Polaris Patent Reveals a Side by Side Three Wheeler – Updated – Is This the Polaris Slingshot?

Polaris patent drawing for reverse trike - front view

Polaris patent drawing for reverse trike - front view
The Polaris Slingshot?

Polaris Slingshot logoPolaris seems to have their hands in just about everything these days. Victory and Indian motorcycles, a strong ATV lineup, snowmobiles and even electric vehicles. This diverse lineup keeps the company profitable so they can expand in even more areas and it looks like they're about ready to strike on another front, because they've applied for a patent on a street legal side by side reverse trike.

Polaris patent drawing for reverse trike - side by side seating

Polaris patent drawing for reverse trike - side by side seating

Instead of building a tandem seat straddle trike like the Can-Am Spyder, they've placed the driver and passenger in side by side seats with a steering wheel instead of handlebars. The vehicle has a tube frame with bodywork of a non-specified material. The longitudinal mounted engine is up front with power going through a transmission and driveshaft to a final drive system mounted behind the seats with an input U joint and an output sprocket where it then transfers power by means of a belt drive to the single rear wheel mounted on the swingarm.

Polaris 3 wheeler rear drive system

Polaris 3 wheeler rear drive system

The rear swingarm has a centrally mounted monoshock and the front wheels are mounted to upper and lower A arms with a single shock on each side. Steering is shown as rack and pinion and the patent says it could incorporate an electronic power steering system in the future.

Polaris 3 wheeler side view without bodywork

Polaris 3 wheeler side view without bodywork

The patent describes the engine as a GM 2.4 liter Ecotec with a manual transmission, though it could also incorporate a hybrid system or even be a battery powered electric.

Underside view of engine, transmission, driveshaft and final drive

Underside view of GM 2.4L Ecotec engine, transmission, driveshaft and final drive

Polaris obviously has international markets in mind, too, because they describe the interchangeable lighting depending on the country where it will be sold.

Polaris 3 wheeler cockpit

Polaris 3 wheeler cockpit

They have a lot of features in the "may include" section, too. Other "anticipated" features are antilock brakes, traction control, MSR, which limits rear wheel slip during downshifts or a locked rear wheel on a slippery surface, EBD, electronic brake distribution to modulate brake pressure front and rear and VSC, vehicle stability control to limit yaw rate in a turn by modulating throttle input and applying the outside front brake, which means it will be really hard to drift unless you can turn it off since this baby looks like it could toss the back end out pretty easily.

Is this a competitor to the Can-Am Spyder or the Campagna T-Rex or V13R or possibly the Morgan 3 wheeler? It's hard to say, but with the Polaris engineering and design teams behind it and dealer network supporting it, this could be a formidable entrant in the market. Price will be a factor, obviously, but they have considerable leeway there because of all of the optional configurations and features. I think Polaris has big plans for this and with all of the detail shown in the patent drawings, it looks like this could be very close to getting the go ahead, if it hasn't already. If I were Can-Am or Campagna, I'd be a little uncomfortable.

This is very interesting, and though I have no information beyond the patent itself, I'd be surprised and disappointed if Polaris didn't introduce this sometime in the near future. I like it!

UPDATE! - logo and name - The Polaris Slingshot

Polaris Slingshot logoAmong the other paperwork Polaris filed recently, here's a design for a vehicle logo with the name included. It's registered as the logo for "three-wheeled motor vehicles for on road use." The name in the logo is "Slingshot."

With the design so well developed and the name trademarked, you have to wonder how close we are to seeing this vehicle introduced. Maybe something for this spring?

Link: US Patent Office


  1. paolo says

    thanks paul, great find
    ill also add the followin info
    -GM is very good with 3rd parties and crate engines, so it seems like a perfect fit
    -the ecotec is GM’s new ‘world engine’ and will be made in china ie affordable and even more supportedl
    -big aftermarket community with big HP upgrades GM themselves have or had turbo versions and maybe s/c too i think

    these will make over 200 stock and boost to 400 with an all up weigh probably close to 100-1200lb this is a serious car, i think they’ll have a big winner here

    • Weight weenie says


      A Can-Am Spyder RT weighs about 1000lbs & a T=Rex even more.

      I think you are about 300+ lbs shy on your high estimate. The motor/trans alone is 200+ more than a m/c motor. The frame & body look alot more substantial as well.

      How do you propose putting 400hp (turbo) thru a single tire with it not doing 180’s @ 90?

      This thing doesn’t know what it wants to be a slow overwight boring T-rex or an uncomfortable run-about for retirement villages…..fail

      • paolo says

        yea you might be right about the weight 1200-1500 depending on what their cost targets allow

        there are some curious decisions thats for sure, the motor is a good candidate for a transverse layout and just use the whole GM drivetrain that goes with the ecotec and make it mid engine and less expensive, any idea where that trans is from?

        the power at 200 is fine and even 400 with tracton, drag bikes do just fine
        not my cup of tea at all! but presume polaris has put a ton of market research into this i wouldnt bet against them, the more diversity out there the better

  2. paolo says

    is there an original link where we can read the patent? tks
    also if this is a published patent it means its been at this stage for a couple years so yes that product is imminent

  3. stanisław żółczyński says

    Design like it looks somewhat ackward. To my eyes it would be more logical if the side by side were seated just the opposite way, with their backs on the rear axle facing the single tilting front steering wheel.

    • Travis says

      The problem with that is that then it will brake like a motorcycle and accelerate like a car, great for running a quarter mile, BUT it greatly decreases lateral stability when cornering while braking.

      whereas the inverse delta design does the opposite, it has less control under acceleration, but handles like a car when braking, thus increasing safety.

  4. mark says

    Is having a engine in the front the claim to the patent? All the front track trike/cars i have seen have had the back end of a motorbike to do the rear duties – i still think this is still a better method but hey the Cam Am thing they produce is a god awful machine that is only justifiable if you cant actually ride a bike. I think this is a far better solution and i think would be a great car to drive.

    • mark says

      Wait a minute the moragn has the engine in the front – a motor cycle engine at that. Actually the motus crate engine would be a great match for a front engined vehicle like this – much lighter too. – So what are the actual patents???? This stuff has been done many times over through the years. I hope they build it but any idea that the style of vehicle is anything new is bollocks – Can anyone tell me what the patents are as i am very curious.

  5. TJW says

    Anybody familiar with the Morgan Trike? Side by side. The F series had 4 cyl engine up front driving a rear wheel with a chain. Earlier types had a V twin out front driving the rear wheel. They are back in production in England.

    • Paul Crowe says

      As noted above the comment box:
      “Please read the entire post … before commenting or asking questions.”

    • Paul Crowe says

      Three wheel vehicles are registered as motorcycles in all 50 states, so believe what you wish.

      • Travis says

        He has a point, which could be a great article, despite what the law says (which are oft outdated anyway) when is a three wheel vic a three wheel car and when is it a three wheel motorcycle? The Can Am Spyder i think we can all agree is a motorcycle, but is this?

        • Paul Crowe says

          Since the appearance of the Can-Am Spyder, there have been discussions about how to license their drivers, but, unless there has been a recent change somewhere, these are motorcycles for both driver licensing and registration.

          Unfortunately, he raised the point above, not because he was questioning legal definitions of what a three wheel vehicle is, but because he is under the impression that “this is a motorcycle site,” and this vehicle doesn’t belong here which means he has not been paying attention for the last eight years. This site is about all kinds of interesting vehicles, technology, motivation and inspiration and far, far more. Three wheelers of all types, not to mention a lot of four wheelers and boats and planes and many, many other things have been appearing here all of that time. If anything outside the bounds of the strictest definition of a motorcycle makes someone uncomfortable, that’s a pretty good indication The Kneeslider might not be a good fit for them.

          • Paulinator says

            I knew a guy in Alberta that had a terrible time with that DMV over some 3-wheeled Vespas that he imported and sold. I also believe that many of the T-Rex vehicles are actually registered in the province of Quebec (under a regulation easement) to promote the local manufacture…then exporting of the product. I’m sure Polaris has done its homework, but dealing with bureaucrats will be sticky. Though the appeal of this product will be universal, I doubt the legality of it will be.

            • Paul Crowe says

              Perhaps one of the best things all around is that Polaris will be dealing with this issue. It’s sad that it takes someone with considerable resources to wade into the bureaucracy and regulatory mess which seem to exist more for restricting, penalizing and taxing than to encourage the development of new ideas. Once this is on the road, others may be able to follow with similar vehicles and register them the same way.

            • Kyle T says

              Perhaps any motorcycle that you can’t get a knee down on should also not be discussed, if you’re going to take that literal an interpretation of the name.

      • zipidachimp says

        with a steering wheel? is the Morgan licenced as a bike? if that’s true, insurance cost savings should be considerable.

  6. says

    I have been waiting to see more of this, and I expect that we will.

    The 3-wheel vehicle is the way to provide traditional side-by-side seating in a new vehicle which can avoid many of the government-imposed regulatory impediments to new entries in the vehicle market.

    Back in the 1950s and early 1960s, there were scores of innovative small auto manufacturers with many interesting and unique vehicles at attractive prices, and with excellent fuel economy and performance. But they were almost all snuffed-out when the gov’t started up with all the regulatory barriers to competition.

    Maybe if we are lucky, some innovation and competition can start happening again in the 3-wheeled market, before the gov’t closes the door on that too.

  7. says

    How about ‘ If you sit ON it, it’s a motorcycle, If you sit IN it, it’s a car’? If it’s interesting let’s check it out… I still like a transverse engine mounting with all wheels driving. Subarucycle.

    • Mykola says

      The most logical distinction ought to be by steering method. Motorcycles go through an elegant countersteering->lean->directional change process, whereas cars go through the ham-fisted wheel hub steering->sidewall-flexion->contact patch directional change process. Thus, the Piaggio MP3 is a motorcycle, Can-Ams are cars.

      • Adam says

        You still have motorcycles that blur the you propose: Bimota Tesi, Vyrus, Yamaha GTS 1000. I’m not saying those should be considered cars; clearly they are motorcycles.

        I think you’re on the right track, but I wouldn’t classify vehicles solely by steering components. Motorcycles should be classified as vehicles that alter their direction mainly though camber thrust. There should be a width limit as well.

        However, without another class of vehicle, the Can-Am Spyder, Campagna T-Rex, and Polaris Slingshot, Morgan three-wheeler, etc., could never exist on American roads. Modern automobile standards wouldn’t allow it.

        Perhaps the U.S. needs a new class of road vehicles, akin to the ultralight or light sport classes of aircraft in the flight industry or kei cars in Japan. Set a maximum weight, size, and engine size restriction and allow the cars to be road legal without all the safety requirements required for larger vehicles.

      • GenWaylaid says

        Both Mykola and Skizick make good points. A reasonable classification probably would have to take into consideration both how the vehicle is controlled and how it protects its occupants.

        For licensing drivers/riders, the key factor is whether the vehicle turns flat like a car (CanAm Spyder, most three wheelers, sidecar rigs) or leans into turns like a motorcycle (Peraves, Piaggio MP3). These are two different methods of vehicle control which require different training. Arguably, traditional asymmetric sidecars would require their own special endorsement. The ambiguous case would be something like the Vandenbrink Carver, where lean is computer-controlled and not determined directly by the driver.

        For registration and insurance purposes, it matters most whether the vehicle is designed to enclose and retain the occupants in a crash situation (three wheelers with seat belts, Peraves, Vandenbrink, BMW C1) or whether riders are exposed, may come off, and are expected to wear protective gear (CanAm Spyder, sidecar rigs, Piaggio MP3).

        This creates a total of four categories in these criteria alone, including a category that would require a motorcycle license but no helmet (Peraves) and a category that would require a helmet but no motorcycle license (CanAm Spyder, sidecar rigs). Then there’s the distinction between low-speed (30 mph), medium-speed, and freeway legal vehicles that is implicit in many states’ registration categories.

        I’m all for a simpler and more uniform classification of vehicles. Given the number of bureaucratic agencies involved worldwide, though, our best hope for the foreseeable future is to continue exploiting whatever local loopholes exist.

  8. Adam says

    Traditional motorcyclists will probably miss the market this machine may be built for.

    Polaris is an off road company that is expanding into the on-road market (Victory and Indian). They started with snowmobiles and then grew into ATVs. They are now the makers of the most popular side-by-side vehicles in the market – the Ranger and RZR vehicles. Side-by-sides are quickly taking market share from traditional ATVs. Why? There are many reasons, but a very important one is that riding is better with company. People prefer sitting next to each other over talking through intercoms or turning their head’s and shouting.

    This is a logical step for Polaris’ off-road customer, whether they come from a snowmobile, ATV, or side-by-side.

    Furthermore, I’ve driven all styles of the Can-Am Spyder (RS, ST, RT). For me, the Can-Am Spyder is a nasty conglomeration of the worst traits of different vehicles. It costs as much a convertible car, yet doesn’t offer the safety of a car. It weighs as much as a large touring motorcycle, but can’t offer the performance of a Goldwing. The merit of the Can-Am is that it allows people either afraid or incapable of operating a traditional motorcycle the panoramic view and a bit of the performance that only motorcycles can provide.

    Polaris’s concept (as well as the T-rex) provide close to motorcycle performance with a familiar automotive style cockpit at a reasonable price. By design, it’ll be far safer than a Can-Am Spyder.

    I think it’s cool and I really hope they are able to produce it. Getting it certified as a motorcycle is a major hurdle.

  9. Jason says

    As a Brammo employee this machine is great news to me. Obviously, an electric version would up Brammo’s alley.

    I totally agree with Adam regarding the Spyder. I used to work for a BRP dealership, they are lame to drive and a bigger pain to work on!

    • Jason says

      I guess I shouldn’t say they are “lame” to drive. They are very “different” to drive if you are used to riding on 2 wheels.

      Always take one to a BRP dealership to get worked on as they are difficult to service etc.

  10. Grey says

    If they had just made this a Low down four wheeler utilising their regular side by side components it would be worth it. But laws are so muddy on what’s a car, bike and atv it couldn’t be registered for the road… which is crap considering the ktm xbow is considered a car, when it’s more of a side by side and the T-rex is a bike because it’s just a kit over a bike frame.

  11. MikevC says

    I’ve been riding since I was 15 but my current toy is a Blackjack Zero trike. My dad drove a JAP engined Morgan in his day. I’m heartened to see developments in 2F1R, i.e. reverse trike layout in recent years. Arguments amongst ourselves and within bureaucracies as to whether these vehicles are bikes or cars are moot. When I started building my Zero it was going to registered as a bike. A year and a half later it was deemed to be a car, partly due to the introduction of the Can-Am Spyder to this country (New Zealand). To me that’s not the point. The format’s logic lies in its innate qualities when compared to 4-wheeled tin boxes: lighter weight, fewer components, lower polar moments and potential aerodynamic benefits. It’s all about thinking outside the box, the kind of thinking we can all do with right now. Without having studied Polaris’ patent application I’m slightly bemused that they would seek to patent aspects which are quite plainly in the public domain: seating layout, drive train solutions, etc., etc.., which have all been done before. I’m also appalled that they seem to be seeking to preclude others from adding their input to developments.

    • Tanshanomi says

      I believe this is a design patent, not a utility patent. A design patent protects the general appearance and overall configuration of a product without necessarily claiming patent on the function or technology behind it.

  12. Roy says

    Why wouldn’t they use the motor from Motus, get a simpler, lighter motorcycle engine and, in doing so, provide support to the motorcycle industry in this country/continent. Motus is a longitudinal V4 with considerable horsepower and a wide open platform for modification. The GM ecomotor seems like a strange choice and very unappealing to one in the motorcycle community.

    • Wave says

      The GM Ecotec will cost them probably a third of the price of the Motus or less, and it has full service support in tens of thousands of dealerships around the world. Pretty hard to argue with if you want to sell to a global market.

  13. Walt says

    The 2.2 first-year Ecotec in my car has now gone 115K without a single motor issue. Satisfactory power (140 in my version–more available in later models) and chain cam drive so no timing belts to mess with. Doubt a semi-open three wheeler would ever pass 100K miles, though.

  14. Tanshanomi says

    I have to give Polaris props for being the most consistently bullish powersports firms out there. They seem to be the manufacturer most optimistic about the commercial viability of recreational sport vehicles.

  15. mark444 says

    Price Guesstimates????? $25k – $30k……..???
    If so, alot of $$$ to pay for a “Toy” with not much weather protection……….??

  16. Nortley says

    A couple of old friends who can no longer ride two wheels looked at sidecars, trikes, conversions, Morgan repros, and custom work before buying a nice used BMW ragtop. From a mile away I can see that chrome smirk topped by two big grins coming at me.

  17. Scott says

    I think a design like this makes a lot of sense for a irrational reasons. When I was visiting my brother, we saw a Spyder and he commented: “Something like that looks like a lot of fun . . . but I’d be afraid people would see me as a motorcycle wannabe who needs training wheels.”

    With something like this, there would be less of a perception that it’s a ‘motorcycle for sissies’ and the stigma that comes with that.

    Like I say, it’s irrtional, but it’s a marketing reality.

  18. Mike says

    On the car/motorcycle note. For licensing purposes in Washington state it’s neither. We have a separate training and test for trikes/sidecars. Anything with three wheels falls into that category. I think driving a sidecar or a Spyder is very different than riding an mp3 but it they are in the same class. I can not legally drive a sidecar outfit with my motorcycle license. Both are covered under the insurance exception though, in that vehicle insurance is not required for motorcycles or three wheeled vehicles in WA.

  19. Tin Man says

    I have rode my Brothers Can Am and I remember thinking this thing would be better with a steering wheel to hang on to, Bravo Polaris!! The only drawback would be the price and the use of an OVER POWERED engine, The original Can Am engine would be more than enough for this application. 200HP will just get the Government looking for a way to restrict the poor thing to keep it out of the hands of untrained/clueless riders.

  20. Adam says

    “This thing doesn’t know what it wants to be a slow overweight boring T-rex or an uncomfortable run-about for retirement villages…..fail”

    Campagna states the dry weight of a T-Rex at 1,040 lbs. The dry weight of a Spyder ST comes in at 955 lbs.

    Slow & overweight compared to a T-Rex? You have no idea of the weight of this machine. Let’s say it does come in at 1,400 lbs. Assuming Polaris does use the Ecotec LE5 engine, you’ve still got a 2.4 liter 170 hp engine turning the rear wheel. That’s A LOT of horsepower for a 1,400 lb machine.

    What you haven’t considered is that the Ecotec won’t have to rev to 7,000 RPM to get into the power band – it’ll make well over 100 lb-ft of torque not far from idle.

    Then you’ve got the purpose chassis and frame, rather than trying to accommodate a ZX-14 rear suspension. Campagna reuses as many components from the ZX-14 as possible.

    With modern family coming standard with 200 hp and easily boasting up to 300 hp, it’s easy see less than 200 hp as lackluster. When you throw anything over 100 hp at a 1000 lb frame, you’ve got a serious performance machine.

    I think it’ll be very comparable to a T-Rex and with Polaris manufacturing it, far more attainable.

    • Weight weenie says

      “When you thow anything over 100hp at a 1000lb frame, you’ve got a serious performance…DEFICIT

      I must have missed this site being renamed….Sensible Vehicle news. In case you haven’t noticed 600cc sport bikes have 135+hp on 360lb frames. 10lbs/hp will get you 14 sec. 1/4miles, run of the mill performance..in 1972!

  21. Walt says

    Not really a car, so I suppose this machine escapes the DOT rules for air bags and other safety devices, which only add weight, cost and complexity. Oh, and maybe save your life. Anybody know what safety gear might be included?

  22. Paul Crowe says

    It’s amazing how many comments here want to stress that this is a car, but to what end? Coming up with a new product, especially a motor vehicle, is hard enough without inviting all of the extra regulation and restrictions this would have to deal with if this were classified as a car.

    If those of you convinced it’s a car managed to force it into that category, and perhaps convince the DOT that it’s a car, it’s unlikely this will ever see the light of day on our roads and how would we benefit from that? What would you accomplish by inviting the government to force the airbags, bumpers and passing of crash tests and who knows what else onto a vehicle that will have a limited market at best. Winning the “it’s a car” argument has consequences and the consequences are this never makes it to the showroom.

    Isn’t it a lot better to welcome a vehicle that gives us another choice, whether or not you want one yourself, from a company that seems to be a bright spot in the powersports industry, creating opportunities for Polaris and all of the aftermarket companies that will surely add their components to this vehicle? Wouldn’t it be nice to see something new for people to consider? If this is classified as a motorcycle, we’ll more likely see it on the road and all of us can make our own personal choices about whether we want one or not.

    The beauty of a free market is your ability to say “No thanks” if you don’t want something while leaving it there for others to say “Yes” if they do. Everyone wins.

    • Rick says

      Thanks Paul for saying what I was thinking but not sure how to put into words. Let’s keep government intrusion into our lives at a minimum.

    • racer-esq. says

      I think that there is no doubt that this would handle better with two rear wheels (although I am sure it will be great as it is). The question is whether, if someone started making a two rear wheel kit, the government would treat these vehicles, legally sold as motorcycles, as illegal cars, or still consider them motorcycles. Is the two rear wheel kit something that Polaris could sell for, wink-wink, track use only, as some motorcycle companies do now with exhausts and other performance parts?

      • Wave says

        Apparently the US-spec Ariel Atom now has a 2.4 litre Honda engine. Priced from $56,480. If a stripped-down four wheeler is what you want, then it’s already on the market.

  23. racer-esq. says

    Wow, Paul, this is a huge scoop. Did you find this directly at uspto.gov? If so I hope you get credit from all the other blogs.

    Based on my understanding of engineering and vehicle dynamics there is no technical reason to make a three wheel vehicle. For example, the optimal engine layout for a small sports “car” like this would be mid-engine, but because it only has one rear wheel Polaris had to make it front engine to improve stability. In a world governed by physics performance vehicles would have two or four wheels. But we live in a world governed by laws, and there is a huge legal reason to make a sit-down reverse trike. The federal government and, as you pointed out, every state, treats a reverse trike or any other three wheel vehicle as a motorcycle (traditionally because of motorcycles with sidecars). That means that the weight and development costs related to various automotive safety standards can be avoided. Even the original Morgan reverse trike was designed for legal reasons – to avoid the much higher road taxes that Britain places on cars, compared to motorcycles.

    Sure a Caterham Super Seven or a Ariel Atom is a great car. But if you ever want to drive them on the road there are a ton of hurdles. And the cost is $50K+ for kits that still require assembly.

    This, on the other hand, will be as easy to register, finance and insure as any new Harley or Honda. The huge question is the price, but given that they are using the dirt cheap 2.4 liter GM Ecotec (instead of, for example, the 2.0 liter Ecotec turbo or one of the high output motorcycle engines) I think that they are targeting a low price point. The Can-Am Spyder starts at $16,699, so I could see this coming in at just under $20K.

    The question will be whether, at $20K, the government will start to consider whether a sit-down trike should be regulated as a car. The T-Rex and Morgan can fall under the radar because of their cost and rarity, but an ultra-light sports car for $20K (if that is roughly the starting price) will be a game changer.

    I assume that the threat of future regulation, and the potential liability of making something that is like a “car”, but does not have the safety features of a car, are among the reasons why VW abandoned its similar GX3 reverse trike concept ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_GX3 ).

    I hope that the government stays out of this, at least as long as the trikes are performance oriented, like this. If the Chinese start using the three wheel loophole to import unsafe, poorly made Reliant Robin-like trikes then that will be a problem.

    • says

      I also remember that due to a number of law suits relating to the three wheeled atv’s that Honda etc made years ago… that any talk of three wheelers send alarm bells ringing in the legal departments of any big ‘wealthy’ company.

    • Wave says

      Even if it does sell for $20k, that doesn’t make it a particularly cheap toy. The lack of weather protection and luggage space effectively prevents you from using it as a daily driver, so it will be bought purely as a weekend toy. That means that you’re going to need another car as well, so essentially anyone looking to buy this could also buy a sports car costing $30k if it can be used every day.

  24. says

    Less than 1500 lbs with three wheels and its classed as a motorcycle. Over that weight and its deemed a car. I know they will be under 1500 or they would have a hard time legalising it.

    • racer-esq. says

      The 1,500 pound limit seems to be a California state rule. Federal law only requires three or less wheels:


      (search for the word motorcycle in the link above to find the definition)

      The federal motor vehicle laws preempt state laws, so California cannot ban this vehicle, even if it is over 1,500 pounds. However, if it is over 1,500 pound California can probably deny it the car pool lane privileges that California grants motorcycles. I am hoping that this is not over 1,500 pounds.

  25. FormerTurbineGuy says


    They are going to loose a lot of buyers with the Government Motors Engine.

    Should have gone with an Eco-Boost, Still time to reconsider Polaris…

    • racer-esq. says

      I do wonder what the weight of the 2.4 liter engine is compared to other engines Polaris could have chosen, maybe it’s not so bad. I have to think that Polaris is using this engine for a very aggressive price point. Sure at $30K I would expect better than the GM 2.4 liter engine. But for $20K or less I would rather take the 2.4 than a shortcut somewhere else.

    • Anthony says

      I would preorder one right now If I could. So I don’t think they will be losing money by going with this “Government Motors Engine” .

      and to the people that say this is just an “expensive toy” I daily my Yamaha R6 everyday. I’ll be doing the same thing with this.

      I promise you if this thing makes it to market I will be owning one within a year.

  26. says

    I am a trike rider. For over 12 years.
    I notice you never mention the Stallion made by Motor Trike . Of Texas.
    This is a partial,enclosed trike with a Ford motor up front. The rear wheels are powered directly from the motor and it is steered with a wheel. Has automatic tranny and even AC.,
    It is registered even in the PITA. State of Conn as a motorcycle. I hope they pull this off. As said it will open a lot of doors for cheap transportation .

  27. Dano says

    All great comments and insights but knowing their thoughts with regards to the target market would be great. They must have done some sort of survey or study, one would think.
    I don’t get the feeling that it is us though, two wheels seem to be our main interest.
    I look forward to seeing them out on the road.
    Maybe there will be a division established that can run at Lime Rock or New Jersey Motorsports Park, Barber, Mid Ohio…that would be fun.

  28. Paul says

    I think it will be built from experience from the Polaris design team. Polaris has been building some excellent machines lately with their ATV line and their Victory and Indian Motorcycles. It only makes sense that they will produce some sort of street legal trike. Makes more sense to build 3 wheels with less regulation on safety features. Not that it wouldn’t be safe with it’s cage like frame structure, traction control and abs brakes.