Anto

Eurobricks Citizen
  • Content Count

    164
  • Joined

  • Last visited

5 Followers

About Anto

  • Birthday 02/02/2001

Spam Prevention

  • What is favorite LEGO theme? (we need this info to prevent spam)
    technic
  • Which LEGO set did you recently purchase or build?
    I only create MOCs

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    France
  • Interests
    Karting, mountain bike (enduro/downhill) and LEGOOOO!

Extra

  • Country
    France
  • Special Tags 1
    https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/public/style_images/tags/technicgear2.png
  • Special Tags 2
    https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/public/style_images/tags/technic_bronze.png

Recent Profile Visitors

4870 profile views
  1. This is simple: there have been so many similar MOCs over the past decade that if I had to make list of the MOCs I am fascinated about, there would be two. Yours is the third one. One question: are you really serious when you are wondering if it is recognizable?
  2. Your prototype is interesting, but in order to be used, the axle connected to the 8t gear has to have positions multiple of 45°. Here, the positions are n times 45° + 22.75° - you can't make the cross axle perpendicular to the liftarm. If you want to correct this, you must change the lock-mechanism a little, but it will be way harder to create a clamp that is able to push the teeth of the gear. It's hard to explain, but if you try, you'll understand what I mean! (I hope )
  3. @R0Sch: I also had the idea to use 2 knobs, but I don't have gray knobs to test in real life... Be careful when you try to design a stepper in Studio, because in real life, even when you think that it could work, you often have bad surprises. So with a virtual design, it's even worse! Anyway, these prototypes are interesting and must be tested in real life! I have quickly tried, and it seemed compromised. The tooth are so small that it's hard to push on them correctly. It's also difficult to make a good 45° lock-mechanism using 8t gears.
  4. I'm back with something new! For my new gearbox, I needed a 45° shifter. At first, I reproduced the one of the Yamaha MT-10 SP, but I was not satisfied with it. Indeed, I didn't like the feeling (you have to assist the lever until the gear is shifted, it doesn't feel like a keyboard touch) and the return to center doesn't work properly. This is why I decided to work on a new shifter having the following features: "Keyboard" touch Uses only one 8 tooth stepper gear More compact 45° lock-mechanism Working return to center The architecture is based on the one of the shifter from the Bugatti Chiron, using 135° connectors. Here, I used a tile round with bar holder to obtain the right distance between the connectors and the gear. The result is a compact shifter with a nice feeling, a working return to center and that only uses one 8 tooth shifter gear. Link to Rebrickable: https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-175515/Anto/45-stepper-mechanism
  5. It is the most probable option in my opinion, to stick with the previous 8+DNR gearbox architecture. But an 8-speed gearbox would be harder to make, because you can't easily get 4 different speeds on a same axle, like @Stereo explained. Yes, it's possible, but too complex for only 2 more gears. However, it's interesting to notice that the new 8 teeth stepper gear perfectly fits pins, so you can make something similar to my 8+N+R gearbox using a pin instead of a microphone, to have 1/8 of a turn in output for each turn in input - or more. This is interesting, but what does this solution add compared to the forks, except the price of the parts?
  6. I'm happy that you like this gearbox! I didn't check if they can allow 45° offset - anyway, it's not an elegant solution to me, a fixed assembly is still the best in this way. Moreover, a clutch wouldn't allow more shifting options. On the selectors, all the letters have to be aligned, so you need a multiple of 45° offset. Thanks! That's what I thought at first, but the new 2L driving rings allow to fit allmost everything inside the frames. I had the exact same reflexion. The best explanation I came up with is that it was the "less worse" configuration for: 4-speed gearbox, like the Yamaha, where the 45° offset is used. 8-speed gearbox, when the 45° offset can be cancelled. But it's impossible to make a dual-clutch gearbox structure. 6-speed gearbox, where 3 cylinders are on the same axle. But it requires more space than an 8-speed geabox for fewer gears and only 6 positions on 8 of the stepper are used, so this configuration seems useless. So I can't figue out why they made this pattern neither the 45° offset, this seems to only bring issues. That's why I'm so curious to see the next supercar. This is an interesting way to solve the 45° question, but it's a rather complex solution (more than the one I used), which doesn't explain why LEGO chose this design since they started from a scratch. Like you said, the forks are really interesting to make a realistic manual gearbox.
  7. INTRODUCTION This gearbox is the successor of my previous 8+N+R-gearbox. It is based on the new parts released on the Yamaya MT-10 SP #42159. Thanks to these, I could make a new and better gearbox for 1:8 manual supercars. Thanks to the 8 positions by rotation, I made a 6+N+R gearbox. The best arrangement I found was to put 2 cylinders between 2 shafts, each cylinder controlling 2 forks. Thus, I would need 2 cylinders to make the 8 positions I wanted. VIRTUAL DESIGN I started with simulations in Excel when the parts were not available yet. The purpose was to virtually recreate the functioning of the new rotary cylinders to find out a configuration that worked. So, I reproduced the sequence of the cylinders. Then, I created an offset between the 2 cylinders. To make the best gearbox possible, it was necessary to obtain: Reverse gear on an extremity of a shaft Not 2 gears engaged at the same time on the same shaft EXCEL TABLE The Excel table may seem hard to understand, but the main difficulty is because I made written in French! The first column represents the positions of the rotary cylinders. The second column is used to create an offset between the 2 cylinders. I tested all the configurations and keeped the ones that respected the criteria above. Then, I used the supposedly working configurations to calculate the possible gear ratios. The sub-table called “Transitions” corresponds to the ratio between the two main shafts. Then, on the sub-tables on the right, I put the gears on the primary and secondary shafts to get 3 different ratios on each shaft, placed in the correct sequence, for each remaining possible configuration. I got only 2 possible configurations (A and B). Other configurations exist, but they are symmetries of these two configurations, so they are useless. I finally came out with only one possible configuration, which is the one I realized in Stud.io and in real life. IMPROVEMENTS Compared to my previous gearbox, this new version features: Way better efficiency More compact, easier to integrate into a chassis More reliable gear selector More realistic and easier to understand The shifter can be less robust The input and the output are centred, and can easily be moved It is reversible, meaning that you can power both the input and the output Gears better staged HOW IT WORKS? The way it works is close to a dual-clutch gearbox - however, the exact same operation cannot be achieved due to the way the sequence of a rotary changeover cylinder is made. The ratios are better staged than the ones of my previous gearbox. The reverse gear is situated between the 1st and the 2nd gear, making it more realistic. R: -0.375 N: 0 1st: 0.25 2nd: 0.45 3rd: 0.50 4th: 0.75 5th: 0.90 6th: 1.50 A simple mechanism prevents from shifting from 6th to reverse gear. This mechanism can easily me moved to another place (for instance close to the shifter) though. The centre changeover cylinder is used to create a 45° offset between the two other cylinders. However, to spare a part, you can use one of the following assemblies. VIDEO REBRICKABLE LINK Here is the Rebrickable link if you want to test this gearbox! https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-171508/Anto/ultimate-6nr-gearbox-with-forks/#details I’m wondering what the gearbox on this summer’s supercar will look like. It should either be pretty similar, or totally different. What do you think?
  8. Wow, the amount of functions you packed into this model is unbelivable! Even though the mechanism to select the pneumatic switches is not 100% reliable, that's a pretty good concept, never seen before! Now I want one!
  9. Your entry is absolutely incredible! You made the right choice with the #8284. It's a quite empty set so you were able to reproduce everything without any compromise. Even the building of the chassis looks the same, every single part looks like the original one! Great job!
  10. Thanks! They hold pretty well. They are attached by 4 half-pins and do not fall, even if you push a little on them. Thank you, I'm happy that you like the editing because I spent much time on it to try to make it look cool to watch! I edited the video with Hitfilm Express. It's a free software but you can do a lot of things with it. For the camera movements, I mainly used a GoPro Hero 9 fixed on a tripod, with wipe underneath, so it was easier to have smooth shots. For a few shots, I directly slided the camera on the background (homemade with plywood and a black fabric on it) or slided the camera with my hands between it and the fabric. Sometimes, several tries were necessary to obtain a satisfying result but it was not too much difficult. :)
  11. Thanks! I'll make a RC version, I just need to find time to work on it!
  12. Thank you! Indeed the wheels were perfect for this model, since they look really close to the ones of the real car and I couldn't have done it with other rims of this diameter - because the ones of the Discovery have got an offset, allowing a shorter width! Yes, I didn't want to make a non-LEGO model just because I was asked to, I wanted to make something pretty unique that wouldn't seem a great idea when you thought about it (Barbie's car?) but that actually looks nice! It's a while since I thought about this but I didn't have an appropriae model for this!
  13. Thanks! I agree with that, it was a challenging point to make. I tried several things: using flex axles, other panels, studful... But I could only get an average result from every angle. With the panels I used, I got a pretty nice result when you look the car from the front and the sides, but not as convincing from the top. I prefered something really nice from most of the angles that something average from everywhere.