And from how you describe it you probably have a decent understanding of the dangers involved with the trike... My issue is with many of these companies playing a numbers game of "2% safer therefore it's safe" numbers game. While yes, a reverse trike is able to accept a bit more sideways force, ultimately the single wheel remains the tip point with the peak force in the middle.... or you know... where you sit... so regardless of the configuration a tip means a bad time.

Everyone is welcome to ride / drive what they like but the marketing should be transparent - and education should be required.

That is definitely the direction they all should be going in. The tragedy is that most salesmen and indeed most of these companies push the narrative of "safer/easier to ride than a motorcycle" but are only looking for that easy sale. Educated drivers help a lot. That said: it's still a dangerous design... but at least an educated driver should understand the risks involved.

It's not a new design. Leaning is attempting to leverage a concept from 2 wheeled physics to bandaid their poor design (all three wheelers):

Leaning shifts a center of gravity and leverages that force. Except 3 wheels receive different levels of force and cannot distribute it evenly... because it is a triangle. Also leaning doesn't do much for the passenger which is still elevated and raises the center of gravity. These don't just flip- they tumble.

This. Yes. Both are still dangerous- rear more so but ultimately at speed both will want to roll and flip. The results are not pleasant.

It's almost as if physics are physics and 3 wheels simply aren't stable at speed eh? Good to see someone else speaking up about it.

It's a safety issue. 4 wheels are stable, 2 wheels while having a learning curve are stable and require additional training and (in most places) additional licensing. Both of these things are acceptably 'safe.' The biggest draw of these 3 wheel vehicles is that they require no additional licensing. The assumption is they are just like 4 wheel vehicles... except they aren't. Three wheeled vehicles aren't stable in motion - especially when maneuvering. This is a physics problem - and most drivers untrained will walk themselves right into the problem and run the risk of injuring not only themselves and others. I have a lot of EMTs in my family and I have lost count of how many times I've heard stories of how these things will kill and maim their passengers. Doubly so for the ones that have two seats. If they required additional licenses, sure go to town- you know the risks but as it is right now... it's a danger that is downplayed and sold to people who are just completely unaware.

Do I think they are ugly? Yes- that's my opinion... but that aside they are a danger to the driver and others. Any "countermeasures" that are introduced to help solve a physics problem that don't involve an extra wheel aren't actually solving it.

I have this crazy concept for a safety system... it's a fourth wheel. 3 wheeled vehicles are dangerous and what's worse is they are billed as safer than motorcycles which is simply not true. It doesn't matter if 2 are in front or in back.

[personal bias follows] They are fucking ugly as hell: it's like someone is trying to dress up that three wheeler you had as a kid before you could ride a bike and sell it back to you.

Edit: It would appear I and others have upset the marketing team. I'm not sorry. These things kill people.

No, see- they already know that the votes to convict were miscounted. They are currently on a crusade to overthrow it 😅

Best we can do is an orange jumpsuit.

I love angry comedians... but you weren't kidding: That was a brutal watch. He makes some decent points but he presents it like Jim Cramer crossed with a 10 year old making fart jokes.

What precisely am I contradicting? Both of those statements are accurate.

As I asserted earlier - you are heavily downplaying the efforts of someone working in the same field for the same amount of time and treating it differently. That simply isn't a fair assessment and is being used to sell a statement that is a half truth. Both individuals have something to show for their time investment that highlights their value. One has a degree which, for the reasons you have specified, is valuable - one has 4 years of experience in the field highlighting they are competent enough and skilled enough to be an asset to the same company for 4 years. To head off the followup: does every worker at a job have 100% "hire this man" energy? Certainly not. Conversely does every graduate have what it takes to succeed in a field? Absolutely not. With that in mind both individuals applying to a new job with the aforementioned experience/degree will, and should be, weighted similarly.

With regard to your electrician example: a licensed electrician is just that. When you hire one do you care if he got a degree in EE prior to getting his license? The result is what matters. This is the point I keep driving at. If I hire a lawyer, I could care less what is hanging on his office wall - I care that he passed the bar and wins consistently. There are many paths to the same result... don't simply scorn one because it is a path you wouldn't take.