42143 - Ferrari Daytona SP3

[Ngoc Nguyen]

Found another error in the instruction.

The knob gear in the 45 degree rotated position is somehow inserted into an axle hole in the upright position.

This structure is built identically in the Sian, so I checked the Sian instruction. In that one the knob gear is inserted in the upright position.

[kbalage]

The digital instructions were updated with a fix for the gearbox sequence anomaly, but honestly I don't think they chose the best solution. Up until step 87 the orange wave selectors form the V shape as previously, then at step 88 the wave selectors are rotated into the position what was used in the Lamborghini, just to allow the green 2L beam to be mounted as previously. But from step 89 nothing was updated so the original incorrect positions are shown. 

I know not many people will actually care about the gear sequence, but it's a bit sad to see that even the fix is not properly implemented or particularly thoughtful. And of course there's no steps added yet for the extra panels, no fix for step 104...

 

[Peter1999]

Book arrived! 3136/5000, number is printed only on the rear side of the slipcase. Slipcase is harddeck, one side open, not just paper sleeve.

Edit: By advice - not going to share via link.

Edited June 6, 2022 by Peter1999

[howitzer]

36 minutes ago, Peter1999 said:

Book arrived! 3136/5000, number is printed only on the rear side of the slipcase. Slipcase is harddeck, one side open, not just paper sleeve. I am going to photo-scan it. Can I post the link to pdf on google drive directly here or is it against the forum rules?

Posting pdf of the full book is pretty straightforward infringement of copyright, so I'm quite sure it's against the forum rules.

[allanp]

4 minutes ago, howitzer said:

Posting pdf of the full book is pretty straightforward infringement of copyright, so I'm quite sure it's against the forum rules.

It's been allowed with instructions which are also copyrighted, but then Lego freely shares those anyway. So really I think only Lego can give that permission to share, I don't think this forum can give that.

[Peter1999]

Alright.

Edit - by advice, not sharing via link, thanks for info.

Edited June 6, 2022 by Peter1999

[howitzer]

Just now, allanp said:

It's been allowed with instructions which are also copyrighted, but then Lego freely shares those anyway. So really I think only Lego can give that permission to share, I don't think this forum can give that.

Yes, that's true, but there's indeed the fact that building instructions are freely available anyway, so sharing a page or two here doesn't really deprive TLG their profits. I'm pretty sure it's a different matter with the Ferrari book.

And regardless of BI sharing or forum rules, it would still be illegal.

[allanp]

3 hours ago, kbalage said:

The digital instructions were updated with a fix for the gearbox sequence anomaly, but honestly I don't think they chose the best solution. Up until step 87 the orange wave selectors form the V shape as previously, then at step 88 the wave selectors are rotated into the position what was used in the Lamborghini, just to allow the green 2L beam to be mounted as previously. But from step 89 nothing was updated so the original incorrect positions are shown. 

I know not many people will actually care about the gear sequence, but it's a bit sad to see that even the fix is not properly implemented or particularly thoughtful. And of course there's no steps added yet for the extra panels, no fix for step 104...

 

The panels aren't a big issue for me. That gearbox however...since then I made my own first draft, only in the computer though.

The rotary cams can support 8 speeds but I would need to fiddle with the gear sizes, or just have 6 forward, a reverse and a neutral position. But even at only 6 speeds I'd much prefer this. Gears are double sided and 6 speeds fits into 9 studs of length. Cam position locking can be done with an 8t gear (if you want to lock always in a gear position) or a 16t gear (if you want to also click into any of the 8 neutral positions between gear positions) as the spaces between gear teeth align with these positions on the cams, though a new, 8 position indexing piece may be needed to reliably position the rotary cams. There are probably some issues and certainly improvements to be made as it's only a first sketch of an idea but you get the point. Much more realistic, more intuitive and easy to understand, less friction, compact size can fit into non supercars (like trucks, 1:5 scale motorbikes, etc), for high torque (motorised) models the 2 axles can be braced with beams between 2nd and 3rd, and 4th and 5th gears (making the gearbox 2 studs longer). I'm all for attracting the casual fans and making it look good on the box, but why not also include something mechanically new and improved like this to ALSO attract the die hard fans as well?!

Edited June 6, 2022 by allanp

[gyenesvi]

4 hours ago, allanp said:

since then I made my own first draft, only in the computer though

That's an interesting start, though I have wondered before if something like this is actually possible from plastic in a solid way. I think the problematic point may be size (depth) of the teeth on the driving ring that catch the otherwise free spinning gears. That's roughly 1/4th of a stud here, which may not be enough for a solid connection, given some (required) free play of lego parts. Even the almost half-stud tooth-size on current lego gears and driving ring can disengage under stress (though not with a rotary catch, but only using the old changeover catch in a manual gearbox). So it would be interesting to see if something like this can withstand forces, because the teeth cannot really be made bigger (unless the gear are made asymmetric?) without bloating the whole thing substantially with 2L / 3L driving rings).

The rotary cams lock in 45 degree positions, right? That may also be more cumbersome to build than currently used 90 degrees. Though I'd even like this for only 4 gears, arranged in 90 degrees, and that could even be done with currently available gear sizes, though small ones would require extenders, adding length.. I suspect these may be the issues why something like this does not exist in lego.

Edited June 6, 2022 by gyenesvi

[2GodBDGlory]

Cool gearbox! I've also 3D-modeled some custom gearbox parts, but yours is a much more radical redesign than mine! I do wonder, though, about how much friction there might be between the "wave selector" equivalent parts and those other sliding parts.

[allanp]

Like most complex new parts I expect it would need a few rounds of rapid prototyping and revisions. I don't think the teeth would disengage that easily as they are straight, there shouldn't be hardly any forces moving them apart, at least not enough to overcome the flat faces in each of the cams stop positions. To reduce the sliding friction I made the sliding hole 2 module long to prevent twisting and aid sliding. I think the biggest issue would be getting the cams to rotate precisely enough to the right positions, an 8t gear used to make it click into position would help, and a new piece similar to what you find in some real life motorbike shifters would help greatly also. Or maybe use a 4 position indexer and gear down 2:1. But as an idea I think it shows the concept pretty well.

[Cumulonimbus]

8 hours ago, allanp said:

... I made my own first draft ...

That is a very interesting setup. I like how close it resembles a real gear selector mechanism. Without the need for all those extra gears for the "multiplier function" in the official gearbox, this would result in a much more compact gearbox, right? It would be great if the fork design would make it possible to connect them to a manual gear shifter.

Not sure about the size of the pin on the forks and width of the channels: to me it seems that any lateral play between the two axes could be enough to miss-align the fork and the selector disk.

[Erik Leppen]

What I would be most afraid of in this design is the sliding action of the selectors that need to engage the gear. I think just the tiniest friction on the gear axle, and those sliding elements might jam, because the action is quite far from the sliding axle.

I have no idea if it's realistic, but it might work better if the axle with the "wave selectors" is lowered so that it acts directly on the part of the sliding piece that engages the gear, instead of 3 studs up there.

Also I dont know if a 12t is possible (if you're designing new elements anyway, maybe have it so that 12t is possible. Then the biggest gear can be a bit smaller, which allows axles to move slightly closer together.

Also, the axle with the gaers now has 9 studs length without any support. I would expect that distance to allow enough bending to cause trouble. Although sections can just be moved away from each other by a stud, so that's a solved issue.

But I have no experience with this - just thinking along, for what it's worth :)

[SNIPE]

2 hours ago, Erik Leppen said:

What I would be most afraid of in this design is the sliding action of the selectors that need to engage the gear. I think just the tiniest friction on the gear axle, and those sliding elements might jam, because the action is quite far from the sliding axle.

I have no idea if it's realistic, but it might work better if the axle with the "wave selectors" is lowered so that it acts directly on the part of the sliding piece that engages the gear, instead of 3 studs up there.

Also I dont know if a 12t is possible (if you're designing new elements anyway, maybe have it so that 12t is possible. Then the biggest gear can be a bit smaller, which allows axles to move slightly closer together.

Also, the axle with the gaers now has 9 studs length without any support. I would expect that distance to allow enough bending to cause trouble. Although sections can just be moved away from each other by a stud, so that's a solved issue.

But I have no experience with this - just thinking along, for what it's worth :)

Weird thing is, I asked an engineering chatroom why a real F1 car gearbox does not have this same issue, i forgot why it does not but it does not.

So maybe the same will apply here.

[gyenesvi]

That's a great video, and I'vel learned two things. First, the gears should indeed be asymmetric to pack it into a small space (about half stud for the teeth, just like current gears, and about the other half for the engaging surface. That could even work for 8T/12T gears without the need for extenders (but also 10T, 14T, 18T gears could be used if they are speacial anyway). Second, the small teeth for the engagement mechanism should be triangular shaped pointing inwards, that way the force pulls the gear and selector together, instead of pushing them apart. Starting to believe it could work out.

I also agree that the lengh of those selector parts should be minimized to avoid friction and jamming because of the necessary free play of the plastic parts. It would be good to keep gear sizes such that they work on a regular grid, 2 studs apart.

[howitzer]

These design issues make me wonder how much there has been internal prototyping on gear selectors and gearbox mechanisms at TLG? Obviously all of that is secret so I'm not expecting any answers, but I wouldn't be surprised if the issues of unrealistically large and cumbersome gearboxes is a well-known problem, but they just haven't been able to implement better designs because of the inherent limitations of the materials and production processes in question.

Does anyone know if there are there more realistic/compact designs from other brands? That would surely be a great selling point for their products, if such a design (that meets the quality standards) were brought on the market.

[williamyzfr1]

Probably not a valid question but why does a dislay model require a gearbox. My models get built and dislayed end of story.

[allanp]

1 minute ago, williamyzfr1 said:

Probably not a valid question but why does a dislay model require a gearbox. My models get built and dislayed end of story.

Well it shouldn't be just a display model. It should look good on display if course, but it shouldn't be just that. Otherwise just make it from regular Lego bricks.

[howitzer]

25 minutes ago, williamyzfr1 said:

Probably not a valid question but why does a dislay model require a gearbox. My models get built and dislayed end of story.

Asking the real questions.

But somehow TLG sees these things as profitable, even if empty shell-design would be much cheaper or alternatively, functionless System-based design would be much more accurate in looks.

[astyanax]

29 minutes ago, williamyzfr1 said:

Probably not a valid question but why does a dislay model require a gearbox. My models get built and dislayed end of story.

It seems to me a UCS Technic set offers 2 kinds of value: building experience and display value. Here I count the premium packaging and unboxing experience as part of the building experience. The technical features, including gearbox, are also part of the building experience, not the display value. The fact that you can occasionally pick up the model and go through the gears is not 'playing'; it's merely a way of re-living part of the building experience. Thus, the technical features need not be practical to operate (no HOG) and their effect need not be easy to observe (pistons covered).

The above is just my interpretation of the UCS Technic line... not my desire as to how it should be....

Edited June 7, 2022 by astyanax
emphasis added

[GirchyGirchy]

1 hour ago, astyanax said:

It seems to me a UCS Technic set offers 2 kinds of value: building experience and display value. Here I count the premium packaging and unboxing experience as part of the building experience. The technical features, including gearbox, are also part of the building experience, not the display value. The fact that you can occasionally pick up the model and go through the gears is not 'playing'; it's merely a way of re-living part of the building experience. Thus, the technical features need not be practical to operate (no HOG) and their effect need not be easy to observe (pistons covered).

The above is just my interpretation of the UCS Technic line... not my desire as to how it should be....

Those are my thoughts exactly...although I think it's becoming a little more blurred as time goes on and Technic sets look 'prettier', but generally, Technic vehicles are a compromise between looks and function.  Creator/Creator Expert sets have zero functionality (other than opening panels) but look far more realistic. 

Now the supercars are bordering on Creator Expert levels of body accuracy and coverage, perhaps more fans of the Creator style are migrating over, and wondering what all of the funny colored gears and garbage are under the skin.  To you and me, those are the fun parts, and we're happy with a generic 8880 beam body or the SP3 Daytona because they include inner workings that vaguely mimic a real vehicle.  Buyers complaining about these functions might want to just stick with the more aesthetically pleasing Creator Experts...but dumbing Technic sets down would disappoint many fans, including myself.

Edited June 7, 2022 by GirchyGirchy

[Polarlicht]

My book came today

The car set probably tomorrow

[gyenesvi]

2 hours ago, astyanax said:

t seems to me a UCS Technic set offers 2 kinds of value: building experience and display value. Here I count the premium packaging and unboxing experience as part of the building experience. The technical features, including gearbox, are also part of the building experience, not the display value. The fact that you can occasionally pick up the model and go through the gears is not 'playing'; it's merely a way of re-living part of the building experience. Thus, the technical features need not be practical to operate (no HOG) and their effect need not be easy to observe (pistons covered).

I agree that this could be part of it. On top of that, I think it's easier for adults to justify buying and building with lego if it contains all those gears and internal mechanism. You know, it feels more adult-like to build complex things (even if one doesn't understand them) than just putting bricks on top of each other.. But as for you, this is just my interpretation. On the other hand, I build for the design challenge (be it technic or brick-build), which is a different experience, and mainly buy sets for the parts.

[howitzer]

5 minutes ago, gyenesvi said:

I agree that this could be part of it. On top of that, I think it's easier for adults to justify buying and building with lego if it contains all those gears and internal mechanism. You know, it feels more adult-like to build complex things (even if one doesn't understand them) than just putting bricks on top of each other.. But as for you, this is just my interpretation. On the other hand, I build for the design challenge (be it technic or brick-build), which is a different experience, and mainly buy sets for the parts.

Considering how many System sets are nowdays being marketed strictly for adults and apparently selling well, I don't think the internal mechanisms are important anymore as a justification for buying toys. Almost all of these sets are more or less representations of real-world objects, which is probably enough justification for adults to buy them. Of course some non-realworld stuff is also marketed to adults, especially Star Wars UCS sets and such, but that has more to do with fandom culture as it has become normal and even "cool" to be a fan of some fiction franchise and show it off.

[gyenesvi]

5 hours ago, howitzer said:

Considering how many System sets are nowdays being marketed strictly for adults and apparently selling well, I don't think the internal mechanisms are important anymore as a justification for buying toys. Almost all of these sets are more or less representations of real-world objects, which is probably enough justification for adults to buy them. Of course some non-realworld stuff is also marketed to adults, especially Star Wars UCS sets and such, but that has more to do with fandom culture as it has become normal and even "cool" to be a fan of some fiction franchise and show it off.

Indeed, you are right about that. And maybe also Lego itself has some coolness factor nowadays, especially for decorative purposes. I think Lego Ideas sets also aim to ride that wave. I was seriously thinking about buying the typewriter just to put it on the shelf.. But we are already diverging from the topic of the thread..