Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Had another go at making a simple RC car last night (I don't drink, so New Year was seen in whilst playing with LEGO and watching crap on TV). I'm fast getting the idea that I'm just not a very good vehicle builder. I just can't get my head around how steering should work, how drive should be transmitted and suspension is a massive step too far.

OK, so I have been building for a short time and studless is very new to me, but I'm pretty good with studded and I learn very quickly so this is leaving me pretty frustrated.

Anyone else have the same issues? How'd you overcome it? How steep is the learning curve?

Oh, and Happy New Year to y'all!

Posted

Gee,

Maybe vehicles are not for you. Try your hand at something else like a gum ball machine, maybe a plane or helicopter or something sci fi. Learning can be frustrating expecially when something does not work the first time but you need to keep at it. I know all about frustration. I could write a book about it. Work on steering first, then drive and you can forget suspension for now. once you've mastered steering and drive, put the two together and see how you get on. Take it step by step, use the web for images etc, google "lego technic steering" and see what images come up. Practice practice practice. Oh, and let us know how you get on.

H

Posted

Cheers fellas! I'm probably being a little impatient here.

On the flip side, I just ordered 33 GBC balls off BL!

Posted

Cheers fellas! I'm probably being a little impatient here.

On the flip side, I just ordered 33 GBC balls off BL!

Ooh, GBC. I love GBC and I want to make GBC machines for years, but I for some reason I never started... :innocent:

Maybe a good plan for this new year :laugh:

Posted

Can't believe how expensive the balls are, but hey, it's only money and you can't take it with you. Besides, like my Mrs says, LEGO is an investment as well as a toy! :grin:

Posted

Can't believe how expensive the balls are, but hey, it's only money and you can't take it with you. Besides, like my Mrs says, LEGO is an investment as well as a toy! :grin:

Yep, it can be an investment for sure. Sometimes I wish I bought 2 10179 Millenium Falcons. They were sold at the time for around €500, but you can sell them now on bricklink and Ebay for a lot over €1000.... :wacko:

Posted

Incredible. When I got back into LEGO I just couldn't believe the value of my old sets.

I'm looking forward to getting hold of my balls (oo err!) and kocking up some GBC modules.

Posted

Good for you Gee. I look forward to seeing what you can come up with. There are many youtube videos of GBC modules. I watch them in total amazement but am yet to try my hand at one.

H

Posted

Here's this weekend's attempts. Firstly I made a pseudo monster truck. Very simple chassis. This drove well enough and wheelied to when going from reverse to forward!

11776985406_2af8e24395_c.jpg

11776211495_4c25938db1_c.jpg

Not much to say about this one, it worked well enough, but I feel it could have been better. I found that I was stacking the liftarms on top of each other and struggled to get any perpendicular bracing in.

Secondly, I made this "rock crawler". I put it in inverted commas as it's pretty crap and didn't really crawl over any rocks!

11776452833_2994596774_c.jpg

11776625574_7a7f037251_c.jpg

11776450793_1ae6011b4d_c.jpg

Problems with this one were as follows:

- The steering didn't work as I wanted (aside from the motor continuing to work when I'd released the remote). The linkages were weak and sheared apart and I needed more reduction on the gearing to get a more controllable feel. Also, when steering, the whole vehicle moved from one side to another.

- The suspension didn't work as it should. I found it really hard to get it sitting nicely and it was a constant compromise of being too stiff or flopping around. The angles also mean that the steering gear digs into the ground!

- I didn't have enough parts to create portals on all hubs and so had to do the gear reduction in the centre of the rear axle rather than at the hubs. Noticeable when try to climb obstacles.

- There is not a lot in the way of rigidity. I'm constrained by the small amount of studless parts that I have and so it's all kinda stitched together out of smaller bits.

Your thoughts as always welcome. I have enjoyed making these, but I'm finding it pretty unsatisfying overall (the Mrs is getting racked off at me sat playing LEGO all weekend too when I should be doing other things - hey ho!).

Posted

Hi Gee,

Welcome on EB and happy New Year :classic:

As you're coming out from your dark ages and make new steps on technic, I want to say that you're not alone with your problem. I'm not a Moccer, the highest I can make ist motorizing vehicles, but I still cannot built up a MOC from zero. I've my skills more in making instructions from modified sets with LDRAW than making my own creations. Will say I'm an instruction maker, but not a Moccer :grin:

But all needs time, after first crap MOC's/Mods will follow better creations. Learning by doing. :wink:

Whatever, I like your first "mickey mouse" MOC in post #54, especially the mix of old grey/light bluish grey :laugh: It reminds me the years as I had made my first technic steps in my childhood, as I got the 853 car chassis.

Greetings

Alex

Posted

Hi Alex, thanks for the kind words! I'm getting there slowly I think. I've made a BL order today for some parts to make a tracked vehicle using Sariel's subtractor gearing. Looking forward to that one. Track will be easier than wheels anyway!

Posted

I'm not sure if you noticed but your 4-long uv-joints dont align with the turning of the wheel hubs. 3-long ones would work. I recommend grabbing a stockpile of those.

Also, when building studless, it is a good idea to avoid building with the beam holes facing upwards as they don't hold well when bending.

Posted

Yeah, I know the 4L UJs don't quite work. I've got a load of 3L ones on order from BL!

Thanks for the tips on the beams. Don't know why but I naturally wanted to build with the holes vertical. I take it it's better with them horizontal then?

Posted

He means that when the beams have to hold something, holes upward are less strong.

Imagine 2 long beams attached to each other with 2 pins. Now lay one beam on the edge of a table and the other over the edge. If you put pressure on the beam over the edge, it will come off the other beam if the holes are facing upwards. Not if the holes are facing sideways (or at least a lot less).

Of course you have still use upward holes when you would lock the 2 horizontal beams with vertical beams. This is done a lot in the older Technic. Because the bricks are stacked on top of each other, they had to be locked using a vertical brick.

Posted

Hi Gee,

See what you can do! I love your first model and I would say, as it's the better performing out of the two, keep working on it and try to improve it. Try and include a differential on those rear wheels and try to get a servo for your steering. You've done something I could not do and that is steering with an M motor. Well done on your creations. Now keep at it.

H :thumbup:

Posted

I'm interested in building a simple chassis with transverse pendular suspension. I thought about using the mini turntable for the pivot. Do you think it would be better to have the pendular suspension on the front or rear axle? Or even in the centre of the chassis? And why?

NB - it'll be unsprung.

Posted

Been doing some thinking on the subject of off-road ability and chassis.

Is there any real need, other than for the sake of realism and technical demonstration, to have (elaborate) suspension on a Technic off-roader? There are only 3 reasons to have suspension that I can see - 1, passenger comfort, 2, to keep all wheels in contact with the ground and (to a lesser degree) 3, to protect the actual parts from shocks.

Clearly a Technic model doesn't need to worry about passenger comfort and a very simple pendular system, like that in Sariel's book or on Jennifer Clark's web page, takes care of keeping the wheels on the ground. As for 3, I'd say that any of the balloon tyres have sufficient bounce to protect the structure from hard shocks. So why bother with all suspension gubbins etc if the goal is purely performance? It's very rare that a Technic suspension system is correctly sprung for the weight and works exactly as intended anyway.

Posted

Right, I read that topic. It started as a question about suspension or not, then quickly turned into a conversation about different suspension systems and electric motors. It still doesn't quite answer my question - why bother with suspension if you only want off-road performance.

I can understand that you may need suspension if you are going to make a car that goes fast, but the majority of LEGO cars do not go fast, especially the off-roaders.

So why bother with suspension?

Posted (edited)

If you are off-roading in a fast car,the minute you hit a bump in the ground it will most likely flip the car.

Travelling fast on uneven ground can also roll the car,so suspension helps here as well.

Edited by Alasdair Ryan

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...