SNIPE

The only way, besides what @gyenesvi said would be to link a 3L drive ring up to a 2L drive ring, so that they both move at the same time, the 3L would be using the white 3L axle joiner. you could also maybe use some sort of spring loaded latching mechanism like the trigger on a gun, but you would need to probably make one for when the ring is up and down (but not one for if its centered). a more elegant solution would just be to use this part along with a motor, the motor will keep the drive ring from sliding around, unless you apply enough torque to manually turn the motor, in that case you could use a worm gear + spur gear to move this part and keep/ditch the motor

hi, Yeah it's when I have the grid stepping at 0.1 ldu, I then make sure that the part is centered at 0,0,0 and that it's perfectly horizontal, then sometimes when I rotate it, it rotates, but also rotates slightly in another axis for some reason. I had to close LDCAD and then set the custom rotation stepping in the config file then make the file read only, other wise the config gets overwritten by LDCAD. I'm not sure if this problem is helped by locking the axis by hitting 'v' but that's hardly a solution anyway.

Actually I think the two 2L yellow beams would work! (I thought they would pivot too much but I guess the 5L beam locks them in place EDIT: OK it has a little bit of play still but it's the closest solution to what I want that I can build, the better solution would be to use that rare inear actuator bracket (61905) along with two 15100 connected to the axle holes with 2L axles

that disc won't let the central axle spin independently because it has an axle hole the 3x3 commetor will but it wont be able to spin independently to the turntable.

I mean so that the beam will sit flush against the turntables pinholes. the ideal part here (if it existed) would be a 1L thick disc with 5 pinholes in a + pattern

I wonder if anyone can find a part that lets me attach a beam 5 via pinholes 2 and 4 into these pins but where theres a 0L gap instead of a 1L gap which the pin joiners have: However it must still be able to rotate independently of both the turntable halves and also still allow for an independent center axle

not sure how hard it would be to turn, I have the dark bluish gray half but nothing to snap it into.. I only bought that part to check if it would work with the existing linear clutch halves, it does not. The aforementioned new part MAY fit inside of the 28 tooth mini turn table half but I doubt it will click into place. However it doesn't seem to be that much because this set uses the exact combination anyhow :) EDIT yeah in LDCAD it is too wide to fit inside of a 26 tooth turntable half :( but at least you can have an independent axle running thru the middle, or can connect the pins to a 28 or 36 tooth double bevel gear.

This new part could be used with this to make a stronger linear clutch, the existing white one we have is very bendy, but these 2 parts have embedded pins and so you could just convert the pinhole into an axle hole anyhow: we also get the thin 9L beam with 3 holes in green. it has not been used in a technic set yet, however the fairly new axle 3L with pinhole will be used in the 42205 Corvette stingray

a flagship with only 2300 parts , flipping heck... Yes I know parts count isn't everything, the number of functions is the highest priority for me but... We will see. I bet its just the basic car functions because, well, otherwise it would be too close to the 1;8 scale flagship super cars.. if its a jeep then why not just get 42110 or last year's 42177...

What would be the best way to connect 2 motors to 1 hub output port, say from a buwizz 3.0. Preferably where the motors can, in hardware, be set to rotate both in the same direction or in opposing directions. If the pole reversing is done in software as well, then it would override the hardwares pole reverser. I checked some third party options such as a Y cable or a 3 input port replicator, but the port replicator has a fixed 50cm cable and both the Y cable and port replicator don't have pole reversers

Here's a basic LDRAW mockup of the new 7229 liftarm 3L with centre axle hole

OMG YES we finally get this part!!!

CADA finally, in december, added instructions for a bunch of sets, including the AMG ONE: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1WudE5AInLE2D5LyO4N3Zsur4tKGI3uMH

Yes, however the newer mold is too loose to fit a bar in, which is useful with axle pins if you want 2 levers with a 1L gap between them but where they are independently movable, so I usually just always grab the older mold just incase. This may have been mentioned but there's also a 1x1 round plate with a clip on the bottom coming out very soon.

Everything fitting together is the whole philosophy of LEGO... What's so stupid about my last reply anyhow, there's no good way to build diagonally in a neat way using LEGO because you either have gaps or have to hide stuff that sticks out or that doesn't make a flush edge under more parts (which you can't always do) If you wanna be a fanboy then that's not my problem, I like LEGO but that's not to say they don't make mistakes

I'll take a look. Anyhow, THIS is what I have in mind: (proof of concept. the road and sidewalks would be wider in my real city) yellow are 11.25 degree slopes, they have 1 clutch under them. they make up the road Dark bluish gray is the road also, Light blush gray is the sidewalks. Here I made a angled junction but you can do so much cool stuff with this theoretical piece. thanks to @Philo for making this part and fast! EDIT, I reuploaded the images using bricksafe for the previous replies

Thx all.

It's back together! The paddle shifter still isn't working but i'll have to rip it out again later anyhow.....

It is still in lego geometry... you're just making the lip (which already does not line up with tiles anyhow) slightly larger so that these slopes can make diagonals without the shingle effect. It just means that the diagonals angle is different, because otherwise the highest point of the slope would not be able to be flush with tiles (which all lego slopes alredy are, just not on the fronts) As I just said already, you make the tiles easier to remove yet still eliminate the bottom groove. Now heres a problem I have too, its not a huge deal but usually is if theres a large gap: This is fine for these slopes to have the gap but LEGO , as I mentioned should make specical parts that are 45, 22.5 and 11.25 degrees (because these all can still add up to 90 , 180 270 or 360 degrees and make them have bo bottom lip or have the bottom grooves, and make all 4 sides diagonals so that you don't get these gaps like in the above image. Yes wedge plates and other slopes now would be weird when put against these new parts, but thats because lego gave slopes the half plate lip, and because they made (except or 45 degree wedge bricks/plates/tiles) have angles that do not add up to 90,180,,270,or 360 degrees. Parts like that would be invaluable because you can make cities that have all sorts of anglad roads, or angled streets Since they can add up to 90/180/270/360 degrees you can still build normally on the ends of them, Modulex slopes got close to this but sadly it was never done in LEGO parts

Again, totally un-neccesary, this is the 4x1 version of the 6x1 shown in my original post. having 0 or 1 plate lips does not make the part worse in any way. And tiles + slopes should not have the groove on the underside to make them "easier to remove" They should just instead use a different plastic that has slightly less friction than the old tiles without bottom groove or something like that. LEGO asthetic is nowdays is 2024 not 1994

And weirdly, this 8x6 slope works fine when making non shingled diagonals (IIRC) unless LDCAD has the part wrong, I only have 1 of the 8x6 slopes so its hard to test.

This part came out last year... TLG needs to make parts that can make different shaped roads in a flexable manner, not just right angles. and even have inclined and declined roads, the parts should be as flexable as possible in what they can do.

I said half plate not half brick, and the other studless slopes work just fine, as shown in the above image I just added (but I dont know if they line up with tiles with the diagonal cutout so I would have to I guess make the sidewalks use slopes on their side as well :) but raise them by a brick or half a brick which is more challenging but oh well. LEGO is all about having a system where parts can connect with other parts, and this is hardly a weird thing im trying to do. OK maybe I am mistaken (I got impatient) in that its a half brick offset but the fact that there is still a lip there doesnt change anything, when using half plate offsets can make smooth diagonals with no "shingling" infact LEGO could even have slopes with no lip and still ditch the rounded corners, as this 6x1 slope has no counded corners unlike a cheese slope. of the new studless 2x1 slope

This is wrong in 2 ways because stupid LEGO didn't bother testing the part properly: Had they properly tested this part as well as the 2x1 and 4x1 versions of these studless slopes they would have noticed that you can"t use half plate offsets like you can with other studless slopes to have the diagonal bit flush and not "shingled" (now I've wasted money on a part that I can no longer use to make diagonal roads) But also theres a hideous gap between the brack and snot brick. WHY CAN'T THEY JUST MAKE A 1X1 SLOPE WITH A FULL PLATE LIP ON THE BOTTOM IN 2 OR 3 DIFFERENT ANGLES so that they are the same angles as wedge plates, you can therefore have SNOT SLOPES and clamp them in with non SNOT wedge plates for the sidewalks and not have to deal with half plate trickery and even then they are not at the same angle as any wedge plate.

I have LDCAD with a custom rotation (0.5 LDU) however it is a major pain in the megablocks, im not sure if MLCAD would be much better. LDCAD is buggy when you try to force it to rotate at like 0.01 increments as it starts to rotate the part in axis which you didnt tell it to be rotated in I'm so done with this , this is REDICULOUS.