gaut1202
-
Content Count
40 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by gaut1202
-
Hello all, I present you here an old car you can easily see in France, my version of the famous Citroën 2CV. I saw those ones, which inspired my version on some points : MisterZumbi : Henrik Hoexbroe : and NanoC : I wanted mine to be playable, without illegal builds, accurate and strong. So here it is : 11.7 cm long, 4 cm large and 5 cm high. The dark and light green pieces are painted ones. On some pieces, you can see that I could have paint them better ... There is a beautiful contrast between the dark and light green and the grey and transparent elements. It can roll on the floor without problems thanks to the 1x1 round tiles, that don't block the front wheels. With details such as lights, an interior or rear-view mirrors, it is kind of realistic. Technically, it is quite simple, there are only three SNOTs, here is an LDD screen of one of them : An LDD file and PDF instructions are alvaible on my Bricksafe gallery. There you will also find bigger photos. This MOC was basically build for my uncle, who also has a 2CV, but a real one, with the same color sheme. It's going to be his christmas present ! As always, comments, remarks and suggestion are welcome .
-
[MOD] UCS Slave 1 (anti-droop/bend when on stand)
gaut1202 replied to ArchieNov's topic in LEGO Star Wars
Well if it happens for others, there is no reason it won't happen to you, in more or less big proportions => But you can try some MODs described in this topic, if you have some parts to make MOCs and a bit of time, try an even better modification described previously by Anio. -
[MOD] UCS Slave 1 (anti-droop/bend when on stand)
gaut1202 replied to ArchieNov's topic in LEGO Star Wars
+1 to both of you above. I thought that the sidepanels were slipping downwards because of they connexion to the tail, but in fact, it is the whole structure that is slipping, which is finally the same problem. It means that the structure is not adapted to the tail, surently the most beautiful part of the set. When I first saw this picture, I reckoned that the structure was well thought : But there is an obvious problem : both arms on each side pointing upwards are not in a conventional direction. Ok, it's not a problem. But there is room for play, with the fact that technic beams are used and that the tail is pulling everything downwards. -
[MOD] UCS Slave 1 (anti-droop/bend when on stand)
gaut1202 replied to ArchieNov's topic in LEGO Star Wars
Really a huge gap, which is very surprising for an official model. But I don't understand one thing : is the connexion between the tail and the body already forcing right after the finshed build with the ball joints and clip connexions ? They are for sure angles which are out of the Lego system. If it does, how could it be validated in the production process ? Ball joints offer many possibilities, but can they be considered as usable when linked to heavy elements, such as the tail here ? I never used these kind of parts. And last but not least, was this gap really noticed during the design process ? If yes, what were the solutions you could offer to solve it ? I'm pretty sure that with the variety of tests and TLC expectations you were praising, you could have anticipated it. And it shouldn't be taken as a sad fact. To me, it means that TLC doesn't care about quality, and sells unfinished, botched products. The worse is that it's not the only model to suffer from design problems, and we can only hope to encounter as many exceptions as already seen in the past in the future. And I didn't even mentioned the #10221, made by the guy who designed the #10215 and #10240, which are both excellent sets. So where does the responsability in a design process of both TLC and the designer begins or ends ? Nevertheless, there are still very good, well thought, simple and clever models. I'm only looking forward to seeing these kinds of sets to be still produced :) . -
Hi Dan, love it, simple yet cute, good job ! You had the perfect piece for the eye, and the head is well designed, with nice curves. The round wings for the body match perfectly. For R2 : couldn't you design a new head for it ? It's too blocky and the eye is far too small, I would rather prefer a more cartoon, recognisable one. I took a look at your Flickr and was glad to see that you have continued to produce excellent work, amazing architecture MOCs and others, your Wall E is adorable. Sad not to be able to discuss about them on another forum, but that's another topic ;) . What's your next MOC ? Brick on !
-
Ok, it do look much better but with the central collar less (only the for- and backward parts), it could become even better, and you could than use plates to control the width. I can understand for the tiles on the top, but not on the bottom of the body and on the legs. It's not really smoothly incorporated there. Which explains the alvailbility of colours and the LBG version, to be more affordable than an other version .
-
Hi Dan, Nice MOC, cool that you managed to get a 3PO for your R2. You built it at scale and the final result is quite interesting, good job ! Despite of that, three points : - As Beaver said for the hands, robot arms (exo force) could be much better, there are alvaible in gold and silver for both versions. - The head is too big, too long. 1 stud less longer would be better. You just have too many details there. For example, the jumper creates a caricatual nose. - Why did you decide not to show studs ? Because of the tiles on the torso, it seems too blocky. Still, the articultions give to the MOC a lot of playability, which was I think your first goal to match with R2, and you rendered a lot of areas really well ;) .
-
Version 2 looks definetly better. You only have to use trans black cheese slopes and not to use plates on the top of the windscreen to hold it : than this cockpit will be perfect !
-
Amaizing MOC of course, detailed and with good ideas. Great work on the reactors ! Trying to improve the cockpit with a SNOT version should be the best way to get a better one. Maybe you'll have to make few scale adjustments, but if you manage to build the right cockpit you wont regret it. What about using the #10212 windscreen with a SNOT armature for the sides ? Do not hesitate to show your trials with other pieces here. Also, not a fan of the wings to make a dark red curve, but an intelligent compromise. A SNOT with arches coud, at this scale, be useful.
-
In fact, TennorPenny, the color scheme plays a big role for little city MOCs. It's even more eye catching to have a colored version. But the color choice was decided by the Citroën 2CV green Charleston scheme from my uncles car, translated in LEGO colors. Yes Headbrick, I agree, but to me it was more important to have a strong and detailed 2CV than one with a mimifig, but weaker. You might can manage to put one I inside, but than or with a higher roof, or without seat or with a deeper seat position. Thanks a lot for sharing Cunctator ! It's not exactly the same, but looks great too ;) !
-
Thanks Henrik :) . Your MOC was a good size indication with the wheels and the jumper making the 5th plate with rail. At the time you built yours, a lot of the pieces I used were not alvaible too. No problem Alex ;) .
-
Thanks again ! HeadBrick, here is a comparison between my actual, NanoCs and my previous front axle building technique. You can see that the two first vehicles can roll. The first one thanks to the round tiles 1x1 and the second thanks to the gaps. The last version might look better, but can't roll on the ground because the 1x1 tiles block the wheels. I did not wanted NanoCs gaps, so I came to the version without gaps with 1x1 round tiles. Yes, the car is kind of playable, even though you can't put a minfigure in it : not high enough. Still, it remains swooshable and detailed . I really wanted to use the 4x6 roof. If you need a minifig, than MisterZumbis roof is a good solution. I uploaded a new LDD file on my Bricksafe, a white version, without the Charleston colour scheme if you don't need it.
-
Thanks Guys for your comments ! Glad you like it ! Alex 54, do not hesitate to pm me or to post here later if you manage to build my version. Antp, I paint pieces only when they are not producted by LEGO. The painted pieces are in official LEGO colours. Also, I wanted this 2CV to have the same colors as the one from my uncle, it was originally built for him. It's a pleasure for me to share the files, if you can use them than it is even better ;) !
-
It's sure that this model looks amaizing. But it is as amazing than impossible to build in real bricks. - The bionicle connection between the legs and the cabin would not support the weight of the cabin. - Using a 3L Technic cross axle for the feet will not hold the positions of the legs straight. Everithing would fall. So if someone wants to rebuild it : Without a holder/stand, There are no chance to have the same modell. Still, your version shows a lot of interesting building possibilities. The main problem is that you gave the detail of a collector scale into a smaller, "playable" close to minifigure scale. At such a scale, the model has to be playable, to be able to adopt a few positions, for example. It's possible with your MOC, but here the legs would not be capable to move corectly. In facts, for every step, too many pieces would fall from the model. There is a too big contrast. Great work, but it remains what it is : an LDD model, not tested in real conditions.
-
[MOC] All Terrain Dewbacked Transporter (Techlug contest 12)
gaut1202 posted a topic in LEGO Star Wars
Hello Eurobricks member ! It has been a while I did not post here, but here is my latest MOC, an All Terrain Dewbacked Transporter build or the Techlug Contest 12., where the goal was to convert a Dewback in Lego, to make it being a Walker, or an AT-DT. As you can see, they are elements : the head, the body and the 4 legs. Here are pictures to show their building : As you can see, the interior is fully playable, there is enough space for 5 minifigs. Their weapons are located on the inner roof side. There are two doors, one of each side and a trapdoor if you get to loose a piece or a blaster Inside, you'll only have to open it to get it back ! Also, the minifigs can use it to enter the Walker. Here are some pics to show different perspecives : I'm quite satisfated with the joints, excepted at the back. I wanted to build a tail for this AT-DT, but the rules of the contest did not alloud to build a Walker longer than 38,5 cm. Instead, a gunner is placed in a cabin at the back and watches for ennemies ! Here is a larger view of the bottom section : I really wanted the Walker to be playable, so it had to be able to adopt different positions. In addition, you can choose t use the turret or as a gun or as a sattelite dish.The design is mainly based on the Clone Wars, with dark red bands and some greebles, such as telephones, levers, bars and plate or tiles modified. If it would exist in the films, it couls be a scout Walker which had to carry a small commando troup for specifics and dangerous missions. I designed it to be pretty strong, and it seems it's quite solid, an X-Wing and two full paint sprays can even land on it : Finally, I enjoyed building this walker for the contest, I could use some interesting, simple building techniques. I personnaly thing it looks like a Dewback, with a strong head, a large neck, small legs... But in comparison to other entries of the contest, I could not rebuild in Lego all the aspects and the whole spirit of an Dewback in a Walker. Still, it remains a proposition of how a Kuat Drives Ingeneer could adapt the abilities and the appearance of a DewBack to make it becoming a Star Wars walker. What do you think ? Dewback or not ? Remarks and critics are always welcome. Also, do not hesitate to take a look at the results topic, with the other entries (DanSto presented his own here), and the Bricksafe gallery of this MOC. -
[MOC] All Terrain Dewbacked Transporter (Techlug contest 12)
gaut1202 replied to gaut1202's topic in LEGO Star Wars
Thanks guys for your answers ! ZBLJ, on Techlug other said te same, but I think my MOC does not have the main caracteristics of a dog, I would have build my walker really differently if I had liked to make it looking like a dog. But in some positions, I can understand what you mean. WarSquirrel, thanks for your comment, seems that my goal is partielly reached. -
Hi all again, This was my entry for the TechLug contest number eleven. The goal was to create a 12x12 vignette repesenting a lightsaber duel. I have chosen MOCing the one opposing Anakin and Dooku on Geonosis. Here are the pictures, you will find some explications at the end of the thread. As you can see, I've tried to build the major elements of the scene as the cable on the ground, barrels, some rocks.... I had one day to achieve my entry, which explains the presence of LBG, which don't make think that the scene is playing in a rocky hangar, only represented thanks to a big brown metapiece. The light of the hangar was interesting, so I decided to show three lamps, with greebles (plates modified and bars in this case), to get a more eye-catching render. Anakin and Dooku are home maded minifigs. Technically, I used SNOT for the base, that is a quarter stud to wide ang long. The main problem also is the colour sheme I applied beause of my own pieces making the vignette loosing a lot of credibility. Still, I am happy having be able to participate to this contest, despite my result : the last place. Even if my creation is from far not perfect, what do you think of it ? You can ge bigger pictues on my Bricksafe or on my Brickshelf gallery.
-
[MOC] Anakin VS Dooku on Genosis (TechLug contest 11)
gaut1202 replied to gaut1202's topic in LEGO Star Wars
Thanks for your kind words guys ! The greebles were not really a plus-point for the contest, because the entries had to be, finally, as simple as possible. My vignette was, I suppose, too overcharged for the contest. Goatman461, I did not had other minfigs avaible, so I build the vignette from those I could make, Anakin ad Dooku. Wilson3a10, why don't trying to build your own vignette ? Take a look at others, select the building techniques you find useful or interesting, the scene you would like to build, head over to brickink and let's MOC ! -
Hi everyone, this is the podracer I designed for the TechLug contest number 10, were the goal was to create his own podracer. It is 45cm long, 19cm wide, 8.5cm high and has 506 pieces. Here is its TechLug topic, There the results topic, with the others 13 entries. Do not hesitate to take a closer look at them ! I finished 7th. I wanted it to be as accurate as possible while keeping designing something simple, coherent and strong. Each reactor has eight same sides with a few variations (shield, cable fixation....). This picture of the first version, with LBG grills instead of white, shows all the elements of one reactor : More pictures of the precedent version with LBG grilles in my BrickSafe or Brickshelf gallery. Hope you like it, remarks, comments and suggestions are always welcome .
-
A UCS model is not only about building wise, rather about converting a Star Wars design into a Lego display design, if you want. For the #10026, there were no reasons to use different building techniques, it was not necessary to build it bigger. If you would like to build an UCS model, which questions would you ask yourself ? Or do you prefer watching a stample on a box and saying : "Hey, this is an UCS ! Im gonna buy it." . MOCers also do build UCS models : take a look at them, maybe you will understand what I mean.
-
[MOC] Podracer of Gaut1202 (TechLug Contest 10)
gaut1202 replied to gaut1202's topic in LEGO Star Wars
Thanks for your kind words, Retro. I have more pics, but from a precedent version, in my gallery, so I will not show them in this thread. Next time, i'll take more photos . -
LoRdAmUnRa, you wrote : Of course they are UCS models. The stample was only not existing. For sets being released in 1999, and still today, they have the qualities of an UCS. For the others : Nowadays, it is not because TLG wrotes UCS on a box tha it is. I understand your answers, TLG is the owner of the UCS label and decides. But if you compare the new UCS models, the Sancrawler for example, to other UCS TLG made, you would understand why people disagree. UCS is a building way, not a stample. Accurate, big models with features. The scale does not maters. Some features or the fact that minifigs are Inside make an UCS always better : they need features. But if a model, called UCS, was designed for playability reasons intead of display reasons, then it is not an UCS.
-
No. Today, TLG uses the UCS stample for marketing reasons. The new Sandcrawler has not the charateristics of an UCS : it's just a very big and expensive playset. There is a difference between marketing and design : UCS remains a building way, a naiming given to truely accurate, well designed models or MOC.
-
No, the Ewok Village, the Sandcrawler and the Death Star are not UCS ; only big playsets with the UCS stample to be better selled). Sculptures are also not UCS (R2-D2 #10225 is not sculpture).
-
[MOC] Podracer of Gaut1202 (TechLug Contest 10)
gaut1202 replied to gaut1202's topic in LEGO Star Wars
Thanks guys ! Kepheus, you're welcome. It's always useful to show how things are done, especially in Lego MOCs.