dhc6twinotter

Personally, I’m not a fan of these motor/hub combos, but the lights are intriguing. I wonder if this will be a new type of plug, or if we’re looking at some sort of fiber optic?

Too many cars. The Volvo is the only thing that interests me at the moment.

I like that idea. I have lots of those WIP projects that never seem to get finished. 😂

This looks fantastic! The paneling flows really nicely. I love the details, and the radiators are a nice touch.

8043 PF Excavator 8258 Crane Truck 42009 Mobile Crane 42043 Arocs All the above sets have a lot of functions crammed into small spaces. 8043 is one of most dense builds out there. 8258 had the most gears of any Technic set, only to be surpassed by 42009. 8258 also had the vertical gearbox, which I found quite interesting. The Arocs was just beautiful with a lot of authentic functions. I would much rather have one of these sets than any of the newer Technic sets. It seems many of the newer sets are unnecessarily large and just end up being quite a boring build with lots of pins and beam stacking. That’s not fun to me. I would much rather have a smaller, well thought out set with a lot of functions. Honorable mention goes to 8109 Flatbed Truck. I bought this when I first got back into Technic because it was on sale. Turns out there is some very clever build techniques used in the set. The way the forks flipped out was brilliant, and the lowering suspension was a function I didn’t even know the set had till I was building it. It’s a brilliant set for its price point.

I may be wrong, but It looks like it’s being used for return-to-center steering. Some people did that before the servo motors were introduced.

This is a really fantastic model! I love how you think outside the box with your builds, and this is no exception. You’ve managed to pack a lot of functions into a really tight spot. I built a 3CX years ago, although I didn’t have the side-shift arm, thumb, or 4-speed gearbox. I’m currently working on a smaller scale PU version now. I think backhoes and road graders are probably some of the most challenging machines to build out of Technic. There’s just no room for anything. You’ve pulled it off nicely.

I wonder if the truck has a low loader trailer, or if the truck itself is a low loader? A tipper with a trailer would be neat, but that also means less parts usage for the truck and excavator. A hub with USB-C sounds very intriguing. Hopefully it will have more than 4 ports.

The truck and excavator is the only set that interests me. Cars are good for body panels, so it’ll be interesting to see what new panels or panels in new colors appear. I was kinda hoping we would see an Aston Martin Valkyre, which I find far more interesting than a McLaren. Nonetheless, I’m excited to see what new parts appear.

It’s hard to believe, but it’s been over 10 years since the 42009 mobile crane was released. It might be time for another mobile crane. I’m still waiting on a proper flagship tow truck and backhoe, but I wouldn’t mind another mobile crane as well. I also think an PU John Deere forwarder would be a very nice and very playable set.

I’m totally guessing here, but I think the excavator will be pneumatic, and the truck might use a single large LA.

That would be amazing. I’d love to see the truck at the same scale as the Mack Anthem too, but not sure that’s possible with 1100 pieces. I think so, especially with it just being a cab-over truck with no sleeper.

The Volvo FMX and electric excavator are really the only ones that sound interesting to me. I don’t care that much for cars, except for the parts they may have.

I’ve briefly tried a few configurations, and it is very tight with the 107 tires, especially with AWD, pendular front axle, and fake engine. I think the best spot for the battery boxes would be down low, between the axles. This gets weight towards the front, and makes battery access easier. The downside is the wheelbase is maybe 1 or 2 studs too long (compare to a 3CX anyway), but maybe that is acceptable. Motor placement would be a bigger challenge. If a fake engine isn’t needed, then at least two motors could be placed under the hood. Otherwise, it would be difficult, especially with any sort of structural rigidity. The new, larger frames may help here though. If TLG were to do it, I think it would be better to either make a larger PU hub with eight outputs, or offer a larger version of the Claas tires (like the 120 mentioned). This thread makes me want to have another crack at a PU JCB backhoe…

I’d love to see a proper flagship RC backhoe. It could be done with 6 or 7 motors and a gearbox. Playability would be fine if the gearbox were designed properly. For example: If 7 motors are used: Gearbox position 1: boom rotate, boom up/down, stick up/down, bucket curl Gearbox position 2: loader bucket up/down, loader bucket curl, left stabilizer, right stabilizer. 4 motors for gearbox, plus a drive motor, steering motor, and gearbox selector motor. 7 motors total. It could also be done with 6 motors and a 3 position gearbox, if the wheels were driven through the gearbox (which I’m not a fan of). If TLG built such a flagship set, it’s probably one of the few sets I’d be willing to pay $500+ for. That or a proper RC tow truck.

I’d like to see a front engine car for a change. Maybe a Ferrari 812 GTS or something. Or TLG could do an old classic. An old Mercedes gullwing with silver metallic panels would be quite stellar.

TechnicBricks is also saying there will be a 4x4 Mercedes Zetros of some sort. "Today another set from the LEGO Technic 2H2021 wave - 42129 "4x4 Mercedes-Benz Zetros Tri..". This one will arrive in August, with a price tag should be in the range of 289,99€ - 299,99€." https://www.facebook.com/TechnicBRICKs/posts/3598979400180252

This sounds like a great contest! Once again, I’m in the middle of another move, so not sure I’ll have time to participate. Sounds great though! Thanks Jim and Milan for hosting another contest!

I really like building things in modules, and modular builds make it easier to do exploded views. I did this on my Case Steiger that I built years ago. That was my first MOC since my dark ages, and the modular aspect of it make it still one of my favorites.

I’ve built pressure sensors using the PF switches, but I haven’t tried it with PU. I think the PU forces sensor connected to a pneumatic cylinder would work well for this.

I disagree with this. This is a Technic. Technic is supposed to be about the technical functions of a build. An entry that has complicated functions and is well constructed is more awesome to me than something that is poorly built but looks good. When I vote, I vote based on technical complexity and how well something is constructed. There is a certain amount of skill that is required to make an entry look good with Technic, and I do account for that when I vote, but technical complexity is far more important to me. If future entries were voted on by only people who mostly frequent the Technic forum rather than Eurobricks wide voting, I think our results would be very different.

If we limited voting to members who primarily post in the Technic forum, I think our results would be very different. Those of us who build with Technic on a regular basis understand the complexity and amount of thought that goes into a Technic MOC or entry. People who don’t build with Technic are more likely to vote based on appearance rather than technical complexity. Personally, I have always voted in favor of complexity and functions rather than appearance, but I tend to think I’m in the minority there.

What is the difference between the two Olive blocks? I think the fact I have to ask that shows it’s not as simple as you make it out to be. I tried to put together a program for a PU backhoe. Creating the button layout was pretty easy, but putting together the code blocks sucked. There was no explanation for what each block was, and I ended up googling a bunch of stuff. I was trying to create flashing lights, a multiple position gearbox, and a way to change the color of the LED on the hub to correspond with the position of the gearbox. None of it worked. I probably could’ve eventually figured it out, but I spend all day in front of a computer at work, and the last thing I want to do is to go home and spend hours on the computer again. That’s easy. The PF example is running all motors off one battery box. The PF example will allow you to add more motors through port stacking. PU won’t let you do that. The PF example will let you add lights. The PU example has no more ports, so can’t do that. The PF example will allow you to use extension cables for larger MOCs. The PU example won’t let you do that. PU extension cables don’t exist. The PF example will let you add as many motors and lights as you want to a battery box (provided the overcurrent protection doesn’t kick in). PU will only allow 4 things plugged in. Nothing more. PF has switches available. PU does not. PF has backwards compatibility with the old 9V stuff, particularly speed controllers. PU does not. PF had a rechargeable battery pack. PU does not (unless you want to count the $250 Spike Prime hub). The only benefit that PU has is the ability to program motors. I have never built a MOC that needed programming though. PF servo motors and the ocasional stepper mechanism has solved all my needs. PU will also allow up to 16 individually controlled items (lights, motors) in a MOC (with four hubs), whereas PF was limited to 8 channels. There are advantages to both, and I do plane on using PU for some things I have in the works, but as a whole, PF was a much better, complete system.

I dunno…I’m a bit skeptical of the accuracy of this. That’s a lot of space sets for one year. It’s a big departure from the typical cars and construction equipment we usually get.

It seems LEGO is thinning out the PU items available for purchase on their site. The LED light, XL motor, and m are no longer listed on their PU page. The Large Hub and medium angular motor are now 20% off. Even a lot of the PU related reviews on TLG website are bad. Only the train stuff seems to be getting decent reviews. It would be neat if TLG offered a RF remote and receiver (either as part of a BB or a separate device). They need to overhaul PU or replace it with something different.