RC of lego technic "supercars" sensefull or not?

[DLuders]

"Eurobricks -- Bringing People Together Around the World". I recommend that people get back on topic, or (better yet) let this topic alone for awhile....

[Meatman]

I would much rather have an optimized supercar with manual functions and a boring gearbox because after 15 minutes of Remote Control fun and your batteries are dead, a motorized supercar doesn't have much appeal because you can't really do anything with it. I like the idea of a Power Function motorized supercar more than I actually like the reality of it. Sariel's R.C. stuff is very impressive, but as stated above, RC=Radio Controlled which is much different then IR=Infrared, people often get the 2 confused. I know RC can also stand for Remote Control, but normally when you refer to RC, you are talking about the method in which the information is passing to the vehicle that you are controlling. I also like the idea of a motorized sequential gearbox, but if there is too much binding in the gears when motorized, it becomes more of a gimmick and a novelty.

[piterx]

I dont know if for you is the same but all my cars last only the time to shoot some pictures and a video xD

ive never exhausted my batteries with a single model :-D

[hrontos]

Sometimes RC version demostrates better some problems of a real car. It helps to learn that gears have to be synchronized to change gears under the load etc.

I am not sure what is default by others, but I do not expect speed or huge power from any LEGO model. Power functions do not provide enough power and friction in LEGO parts is high. On LEGO I like all those gears and realistic representations of the functions and do not look for the speed.

[jorgeopesi]

Sometimes RC version demostrates better some problems of a real car. It helps to learn that gears have to be synchronized to change gears under the load etc.

I am not sure what is default by others, but I do not expect speed or huge power from any LEGO model. Power functions do not provide enough power and friction in LEGO parts is high. On LEGO I like all those gears and realistic representations of the functions and do not look for the speed.

You're absolutely right, we could talk more about geometry, clutches, transmissions, suspensions and all those so pretty details that make a great MOC.

[AKM_76]

For example: I'm sure it must be considered a crime to motorize the beautiful 8386 Ferrari F1 Racer

Edited March 27, 2013 by AKM_76

[Lipko]

There is a tendency in the Hungarian Technic community to RC-ize everything. That's cool and all but I feel that if a model is not fully RC then it is considered meh. Okay, exaggerating, but still.

I was never in my life interested in RC models. I like to touch and push things. There are a lot of challenges in RC model making, but I see no point challenging myself just to challenge myself.

I like (and I'm in the minority with this) the TLG conception. Some functions may be motorized but the overall model is not motorized and not RC. I'm building something like this now, though much more complex than an official set (two pole reversers with two motors and 5 motorized functions with gearbox+more stuff)

Anyway, I wanted to say something but i forgot what it was....

Edited March 27, 2013 by Lipko

[hrontos]

What I do not like on RC-izing everything is the ugliness of the result.

For example RC version of the 8265 is nice, because model looks like unchanged.

RC version of 8069 was just ugly. Battery box in the drivers cabin, wires everywhere.

Of course, also professionals like TLG sometimes make not so nice motorization (like for 8070, 9395 or 42000).

[piterx]

i have to admit that sometimes all those wires (expecially in small models) are quite ugly...

something that i don't like too is the fake V engine with the electric motor hidden somewhere....i dont know, it may be only my fixation but id like to have the engine where it's supposed to be on the real thing

[Tamas Juhasz]

Why: Lego and its motors and transmission parts have never been designed for usage in RC controlled cars. some weeks ago i gave my son an RC controlled BMW X3 and i have to say i is a lot of fun to play with it. But why is this fun: because the cars is fast and has power.. IMHO playing with RC cars is only fun if these cars can drive really fast and have enoughe torque to climb up some hills (fast)

I agree. An onroad (very important) RC modell makes REALLY fun, when it's fast. But trial truck or crawlers MUST be slow, to control them well. The real RC ones are also slow. (Ok, I know, you meant the first comment to supercars.)

one example: sheepos Landrover would be equaly impressive if not motorized, just the working breakes, sequential shiftbox, clutch etc. are enough to be a great supercar (i really admire these features a lot but not the motorization of it)... but as a RC-model it is still somehow boring, because too slow and weak...sorry, sheepo ;-)

I was thinking nearly at the same. I just can't imagine, how could that only two XL motor drive the Land Rover at 4 km/h (as written) speed, with more than 3 kg, and really lot of gears. My Peterbilt had two XL, 2,2 kg, 3 or 4 gears in the drivetrain, and could run at max. 1,2 km/h in fourth speed(1:1,4 final ratio). (I used separate IR receivers[V1] for the two driving motor, nearly full batteries, all gears could rotate easily) Anyway I really like the Land Rover, don't misunderstand me, but that speed is unimaginable from that power. 4 km/h is huge speed for such a large and heavy PF moc.

Sometimes RC version demostrates better some problems of a real car. It helps to learn that gears have to be synchronized to change gears under the load etc.

You are right. And the conversation was about the reality of Lego supercars too: which is more real? A supercar with electric driving motor(exists in reality, e.g. mercedes SLS), or a supercar with a huge hand of god? I just want to say that manual functions doesn't make the model automatically more real. I understand the viewpoints, I just wanted to give an other. In my opinion, a technic moc with motorized or even remote controlled functions is "more" and more challanging to build than a manual one. Of course, I mean those mocs, which have nicely covered motors or other electric/RC components, "ugly motorized" mocs are worse than the same without motor. There is basically two opinion, manual or motorized. Both are good, I think, depends on the builders notion. I also really like manual mocs. But imho if we have space for the RC-izing, then do it, imho a "self working" vehicle is more inetersting like a manual one(this isn't really true for supercars, but for construction models, like 8265 --> so everything depends on the type of the model)

There is a tendency in the Hungarian Technic community to RC-ize everything. That's cool and all but I feel that if a model is not fully RC then it is considered meh. Okay, exaggerating, but still.

I was never in my life interested in RC models. I like to touch and push things. There are a lot of challenges in RC model making, but I see no point challenging myself just to challenge myself.

The tendency is everywhere, you feel that maybe because in hungary this tendency becaome a bit later, I see. I don't see, that anybody is considered in Malug(hungarian Lego users group) because his/her moc isn't RC. They(manual/RC) coexist well.

Lego RC cars can be fast, as were written before me. EVERYTHING depends on power (I mean under this dW/dt), and Lego motors doesn't have much of it. Some of us really want to build nowadays with L motor(ok, can be good --> more rpm --> less gear for fast car), but if we take a look at Philo's tables, can be seen that XL motor is still the most powerful PF motor with it's 2,2 W @ 9V. RC buggy can produce 4,6 W. In a fast car you can use max. 2-3 RC unit to power them, the car shuold have 0 gears for best efficiency(really matters), that menas you have max. 6 motors and 27 W. This would be good, but the car has at least 1,2 kg weight. So the speed whic can be reached with Lego, currently is about 16-20 km/h (maybe faster if you overvolt the motors, I didn't try everything). This is really lot compared to Lego. My fastest 4 wheel car could produce 16,3 km/h with one RC unit (the limit was a wall for the measurement ).

I also agree, that to much speed compared to the real (1:1) one decrease the reality of the model.

Edited March 27, 2013 by Mbmc

[sten]

I only recently got the supplies to use power functions using IR and so have only built one model (http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=80554&hl=). It really isnt very fun at all to drive because it is slow and I couldnt gear down the med motor for steering enough, so steering is super touchy. In hindsight, it would have been more fun to play with without the motors. The build however, was more fun since it was a challenge to fit everything in and make it work. For the scale, I dont think that there are any more realistic functions that I could have included, since a gearbox would be too large (I think!) and the engine blocks are far too large. I wanted to have driven axles, but without anything on the other end, it would be pointless. Hence, power funtions. So for some situations and some builds, they have a place. Others, not so much. Its all a balance between playability and reality, which varies from person to person.

[Luc2000]

I think I have something more to say but not about Sariel this time sorry, just kidding . I often misunderstand me and I hope this isn´t one of them ... be my weird sense of humor or the bad google english... Really all MOCs I build are motorized but not because I want to play, maybe is a bizarre search for work in little space and go to check that what I do works, in fact I got tired of large scales cars because I had lot of empty space and prefer the intermediate scales for the "no room experience", does anyone else the same problem? , not the humor problem .

I don't understand half of your post, but I agree on the medium scale thing. When I use 8070 wheels, I have so much room left that stays unused. So most of the time I'm using smaller wheels, like from 8041 or 8445. I'm trying to build a full RC supercar with 8041 wheels like forever. It's a nice challenge though.

I think RC is a good challenge, but most of the time it doesn't add much to playability and it doesn't make a model more realistic, since most real life cars aren't electric. So for an official model I prefer non-rc sets. As a building challenge, both RC and non-rc can be fun builds. Just build whatever you want! As long as you are happy with the result, it doesn't matter what other people think.

Edited March 28, 2013 by Luc2000

[jorgeopesi]

I don't understand half of your post, but I agree on the medium scale thing. When I use 8070 wheels, I have so much room left that stays unused. So most of the time I'm using smaller wheels, like from 8041 or 8445. I'm trying to build a full RC supercar with 8041 wheels like forever. It's a nice challenge though.

Don´t worry that´s my fault, the important thing is that I like to put the maximum possible mechanisms in my MOCs, I hate the unused room like you.

[Kumbbl]

So i will state my initial proposition more precisely: IC and motorized typical supercars are IMHO nothing which is well supported by current lego parts but transmissionless RC-motor-based (racebuggy motor) "car-objects" can be indeed very funny and well done with lego

just catched today a 8284 tractor for 39€ + a racebuggy motor (incl. battery box, white clutch-gear etc.) for only 5€ extra charge... in view of the current bricklink-prices of a racebuggy motor IMO a really great deal or what do you think...

[LeocornoProductions]

Sometimes I feel bored with a manual moc, because it feels like the moc is limited, though a

manual moc is easier to design. I'm vastly interested in motorized mocs, especially supercars

and offroad vehicles. Because a motorized offroad vehicle, gives you the understanding of what

a real 4x4 goes through and how torque works.

I'm currently building a motorized supercar with a motorized gearbox, it is try that supercars

which are motorized and have a gearbox are slow, which meant I had no references or examples of

the type of moc I am attempting to build. But that encouraged me to take on this project. But

some people enjoy different types of mocs, some motorized and some not. But for me, I have

developed a strong craving for motorized mocs.

[nerdsforprez]

The way I see it people we are comparing apples and oranges. Consider this point.... even IF lego PF elements were powerful, motors, servos, etc... and could make models faster they will not compare to RC models. People seem to be forgetting one thing. With great speed comes..... great crashes (yes, Sariel, if you want to use this as your new signature block you are welcome to ). If somehow Lego were to produce elements that could compare to RC parts then there would undoubtedly be some pretty fantastic crashes. And Lego elements would not be able to withstand such crashes. It simply does not have the durability or strength of RC parts. Nor should they and builders should not expect this.

There is a trade off here. Lego may not have the durability or strength of their RC counterparts, but RC counterparts neither have the buildability or potential for creativity that Lego does. Trust me, have have experience in both. Although RC kits can be purchased that allow for building, the building is assembling, not creating (building in the purest sense). Part counts can be high, but not nearly as high as Lego sets and the combinations of assembly are the model and that is it.

So, like I said... apples and oranges. If you want buildability, creativilty and options then Lego is your brand! If you simply want something fun to drive, then buy an RC car/truck. SOme of the posts are trying nto defend Lego as being as fun as RC cars... which is ridiculous. They are not nor should they be. If Lego build pieces as strong as RC car/trcuk parts then they would not be pliable enough to provide the options a Lego element does. But I will say this.... if one is not buying the apples/oranges argument, and still comaring the two like they are the same thing, then I think Lego wins! Lego offers more of playability/fun [like Sariel and others have said, Lego can be fast (** but don't buy for a second that they will ever be as fast as RC**)] AND buildability than RC offers playability/fun AND buildability (because their "'buidability" really is only assembly. Yes, you can modify and upgrade parts, but still... kind of just assembly. Can't even come close to arguing that RC compares to Lego in buildability). Succinctly... Lego offers more performance (the area it lacks) than RC does in buildability (the area it lacks).