Henry Ford's Quadricycle Driven | Video Review | ZEEGNITION
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 08. 2024
- We go vintage and check out the 1896 the Henry Ford's Quadricycle and get some in sight from our Editor in Chief Adil Jal Darukhanawala about this iconic car.
More car and bike news, views and reviews on www.zeegnition....
Also join the conversation:
Facebook: / zeegnition
Twitter: / zeegnition - Auta a dopravní prostředky
The Quadricycle is missing the household, electric doorbell! Both very nice replicas.
How much do they cost? Beautiful engineering!
Cool video. Can not imagine going from horse and buggies to seeing these things go. Crazy times.
wow you guys have done it again another home run
A great little film.
A video of my LEGO MOC of Henry Ford's Quadricycle - czcams.com/video/L9qZX2fBqVg/video.html
I ENJOYED !!
can i buy 1886 benz? how much it is
Hi, how much it cost for a replica of this little Ford ? Whrere you can by it ? Have a nice day. ¡
how do I get one of each
look like bicycle wheel
Screw Him the Ford is Superior in design
In geometry, three points define a plane. Four is redundant. A three legged table is more stable than a four legged table.
The Reliant Robin is backwards. Two wheels front, one rear is far more stable.
I know, that is why I said the robin is backwards. If it had been made (but wasn't) with two wheels in front, but one in the back THEN it would be more stable.
I agree completely.
@@ronarmstrong835 ,that's great for something that doesn't have to move over uneven ground.three wheel vehicles are known now for flipping, because of cars like this.benz next cars had four wheels...now that being said,as a carpenter, I can tell that three legged tables get thier stability from only three points of contact on the floor,so there is less chance of rocking from a short table leg....but four points of ground contact will not allow for tipping...
Very nice, but you should state that this is a replica. There is only 1 original and it is in the Henry Ford Museum.
Some people just don't *listen!* - it was clearly stated more than once that they were replica(r)s.