Koenigsegg Regera (Instructions for Manual available on rebrickable)

[langko]

2 hours ago, jensrodi said:

Understandable - and very sad that some people have no respect. Makes me really regret I didn't just buy the instructions right away instead of waiting until I had a reasonable amount of the parts needed. Was looking forward to the very unique door mechanism on this car. I can only hope that another designer comes up with a similar Koenigsegg model, though probably unlikely

I made the manual version and to be honest I was a little bit disappointed with the final model... In my experience the doors had lots of gears making them quite hard to actually open with the HOG, they work ok individually but trying to do it with them both selected at the same time is almost to much for the gearing to handle. The whole mechanism is quite slow as well (was definitely sped up in the video). I also had issues with the doors closing due to the backlash in some of the gears (mine needs a helping hand on the closing mechanism). See the GIF below to see the amount of movement the door has due to the backlash. Because of this and the way gravity works, the doors on my model tend to close in sideways too much before they start coming down, meaning they get stuck on the bodywork when closing. 

Another annoyance its the way the HOG steering is attacked with this 5l axle and bevel gear... The axle can easily come loose and the gear falls out and gets lost in the chassis, happened to me a few times and was a huge pain to fix.

I plan on going through and modifying some things to see if I can improve things but haven't got around to it yet.

I would be interested to hear if anyone else that's built this model has had similar problems with the doors. I feel like the motorised version would work better but I never got to make that one. The motors should provide more torque and speed to the mechanisms making them work more easily and quicker than it does turning by hand.

 

[LvdH]

33 minutes ago, langko said:

would be interested to hear if anyone else that's built this model has had similar problems with the doors.

Yep. Same thing here. 

[Lipko]

Hmm, interesting to see. In case of and official model, we would whine a lot about these issues. Double standard. 

[LvdH]

1 hour ago, Lipko said:

Hmm, interesting to see. In case of and official model, we would whine a lot about these issues. Double standard. 

You mean we’re putting higher expectations on a multi-billion dollar corporation with a team of designers than an individual building in his free time? Sounds quite normal to me. Besides there are probably thousands of Lamborghini Sians or Bugatti Chirons built for every Regera, so complaints will just be fewer

Edited June 22, 2022 by LvdH

[Lipko]

31 minutes ago, LvdH said:

You mean we’re putting higher expectations on a multi-billion dollar corporation with a team of designers than an individual building in his free time? Sounds quite normal to me. Besides there are probably thousands of Lamborghini Sians or Bugatti Chirons built for every Regera, so complaints will just be fewer

I'm looking only at the models which are made of the same standard parts with simple processes that doesn't require any special tools (there is free and good quality software for hobbyists too) or skills to design and assemble. So multi-billionairity doesn't have much effect on this. Team of designers? Sure, more eyes see more stuff. Free time? I think only the time part (actual work hours) is relevant, because it's spent on the same thing. So at the end, I don't see a huge advantage for official designers apart from introducing new parts every now and then. The quality issues are usually not related to new parts.

Also I'm looking at forums and review videos. The quantity of selled sets/instruction doesn't have much effect.

What I wanted to say that the double standard is this: we complain that official sets value looks much more than function and quality, yet we don't complain about it in case of MOCs.

And I admit, it's much-much easier to afford having official sets than MOCs, so that explains why there are so few MOC reviews and too small number of samples will mean imprecise results.

Edited June 22, 2022 by Lipko

[Gray Gear]

I used a similar gear arrangement in my Nissan 180SX MOC. I used a 6.5L with stop to make sure the axle cant back out, that solved the problem for me.

Flaws in MOCs can and should be openly adressed I think. But I do think different standards have to be used for MOCs and official Sets, because they are built with different standards to begin with.

While I do try to make my MOCs as sturdy as possible, not all MOCers do the same. If stuff breakes easily that's normal if it was just intended as a display piece.

And "new parts now and then" is quite the understatement. I wonder what kind of LEGO Supercar you would compare this MOC to. "built from standard parts"? All of the 1:8 Supercars introduced new and gamechanging bricks.

Edited June 23, 2022 by Gray Gear

[langko]

On 6/22/2022 at 6:39 PM, LvdH said:

Yep. Same thing here. 

Well it is definitely a bug then. I had originally thought I had built something wrong but after going over and over the instructions I didn't think I had. 

The RC version has rubber bands in the doors to help with the backlash in the closing mechanism. Sadly the same solution cannot be applied to the manual version as the HOG control doesn't provide enough force to stretch the bands in the opening movement. I am convinced the RC version would be much better.

On 6/22/2022 at 7:04 PM, Lipko said:

Hmm, interesting to see. In case of and official model, we would whine a lot about these issues. Double standard. 

 

22 hours ago, LvdH said:

You mean we’re putting higher expectations on a multi-billion dollar corporation with a team of designers than an individual building in his free time? Sounds quite normal to me. Besides there are probably thousands of Lamborghini Sians or Bugatti Chirons built for every Regera, so complaints will just be fewer

 

3 hours ago, Gray Gear said:

But I do think different standards have to be used for MOCs and official Sets, because they are built with different standards to begin with.

I think I agree with @Lipko here. It doesn't matter whether you spend 500 hours in 3 months designing a model because its your job, or 500 hours designing a model over 2 years in your spare time, its still the same amount of effort being put in. I don't see much advantage for working for LEGO except being able to have new parts or existing parts in new colours -> which mainly improves the looks of things not the mechanics. And in the this case I have zero complaints about the looks of this model, I personally think its the best looking car that's ever been made in the Dark Azure colour scheme: despite the very limiting part availability in that colour. I just feel like the mechanics don't live up to the rest of the model or what seems advertised. If you are going to sell instructions for a model that will most likely be more expensive than a LEGO set, I think its fair for the buyers to presume everything will work properly. In my opinion whether you work for LEGO or you a MOC maker, having functions that work properly should be the standard. Then if you are going to take it a step further and sell your MOC to another brick company to produce, then I think its absolutely fair for the model to be judged to the same standard as LEGO sets. 

3 hours ago, Gray Gear said:

I used a similar gear arrangement in my Nissan 180SX MOC. I used a 6.5L with stop to make sure the axle cant back out, that solved the problem for me.

While I do try to make my MOCs as sturdy as possible, not all MOCers do the same. If stuff breakes easily that's normal if it was just intended as a display piece.

And "new parts now and then" is quite the understatement. I wonder what kind of LEGO Supercar you would compare this MOC to. "built from standard parts"? All of the 1:8 Supercars introduced new and gamechanging bricks.

Yes I use axle with stops or other methods to stop axles coming out. I think building things so that axles can't come out of gears is a realistic and easily achievable standard one should aspire too. 

For me "built from standard parts" means building from anything that is currently available in the LEGO inventory. This model doesn't use 3D printed parts, painted parts or off brand parts so for me this is built with standard parts. 

[LvdH]

1 hour ago, langko said:

Well it is definitely a bug then. I had originally thought I had built something wrong but after going over and over the instructions I didn't think I had. 

To be fair, mine has been sitting on a shelf for 2 and half years. It might have worked better when I first built it, but I can’t remember.

1 hour ago, langko said:

I think I agree with @Lipko here. It doesn't matter whether you spend 500 hours in 3 months designing a model because its your job, or 500 hours designing a model over 2 years in your spare time, its still the same amount of effort being put in. I don't see much advantage for working for LEGO

I think it does matter, because it’s not just one person designing or figuring out solutions to problems. It’s a team of people with all the resources we could only dream of. All those people have different ideas, solutions, suggestions, etc plus years of experience. 

[astyanax]

1 hour ago, LvdH said:

I think it does matter, because it’s not just one person designing or figuring out solutions to problems. It’s a team of people with all the resources we could only dream of. All those people have different ideas, solutions, suggestions, etc plus years of experience. 

I'm in continual awe at what the people in this community can come up with, seemingly by themselves. From that perspective, I judge MOCers less strictly than TLG. Nevertheless, I do feel a little jolt of disappointment when a MOC I paid for doesn't function as smoothly as hoped. But I see this as part of the risk I knowingly took when sending my money to a lone designer without QC department.

[langko]

1 hour ago, LvdH said:

To be fair, mine has been sitting on a shelf for 2 and half years. It might have worked better when I first built it, but I can’t remember.

I think it does matter, because it’s not just one person designing or figuring out solutions to problems. It’s a team of people with all the resources we could only dream of. All those people have different ideas, solutions, suggestions, etc plus years of experience. 

I'd like to give the model the benefit of the doubt, but I built mine about a year ago... and its never worked smoothly. I don't think sitting on the shelf would do much harm in this case and there's no elastic bands that wear out or stretch.

That is a good point. Although I think there is plenty resources available to MOC makers to help make the best models possible. Read Sariels book "the unofficial lego technic builders guide". Buy the instructions for a popular and well respected MOC like Charbel's 720s or Bruno's P1 to see how they've been constructed, or read through one of the many WIP threads here to see how some models came to life. Start your own WIP thread on this forum if you need help on a mechanism or how to attach something, there's plenty of smart people here that would be happy to help. Build the official 1:8 LEGO sets -> then build the pimped up versions to see how the mechanisms have been improved. Ask your friend or partner to test out the functions while your designing, they'll be able to help give feedback if something doesn't work quite right (I'm constantly asking my wife what she thinks of what I'm making and she's is always more than happy to tell me when something isn't quite good enough haha). Ask someone in the LEGO community who you trust and respect to test build your model and give feedback before you start charging for instructions. At the end of the day I think it all comes down to how badly you want to make something and the personal standards you set for yourself as a builder. 

[T Lego]

IMO it is not so much about having access to resources, at least not if you are in the game of publishing premium MOCs. I only whish I could have a 1:8 scale diecast model next to a WIP for optimum comparison, instead of blueprints, allowing me to judge the proportions more accurately. Unfortunately making such purchase is simply not lucrative in the end. 

After releasing my Centenario I was soon full of regret not having taken, let's say, three extra months to focus on improving build quality and DFA, so it would actually be able to compete with UCS supercars on that level. Despite having disappointed a number of people who purchased my instructions, the model could still be considered a relative succes, looking at the rebrickable statistics. And for me personally too, having gained valuable experience. Now, my personal standards have risen and consequently the portion of 'hard work' needed to fnish a moc has increased significantly, part of the reason why I haven't published anything myself for the past two years. 

MOC designers are not obligated to meet certain standards, they can do whatever they want, even if they sell their instructions. They are hobbyists doing it for fun, and pollishing everything up to TLG equivilant standards takes a lot of discipline which can take away that fun. In the first place, I think one should rather be thankful for making it availble to the public, regardless of whether it meets up with the expectations of the buyer. After all, it doesn't harm or compromise anything.

Shifting back to the topic, it is logic to pressume that Dugald first designed the motorized version and then converted the design to a manual. Meaning the RC is probably all round much more sophisticated in design as the model was primarily designed around that. 

Edited June 23, 2022 by T Lego

[Gray Gear]

@T Lego I fully agree. Also I would love to have access to the real Car I am building to take pictures. I sometimes find areas which are hard or even impossible to find pictures of on the Internet.

Also, making building instructions is not free only because the programms are free. Personally I spent a good chunk of money for a new PC to run those programms reliably and a 32Inch monitor so I can actually see what I am doing. That's money not every MOCer will be able to spend just to make instructions for others. 

What I would really love to have is one of these massive touch display monitors digital designers or artits use, but I can't afford them as they are cost like 5K. I bet TLG designers have a lot better hardware than the average MOCer.

Edited June 24, 2022 by Gray Gear

[Lipko]

12 hours ago, T Lego said:

IMO it is not so much about having access to resources, at least not if you are in the game of publishing premium MOCs. I only whish I could have a 1:8 scale diecast model next to a WIP for optimum comparison, instead of blueprints, allowing me to judge the proportions more accurately. Unfortunately making such purchase is simply not lucrative in the end. 

After releasing my Centenario I was soon full of regret not having taken, let's say, three extra months to focus on improving build quality and DFA, so it would actually be able to compete with UCS supercars on that level. Despite having disappointed a number of people who purchased my instructions, the model could still be considered a relative succes, looking at the rebrickable statistics. And for me personally too, having gained valuable experience. Now, my personal standards have risen and consequently the portion of 'hard work' needed to fnish a moc has increased significantly, part of the reason why I haven't published anything myself for the past two years. 

MOC designers are not obligated to meet certain standards, they can do whatever they want, even if they sell their instructions. They are hobbyists doing it for fun, and pollishing everything up to TLG equivilant standards takes a lot of discipline which can take away that fun. In the first place, I think one should rather be thankful for making it availble to the public, regardless of whether it meets up with the expectations of the buyer. After all, it doesn't harm or compromise anything.

Shifting back to the topic, it is logic to pressume that Dugald first designed the motorized version and then converted the design to a manual. Meaning the RC is probably all round much more sophisticated in design as the model was primarily designed around that. 

I agree with this.

And I also admit is that my comments are partly driven by jealousy. I was the guy who spent the 3 months on refining the build, the instructions etc. and who didn't lower his personal standards (for example the model should be sturdy enough to be playable without carefullness). The looks of my models were okay but not that spectacular. And than the big boom came in the MOC community with all the awesome looking flashy models I just couldn't compete with. Because I couldn't lower my standards. Partly because I couldn't afford to actually try those builds so I thought those MOCs were really magic I will never be able to design anything close to it. And party because of simple stubbornness. The very one-sided hype about those models didn't help that delusion I had. Then I realized that in most cases those hyped models were actually lacking the quality I strived for (and yup, official sets too) and often their "selling points" were actually achieved by cutting corners (not literally), but it was too late, life intervened. And because of that delusion, I never got pass the medicore desinger level (I still don't get that pro tag at my avatar) and never got to know what I would really be capable of.

So that way my story.

Edited June 24, 2022 by Lipko

[langko]

15 hours ago, T Lego said:

IMO it is not so much about having access to resources, at least not if you are in the game of publishing premium MOCs. I only whish I could have a 1:8 scale diecast model next to a WIP for optimum comparison, instead of blueprints, allowing me to judge the proportions more accurately. Unfortunately making such purchase is simply not lucrative in the end. 

I bought a cheap 1/14 scale RC car when I made the second Senna. Granted its not the same scale but I found it super helpful in terms of being able to visualise things from a 3D perspective. Plus it was fun to drive around and I gave it to a friends kids when the model was done so it was win win for everyone.

15 hours ago, T Lego said:

After releasing my Centenario I was soon full of regret not having taken, let's say, three extra months to focus on improving build quality and DFA, so it would actually be able to compete with UCS supercars on that level. Despite having disappointed a number of people who purchased my instructions, the model could still be considered a relative succes, looking at the rebrickable statistics. And for me personally too, having gained valuable experience. Now, my personal standards have risen and consequently the portion of 'hard work' needed to fnish a moc has increased significantly, part of the reason why I haven't published anything myself for the past two years. 

MOC designers are not obligated to meet certain standards, they can do whatever they want, even if they sell their instructions. They are hobbyists doing it for fun, and pollishing everything up to TLG equivilant standards takes a lot of discipline which can take away that fun. In the first place, I think one should rather be thankful for making it availble to the public, regardless of whether it meets up with the expectations of the buyer. After all, it doesn't harm or compromise anything.

Huge respect for you coming out and admitting that. I have to say I was pretty disappointed with how unsecured how all the body work was attached, especially given that it was available as a set as well. It almost seemed like CADA didn't care about how it was put together, just on how it looked. I feel like a lot of people on social media were quick to say comments like "this is so much better than the sian", "shame on LEGO" etc etc... but when you actually build it you realise the build quality doesn't actually compete. I think that's where some of the double standards come into play: it seems we praise MOCs before we have built them and whine about LEGO sets before they have even come out. I have no doubt though that you've learnt massively from the experience and your LaFerrari will be on another level. 

I agree people can do whatever they want, and with that reasoning I think LEGO can as well, but if an individual or a company's happy selling things that don't work properly then that's up to there own conscious and standards. I have no problem buying LEGO sets or supporting MOC designers by purchasing instructions, I just wish there was more openness in the shortcomings of things as well. Reading through this thread the model comes across as being as close to perfect as one can get, and looking back at the video there is no footage of the doors closing so it seems like effort has been made to hide any malfunctions. After I had built the model I had commented my findings on rebrickable, just so other people could be aware before they potentially sunk quite a lot of money into the model. I am still happy to support designers but after the experiences with this and your Centenario I'm just a lot more cautious of what MOCs I build.

15 hours ago, T Lego said:

Shifting back to the topic, it is logic to pressume that Dugald first designed the motorized version and then converted the design to a manual. Meaning the RC is probably all round much more sophisticated in design as the model was primarily designed around that. 

He mentioned he designed both at the same time, but I more or less come to the conclusion that the RC version was the predominant focus as well.

7 hours ago, Gray Gear said:

Also, making building instructions is not free only because the programms are free. Personally I spent a good chunk of money for a new PC to run those programms reliably and a 32Inch monitor so I can actually see what I am doing. That's money not every MOCer will be able to spend just to make instructions for others. 

This is a good point too, and something I struggle with every day in my day job. But I personally think making instructions and making the actual MOC are two entirely different skillsets. You don't have to be great at making instructions to make great MOCs and vice versa. From my end there were definitely no complaints with instructions with this model, they were of super high quality. 

2 hours ago, Lipko said:

Because I couldn't lower my standards.

This is something that sums me up too. Maybe its because I work for a company that manufactures and designs things to the highest of standards, that carries over to a lot of what I do in my personally life. I've always been the type of person that can't settle for anything less than my best work so I can admittedly sometimes fail to understand why others wouldn't want to do the same. The approach of 'only the best is good enough' can be a burden at times but it is also incredibly amazing when you see the potential and results of what can be created with that attitude.

I agree and can empathise with the rest of your comment as well.

[ndm1306]

this Moc has been removed and selly store also closed, how can I buy the instruction? thank you.

[jensrodi]

On 8/1/2022 at 8:44 AM, ndm1306 said:

this Moc has been removed and selly store also closed, how can I buy the instruction? thank you.

I've also been looking for this for a while, regret very much that I waited to get the instructions. I did not consider that the designer would ever pull this incredible design from Rebrickable, really very sad. And there is not much we can do, I guess, but if you find a way to get the instructions please let me know.

I did notice that the designer is credited for a new set from CADA: The C61048 Koenigsegg Jesko Fantasma, in some respects similar to this moc. Personally I would not buy that, the brick quality is not that good, but I've noticed that CADA make instructions public after a couple of months. I know they use special non-lego parts to some extend, but I'm hoping to build around that and maybe be able to reconstruct this model using the CADA as a base. Just an idea.

[Sokolov Edward]

On 9/27/2022 at 10:56 AM, jensrodi said:

I did notice that the designer is credited for a new set from CADA: The C61048 Koenigsegg Jesko Fantasma, in some respects similar to this moc. Personally I would not buy that, the brick quality is not that good, but I've noticed that CADA make instructions public after a couple of months. I know they use special non-lego parts to some extend, but I'm hoping to build around that and maybe be able to reconstruct this model using the CADA as a base. Just an idea.

I was also interested in this model from CADA. The model is really complex and interesting to assemble, but I'm not satisfied with its color - white. Therefore, I decided to assemble it myself from the available parts in a red and black body color. In this model, CADA uses parts of its own design, which have no analogues in Lego and are very difficult to replace - these are modified beams and beams with pins at the ends. The gear shifter from CADA can be easily replaced with 4 Lego pieces. I'm not a "Lego-only" fan, so I bought 2 cheaper models from CADA (C64004 and C52027) which have the required modified beams. The manual for C61048 is already available on the CADA website.

Edited March 13, 2023 by Sokolov Edward

[Domas]

Does somebody have the instruction for this model? I would really want to get it? Would it be problem to send it to e-mail ?

[MAP Tec]

Great design and details!!!

[vded]

Guys, does anyone have the parts list? I have built and disassembled my model but the Regera isn't available anymore at Rebrickable to download the parts list again.