (Bombardier Recreational Products) has invested into it, it really must have been quite the proposal meeting at BRP headquarters!

So I voted Uncool because I think if you rode (see, I do say RODE, rather than DROVE) in on one it would attract attention (both positive and negative) amoung motorcyclists, and there would be people interested in it. But as a motorcycle it is very close to a fail. As a car, it's very close to a fail. As a Reverse Trike alternative vehicle, it's cool as it's really something unclassable but nothing like a motorcycle with a side-car.

Can-Am also seems to be leaning towards making it bigger and bigger each year for touring. So my guess is the market is for those who can afford it (older), want to carry a lot of stuff with them, don't want a car, used to be motorcycle riders (or still are) and want that feeling of freedom on the road still.

I would definately call it a niche machine. It will be interesting to see how it continues to sell in light of the soft economy.

Love it or hate it, it's different.

I voted cool because innovation and trying something new is never a bad thing. But that is the only reason I voted cool. If this were the Vehicle Cool Wall, maybe I would vote something different.

Wow, the voting is very close as of this morning:

Awesome 7% [ 1 ]
Cool 29% [ 4 ]
Uncool 29% [ 4 ]
Fail 36% [ 5 ]

Total votes : 14

What do you think if they made a "stripped down" version of the Spyder? It would still have 3 wheels, but say would look more like a sportbike with a side car...?