Recommended Posts

On 12/22/2021 at 3:08 PM, Takanuinuva said:

What possible purpose would having those 3 parts melded together serve. Wen you could just make the same assembly just with 3l axles sticking out.

Sure the 2 book sets it's in use it for a lock. But I feel like there were other solutions that could have been used instead of making a new POOP piece.

Normally I'm all for new technic molds. But I don't ever see myself in a situation where I would need this part when I could just make it with the 3 existing pieces it's composed of.

What was wrong with the old lock mold anyways?

Of course you can make this part using 2 2L axle and 3 connector. But that version can't put key because it already filled with axle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Gray Gear said:

Axle with stop in 6L, 7L have been long overdue imo

Exactly. And longer pins would be very cool too, like 4L (2+2 pins or 2 pin + 2 axle).

Though some of the arguments above for this new piece are somewhat valid, I still find it strange that this seemingly limited usage part is moulded sooner than those simple missing axles that could be used in a lot of sets. Let's see where else they'll be used. Maybe in a system set with some technic structure, because of the even size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, gyenesvi said:

Exactly. And longer pins would be very cool too, like 4L (2+2 pins or 2 pin + 2 axle).

I second that. During my modification of some builds I felt the need for 4L pins. I also think the pins with round/sphere shape should be extended by 1 or 2 stud. The only reason that held me back from saying the need for the former one is: will the 4L/5L pins be as durable? A 6L/7L axle with stop or a beam with 4/6/8L will have no issues. But a pin that big? I am a bit confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While we're listing obvious parts that should've been introduced looong ago: how about female versions of 85x85p.jpg and 85x85p.jpg and 85x85p.jpg!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, astyanax said:

While we're listing obvious parts that should've been introduced looong ago: how about female versions of 85x85p.jpg and 85x85p.jpg and 85x85p.jpg!

Actually, a part I was needing yesterday was a 1x1 brick with an internal ball socket. So, just a 1x1 brick with a hole carved out that would fit a ball. That could be useful in studded builds. Similar to how we finally got the 1x1 brick with axle hole :)

And there is an old part I still find myself using now and then, and that's this one: 6571.JPG for mostly the same reasons: it has a ball socket in a small space. But it's a bit unwieldy to use sometimes.

Also, Mixel joints :grin:

2 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

 And longer pins would be very cool too, like 4L (2+2 pins or 2 pin + 2 axle).

As for 4-long pins... I sometimes use a bar 4L to connect two normal 2L pins. It's a bit of a problematic solution (you hav eto insert the bar last, because if the bar is in place, the pins can't "snap". Maybe you can use a 3L bar, but I haven't tried this.) Actually, I can't remember ever having needed other 4-long pins than just normal ones.

Maybe even there could be 3L pins without the middle ring, so they can be slid in from any side at any point. This would also make them visually different from other pins, which would mean they don't have to have a weird color, and can just be made black.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Erik Leppen said:

Maybe even there could be 3L pins without the middle ring, so they can be slid in from any side at any point. This would also make them visually different from other pins, which would mean they don't have to have a weird color, and can just be made black.

85x85p.jpg

https://rebrickable.com/parts/77765/technic-pin-long-3l-no-friction-ridges-with-stop-and-hole/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Erik Leppen said:

 

Maybe even there could be 3L pins without the middle ring, so they can be slid in from any side at any point. This would also make them visually different from other pins, which would mean they don't have to have a weird color, and can just be made black.

Do you mean these pins?

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=77765#T=S&C=86&O={"color":86,"iconly":0}

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, did I say 3L? Oops. I meant 4L. Sorry! :blush: I was indeed thinking of that part (that's probably why I wrote 3L), thanks for the mention. It seems super useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Erik Leppen said:

Also, Mixel joints :grin:

Right. Recently I got myself a ball socket in a tight space by pushing the studs of 85x85p.jpg into the pinholes of 85x85p.jpg such that the socket was between the axle holes. In that configuration, I could still run an axle through the axle holes. Perfect fit. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, I have to bring a bit different aspect to this discussion: if anyone reads the current discussion that's been held a few pages it will be clearer that we want different shapes and options for different parts. Howevr, there are certain parts of which most people want to have options i.e., the 6/8/10L beams. My thought is that we want them from Lego, but could not we also expect them from Cada? I am pretty sure the MOC designers definitely welcome if Cada introduce or allow them (while developing) these new kind of parts. If there is no reason or problem to introduce a new 8L beam then there should be no problem with Cada too. Or, is it that the bricks manufacturers all think for example, 3/5/7/9L beams are enough?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, thekoRngear said:

Guys, I have to bring a bit different aspect to this discussion: if anyone reads the current discussion that's been held a few pages it will be clearer that we want different shapes and options for different parts. Howevr, there are certain parts of which most people want to have options i.e., the 6/8/10L beams. My thought is that we want them from Lego, but could not we also expect them from Cada? I am pretty sure the MOC designers definitely welcome if Cada introduce or allow them (while developing) these new kind of parts. If there is no reason or problem to introduce a new 8L beam then there should be no problem with Cada too. Or, is it that the bricks manufacturers all think for example, 3/5/7/9L beams are enough?

Well, "competitor brands" are not very welcomed here (except a few significant cases) and I'm not sure Lego MOCers will actively use these even-lengthed beam parts once/if competitors will release them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather see much more diversity in small liftarms and connectors. For example, a 2x2 liftarm, or pin with perpendicular axle hole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, astyanax said:

I'd rather see much more diversity in small liftarms and connectors. For example, a 2x2 liftarm, or pin with perpendicular axle hole.

Yeah, these would be far more useful than even-length liftarms. 3x4 L-shaped liftarm would be pretty useful too, as would a zig-zagging liftarm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't remember needing 8L or longer even liftarms. Maybe in some highly specific solutions, such as when working with triangles.

I do remember needing a 9L thin liftarm on various occasions. I'd say if 1x12 plates ar possible then 1x9 thin liftarms should be feasible too.

Or a 1x3 thin liftarm with middle axle hole and round holes at the ends. Or more parts in general with axle holes at other places than the ends.

In general, I find myself using more half-stud offsets and thin liftarms than official sets do. This enables a finer grid than the 1x1x1 cube grid. A simple "thin L-liftarm with pin holes" (the existing 3x5 L sliced in half) would open up so many options for compact frame building.

And I'm still advocating my "1 x 2.5 thin liftarm with 1 axle hole and 1 hole", to add more ways of adding half-stud offsets - the two different holes being to distinguish it from other thin liftarms and offset 2 different orientations to increase build options. That's what I often find: if parts are too symmetrical, they are of more limited use, because flipping it over doesn't add a new option. That's why the basic 2x4 L liftarm is so great.

Edited by Erik Leppen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

Exactly. And longer pins would be very cool too, like 4L (2+2 pins or 2 pin + 2 axle).

Though some of the arguments above for this new piece are somewhat valid, I still find it strange that this seemingly limited usage part is moulded sooner than those simple missing axles that could be used in a lot of sets. Let's see where else they'll be used. Maybe in a system set with some technic structure, because of the even size.

When designers are coming up with new functional parts, I expect a key question is whether the design problem at hand can be solved without them. In the case of this latchkey mechanism, the answer is not really (since the sets they were designed for had very particular needs as far as simplicity and functionality were concerned that would make a more complex solution impractical). Whereas as liftarms/axles get longer, so too does the size of the model using them—and the more space a model has to work with, the easier it is to redesign things to use existing parts (especially at the high age rating for typical Technic sets where complexity is no longer a limiting factor). So instances where a longer axle/liftarm could be introduced and no alternative solution would do are quite a bit rarer than for "specialty parts".

Another thing this discussion omits, of course, is that there's a strong likelihood that that new part (so far only used in Disney Princess sets) came out of that theme's design budget rather than Technic's. So it's not really case of that part being made "instead of" parts that would be more useful to Technic builders, since the Technic team would have their own separate budget for new parts designed for their sets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, astyanax said:

While we're listing obvious parts that should've been introduced looong ago: how about female versions of

I shouldnt say ist here, but Cada has a Pin with towball Socket.

Edited by efferman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Erik Leppen said:

I do remember needing a 9L thin liftarm on various occasions. I'd say if 1x12 plates ar possible then 1x9 thin liftarms should be feasible too.

BrickLink catalogue even contains a 16L thin liftarm... Probably a prototype, and probably too fragile...

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?id=11003

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, efferman said:

I shouldnt say ist here, but Cada has a Pin with towball Socket.

Just want to ask if CaDa have Torsen Differential already? Like yours? 

Tnx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dylan M said:

Torsen Differential

As far as i know they have not.

We shouldnt talk to much about other brands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, astyanax said:

BrickLink catalogue even contains a 16L thin liftarm... Probably a prototype, and probably too fragile...

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?id=11003

Yeah, I think a longer thin liftarms would be too fragile and TLG wouldn't manufacture such a part as it's easy to break it accidentally. Comparing to 1-wide plates, if you have an 1x12 one clutched to other pieces and you start separating it from one end, the rest of it tend to follow, rather than bend and break, while a liftarm would be attached with pins, which might get stuck so a careless pull would easily break it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, efferman said:

As far as i know they have not.

We shouldnt talk to much about other brands.

Oh, is eurobricks is exclusive only for LEGO?  I thought this is for the Brick Lover as long as its not Counterfeit/ fake Set/fake bricks pcs, 

And what I'm asking is a original design of yours,  

If that so, well I'M VERY SORRY 😞 

I Will not ask about other brand again 

(This topic is "General Parts Discussion " ) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Erik Leppen said:

I sometimes use a bar 4L to connect two normal 2L pins.

I use that too, it's a neat trick but only works with black 2L pins and towball pins (with 3L bar), and I never like to put it in a place where there would be too much stress in the middle connection, where only the bar holds it together.

3 hours ago, Lyichir said:

Another thing this discussion omits, of course, is that there's a strong likelihood that that new part (so far only used in Disney Princess sets) came out of that theme's design budget rather than Technic's.

That's an interesting angle, thanks for noting. Though I hope that budgets are not so strictly separated at least for the design of not so specialized new parts, which should really be a cross theme thing. At least that would be an essential feature of lego.

3 hours ago, Lyichir said:

I expect a key question is whether the design problem at hand can be solved without them

Sure, but I'd also weigh in the complexity of that solution if it exist. Sometimes a new part could significantly decrease the complexity, removing unnecessary connector parts, saving space and weight, making denser builds possible. And I think such things compound. An example I have been slowly realizing lately is a live axle in real life vs in lego (larger scale, driven). It all starts with the differential being too thick. It needs a (longitudionally) thick frame (5x7). If you want to strengthen the axle sideways with cross beams, you have to go around the diff by a large margin. The steering rig has to go around it. Wheel hubs are quite cumbersome to attach and need many connectors, especially the new planetary one as it requires a towball socket. The driveshaft joint gets very far from the axle center (because of the lack of shorter CV joint parts). As a result lego live axles are very thick compared to real life conterparts. And it effects the whole chassis, as it has to go around the axles by a large margin too. As a result, there's less space for the drivetrain and everything else. So while a solution does exist, the cost is high in terms of consequences. (On the other hand, smaller scale rear axles can be relatively well built with the ball joint specialized for this purpose, and they often don't need that much sideways support.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Dylan M said:

Oh, is eurobricks is exclusive only for LEGO?  I thought this is for the Brick Lover as long as its not Counterfeit/ fake Set/fake bricks pcs, 

And what I'm asking is a original design of yours,  

If that so, well I'M VERY SORRY 😞 

I Will not ask about other brand again 

(This topic is "General Parts Discussion " ) 

I do not make, enforce, or endorse the site rules, but they can be found here:

It appears quite clear that non-Lego stuff should only be discussed in the Community forum.

Exceptions seem to be possible; see e.g. the topic about brunojj1's model of the Ferrari 488 Pista, which was for a while moved to the Community forum but then moved back to Technic. Not sure if these were different admins, nor what internal discussions led to the double move.

So it seems, in case of grey zone stuff, some leeway is possible. It's not really on topic here though. Maybe a new thread is in order? I don't feel like starting this argument, but it seems to keep coming up. Oh well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, astyanax said:

So it seems, in case of grey zone stuff, some leeway is possible. It's not really on topic here though. Maybe a new thread is in order? I don't feel like starting this argument, but it seems to keep coming up. Oh well.

Do you mean something like "competitorsourced Technic counterparts"? It would be interesting to see missed/possibly coming (like alternate flip-flap liftarmzs) or differently solved challenges, for sure if Jim and Milan approve it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.