42114 - 6x6 Volvo Articulated Hauler

[kbalage]

45 minutes ago, Gimmick said:

@kbalage

You said in your review that 1st drive gear and tipping are on the "opposite" position in the gearbox: 0° 1st gear and 270° tipping, and the change from 270° to 360° with an addition of 90° is blocked for calibration,

So if I set the L-Motor in PU to absolut 0° before I install it and leave out the cable holder, there should no reason why the "use shortest rotational direction" function would not always work and directly switch from tipping to first gear, right?

Absolute 0 does not play a role here, that is only used internally as a reference for the application to be able to rotate by 90 degree increments. Park position is at 6 hours, 1st gear is at 9 hours, 2nd gear is at 12 hours, 3rd gear is at 3 hours. Switching from park to 1st requires a 270 degrees rotation counterclokwise since the physical block is between 6 and 9 hours. Hope it makes sense.

15 minutes ago, mpj said:

What I don't understand is: if I drive the truck faster, it goes automatically from 1st to 3rd gear. Then I stop it. When I restart, does it restart from 3rd gear or does it go automatically to first gear?

Same question, I stop it for tipping. Then does it restart automatically from first gear?

If you release the throttle it always goes back to park gear, does not matter in which gear you were previously. This applies to automatic and manual mode as well, so the manual mode only sets the target gear but the gearbox does not stay in gear. Tipping is engaged in park position, so that works every time the truck is not moving (meaning it is not in any other gears).

4 minutes ago, I_Igor said:

@kbalage first of all sorry for late response but I find your review very simple and informative enough to help people to make decision about 42114 set. Since I use mobile phone I want to ask you for one favour - is it possible to have separate photos of those few building steps that you showed in video review?

I showed a lot of things there but did not really take separate photos during building, so the best I can give is some screenshots. Which parts would you like to see?

For a little Sunday morning fun here's 42030 and 42114 working together:

 

[Gimmick]

Just now, kbalage said:

Absolute 0 does not play a role here, that is only used internally as a reference for the application to be able to rotate by 90 degree increments. Park position is at 6 hours, 1st gear is at 9 hours, 2nd gear is at 12 hours, 3rd gear is at 3 hours. Switching from park to 1st requires a 270 degrees rotation counterclokwise since the physical block is between 6 and 9 hours. Hope it makes sense.

 

Yes, I remembered the position of the blocking lift arm wrong ^^

What I meant is:

1. Remove the cable clip / move the lift arm one stud back

2. Connect the L motor to the PU App -> Set position to absolute 0°

3. Built it with a clearly selected gear and remember what it was :D

-> ignore the c+ profile and use your own PU-Profile, that reads and sets the absolute position -> you can move from anywhere in any direction. And you always know which angle selects which gear.

And if you want to use the c+ profile again, maybe (?) an axle or pin is good enough for calibration.

I think they only used the block+calibration method, because you cannot tell in which position the L-motor is without using a second app.

[1gor]

@kbalage the part of video when you build rear axles, rear part front part and hood are interesting to see as images (if it is possible) I could look at review and wrote down time in video where it is.

Approximate time for screenshots are:

~~ 3:20, 4:40, 5:40, 8:30, 9:50, 10:10

Of course you can PM them if you do not want to reply here.

Kind regards

 

 

Edited July 19, 2020 by I_Igor

[kbalage]

@Gimmick if you don't use the Control+ profile then there's practically no need to change the structure. You assign 4 buttons to the 3 gears and the park/tipping position and switch between them manually, and the gearbox won't jump unnecessarily between gears.

@I_Igor you can PM me the timestamps and I can make the screenshots for you. Raw video is 4k so that should be usable. 

[Gimmick]

Just now, kbalage said:

@Gimmick if you don't use the Control+ profile then there's practically no need to change the structure. You assign 4 buttons to the 3 gears and the park/tipping position and switch between them manually, and the gearbox won't jump unnecessarily between gears.

The idea is simply that you can switch from parking to first gear without first having to mechanically select the third and second gear ;)  P -> 1st instead of P -> 3rd -> 2nd ->1st. I know it would only be one button press in both cases, but it would save 180° of rotation and it .. eehmmm.. would be "optimized" and "hill start" and things... you know? :D

[dabo]

For me personally it feels wrong to pay more for this than the 42082 which had a lot more parts especially when I have zero interest in C+. But I do think it would look good on the shelf. I’m in a pickle. :) 

[Jundis]

This thing surely turned out better, than I expected. Still, I am unsure on this one... it is a great piece donor with the big wheels, panels, diffs and electronic components. But there are really major points bugging me:

- steering just doesn't feel right, little LAs would have been the better option imho

- no suspension :-/

- this thing has exactly the same D16J engine as the Volvo L350F (42030), they should have tried to squeeze the big green cylinder blocks in.

*edit: And of course the overall shape/dimensions of the cabin and dump bed

To implement a gearbox is nice, but why on a construction machine? For a motorized rally car or something, this would really be great, but here, it's not really necessary.

Maybe @grohl comes up with a B-Model of a T450D with a Scraper :-)

Edited July 20, 2020 by Jundis

[TeamThrifty]

3 hours ago, dabo said:

But I do think it would look good on the shelf. I’m in a pickle

Lego is like a wild animal, it shouldn't be 'caged' on a shelf.. thats what diecast models and airfix are for.. Lego is meant to me taken to pieces and used for moc's or mod's, to be set free with your imagination and run wild!!

So with that thought(!!) and you not liking C+, leave it in the shop would be my advice.... (it i will mean more stock for me to buy one in a couple of months and give it the life it deserves!!)  

2 hours ago, Jundis said:

This thing surely turned out better, than I expected.

Agreed!

 

2 hours ago, Jundis said:

- no suspension :-/

Also agree... bit of a shame.

 

2 hours ago, Jundis said:

To implement a gearbox is nice, but why on a construction machine?

Cos its a great idea to help inspire us all. Doesn't matter if its in construction or a rally car, its a launching point for idea to flow from. I've got plans for it in a tractor moc.. so it inspired me, which is great!!

[Bartybum]

2 hours ago, Jundis said:

To implement a gearbox is nice, but why on a construction machine? For a motorized rally car or something, this would really be great, but here, it's not really necessary. 

So it can traverse steeper slopes

[Parazels]

2 hours ago, TeamThrifty said:

Cos its a great idea to help inspire us all. Doesn't matter if its in construction or a rally car, its a launching point for idea to flow from. I've got plans for it in a tractor moc.. so it inspired me, which is great!!

I agree. The Lego designer has shown us, that an ordinary vehicle (at first glance) can be pretty complex and exciting.

2 minutes ago, Parazels said:

 

 

Edited July 19, 2020 by Parazels

[Cumulonimbus]

5 hours ago, Jundis said:

This thing surely turned out better, than I expected. Still, I am unsure on this one... it is a great piece donor with the big wheels, panels, diffs and electronic components. But there are really major points bugging me:

<list snipped>

To implement a gearbox is nice, but why on a construction machine? For a motorized rally car or something, this would really be great, but here, it's not really necessary.

I feel the same way: In principle it is a good set, with an attractive license, good play value and the necessary functions. But it's not the set I longed for: C+ still is a considerable obstacle for me, in price, the volume claim and the smartphone dependency. Beside this, the gearbox does not really trigger me and its penalty of unrealistic proportions is too high in my book (especially in a licensed set).

It does have potential though. I think we will see many MODs: realistic rear suspension, mLA steering, tweaked proportions, tail gate etc. Maybe @efferman has plans to take away some of its shortcomings, I really liked his mLA steering modification for the 42030. A realistic rear suspension would be a great addition as well, but I think one will need to loose the gearbox and/or the C+ elements to achieve this.

I'm considering buying the set eventually as the basis for a MOD/MOC, make it a manual or PF(non-RC) model and selling the C+ components to soften the pricetag. The suspension is an interesting challenge to take on, but it will have to wait while I'm working on another suspension related project.

[Ngoc Nguyen]

15 minutes ago, Cumulonimbus said:

A realistic rear suspension would be a great addition as well,

I planned to go for a quick and dirty incorporation of 42070's rear suspensions in my upgrade from 42030 B to 42114.

[efferman]

19 minutes ago, Cumulonimbus said:

has plans to take away some of its shortcomings

Indeed i have a few ideas, but as always this would result in a massive overhaul.

[Cumulonimbus]

1 minute ago, efferman said:

Indeed i have a few ideas, but as always this would result in a massive overhaul.

Great, can't wait to see what you come up with .

[suffocation]

I guess another mod would be to replace the small turntable with a large one, although that would leave a meagre two-stud clearance.

[Timorzelorzworz]

Has anyone noticed that this set uses two 3L pins with axle in dbg? They are used in the roof of the cabin and may look ugly in red there. It is the first time that we get this part in a set since it was replaced with the red version. It is like in the Sian where black 2L axles are used in case the red ones would look ugly, but it IS the first time to get both dbg and red pin together in one set.

[TeamThrifty]

5 hours ago, suffocation said:

I guess another mod would be to replace the small turntable with a large one

I don't think its the size... it needs a bracing arm above it. I used a steering arm with a ball joint on each end to handle the pivot and caster. Its used by Case IH in their steiger tractors and work perfectly in lego..

 

[mpj]

7 hours ago, Timorzelorzworz said:

Has anyone noticed that this set uses two 3L pins with axle in dbg? They are used in the roof of the cabin and may look ugly in red there. It is the first time that we get this part in a set since it was replaced with the red version. It is like in the Sian where black 2L axles are used in case the red ones would look ugly, but it IS the first time to get both dbg and red pin together in one set.

Interesting observation! 

[kbalage]

9 hours ago, Timorzelorzworz said:

Has anyone noticed that this set uses two 3L pins with axle in dbg? 

Yes, it was quite refreshing to see. Recorded it but did not make it to the review as I thought it was way too long already. Btw it's interesting to see how often the dbg variant is used in non-Technic sets.

[dabo]

15 hours ago, Cumulonimbus said:

I'm considering buying the set eventually as the basis for a MOD/MOC, make it a manual or PF(non-RC) model and selling the C+ components to soften the pricetag.

Sounds like something I will consider too.

[Rudivdk]

On 7/19/2020 at 5:32 PM, Cumulonimbus said:

I'm considering buying the set eventually ... and selling the C+ components to soften the pricetag. 

My thoughts exactly as well. Same for the Osprey if it ever hits stores...

[1gor]

On 7/19/2020 at 5:32 PM, Cumulonimbus said:

I feel the same way: In principle it is a good set, with an attractive license, good play value and the necessary functions. But it's not the set I longed for: C+ still is a considerable obstacle for me, in price, the volume claim and the smartphone dependency. Beside this, the gearbox does not really trigger me and its penalty of unrealistic proportions is too high in my book (especially in a licensed set).

It does have potential though. I think we will see many MODs: realistic rear suspension, mLA steering, tweaked proportions, tail gate etc. Maybe @efferman has plans to take away some of its shortcomings, I really liked his mLA steering modification for the 42030. A realistic rear suspension would be a great addition as well, but I think one will need to loose the gearbox and/or the C+ elements to achieve this.

I'm considering buying the set eventually as the basis for a MOD/MOC, make it a manual or PF(non-RC) model and selling the C+ components to soften the pricetag. The suspension is an interesting challenge to take on, but it will have to wait while I'm working on another suspension related project.

Perhaps you should wait until inventory will be published (and instructions) and see what you have and what parts you need; perhaps it would be better that way. Despite that can and rear bucket are a bit disproportional and as you said you do not need gearbox so perhaps you have most of parts needed for rear suspension in your inventory...(just a friendly suggestion nothing more)

[Cumulonimbus]

9 hours ago, I_Igor said:

Perhaps you should wait until inventory will be published (and instructions) and see what you have and what parts you need; perhaps it would be better that way. Despite that can and rear bucket are a bit disproportional and as you said you do not need gearbox so perhaps you have most of parts needed for rear suspension in your inventory...(just a friendly suggestion nothing more)

Thank you for the suggestion, I have no plans to purchase the set yet. I once started a LDD design based on the 42030 B-model, I think I had a rolling chassis with the correct suspension geometry. I even bought a second hand 42030 back then as a parts donor for this project. It might be a good time to dust it of and continue building. I have a lot of yellow bricks in my inventory, so that is not an issue. But I will need a lot of panel for the dump bed, two extra tires with yellow rims and two XL LAs.

It just hit me why TLG used the angled panels instead of the 5x11 an 3x11 rectangular panels: The angled panels are 1M thick along both their surfaces, this way both the inner and outer surface of the bed look as smooth as possible.

 

[1gor]

Just now, Cumulonimbus said:

It just hit me why TLG used the angled panels instead of the 5x11 an 3x11 rectangular panels: The angled panels are 1M thick along both their surfaces, this way both the inner and outer surface of the bed look as smooth as possible.

 

That is a good question; perhaps there is certain number of parts mandatory per mold in financial year to be build to cover finance...very difficult question indeed...and you will need mudguards 

Kind regards

[Ngoc Nguyen]

Not sure if someone has noticed: the flagship box for both last year and this year no longer has the front flap.