MOC Daf LF concept

[shimon]

This is my latest and most difficult project: Daf truck

it has many features and lots of SNOT.

took me 2 weeks to design, it is really my limit of functions for such small scale

it was very hard to put all the pneumatics inside but, everything works great!

Truck features:

PF drive

PF steering

Automatic pump switched via clutch

full interior

rotating boom(manually, no place for a motor!)

pneumatic outriggers

raising arm

extending arm

air tank

NOTE, the arm doesnt look so good because i rushed with it and some parts could be replaced

like: the rack for the new technic(i dont have 1) and the hook for the metal(cant find)

and finally i didnt put anything in the back because i think it will be too much heavy and some details wont be noticeable, or its just lack of time

i think the best part is the cabin because what made me build this truck is a use for the new windscreen .

here are the pictures : i worked really hard on this one

video is in the comments

Edited August 17, 2010 by shimon

[Jurgen Krooshoop]

This is very nice, I'll be looking foreward to your video. It's always difficult to fit all the technic stuff inside a model and still make it look good. And the smaller the model is, the more difficult it gets. And you did a good job making this look very good.

[grohl]

Love this. I cannot wait to see the video.

[Zerobricks]

This really looks awesome! The details, compactness and color combination!

[lcs]

Wow, this is awesome. Very compact, great detail and tons of function for the size.

[shimon]

thanks you guys very much!

here is the video its not in the best quality but i dont have another camera for now..

i really try to make my models in the best way they can be built

your support really inspires me

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7kXOTHjEBg

[efferman]

absolutely awesome. i love the design of the truck.

[Bricksonwheels]

Really good and solid design.

[Paul B Technic]

This looks really good. It has a real "Model Team" look to it and it appears to work really well.

Paul

[Sam42]

Nice detailing and function, like an advanced, rc model team version pf 8868 air claw rig.

Great use of the new style windscreen! i'd been thinking about using them myself in a similar scenario.

[telecasterman]

Good looking truck & nice functions!

[shimon]

thanks for the comments i glad you like it

i can also post an lxf file of the main part of the truck.

[Ralph_S]

  On 8/17/2010 at 11:43 PM, Sam42 said:

Nice detailing and function, like an advanced, rc model team version pf 8868 air claw rig.

Great use of the new style windscreen! i'd been thinking about using them myself in a similar scenario.

It's not really a new style windscreen. This part in trans clear was used as a truck windscreen in Model Team sets in the late 'eighties/early 'nineties. It is great that the part is in production again. When I saw the grand emporium, it's one of the first things I noticed. I'm not yet sure whether I'll buy the grand Emporium, but I'd love to get my hands on a few of these parts for use in trucks as well. The trans clear ones are ridiculously expensive on bricklink.

  On 8/18/2010 at 7:20 AM, shimon said:

thanks for the comments i glad you like it

i can also post an lxf file of the main part of the truck.

It's a very nice truck and I am very impressed by the functionality you've managed to shoe-horn in there. I've been building power functions trucks on a similar scale and struggle to fit everything in them, so Ive got some idea of how hard it is.

The cab is very nice with impressive techniques, but I do have a point of criticism. It doesn't really look like a DAF LF to me. I've got a fair idea of what they look like, as a fire engine I built a few months ago uses a DAF LF cab. Some things are excellent (the lower radiator and front bumper), but the upper part of the radiator seems too narrow, the mudguards are too symmetric (the rear part of the mudguard on the real truck is very different from the front part) and the sleeper cab looks too big.

I also have a couple of questions.

I'm guessing you've had to use three motors: one for steering, one for drive and one to power a compressor for the pneumatics. Looking at the picture of the chassis I can see two M-motors. What motors have you used for what function? Is one of those M-motors for the drive or is there an XL motor in there somewhere as well? The reason why I ask is because on my Scania I had some difficulty finding space for the XL motor. It is a rather heavy beast and it would be interersting to be able to build a more compact truck (on a similar scale) and if an M-motor has enough power to move your truck at a decent pace, that would make life easier for me as well.

My second question has to do with the steering. It's a subject that has come up a few times in the past here on EB, Why did you choose your current steering set-up (with a worm-gear) over a self-centring steering mechanism?

Cheers,

Ralph

[shimon]

  On 8/18/2010 at 9:51 AM, Ralph_S said:

It's not really a new style windscreen. This part in trans clear was used as a truck windscreen in Model Team sets in the late 'eighties/early 'nineties. It is great that the part is in production again. When I saw the grand emporium, it's one of the first things I noticed. I'm not yet sure whether I'll buy the grand Emporium, but I'd love to get my hands on a few of these parts for use in trucks as well. The trans clear ones are ridiculously expensive on bricklink.

It's a very nice truck and I am very impressed by the functionality you've managed to shoe-horn in there. I've been building power functions trucks on a similar scale and struggle to fit everything in them, so Ive got some idea of how hard it is.

The cab is very nice with impressive techniques, but I do have a point of criticism. It doesn't really look like a DAF LF to me. I've got a fair idea of what they look like, as a fire engine I built a few months ago uses a DAF LF cab. Some things are excellent (the lower radiator and front bumper), but the upper part of the radiator seems too narrow, the mudguards are too symmetric (the rear part of the mudguard on the real truck is very different from the front part) and the sleeper cab looks too big.

I also have a couple of questions.

I'm guessing you've had to use three motors: one for steering, one for drive and one to power a compressor for the pneumatics. Looking at the picture of the chassis I can see two M-motors. What motors have you used for what function? Is one of those M-motors for the drive or is there an XL motor in there somewhere as well? The reason why I ask is because on my Scania I had some difficulty finding space for the XL motor. It is a rather heavy beast and it would be interersting to be able to build a more compact truck (on a similar scale) and if an M-motor has enough power to move your truck at a decent pace, that would make life easier for me as well.

My second question has to do with the steering. It's a subject that has come up a few times in the past here on EB, Why did you choose your current steering set-up (with a worm-gear) over a self-centring steering mechanism?

Cheers,

Ralph

First of all thanks.

Secondly, about the model i wrote "DAF LF concept" i know what an LF looks like but i wanted to customize my own design

so it will look better.

i know the real one has a low roof and small cabin but as i just said its a concept.

But, still if you look at the cabin from some point of view it reminds a DAF im not a professional builder yet so no stickers here and a pretty ugly crane. but with my current level i try to make things the best way the can be

The fire truck looks great i havent seen it before, we might have the same taste in building style

Now for your questions : there are only 2 M motors and no self center for one reason ( i dont have the spring part or XL)

1 M motor is for steering, firstly i connected it via clutch GEAR but the reduction wasent good enough it couldnt go to center (i thought of that spring part but i dont owe one) so to reduce the speed i used a worm gear( no room for other reductions.

Now for the compressor: there is no place in the truck for the 3rd motor so i just put a driving ring to switch between driving and activating compressor.

the build is very compact and it was very hard to do it because if you look carefully i used about 40 jumpers here

half of the truck is X.5 studs wide

i also have many future ideas for this kind of building.

Edited August 18, 2010 by shimon

[Ralph_S]

  On 8/18/2010 at 2:52 PM, shimon said:

First of all thanks.

Secondly, about the model i wrote "DAF LF concept" i know what an LF looks like but i wanted to customize my own design

so it will look better.

i know the real one has a low roof and small cabin but as i just said its a concept.

But, still if you look at the cabin from some point of view it reminds a DAF im not a professional builder yet so no stickers here and a pretty ugly crane. but with my current level i try to make things the best way the can be

The fire truck looks great i havent seen it before, we might have the same taste in building style

Now for your questions : there are only 2 M motors and no self center for one reason ( i dont have the spring part or XL)

1 M motor is for steering, firstly i connected it via clutch GEAR but the reduction wasent good enough it couldnt go to center (i thought of that spring part but i dont owe one) so to reduce the speed i used a worm gear( no room for other reductions.

Now for the compressor: there is no place in the truck for the 3rd motor so i just put a driving ring to switch between driving and activating compressor.

the build is very compact and it was very hard to do it because if you look carefully i used about 40 jumpers here

half of the truck is X.5 studs wide

i also have many future ideas for this kind of building.

I more-or-less suspected that by DAF LF concept you were thinking of something similar to a concept car and it certainly has elements remeniscent of DAFs

I noticed that it is an odd number of studs wide. The cab is 14 studs wide, but the mudguards stick out half a stud on each side, giving a total width of 15. (on my fire engine it's 12 studs wide with half a stud sticking out on either side as well, giving a grand total of 13 studs).

I didn't realise you used a driving ring to swicth from one motor to the other, but looking at the chassis again I see where it's located. I'm not much of a Technic builder, so it wasn't immediately obvious to me. I understand why you used a worm gear in the steering. If you don't have self-centring steering the steering needs to be geared down quite a bit in order to make it possible to drive in a straight line. You've done an excellent job fitting all these elements inside.

In any case, it's good to know that an M-motor does have enough power. That means that if I want to build anier poer-functions truck on the same scale as the Scania, I might be able to get away with using an M-motor for that as well. I've built two Poer Functions trucks and both were fairly heavy beasts. I chose fairly big trucks so that I would be able to find enough space for an XL engine in the chassis and a large batter box somewhere in the body. If I would want to build a somewhat smaller truck or just a tractor, I feared I wouldn't find space for the XL motor such that it wouldn't be too visible from the outside. Being able to use an M-motor instead will make things a bit easier.

I look forward to seeing more of your work. I think we indeed like the same style of building

Cheers,

Ralph

[shimon]

  On 8/18/2010 at 4:56 PM, Ralph_S said:

I more-or-less suspected that by DAF LF concept you were thinking of something similar to a concept car and it certainly has elements remeniscent of DAFs

I noticed that it is an odd number of studs wide. The cab is 14 studs wide, but the mudguards stick out half a stud on each side, giving a total width of 15. (on my fire engine it's 12 studs wide with half a stud sticking out on either side as well, giving a grand total of 13 studs).

I didn't realise you used a driving ring to swicth from one motor to the other, but looking at the chassis again I see where it's located. I'm not much of a Technic builder, so it wasn't immediately obvious to me. I understand why you used a worm gear in the steering. If you don't have self-centring steering the steering needs to be geared down quite a bit in order to make it possible to drive in a straight line. You've done an excellent job fitting all these elements inside.

In any case, it's good to know that an M-motor does have enough power. That means that if I want to build anier poer-functions truck on the same scale as the Scania, I might be able to get away with using an M-motor for that as well. I've built two Poer Functions trucks and both were fairly heavy beasts. I chose fairly big trucks so that I would be able to find enough space for an XL engine in the chassis and a large batter box somewhere in the body. If I would want to build a somewhat smaller truck or just a tractor, I feared I wouldn't find space for the XL motor such that it wouldn't be too visible from the outside. Being able to use an M-motor instead will make things a bit easier.

I look forward to seeing more of your work. I think we indeed like the same style of building

Cheers,

Ralph

Thank you for your comments.

Actually if you look into my brickshelf folder i built a truck that is much bigger and its driving by an M (i dont have XL)

and it drives pretty well so obviously if a 3kg can drive it, and mine is more than a kg and it drives well you can certainly use it but with proper reduction.

i thought of making a car size like 4896 PF drive and has extremely SNOT shaped like one of ARVO's creation

there is just something wierd about one of their creations...

Edited August 18, 2010 by shimon

[Ralph_S]

  On 8/18/2010 at 5:07 PM, shimon said:

Thank you for your comments.

Actually if you look into my brickshelf folder i built a truck that is much bigger and its driving by an M (i dont have XL)

and it drives pretty well so obviously if a 3kg can drive it, and mine is more than a kg and it drives well you can certainly use it but with proper reduction.

I realise that I can take a small motor and gear it down such that the drivetrain delivers enough torque to accelerate a heavy vehicle, but with the same motor there is nothing you can do to increase the power and the resulting vehicle will be slow. Fortunately your video shows that the M-motor has sufficient power to give even a relatively large vehicle enough speed.

  Quote

i thought of making a car size like 4896 PF drive and has extremely SNOT shaped like one of ARVO's creation

there is just something wierd about one of their creations...

I'm curious what you're getting at with your last comment.

Cheers,

Ralph

[shimon]

  On 8/19/2010 at 9:45 AM, Ralph_S said:

I realise that I can take a small motor and gear it down such that the drivetrain delivers enough torque to accelerate a heavy vehicle, but with the same motor there is nothing you can do to increase the power and the resulting vehicle will be slow. Fortunately your video shows that the M-motor has sufficient power to give even a relatively large vehicle enough speed.

I'm curious what you're getting at with your last comment.

Cheers,

Ralph

I wanted somehow to recreate ARVO's ford GT lemans

but then it the headlight i found a huge problem

look at this image http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=4058738

how is the orange slope 4 x 2 connected?

he must cut the 1\2 pin side of that black wedge(its double).. in order to put the part

Anyway im thinking should i make a sports car (low ride ) or a normal car with suspension ?

any ideas on a model that wouldn't be so hard making in LEGO?

thanks,

Shimon

[Ralph_S]

  On 8/19/2010 at 10:16 AM, shimon said:

I wanted somehow to recreate ARVO's ford GT lemans

but then it the headlight i found a huge problem

look at this image http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=4058738

how is the orange slope 4 x 2 connected?

he must cut the 1\2 pin side of that black wedge(its double).. in order to put the part

Anyway im thinking should i make a sports car (low ride ) or a normal car with suspension ?

any ideas on a model that wouldn't be so hard making in LEGO?

thanks,

Shimon

I suspect that there are a few other things on that model that aren't completely legal. Many of the parts they used don't exist in medium blue or sand blue, as far as I know, so they either built the model in a different colour (light grey/ light bley) and modified the picture to make it look blue or they painted parts. Still, it's a nice model regardless.

Their style is very different from what I normally do. Even if they do make a car with superficailly simpler shapes they go all out on the SNOT work to make it as studless as possible. They also build on a considerably larger scale. Ive never built a Ford GT (or GT40), because at the smaller scale that I use, I haven't yet been able to figure out how to add the functionality I want (opening doors and engine compartment).

My use of Technic elements in my models also is very limited. I don't particulary enjoy technic building and on the scale I use, on anything smaller than a truck technic constructions like Working suspension start taking up so much space that the car's look starts to suffer/ there's very little room left for interior details. I can't really help you there. My Power Functions trucks are pretty much the only exception.

Cheers,

Ralph

[shimon]

  On 8/19/2010 at 11:51 AM, Ralph_S said:

I suspect that there are a few other things on that model that aren't completely legal. Many of the parts they used don't exist in medium blue or sand blue, as far as I know, so they either built the model in a different colour (light grey/ light bley) and modified the picture to make it look blue or they painted parts. Still, it's a nice model regardless.

Their style is very different from what I normally do. Even if they do make a car with superficailly simpler shapes they go all out on the SNOT work to make it as studless as possible. They also build on a considerably larger scale. Ive never built a Ford GT (or GT40), because at the smaller scale that I use, I haven't yet been able to figure out how to add the functionality I want (opening doors and engine compartment).

My use of Technic elements in my models also is very limited. I don't particulary enjoy technic building and on the scale I use, on anything smaller than a truck technic constructions like Working suspension start taking up so much space that the car's look starts to suffer/ there's very little room left for interior details. I can't really help you there. My Power Functions trucks are pretty much the only exception.

Cheers,

Ralph

You're right.

adding functions to a model makes it much harder to build.

usually people do a full technic design or a good looking model via snot , so the thing is; i like to combine both because there must be at least a couple of ways putting parts together making a masterpiece. if i make a car with no functions at all (steering, openings) it will be much easier and the car will look very good but then, if i try making a model in a way that nobody did and struggle to plan it. the results are coming up with couple great ideas and facts

For example: i could make my truck without the pneumatics, then it will look much better and drive better but i just used all the space that can be used in order to stuff it with functions.

i really recommend you to use technic parts (not as main chassis) but still the beams make thing a lot more easier and give us more options.

I am sure there is a way building a car similar 4896 with a small battery box and 2 m motors without affecting any of the builds. however i see you build models Model Team scale then the main problems is steering and that is the reason i made it 15 studs wide- the suspension links 6L wont fit any other way and this is the best steering method i know.

i hope to finish the car in a week (i have to rush)

I have a question also : as you can see most of my builds are same colored: black, Dark stone, light bley

sometimes no matter what i build it looks... boring and its is not fun looking at them (maybe its just my overheated head)

however i am very pleasured to look at your models the color combination just.. brings it to live

now what do you, think does it really has to do something with the colors ?

regards,

Shimon

[Ralph_S]

  On 8/19/2010 at 12:20 PM, shimon said:

You're right.

adding functions to a model makes it much harder to build.

usually people do a full technic design or a good looking model via snot , so the thing is; i like to combine both because there must be at least a couple of ways putting parts together making a masterpiece. if i make a car with no functions at all (steering, openings) it will be much easier and the car will look very good but then, if i try making a model in a way that nobody did and struggle to plan it. the results are coming up with couple great ideas and facts

For example: i could make my truck without the pneumatics, then it will look much better and drive better but i just used all the space that can be used in order to stuff it with functions.

i really recommend you to use technic parts (not as main chassis) but still the beams make thing a lot more easier and give us more options.

I am sure there is a way building a car similar 4896 with a small battery box and 2 m motors without affecting any of the builds. however i see you build models Model Team scale then the main problems is steering and that is the reason i made it 15 studs wide- the suspension links 6L wont fit any other way and this is the best steering method i know.

i hope to finish the car in a week (i have to rush)

I have a question also : as you can see most of my builds are same colored: black, Dark stone, light bley

sometimes no matter what i build it looks... boring and its is not fun looking at them (maybe its just my overheated head)

however i am very pleasured to look at your models the color combination just.. brings it to live

now what do you, think does it really has to do something with the colors ?

regards,

Shimon

It is possible to incorporate some form of suspension and even moving pistons in cars that are about tens studs wide , but I personally don't see the point. I'd rather use the space to fit something that more-or-less looks like in engine instead. I do like to have some functionality. I love building details and like to have opening doors, an opening engine compartment and an opening luggage compartment so that you can look into the car. I do use the odd Technic element in the construction in much the same way as it was done in model team sets. My cars also have a steering system. It usually isn't attached to the steering wheel, but the wheels are inter-connected such that the wheels remain parallel.

There are a lot of older steering systems out there that can be made much more compact than the more modern versions, by the way, with as little as six studs between the wheels (and even less if you get really creative).

Check out the steering mechanism in this set from 1986 for instance:

http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=8620-1

The parts for this system are still fairly cheap on bricklink. You need technic steering arms and technic plates with holes. The latter come in length of 4,6,8 and 10 studs.

Including a lot of Technic functionality can mean having to give up on other things. My DAF, for instance, has a working tilting cab with a representation of an engine underneath. On the Scania recovery truck, I couldn't do that. The Technic parts underneath take up almost all the space, the cables for the IR receiver run through the back of the cab, and adding a working tilting cab would have increased the weight possibly to the point where the self-centring steering would cease to work. I felt it was worth it because having this thing drive around is a lot of fun and I imagine that if I were to take it to events, people would like to see some action as well. However, I'm thinking about building a 2nd Scania that does have a tilt cab, just for fun.

Back when I didn't use bricklink and didn't buy bulk stuff, sets were my only source of parts. I build quite a lot of military models as well, for which greys and black are always very useful. However, in sets you typically get a mix of other colours as well and for a long time the leftovers (yellow, blue and red) were the colours I used for building cars.

I've come to realise that colour is very important. A black truck can look classy, but add a stripe of red or orange to it and it looks a lot more interesting IMO.

Kenworth W900 v.2 (2) by Mad physicist, on Flickr

In recent years LEGO have released a great number of colours that I never used to have as a child and I am really enjoying building things in relatively new or rare colours. It makes my collection of cars far more varied and attractive and in many cases adds an extra challenge to the builds. The parts palettes in lime green and pink, for instance, are fairly limited and building a scale model in those colours requires just a tad more creativity than building the same car in, say, red. I've got a lime green Lamborghini Miura, for instance and a pink Cadillac.

Cheers,

Ralph

[Raphy]

Oh, that's just beautiful! Great work. :D

[shimon]

  On 8/19/2010 at 6:39 PM, Raphy said:

Oh, that's just beautiful! Great work. :D

thanks

  On 8/19/2010 at 6:36 PM, Ralph_S said:

It is possible to incorporate some form of suspension and even moving pistons in cars that are about tens studs wide , but I personally don't see the point. I'd rather use the space to fit something that more-or-less looks like in engine instead. I do like to have some functionality. I love building details and like to have opening doors, an opening engine compartment and an opening luggage compartment so that you can look into the car. I do use the odd Technic element in the construction in much the same way as it was done in model team sets. My cars also have a steering system. It usually isn't attached to the steering wheel, but the wheels are inter-connected such that the wheels remain parallel.

There are a lot of older steering systems out there that can be made much more compact than the more modern versions, by the way, with as little as six studs between the wheels (and even less if you get really creative).

Check out the steering mechanism in this set from 1986 for instance:

http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=8620-1

The parts for this system are still fairly cheap on bricklink. You need technic steering arms and technic plates with holes. The latter come in length of 4,6,8 and 10 studs.

Including a lot of Technic functionality can mean having to give up on other things. My DAF, for instance, has a working tilting cab with a representation of an engine underneath. On the Scania recovery truck, I couldn't do that. The Technic parts underneath take up almost all the space, the cables for the IR receiver run through the back of the cab, and adding a working tilting cab would have increased the weight possibly to the point where the self-centring steering would cease to work. I felt it was worth it because having this thing drive around is a lot of fun and I imagine that if I were to take it to events, people would like to see some action as well. However, I'm thinking about building a 2nd Scania that does have a tilt cab, just for fun.

Back when I didn't use bricklink and didn't buy bulk stuff, sets were my only source of parts. I build quite a lot of military models as well, for which greys and black are always very useful. However, in sets you typically get a mix of other colours as well and for a long time the leftovers (yellow, blue and red) were the colours I used for building cars.

I've come to realise that colour is very important. A black truck can look classy, but add a stripe of red or orange to it and it looks a lot more interesting IMO.

Kenworth W900 v.2 (2) by Mad physicist, on Flickr

In recent years LEGO have released a great number of colours that I never used to have as a child and I am really enjoying building things in relatively new or rare colours. It makes my collection of cars far more varied and attractive and in many cases adds an extra challenge to the builds. The parts palettes in lime green and pink, for instance, are fairly limited and building a scale model in those colours requires just a tad more creativity than building the same car in, say, red. I've got a lime green Lamborghini Miura, for instance and a pink Cadillac.

Cheers,

Ralph

The cars are truly amazing!

i am pretty new to LEGO, ive been building things for 2 years only and i don't really know about the old parts.

i might buy some of these but in light bley, i don't really like old gray mixed with new.

now i have a hard decision to make whether build PF or non PF , as i told im pretty new and i dont really know what is better; i just got 8043 excavator and i want to combine it with 8421 for an ultimate crane truck but

its hard to decide PF or not PF or partial PF(lights+1 or 2 motors) same goes for the car

i just dont want to feel that its unfinished.

regards,

Shimon

[Ralph_S]

  On 8/20/2010 at 8:53 AM, shimon said:

thanks

The cars are truly amazing!

i am pretty new to LEGO, ive been building things for 2 years only and i don't really know about the old parts.

i might buy some of these but in light bley, i don't really like old gray mixed with new.

now i have a hard decision to make whether build PF or non PF , as i told im pretty new and i dont really know what is better; i just got 8043 excavator and i want to combine it with 8421 for an ultimate crane truck but

its hard to decide PF or not PF or partial PF(lights+1 or 2 motors) same goes for the car

i just dont want to feel that its unfinished.

regards,

Shimon

I'm glad you like the cars.

the steering arms are available in light bley, but they only came in one set, so they might be hard to find. I don't really see a problem with having a few of these pieces in old grey in my models, as they are almost invisible from the outside anyway. The Technic plates were also available in black in different lengths: 4, 6 and 8 studs long. Obviously you can make a ten-stud wide mechanism by combining 4 and 6 stud long plates.

I can't tell you whether adding Power functions to a model is better. As I explained before, having a vehicle that can drive under remote control is great fun, but the Power Functions do use a lot of space and depending on the scale and type of vehicle you build that may mean making other compromises.

the most important thing is that you are having fun.

Cheers,

Ralph

Edited August 21, 2010 by Ralph_S

[shimon]

  On 8/21/2010 at 6:32 PM, Ralph_S said:

I'm glad you like the cars.

the steering arms are available in light bley, but they only came in one set, so they might be hard to find. I don't really see a problem with having a few of these pieces in old grey in my models, as they are almost invisible from the outside anyway. The Technic plates were also available in black in different lengths: 4, 6 and 8 studs long. Obviously you can make a ten-stud wide mechanism by combining 4 and 6 stud long plates.

I can't tell you whether adding Power functions to a model is better. As I explained before, having a vehicle that can drive under remote control is great fun, but the Power Functions do use a lot of space and depending on the scale and type of vehicle you build that may mean making other compromises.

the most important thing is that you are having fun.

Cheers,

Ralph

It does feel better making compromises

i just started my crane chassis (just putting technic parts randomly) and it turned out very great.

Actually even close to TLG style, i decided to make it 8421 alike but Liebherr LTM 1100 style

with no PF drive but with an option to put it instead of the engine

I only put 1 motor in vehicle and 1 or 2 in the boom

I also thought of making a new kind of outriggers with a very complex mechanism.(gotta think very hard on it)

it does make things more fun!

i just love the feeling when u randomly put parts and "accidentally" having them in the PERFECT place.

i think this model would be a great success (if i don't get into troubles with it )

Anyways thanks for the tips!

i am always happy to hear from the professionals

Regards,

Shimon

Edited August 21, 2010 by shimon