42083 - Bugatti Chiron

[Didumos69]

24 minutes ago, aminnich said:

I understand you guys are excited about the set, but does it really need at least 4 separate topics?

Maybe a fifth where we can discuss the other four? 

More seriously, I understand your remark, but it's quite common. With the Porsche we also had the general 42056 topic, before that the 42056 speculation topic, the 42056 price and availability topic, the 42056 MODs and Improvements topic and the video reviews topic. And of course @Jim's 42056 review topic.

Edited June 6, 2018 by Didumos69

[aminnich]

I would be fine with 2/3 but 5? Really?? Seems more like people want more attention to their video or thoughts on the set

 

[technic_addict]

10 minutes ago, Didumos69 said:

 And of course @Jim's 42056 review topic.

Speaking of @Jim's review......how is that coming along?

[Didumos69]

1 minute ago, aminnich said:

I would be fine with 2/3 but 5? Really?? Seems more like people want more attention to their video or thoughts on the set

A single topic with speed builds and review videos would maybe be a good idea?

[aminnich]

Just now, Didumos69 said:

A single topic with speed builds and review videos would maybe be a good idea?

One main topic, more mod topic, one videos/reviews topic

[Didumos69]

4 minutes ago, aminnich said:

One main topic, more mod topic, one videos/reviews topic

You have my vote.

There also seems to have been a kind of review race. Not good for the quality of reviews in general. Quite some errors have been made. I haven't seen a thorough review yet, with for instance some info about how the gearbox works, that it has been built up from a 4-speed and a low-high gearbox, etc.

8 minutes ago, technic_addict said:

Speaking of @Jim's review......how is that coming along?

I hope he takes his time 

Edited June 6, 2018 by Didumos69

[conceitedguy]

Something that would be neat to see in future Deluxe Super Cars would be a removal hand-of-god knob. I don't imagine it would be that terribly hard to find an inconspicuous spot on the roof/rear end to have a hole providing access to the steering setup that you could slot a removable axle + gear into; that way, you can please both people who only care about displaying the thing and people who want to play with the functions more easily. Watching sariel try to stick his hands inside the car to access the wheel in his video is painful.

[Zerobricks]

2 hours ago, Erik Leppen said:

Or, now I come to think of it, custom 7L suspension arms, for example by extending the 6L arms with thin 3L or 4L liftarms. But I don't know how strong that would be. But then you could increase the 2/4 distance ratio not to 3/5 but to 4/6.

But I have no idea what could be in the way of moving the mounting points for the suspension arms inwards.

If I would have known that this image would get quoted so many times, I'd have taken some more time to make a better image Also, please note that the perpendicular-idea is not exact, because the perpendicular distance changes as the angle between the parts changes. (As a rule of thumb, compressing the spring should ideally not decrease the length of the red arrow.)

Leave spring as it is, but just extend the suspension arms deeper inside as much as possible. This will stiffen up the suspension.

[Didumos69]

Just now, Zerobricks said:

Leave spring as it is, but just extend the suspension arms deeper inside as much as possible. This will stiffen up the suspension.

Some context is missing, but that is exactly what me and @Erik Leppen are trying to say.

[WvG_853]

10 hours ago, iv-tecman said:

ooh hope so. Just ordered the parts for pimp my Porsche , as that model as a whole bunch of amazing improvements, such as spring loaded doors, stiffer suspension, re worked gearing and removable body along with a handy HOG steering. I can wait to build my Bugatti 

Coincidence! I also ordered the missing pieces as well as the printed parts. While waiting for the price of the Chiron to drop, I decided to build the ultimate Porsche. I hope somebody will do the same for the Chiron ...

[sm1995]

15 hours ago, Didumos69 said:

Aha, so you're talking about moving the point where the springs attach to the bottom suspension arm towards the wheel. But how? I don't see any options.

Yup! I don't know, either way it seems like it'll involve switching the suspension arms out for different pieces. I used the 6L ones on my MOC, ill post a picture of how that's set up over the weekend. I'll have to take a look and see whats possible when I get my Chiron (hopefully tomorrow!)

14 hours ago, agrof said:

Nice old-school calculation, like it! 

Meanwhile, discussing about forces is just one thing to consider, but You also need to offset the upper pivot point - otherwise You flatten the geometry, thus reduce the base clearance of the suspension. So might win on spring force, but loose on suspension travel + ride height.

hahahah thanks, old school is sometimes exactly what we need :)

But you are right, there's a lot of things to consider. That's why I need to get my hands on the set before I start theorizing...

[Kumbbl]

10 hours ago, conceitedguy said:

Something that would be neat to see in future Deluxe Super Cars would be a removal hand-of-god knob. I don't imagine it would be that terribly hard to find an inconspicuous spot on the roof/rear end to have a hole providing access to the steering setup that you could slot a removable axle + gear into; that way, you can please both people who only care about displaying the thing and people who want to play with the functions more easily. Watching sariel try to stick his hands inside the car to access the wheel in his video is painful.

100% agree. As I already said - the more or less unsteerabilty and the failing front suspension are the main faults of this product - all other stuff is at least ok or even very well done and pleasing

but these two are unacceptable - at least IMHO...

[Rikus]

Hi,

Since I was very concerned about the criticism on the shape of the set... I decided to do some quick comparison between the real car and the TLG model...

The result are the three following pictures.

From top view, the model is very good IMHO.

Overall proportions are almost perfect: only the canopy seem to be somehow narrower than the real one and mirror position is a little much towards the back... also the back end of the car is a little bit wider in TLG version.

 

From side view the differences are more visible, because of two main issues in 42053: smaller wheel size and longer "nose".

I made two different comparison pictures; the first one have the real car and the Technic model aligned by using same wheelbase.

You'll notice that the overall proportions of the whole model are good, except for the "C" shape on the side (a little too short on 42053) and, of course, the front end that is MUCH longer than the real one (almost two times longer, from the fender to the nose).

 

In second comparison the two cars have been aligned  by total length... and the overall shape of the TLG version seems to be even flatter than before...

It's almost good, anyway, except for the wheels size and position: the from wheel is really too much towards the back, it should have been positioned about 3 studs more forward.

 

Anyway the global proportions (height, width and length) seem to be (almost) correct and the main issue, IMHO, is related to wheel size (almost acceptable) and front part of the car, especially the "long nose" and/or wheel position (the only real flaw of the set).

Edited June 7, 2018 by Rikus
Embedded Images

[WvG_853]

Thanks @Rikus for this very illustrative images. It shows as well that the  side window is too high or the door too low ... From above the similarity is stunning

[therealjustin]

I tried doing a comparison using those exact images but realized that the perspective of the side view of the actual car is off, making the front overhang appear shorter than it really is. 

 

 

[Jurss]

1 hour ago, therealjustin said:

tried doing a comparison using those exact images

Try to put on this

[Milan]

18 hours ago, aminnich said:

I understand you guys are excited about the set, but does it really need at least 4 separate topics?

 

Yes, we are going to sort it up a bit.

[Maaboo the Witch]

9 minutes ago, Milan said:

Yes, we are going to sort it up a bit.

To quote Chandler Bing from Friends, "MERGE!" 

[nmono]

Hi everyone,

I just finished building my Chiron and I see problem with front suspension that everyone is talking about.

The ground clearance for the front end is 9mm before pushing down on the suspension, after compressing the suspension the car returns to only 3mm of ground clearance! (you have to manually raise the front end).

For comparison the Porsche had 6mm of gound clearance before pushing down on suspension, and after releasing it returned to 5mm, so that's not as bad.

Just wondering if one can somehow modify the springs by maybe adding a spacer piece between the spring and the yellow part of the shock to add firmness. I see this concept on Tamiya RC shocks that the firmness of the springs can be adjusted with adding different thicknesses of spacers.

[AVCampos]

4 minutes ago, nmono said:

Just wondering if one can somehow modify the springs by maybe adding a spacer piece between the spring and the yellow part of the shock to add firmness. I see this concept on Tamiya RC shocks that the firmness of the springs can be adjusted with adding different thicknesses of spacers.

The fat (and, sadly, out of production) shock absorber can do that, by rotating the middle portion.

[technic_addict]

28 minutes ago, nmono said:

Hi everyone,

I just finished building my Chiron and I see problem with front suspension that everyone is talking about.

The ground clearance for the front end is 9mm before pushing down on the suspension, after compressing the suspension the car returns to only 3mm of ground clearance! (you have to manually raise the front end).

For comparison the Porsche had 6mm of gound clearance before pushing down on suspension, and after releasing it returned to 5mm, so that's not as bad.

Just wondering if one can somehow modify the springs by maybe adding a spacer piece between the spring and the yellow part of the shock to add firmness. I see this concept on Tamiya RC shocks that the firmness of the springs can be adjusted with adding different thicknesses of spacers.

 

20 minutes ago, AVCampos said:

The fat (and, sadly, out of production) shock absorber can do that, by rotating the middle portion.

I thought I remember someone using a bush or thin bush on a regular spring.

Edited June 7, 2018 by technic_addict

[T Lego]

Placing a half stud bush in the shockabsorber adds stiffness but it would decrease travel by 50%, so I don't think it is a proper solution...

[Didumos69]

22 hours ago, Erik Leppen said:

Or, now I come to think of it, custom 7L suspension arms, for example by extending the 6L arms with thin 3L or 4L liftarms. But I don't know how strong that would be. But then you could increase the 2/4 distance ratio not to 3/5 but to 4/6.

But I have no idea what could be in the way of moving the mounting points for the suspension arms inwards.

I posted about a MOD with 6L suspensions arms - so gaining 20% strength -  in the MODs and Improvements thread. Perhaps someone could try?

[Ivan_M]

There is an interview with TLG designers and Bugatti representatives published at New Elementary:

http://www.newelementary.com/2018/06/press-conference-lego-bugatti-chiron.html#more

Some questions are from this topic I believe. the most hilarious is this one:

Quote

What would you say is the most important thing to get right, is it the form or the function?

AR: Everything has to be right. It’s a Bugatti. Everything has to reach the top level, both when it comes to authenticity and functionality. Nothing is left to chance.

 

[Bartybum]

@Ivan_M Lol that’s so rich coming from them