42146 - Liebherr LR13000

[nugnug115]

On 12/22/2023 at 11:25 AM, Lego Tom said:

Similar but different:

<img></img>

Hello Tom , I have seen several pictures of your custom LR 13000 and it is massive! I wanted to ask you did you have to make any modifications to your turntable? With all the extra boom sections you have added plus the extra counter weights and hoisting a heavy load I imagine it puts substantial stress on the turntable when you try to rotate the crane. Does the stock lego turntable design work with 0 issues or was a modification needed? I look forward to hearing from you!

[R0Sch]

Pretty cool alternative model, don't you think?

 

[AVCampos]

Very cool! It reminds me of Mahj's Stilskin Bridge Layer from all those years ago.

 

[gyenesvi]

That's a very creative idea from that set!

[Lego Tom]

17 hours ago, nugnug115 said:

Hello Tom , I have seen several pictures of your custom LR 13000 and it is massive! I wanted to ask you did you have to make any modifications to your turntable? With all the extra boom sections you have added plus the extra counter weights and hoisting a heavy load I imagine it puts substantial stress on the turntable when you try to rotate the crane. Does the stock lego turntable design work with 0 issues or was a modification needed? I look forward to hearing from you!

The turntable worked fine, but I did end up adding a second set of roller balls under the counterweight I had added. It helped take out some of the bounce when moving as well as relieving some of stress from the added weight.

 

[2GodBDGlory]

19 hours ago, R0Sch said:

Pretty cool alternative model, don't you think?

 

Very impressive, especially how long its span is!

Edited January 12 by 2GodBDGlory

[howitzer]

So, I finally finished building the set. Here's some of my impressions and feelings about it.

First I must say that none of the photos I saw beforehand prepared me for the size of this thing. Now that it's there, sitting on my building table I really see how huge and imposing it is, I don't think any of the photos I've seen of it do it justice size-wise. The proportions are still significantly off, but seeing it live it's not nearly as bad as in photos, I think especially the main photo on the box is badly chosen from this point of view. There's of course the downside of it being really difficult to move around the house.

As a building experience, I'm not sure what to feel. The bottom part (understructure, tracks, turntable) was quite boring with mostly structural stuff with minimal mechanical builds and almost no interesting building techniques. I get why it is so, but it still doesn't change how it is. The upper part with the booms was much more interesting, and especially the string routing was challenging and required care and thinking, something that I don't encounter too often in today's Technic sets considering the dumbed down instructions. I also had some leftover parts which I feel shouldn't have been there (mainly pins, but too many of them or such that there's never extras) so it's obvious that I made some errors. Whether that's my fault or if the instructions are unclear is debatable. I also routed the hook string wrongly in one place and only noticed after making the reel knots, which is kind of annoying but not a huge issue.

As for the functions, the set works well and it does what it's supposed to do. It also gives nice insights at the workings of such a machine, even if the ballast on rollers is unrealistic. Something I don't get though, is what's the purpose of the motorcycle springs supporting the derrick boom? They don't seem to do much. The load sensing function on the other hand is nice even if it would be great to have it even more sensitive, though it's obvious that making truly sensitive load sensor would be quite hard with current parts. The counterweight parts look nice but are otherwise disappointing, as the lack of connection points and shape makes them really hard to use anywhere else, which in my opinion goes against the spirit of Lego. There's also several places where the design felt unfinished or hurried. The aesthetics is minimal and feels half hearted - most of those could've been left out entirely and it wouldn't even be noticeable.

As for the price... I was interested in building it and seeing it work, but I also wanted to make it bigger and do other modifications, so in that respect it's a good buy. I guess I could've attempted to make a crawler crane entirely of my own design, but I don't know much about crawler cranes so it would've been daunting task, and now I at least have learned the basic principles first hand and and gotten insight on some of the technical solutions necessary to build one. In the end though, I don't think there's much point in the discussion if it's a sensible purchase or worth the price. Some people pay 10000€ for a bottle of whiskey, and I guess they are happy with their purchases and think it as money well spent, and this crane feels similar. It's expensive, sure, but I wanted it and I could afford it so why not buy it?

[Lego Tom]

The springs, in conjunction with the battery box provide feedback of the weight distribution for the app.

[Bricktrain]

12 hours ago, howitzer said:

Something I don't get though, is what's the purpose of the motorcycle springs supporting the derrick boom? They don't seem to do much. 

On a real crane the derrick is built in front of the crane before the main boom is built and then winched over to the back of the crane. The motorcycle springs represent the rams which stop the derrick from free falling over backwards without the main boom to hold it. When disassembling the crane they push the derrick up and over to the front to be dismantled. 

[howitzer]

14 hours ago, Lego Tom said:

The springs, in conjunction with the battery box provide feedback of the weight distribution for the app.

But I don't see them doing anything, regardless of the load on the hook. The battery box tilt is entirely independent of the springs.

9 hours ago, Bricktrain said:

On a real crane the derrick is built in front of the crane before the main boom is built and then winched over to the back of the crane. The motorcycle springs represent the rams which stop the derrick from free falling over backwards without the main boom to hold it. When disassembling the crane they push the derrick up and over to the front to be dismantled. 

Ok, this is a good explanation, and of course those springs worked in similar fashion when assembling the model. Thanks!

[nerdsforprez]

23 hours ago, howitzer said:

As for the price... I was interested in building it and seeing it work, but I also wanted to make it bigger and do other modifications, so in that respect it's a good buy. I guess I could've attempted to make a crawler crane entirely of my own design, but I don't know much about crawler cranes so it would've been daunting task, and now I at least have learned the basic principles first hand and and gotten insight on some of the technical solutions necessary to build one.

Thxs for your feedback, but a few things dont really make much sense to me.  First I read this statement as the set was worth it to you to learn about how crane work.  Fair enough.  But that brought me to my grip with this set all along, which is aside from the electronics (specifically the weight sensor system) what does this crane offer that cannot be build already from existing bricks?  Then you mentioned that you don't know much about cranes, so the value in this set came in that it was a set one had to assemble-only, not design, create, etc.  Fair enough again, I thought.  He wants to learn about these wonderful machines. But then again, I realized, there is a motley of crane plans, instructions, MOCs from others, etc. and even official Lego sets one could buy to teach you the basics of crane building and operation.  Heck, I think set 8288 (i get it, its long discontinued, but the instructions are avail., and with them you could build the crane or something at least similar) would tech you the basics of crane building, physics, etc.  In the end, you mention that building your own would have been a daunting task.  I disagree.  With the amount of aides in the community (Lego cranes in the late 2000s, 2011 and 12 ish were all the rage)  you easily could have built your own, for much less $$.  One can still purchase 42042 relatively inexpensive, and with some blue 15L liftarms even do an extension pack, and build it as large as this set.  Sure, you miss the new pieces, but that is my gripe.  They are wildly expensive and dont add anything that cannot be built out of pre-existing pieces.  

23 hours ago, howitzer said:

I don't think there's much point in the discussion if it's a sensible purchase or worth the price. Some people pay 10000€ for a bottle of whiskey, and I guess they are happy with their purchases and think it as money well spent, and this crane feels similar.

But if we follow this logic then nothing is worth discussing, in terms of things being "worth" their money or carrying value.  Why don't we throw out the whole concept of "worth?"   The reason why?  Because the logic above is a little too extreme.  There has to be utility in discussing value without it being able to explain all, or fit, all situations.  Especially given the wild income inequality in the world.   As long as there are annual incomes ranging from $0 a year to billions, no definition of value will ever apply to every situation.  That doesn't mean its not a useful concept. 

I think we call all label this set, as a poor value and investment, overall and objectively (just based solely on how it matches up to other sets) while at the same time accepting there are some who feel they got their money's worth out of the set.  Seems like you are the latter, which is fantastic.  But, at least IMO, that says nothing in terms of the value of this set (in terms of what it offers, objective numbers compared to other sets, etc.).   

[howitzer]

5 hours ago, nerdsforprez said:

Thxs for your feedback, but a few things dont really make much sense to me.  First I read this statement as the set was worth it to you to learn about how crane work.  Fair enough.  But that brought me to my grip with this set all along, which is aside from the electronics (specifically the weight sensor system) what does this crane offer that cannot be build already from existing bricks?  Then you mentioned that you don't know much about cranes, so the value in this set came in that it was a set one had to assemble-only, not design, create, etc.  Fair enough again, I thought.  He wants to learn about these wonderful machines. But then again, I realized, there is a motley of crane plans, instructions, MOCs from others, etc. and even official Lego sets one could buy to teach you the basics of crane building and operation.  Heck, I think set 8288 (i get it, its long discontinued, but the instructions are avail., and with them you could build the crane or something at least similar) would tech you the basics of crane building, physics, etc.  In the end, you mention that building your own would have been a daunting task.  I disagree.  With the amount of aides in the community (Lego cranes in the late 2000s, 2011 and 12 ish were all the rage)  you easily could have built your own, for much less $$.  One can still purchase 42042 relatively inexpensive, and with some blue 15L liftarms even do an extension pack, and build it as large as this set.  Sure, you miss the new pieces, but that is my gripe.  They are wildly expensive and dont add anything that cannot be built out of pre-existing pieces.  

But if we follow this logic then nothing is worth discussing, in terms of things being "worth" their money or carrying value.  Why don't we throw out the whole concept of "worth?"   The reason why?  Because the logic above is a little too extreme.  There has to be utility in discussing value without it being able to explain all, or fit, all situations.  Especially given the wild income inequality in the world.   As long as there are annual incomes ranging from $0 a year to billions, no definition of value will ever apply to every situation.  That doesn't mean its not a useful concept. 

I think we call all label this set, as a poor value and investment, overall and objectively (just based solely on how it matches up to other sets) while at the same time accepting there are some who feel they got their money's worth out of the set.  Seems like you are the latter, which is fantastic.  But, at least IMO, that says nothing in terms of the value of this set (in terms of what it offers, objective numbers compared to other sets, etc.).   

It would be interesting to see comparison of various techniques to build lattice booms with older parts. As I understand, the new parts simplify boom building greatly, so I see them worth it, despite the cost (and it's not like they are that expensive either, they are available Bricklink starting from 2,5€-3,5€ apiece or so). I also don't think 8288 or 42042 compare as the former while it has certain realism, has no electronics and is much smaller and the latter is quite unrealistic and lacks important parts like jib and derrick boom. I went through stuff that Rebrickable has to offer, and if you discard small builds, stuff that's not exactly a crawler crane and builds that are mods of 42146, there's not many left. Those tend huge and would've required significant investment in parts anyway, and there's not much in the way of quality guarantees on the build. I did spend quite a bit of time considering if 42146 is good buy for me or not, weighing in the parts, the expected building experience, etc. and came to conclusion that it might be worth it after all. One thing that actually swayed my opinion to the "buy it" side was the comments from @allanp earlier in this thread.

It's obvious that you have different opinions on many of the points regarding the value of the set, and that's fine. I brought up the "worth" of the set because it's definitely not a necessity and it's not even something of practical use to make our lives easier or more comfortable (as for example a car or a computer would be). It's a luxury toy and as such the concept of value in any general sense becomes pretty useless. Being luxury toys they are stuff that some people want really bad while others view only as a frivolous waste of money, regardless of price. As such some of them I might want and can afford (such as this set) and some I might want but couldn't ever afford (such as big yacht) but stuff in either category is stuff that can be assigned a price, but not value. As an investment... well, I don't think my hobby has to be something which returns money to me.

[mdemerchant]

10 hours ago, howitzer said:

It would be interesting to see comparison of various techniques to build lattice booms with older parts. As I understand, the new parts simplify boom building greatly, so I see them worth it, despite the cost

They are certainly going to make the build much quicker which is good if you are the sort that really gets bothered by repetitive building.  I think the resulting structure is probably also a fair bit stronger than most built up 7x7 lattice booms, mainly because they have cross bracing in both directions where most people build those booms with two flat lattices just connected by axles so they are flimsy in one axis.  I don't have the parts though so can't say for sure but in looking at how they are assembled they must be stronger.

I think the main limitation is they only work well for a 7x7 cross section.  If that's what you need for your crane, great, but if you are interested in making something closer to scale most cranes don't have booms with square cross sections and don't use a fixed cross section for boom, jib and derrick.  So I don't think the parts are as flexible in their application as they ideally would have been.

[howitzer]

14 hours ago, mdemerchant said:

They are certainly going to make the build much quicker which is good if you are the sort that really gets bothered by repetitive building.  I think the resulting structure is probably also a fair bit stronger than most built up 7x7 lattice booms, mainly because they have cross bracing in both directions where most people build those booms with two flat lattices just connected by axles so they are flimsy in one axis.  I don't have the parts though so can't say for sure but in looking at how they are assembled they must be stronger.

I think the main limitation is they only work well for a 7x7 cross section.  If that's what you need for your crane, great, but if you are interested in making something closer to scale most cranes don't have booms with square cross sections and don't use a fixed cross section for boom, jib and derrick.  So I don't think the parts are as flexible in their application as they ideally would have been.

I don't think it's possible to break a truss made of new parts without breaking the parts themselves, and at that point we're talking about forces far exceeding those that any Lego is expected to withstand. When used as intended they connect really securely and are indeed strong in both directions.

It's true that other cross sections than 7x7 pose challenges, though I think strong 7x9 would also be easy using flipflop beams along with the truss parts. I think variable cross section boom is going to be difficult no matter what your technique, as are triangular cross sections and so on, but those are concessions that we're going to have to make with Lego and not diecast scale models.

[The Southern Brickfan]

I bought this set at Christmas, and enjoyed the build etc, and especially the stability of the trusses used to build the boom, jib etc. But Has anyone noticed that the caterpillar track links seem to be different to the ones we got back in the days of BWE (42055)? They seem slightly softer, like the ones for the Cat buldozer. they sound differerent to older tracks linkages, especially if you have them on say a, wooden table, though their weight is almost exactly the same per piece.

The glossy finish is not there either. Is this due to a change in the ingredients of the plastic they are made from?

Thanks

 

Brian

Edited February 2 by The Southern Brickfan
extra words

[nugnug115]

On 2/1/2024 at 7:24 PM, The Southern Brickfan said:

I bought this set at Christmas, and enjoyed the build etc, and especially the stability of the trusses used to build the boom, jib etc. But Has anyone noticed that the caterpillar track links seem to be different to the ones we got back in the days of BWE (42055)? They seem slightly softer, like the ones for the Cat buldozer. they sound differerent to older tracks linkages, especially if you have them on say a, wooden table, though their weight is almost exactly the same per piece.

The glossy finish is not there either. Is this due to a change in the ingredients of the plastic they are made from?

Thanks

 

Brian

i noticed this as well, i was told this is due to lego switching to more plant based plastics thus resulting in this change. I have no way to confirm this though. The color , and mold are different but also the size. Im building a large moc with the tracks and used 100 links of both the new track parts and 100 of the old. The old track parts were longer by almost half a track when i used this many links, also on bricklink it seems like sellers are holding on to the old version and selling the new so it seems us lego fans are not a fan of this change lol. I myself do NOT like this change.

Edited February 4 by nugnug115

[The Southern Brickfan]

34 minutes ago, nugnug115 said:

i noticed this as well, i was told this is due to lego switching to more plant based plastics thus resulting in this change. I have now way to confirm this though. The color , and mold are different but also the size. Im building a large moc with the tracks and used 100 links of both the new track parts and 100 of the old. The old track parts were longer by almost half a track when i used this many links, also on bricklink it seems like sellers are holding on to the old version and selling the new so it seems us lego fans are not a fan of this change lol. I myself do NOT like this change.

I agree, I don't like this new variation, happily there are plenty of the older types available on Bricklink to buy, at reasonable prices. I might buy some more just to add to my stock :)

[AVCampos]

How is the traction with the new material, compared to the old one?

[The Southern Brickfan]

13 minutes ago, AVCampos said:

How is the traction with the new material, compared to the old one?

For me, not much different on smooth surfaces, not tried it yet on carpet, though I imagine it might sink slightly more because of its bendiness, especially with such a heavy model. I am still in the process of modding my model, so it will be heavier than the original.....

[howitzer]

13 hours ago, The Southern Brickfan said:

I bought this set at Christmas, and enjoyed the build etc, and especially the stability of the trusses used to build the boom, jib etc. But Has anyone noticed that the caterpillar track links seem to be different to the ones we got back in the days of BWE (42055)? They seem slightly softer, like the ones for the Cat buldozer. they sound differerent to older tracks linkages, especially if you have them on say a, wooden table, though their weight is almost exactly the same per piece.

The glossy finish is not there either. Is this due to a change in the ingredients of the plastic they are made from?

Thanks

 

Brian

Yep, there's definitely a change in the part, the finish is glossier in the old ones, and they are slightly stiffer too.

[AVCampos]

Assuming that the new material of the 5L link is the same as of the 7L link, I hope they share the same enhanced traction on smooth surfaces, but fear they share the same ease of easily disconnecting.

[Lego Tom]

There are aftermarket rubber inserts for the pin holes in the track.



These came from Ali Express.

Edited February 3 by Lego Tom

[msk6003]

On 2/3/2024 at 12:32 AM, AVCampos said:

but fear they share the same ease of easily disconnecting.

Yes. It disconnecting very easly compare to old link. Seems like it use same material with small link. I hoped TLG make small link use same material as big link but thay did it reverse. Now all link trade is weak and easly disconnecting.

Edited February 3 by msk6003

[skylinedan]

I'll try to get some of mine later today that are small enough to post on here, I picked up two last weekend at the Store up in Troy Michigan, and built a XL version. Fixed a few issue with the build out of the box, and made it look better I think. 

[nugnug115]

On 2/4/2024 at 9:54 AM, skylinedan said:

I'll try to get some of mine later today that are small enough to post on here, I picked up two last weekend at the Store up in Troy Michigan, and built a XL version. Fixed a few issue with the build out of the box, and made it look better I think. 

lets see some pics!