Talk Morgan Forums Morgan Sports Cars Morgan Three Wheeler & Super 3 M3W vs Blackjack Zero

BLACKJACK ZERO versus MORGAN 3 WHEELER

I’ve driven over 15,000 miles in a 5 speed Morgan 3 wheeler but I now pilot a 2008 Blackjack Zero. Having done 4000 miles in the Blackjack Zero here’s my comparison of the two three-wheelers.
I’ll assume that the Morgan is more than familiar to you. The Blackjack Zero is a rather rare 3 wheeler - only19 were ever built. Blackjack Cars was established in Cornwall in 1996 by Richard Oakes (Aston Martin, Ford, JCB and a graduate of the RCA). The company developed two cars for kit build: the first was the Avion.
The styling of the two front wheel and single rear-wheeled Avion is based on the pre-war Morgan three-wheeler racing cars. It was launched in 1996 and continued in production until 2004, during which time 69 were built. It used Citroën 2CV mechanical parts and engine mounted on a steel chassis of Blackjack's own design, all housed in an open-top doorless fibreglass body.
In 2001 Richard Oakes started work on the Zero. The chassis, fibreglass body mouldings and suspension were all produced by Blackjack Cars - the air-cooled V twin engine came from Motor Guzzi motorcycles.
So my Blackjack Zero is powered by a pre-2003 1100cc Moto Guzzi V twin which puts out about 75BHP and pulls a car weighing about 400kgs wet. This translates into around 187 BHP per tonne.

So the main differences in the cars?

1. Front wheel drive. The Blackjack Zero (BJZ) is front wheel drive and it’s a revelation compared to my experience of the M3W. Cornering is precise with absolutely no slip from the rear. It also means no need for a bevel box, drive belt, or rear wheel sprocket…all of which can present “issues” for the M3W.

2. Compensator. On the BJZ the Moto Guzzi V twin bolts straight onto a VW Beetle gearbox with drive shafts for the front wheels…so no need for a compensator. As I’m not an engineer I’m not sure why the M3W needs a compensator (torque spikes or something), but as a M3W owner I knew this was another source of potential problems.

3. Noise and vibration. We all love V twins because of their historic noise; but we want to drive 300 miles on a trip and reach for a drink at the end of a great day’s motoring without shaking hands and bleeding ears. My M3W’s never made my ears bleed, but one never escaped the bevel box whine and the thumping exhaust. The cockpit of the M3W is never still (although vibration was just part of the M3W experience and never really bothered me). The BJZ runs its twin exhausts from the engine under the car so you don’t have a silencer just under your right elbow and ear. Its cockpit doesn’t shake (far fewer moving parts, I guess) so on long trips I find the Blackjack Zero less tiring.

4. Fuel gauge. A small one this, but the BJZ has a fuel gauge that works! Enough said - but I will confess that M3W habits die hard, so whenever the BJZ tripmeter reads 180 miles I pause at the next fuel (and comfort!) stop.

5. Cockpit space. The M3W cockpit is fine - I just added a piece of foam on the driver’s sidewall where the frame cut into my thigh and found the car very comfortable. The BJZ has no rear drive train to accommodate so the cockpit feels positively spacious. In addition, tilting seats give access to a boot space which is fully enclosed so packing doesn’t need to be so precise. The BJZ also has a storage area in the front that can take two helmets.

6. Ride. I feel comfortable in the BJZ up to 70mph, after that it feels like it might take off. I recall the M3W didn’t have this issue - probably due to its extra c. 150kgs weight.

7. Styling. The M3W styling still has the edge for me - but the BJZ continues to grow on me as the addition of Brooklands screens and a Moto Lita steering wheel has helped balance its 1920’s Morgan style rear end in favour of its more futuristic front.

8. Grip.The BJZ rides on 205/40 ZR 17 tyres. This means that I probably have 4 times as much rubber in contact with the ground than the M3W and, coupled with front wheel drive, this probably goes a long way to explaining the planted feel when cornering.

9. Engine. I just want one that works and am not that interested in the pros and cons of pushrods etc. But I do love the V shape of a twin piston and think that it is the iconic front end for a teardrop shaped three wheeler. Both the M3W and BJZ share V twin front ends…but I’m biased in favour of Moto Guzzi (I had three of their motorcycles before switching to 3 wheels) and my M3W S&S let me down badly on a French autouroute with less than 7000 miles running.

10. Cost. Let’s just say that I swapped my M3W for my BJZ and have the same smile when driving. And some £20k in loose change to fund more trips….

Summary. I loved my Morgan 3 Wheelers and, had it not been for reliability and quality issues forcing me away from the marque, I would still be driving one. But I’m delighted to have stumbled across my very rare Blackjack Zero number 8.

(Posting pictures here defeats me so if you want to see what my BJZ looks like try: https://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C1086325)

the Guzzi twin is a very different configuration than the HD or S&S twins. The second group of engines have a surge of power in each cycle. Probably the best way to describe it was when I was on a paddle wheel on Loch Loman which had a somewhat similar two cylinder lay out. You could feel the boat surge as it went through each power cycle... sort of a SPLASH SPLASH splash splash splash splash… The compensator is meant to ease that surge during each power cycle.

If you were to slow down an HD engine you would actual hear THUMP THUMP pause pause pause pause THUMP THUMP pause pause pause pause

A cool write up Nick and I'm glad you're enjoying the Zero

For me, many of your comparative "negatives" are why I love the M3W:

The S&S character with it's distinctive beat and even the vibration
Rear wheel drive
The ride, performance and handling - I know it's fine up to 115mph and out corners most cars on the road. You do need to build trust in the front end which will understeer but either ease out of the throttle and back of the lock or, more fun, dab the loud pedal and power round.
Cockpit space is fine for me but then I'm typically driving solo

Agreed a working fuel gauge would be nice but I've now got so used to it's "quirks".

The compensator is to protect the gearbox from the torque spikes and in the main the Centa holds up OK. There have been some issues and I suspect there may have been a bad batch of rolllers involved.

At the end of the day, whatever you have the key thing is to get out and drive it. I'm sure you get (almost?) as much attention in the BJZ as you did in the Mog

Hopefully our path's will cross again

I would buy a blackjack today if I could find a VW engine one as seen at stonelee some years ago , I thought it looked great , I do have a morgan and working now on a JZR again guzzi engine , the JZR is a cheap kit but I think fun and value for money , I wont be going over 70 mph

Another interesting fact is that the S&S is a 56 degree and the Harley is a 45 degree, both of which cannot be perfectly balanced through the power band. The Guzzi on the other hand is a 90 degree v-twin and it is perfectly balanced internally for a MUCH SMOOTHER overall power band with greatly reduced torque pulses.

As with the Pembleton V Sport. Has anyone driven it and the M3W for comparison?

Here you go

this is what I will try and find next

What’s that engine?

“Styling” on this is an acquired taste though! My vote goes to the Pembleton although I suspect it is 20cm too narrow in the cockpit and the rear scuttle is 20cm too low...

The Guzzi on the other hand is a 90 degree v-twin and it is perfectly balanced internally for a MUCH SMOOTHER overall power band with greatly reduced torque pulses...……….. this is true and I can never understand why JAP did not keep to this angle , the engine in the blackjack im looking for is VW and I saw it a the Malvern show not stoneliegh (thanks for the correction)

Thanks Craig. Was it supercharged? Very interesting. Has anyone tried a BMW Boxer engine in the Morgan?

I think there were probably two reasons why most V twin motorcycle engines were narrow angle Vs. When they were developed the power and RPM were much lower so the vibration was not felt so much, also a narrow V gives a more compact engine. Don't forget that people were generally smaller than today and without some clever design a 90° V twin would have required a longer frame. The first motorcycles were really based on beefed up bicycle style frames with an engine in the middle. Many of the very first even had pedals like a moped that were used mainly to get the engine started but also so that one could use "light pedal assistance" on the hills



1913 Peugeot

1400 Guzzi should be amazing

Not a popular choice it seems. Have heard a rumour that MMC are looking at the Boxer engine for new M3W though, in keeping with their continued use of BMW powerplants. If so can see V twin re-sale values soaring.

I have a boxer engined Cayman and its a peach.
A bit surprised they are planning it for the M3W thought, it's large and heavy compared to the V twin.
From a design point of view, an engine designed for a mid-engined 4 wheel car is a long way from a motorcycle engine.

I think they are talking the boxer flat twin from the bike , grinnel (grinal) has already built at least one which I have seen , the most interesting v twin I have had was a matchless silver arrow , I have had a few and like them even Harley pre amf , shovels are a poor engine compared the there earlier models

Very much enjoyed your write-up Nick. Although I had a M3W on order before they first came out I never took delivery for a variety of reasons. It did give me the three wheeler bug though and I subsequently owner a 1920 Darmont then a 1934 Matchless MX2 Supersport.

The bug now firmly implanted I decided I wanted a performance 3W and went down the route of a modern re-incarnation of an F2 Sports and bought a substantially assembled Malone Skunk. This is an equally rare vehicle as the Blackjack with I think maybe less than 10 vehicles assembled by the Malone father and son team in Devon, and a similar number of kits being sold.

My particular vehicle has a Yamaha Fazer 1000 engine tuned to produce around 155bhp and the current weight, unpainted but with just about all finished components on-boeard, is 370kg. It's rear wheel drive with output from the engine going through a Quaife reverse box, then a short prop shaft to a bevel box and finally I chain from this bevel box to rear wheel. I hope to have it finished by the summer and will try and provide an honest appreciation of it then.

Cheers

Thank you for posting the photos Gambalunga; thank you US cousins for the quick education on torque differences between the Moto Guzzi and other V twins and thanks for alerting me to the Malone Skunk Philippo! And agree Red Leader, not "negatives" about the M3W...just differences!

The engineering on the Blackjack is superb but the aesthetics are somewhat of an acquired taste. The M3W is beautiful. That's why we can forgive them virtually anything.