[WIP] Greyhound - 4WD RC Buggy with BuWizz 2 - Redesigned wheel hubs

[Didumos69]

28 minutes ago, technic_addict said:

@Didumos69 I was debating giving the yellow black version a go; however, I noticed in the parts list qty. 7 of part 60483 (liftarm 1 x 2 Thick with Pin Hole and Axle) which does not exist in yellow.  Will I be able to use part 43857 ( liftarm 1x2) instead?

The two used in the nose and the one used in the very tail could be 2l liftarms. But the four used at the bottom of the b-pillars should be (0x)-pieces. You could use black ones there.

Edited May 28, 2018 by Didumos69

[Ron1]

Hi all,

I get your message about lack of support and you are right. BuWizz is no longer a prototype it was back on Kickstarter, user base has grown and we did not scale our resources accordingly. This is changing now.

This is where we are:

- BuWizz hardware is OK (the issues like protection shutting down outputs too soon is firmware related, so solvable with upgrade)

- BuWizz software lacks features, there are connection issues

- Support is not adequate, feeling of neglect in the community

- Lack of upgrades

- Lack of direction where BuWizz is going

What we are doing and where we are going:

- Software on both iOS & Android with customizable control profiles is being released now

- Software with programmable interface (=where you can set mixers, power curves, sequential motion, etc.) is in alpha testing, soon to go into beta (for now on Android)

- We are working on connection issues on per-phone model basis (mostly an issue on some android phones)

- Open source BuWizz demo app (with sources for Bluetooth communication, control screen, etc.) is already on GitHub since January, we just did not advertise it

https://github.com/BuWizz/BuWizz-Android-Demo

- Bluetooth comm protocol will be part of open source release (the protocol is still being upgraded, but the current command set can easily be found in source code)

- We are working on several add-on modules (this is why the white connector is for) - we will pre-announce them soon (here we will need your help to figure out which modules would benefit you most)

- We are overhauling all internal processes (i.e. technical support, community support, website, competition support) to make them streamlined & scalable (yes, I confess, support is a mess right now)

- We are expanding our team to handle all the above (and more)

 

Please be patient for a bit longer. We will announce several new things next month, including new add-on modules, software features, competitions, etc.

 

We will not let BuWizz fade to oblivion, quite the contrary!

Regards

Roni

[kbalage]

22 hours ago, mj002 said:

@kbalage If you are very curious, I have a built-in buggy in Budapest and we can do a common Buggy test. It would be nice to have a meeting with a master

Happy to do a test run together, I think I'll have to build the bigger version again because that is the proper match in size for this one  And I'm far from being any master, I just have a habit of shoveling motors in every creation around me 

[scifunk]

4 hours ago, Ron1 said:

Hi all,

I get your message about lack of support and you are right. BuWizz is no longer a prototype it was back on Kickstarter, user base has grown and we did not scale our resources accordingly. This is changing now.

This is where we are:

- BuWizz hardware is OK (the issues like protection shutting down outputs too soon is firmware related, so solvable with upgrade)

- BuWizz software lacks features, there are connection issues

- Support is not adequate, feeling of neglect in the community

- Lack of upgrades

- Lack of direction where BuWizz is going

What we are doing and where we are going:

- Software on both iOS & Android with customizable control profiles is being released now

- Software with programmable interface (=where you can set mixers, power curves, sequential motion, etc.) is in alpha testing, soon to go into beta (for now on Android)

- We are working on connection issues on per-phone model basis (mostly an issue on some android phones)

- Open source BuWizz demo app (with sources for Bluetooth communication, control screen, etc.) is already on GitHub since January, we just did not advertise it

https://github.com/BuWizz/BuWizz-Android-Demo

- Bluetooth comm protocol will be part of open source release (the protocol is still being upgraded, but the current command set can easily be found in source code)

- We are working on several add-on modules (this is why the white connector is for) - we will pre-announce them soon (here we will need your help to figure out which modules would benefit you most)

- We are overhauling all internal processes (i.e. technical support, community support, website, competition support) to make them streamlined & scalable (yes, I confess, support is a mess right now)

- We are expanding our team to handle all the above (and more)

 

Please be patient for a bit longer. We will announce several new things next month, including new add-on modules, software features, competitions, etc.

 

We will not let BuWizz fade to oblivion, quite the contrary!

Regards

Roni

Please add a crystal module so you can use RC handsets instead of phones 

[Didumos69]

4 hours ago, Ron1 said:

Hi all,

I get your message about lack of support and you are right. BuWizz is no longer a prototype it was back on Kickstarter, user base has grown and we did not scale our resources accordingly. This is changing now.

This is where we are:

- BuWizz hardware is OK (the issues like protection shutting down outputs too soon is firmware related, so solvable with upgrade)

- BuWizz software lacks features, there are connection issues

- Support is not adequate, feeling of neglect in the community

- Lack of upgrades

- Lack of direction where BuWizz is going

What we are doing and where we are going:

- Software on both iOS & Android with customizable control profiles is being released now

- Software with programmable interface (=where you can set mixers, power curves, sequential motion, etc.) is in alpha testing, soon to go into beta (for now on Android)

- We are working on connection issues on per-phone model basis (mostly an issue on some android phones)

- Open source BuWizz demo app (with sources for Bluetooth communication, control screen, etc.) is already on GitHub since January, we just did not advertise it

https://github.com/BuWizz/BuWizz-Android-Demo

- Bluetooth comm protocol will be part of open source release (the protocol is still being upgraded, but the current command set can easily be found in source code)

- We are working on several add-on modules (this is why the white connector is for) - we will pre-announce them soon (here we will need your help to figure out which modules would benefit you most)

- We are overhauling all internal processes (i.e. technical support, community support, website, competition support) to make them streamlined & scalable (yes, I confess, support is a mess right now)

- We are expanding our team to handle all the above (and more)

 

Please be patient for a bit longer. We will announce several new things next month, including new add-on modules, software features, competitions, etc.

 

We will not let BuWizz fade to oblivion, quite the contrary!

Regards

Roni

Thank you @Ron1 for taking the time to give us an update. It is good to know you are aware of the issues people are experiencing and I'm looking forward to seeing resolutions for the issues that can be addressed with software / firmware update.

Perhaps it is a good idea to give an update every once in a while in the BuWizz topic, so at least people know which issues are on your radar and what to expect. And I'm sure there are people out here that are willing to test-drive software updates. I'm one of them, just send me a PM.

In the end, I think the Technic community wants BuWizz to be a sustainable success just as hard as you.

27 minutes ago, scifunk said:

Please add a crystal module so you can use RC handsets instead of phones 

I think feature requests better be posted in the dedicated BuWizz topic.

[technic_addict]

@Ron1 thanks for the update.  Please copy and paste your post in appropriate thread so we can all comment there instead of cluttering up this thread.

@Didumos69 do you have an updated parts list?  I recall you were changing a few things so not sure of the timing.  I noticed an M motor in the parts list?  I know you mentioned you will not be doing a body which attaches to the frame but will you be releasing multiple colour schemes?

 

[Didumos69]

48 minutes ago, technic_addict said:

@Didumos69 do you have an updated parts list?  I recall you were changing a few things so not sure of the timing.  I noticed an M motor in the parts list?  I know you mentioned you will not be doing a body which attaches to the frame but will you be releasing multiple colour schemes?

Here I posted the parts list. Nothing has changed since. I plan to only release the color scheme I have. I suppose people are able to reason which parts to replace to make their own color scheme. The medium blue and white parts are all part of the body (except for the silicon bands). For the black stripes you need to look a little better. If you have questions, you can always ask here.

On 5/19/2018 at 6:34 PM, Johnny1360 said:

Have you tried it in reverse?

We used to do this to make it up some very steep grades while four wheelin in the AZ mountains.

On 5/20/2018 at 2:40 AM, sirslayer said:

yeah, from my experience and you can even see some of the videos i posted on my thread that some times going reverse has more torque and even tried to do a balance model and it seems the torque can affect how straight your models goes forwards or reverse vs gear slippage that can occur!! and I even  place my front differential main gear to the left or right side to counter the motors directional pull and realized that the forward or reversal direction on Legos Battery box haves different speeds on my output and its a little difference going to forward or reverse but enough to notice.. I had a dually design on the rear axles and going reversed had better traction and weight .. I just wanted to share this and I hope you had similar incidents !! 

So I tried in reverse and guess what, it works! A 100% slope, without problems. PS: Don't watch the end of the video .

Edited May 29, 2018 by Didumos69

[kbalage]

4 hours ago, Didumos69 said:

PS: Don't watch the end of the video .

 Back to the drawing board, it's unacceptable! 

[Didumos69]

30 minutes ago, kbalage said:

 Back to the drawing board, it's unacceptable! 

LOL

[mj002]

Maybe it was not a bad idea for the spare wheel

[Didumos69]

7 minutes ago, mj002 said:

Maybe it was not a bad idea for the spare wheel

LOL. Actually - I just realized - the point where it drives down at the end of the video, there is no hardboard underneath the carpet. So it make more or less a free fall.

[mocbuild101]

16 hours ago, technic_addict said:

@Ron1 thanks for the update.  Please copy and paste your post in appropriate thread so we can all comment there instead of cluttering up this thread.

Or maybe @Jim or @Milan could just move it there...

[Permo]

Now I wonder how much of that has to do with the tire profile....

If you reverse the tires, will it make it up the ramp head first ?

Oh, and inspired by this buggy I am now also building a 4L motor 4WD direct drive buggy, I have finally found a way to use the three hole rims on turntable hubs, I am using the big 60t turntables wich have no slack at all and sit nice and tight.

 

[Didumos69]

3 hours ago, Permo said:

Now I wonder how much of that has to do with the tire profile....

If you reverse the tires, will it make it up the ramp head first ?

I thought of that too. I might try later.

3 hours ago, Permo said:

Oh, and inspired by this buggy I am now also building a 4L motor 4WD direct drive buggy, I have finally found a way to use the three hole rims on turntable hubs, I am using the big 60t turntables wich have no slack at all and sit nice and tight.

Cool! You're making me curious!

[Permo]

Not to clutter the topic, but this might be interesting for your buggy also;

The two large balljoints connect to the suspension arms, the two connectors allow for double steering rods for extra rigidity.

Not 100% correct allignment of the axles, but the way they are mounted profide enough flex for a tight fit without breaking anything.

From the inside 3x 4L axle with stop.

And with the rim mounted inside out, there is a nice click when you push it on, topped with 6x half bush and a centre axle it sits really really tight.

The connections might not all be in system, but this contraption feels really nice and tight and there is absolutely no slack on this hub, using 6 hole rims there's probably a legal way of connecting this, but if three hole rims is all you've got, this is the way to do it.

https://bricksafe.com/pages/Permo/slackless-hub

Edited May 30, 2018 by Permo
rims

[technic_addict]

I know you said you were done, but with all this talk about broken U-joints, have you considered making an integrated U joint which is strong?

[Didumos69]

39 minutes ago, technic_addict said:

I know you said you were done, but with all this talk about broken U-joints, have you considered making an integrated U joint which is strong?

Don't know what you mean with integrated U-joint. The U-joints have already been reinforced with silicon bands, as was suggested by @nerdsforprez.

This model pushes the possibilities of LEGO to the limited. If you drive with care in ludicrous mode, nothing will break. If you push it to the limit, for instance by going full power forward, full power backward, full power forward, etc., or by making crashes, you will eventually break a U-joint. If you want power in a big rugged model, this is part.of the game.

I wouldn't be too scared. When you drive around with this thing you'll soon get a feeling for what you can do and what you shouldn't. I had to discover that too. In all the videos I shot, I didn't break any parts.

Edited May 31, 2018 by Didumos69

[Jay Psi]

On a related note, what is the performance - and propensity for wear/damage - like in fast mode? I'm not planning on buying another BuWizz 2.0 until I see the changes @Ron1 mentioned implemented* so I'd be using a BuWizz 2.0 and an older 1.0.

*I was pleased to see the faults acknowledged publicly, but it's going to take more than words before I commit to another purchase.

[technic_addict]

14 minutes ago, Didumos69 said:

Don't know what you mean with integrated U-joint. The U-joints have already been reinforced with silicon bands, as was suggested by @nerdsforprez.

This model pushes the possibilities of LEGO to the limited. If you drive with care in ludicrous mode, nothing will break. If you push it to the limit, for instance by going full power forward, full power backward, full power forward, etc., or by making crashes, you will eventually break a U-joint. If you want power in a big rugged model, this is part.of the game.

I wouldn't be too scared. When you drive around with this thing you'll soon get a feeling for what you can do and what you shouldn't. I had to discover that too. In all the videos I shot, I didn't break any parts.

I mean a Lego built U-joint integrated into the wheel and chassis.

I have never made one, so I might be way wrong for implementing something like this?

 

[Didumos69]

26 minutes ago, Jay Psi said:

On a related note, what is the performance - and propensity for wear/damage - like in fast mode? I'm not planning on buying another BuWizz 2.0 until I see the changes @Ron1 mentioned implemented* so I'd be using a BuWizz 2.0 and an older 1.0.

Performance in fast mode it still really good. I believe @mj002 uses 2 BuWizz's 1.0, you can read his report a few pages back in this thread.

As.to wear, you should expect wear in all moving parts. The usual plastic dust. The turntables may also get slack in them, especially when you don't lubricate them and drive around with dust in the turntables.

27 minutes ago, technic_addict said:

I mean a Lego built U-joint integrated into the wheel and chassis.

I have never made one, so I might be way wrong for implementing something like this?

Aha, I get what you mean now. The whole idea of my front module was built around the idea of having realistic steering proportions and motors integrated in the suspension. This is why I used turntable-based wheel hubs. If I would have used a custom built U-joint all realistic proportions would have been gone.

[Jim]

On 29-5-2018 at 10:33 AM, Ron1 said:

Hi all,

...

Roni

I have copied this message to the general topic for BuWizz.

[Didumos69]

Small update to avoid bending in the longitudinal drive shafts. The LXF-file is updated as well as the LDR-file.

Parts list is updated too (click to enlarge):

[Permo]

On my crappy old PC I can't open LXF files so looking at renders is all I've got...

Seeing this render got me wondering if there is a gear ratio on the rear axles or is the gearing 1:1 ?

[pagicence]

11 hours ago, Didumos69 said:

Parts list is updated too (click to enlarge):

20E for a shock absorber!!!!! They are insane!!!!! Even the PF motors are cheaper!

Edited June 5, 2018 by pagicence

[Aventador2004]

35 minutes ago, Permo said:

On my crappy old PC I can't open LXF files so looking at renders is all I've got...

Seeing this render got me wondering if there is a gear ratio on the rear axles or is the gearing 1:1 ?

1:1 (front through uni joint, rear through gears.)