romashkaman

Eurobricks Vassals
  • Content Count

    58
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About romashkaman

Spam Prevention

  • What is favorite LEGO theme? (we need this info to prevent spam)
    technic
  • Which LEGO set did you recently purchase or build?
    42110

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/illyaman/

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Extra

  • Country
    Ukraine

Recent Profile Visitors

513 profile views
  1. @coinoperator yes, everything works, problems are on your side)
  2. @Bricktrain could you make the video of the test of your configuration?) I guess the performance should be quite the same as 42099's, correct me if I'm wrong (in case there is no additional gear reduction or whatever else)
  3. romashkaman

    [POC] Solid ball joint

    It could be implemented in strut-based suspensions where standard lego suspension levers with ball joint mounts are too big. Very good idea, thanks! You deliver great ideas constantly)
  4. romashkaman

    KV-1/KV-2 Tank

    It's USSR's tank. It's normal. Besides jokes - there always were some engineering decisions, that were based only on tests and their results. If the engineers wanted to build something able to shoot - no matter if it breaks a half of tank's transmission. Because even stalled tank can shoot. And look at results of WW2 - this strategy worked. But the price of that strategy...
  5. It would be interesting to watch a video. Only one l-motor for such vehicle? I doubt it'll be enough.
  6. romashkaman

    [WIP] 42110 MOD by Romashkaman

    That is very good idea! Thanks! Will try to implement it.
  7. romashkaman

    [WIP] 42110 MOD by Romashkaman

    Thanks for the attention! 1. Tests will show, but my previous model (unfinished - black Mustang from the video) was built with old cv-joints and I didn't notice any failures. I don't like that front wheels hold on driven axles only, without any hubs, but... For now, I don't see a way to avoid the use of new hubs from 42099 other than this concept. For now, even when wheel holds only on one axle, the backlash is much less than in case of use of every other Lego hub. 2. 4 XL-motors coupled together + gearbox = it stops everything)) I wanted model to be able to do some free ride after motors disabled. 3. I know there is some work to be done, but I doubt struts will slide apart. It doesn't happen even without load (because of spring unclenches, for example), but when the car is on the ground - load tries to compress the strut via frame and spring (it causes that little strut's bending I mentioned before). I can imagine strut's scattering only in case of very fast spring's unclenching.
  8. Just separated into this topic.
  9. Hello all! I know, there already exists a topic about 42110 MODs. But, considering I plan to rebuild the whole car (except exterior) - it really would be better to separate my posts in a new topic (I agree with @Nazgarot). So, for now, I just copy what I posted in 42110 - Land Rover Defender - MODs and Improvements. The actual progress is: - completed front part of the frame (it's stiff enough even without any other part of the body attached): - McPherson suspension and front differential module mounts on that frame and is easily detachable (also McPherson struts include new cv-joints from 42099): - front suspension is built with caster and KPI angles: - engine is built from 4 PF XL-motors coupled together (output gear ratio is 20:36), also it's equipped with one-way clutch (it's built years ago by @nicjasno): - given that drive shaft of the engine has half-stud offset in vertical direction, here is an "offset remover": All modules assembled look like this: And, of course, a video of the short test: This module has some little issues (at first, I need to improve stiffness of the suspension's struts - under load they bend a little bit inward, but it doesn't affect all the process of a drive), but it has a really stiff frame and it's a good start point. You can find more photos on Flickr. About the question why I decided to use XL-motors: XL-s have the biggest torque among all Lego motors (according to the @Philo's page). Buggy-motor has higher rpms, but lower torque (and it's much more expensive and bigger than XL). It's not good choice for heavy vehicles. L-motors are more compact, but, again, if you compare torque/rpm ratio among all of the motors - XLs are the best imho. I tested this setup (4 XLs) two years ago at local fest: This model hadn't any gearbox and was pretty heavy. But, as you can see, the car accelerated easily, than acceleration stopped and speed was constant - only because of low max RPMs of the XLs. Theese motors have very good potential even without gearbox. L-motors are too weak for such acceleration of heavy models. Considering I plan to add a gearbox to this rebuilt Defender - it has to be fast and powerfull))
  10. Mmm, I don't know am I allowed to make separate WIP thread? One "42110 MODs" thread already exists, I didn't finish the model to show it in completed version, so... I don't know, what am I supposed to do)
  11. XL-s have the biggest torque among all Lego motors (according to the @Philo's page). Buggy-motor has higher rpms, but lower torque (and it's much more expensive and bigger than XL). It's not good choice for heavy vehicles. L-motors are more compact, but, again, if you compare torque/rpm ratio among all of the motors - XLs are the best imho. I tested this setup (4 XLs) two years ago at local fest: This model hadn't any gearbox and was pretty heavy. But, as you can see, the car accelerated easily, than acceleration stopped and speed was constant - only because of low max RPMs of the XLs. Theese motors have very good potential even without gearbox. L-motors are too weak for such acceleration of heavy models. Considering I plan to add a gearbox to this rebuilt Defender - it has to be fast and powerfull))
  12. Hello all. Just started rebuilding this set. I wanted this set to be rebuilt inside and to save exterior (like many others here). The actual progress is: - completed front part of the frame (it's stiff enough even without any other part of the body attached): - McPherson suspension and front differential module mounts on that frame and is easily detachable (also McPherson struts include new cv-joints from 42099): - front suspension is built with caster and KPI angles: - engine is built from 4 PF XL-motors coupled together (output gear ratio is 20:36), also it's equipped with one-way clutch (it's built years ago by @nicjasno): - given that drive shaft of the engine has half-stud offset in vertical direction, here is an "offset remover": All modules assembled look like this: You can find more photos on Flickr. And, of course, a video of the short test: This module has some little issues (at first, I need to improve stiffness of the suspension's struts - under load they bend a little bit inward, but it doesn't affect all the process of a drive), but it has a really stiff frame and it's a good start point.
  13. Very unexpected model. It represents the real tractor good, it works - good model. I see some weak points (like "struts" in front suspension), but this model isn't about extreme stiffness and etc. Or tell me I've understood you wrong :) Interesting thing - how many people can tell what blue part used to recreate a seat?) I already forgot these parts ever existed, although I have at least one set containing this blue parts)
  14. romashkaman

    [WIP] Ute supercar

    You always have to remember - that shock absorber can handle 500 grams only if the compression force direction perfectly aligns with the central axle of that shock absorber. That's the basic mechanics, I'm sure you know that. Let's just take a look at 42110 suspension. Model isn't very heavy, TLG used 2 hardest shock absorbers for each wheel, but suspension is soft. And that all is because of the use of the class 3 lever-based suspension. Sorry if I explain basics :) but in case of your suspension struts there are some different calculations.
  15. romashkaman

    Scania Next Generation S730

    @mpj Even it's model only with steering and drive functions - it could be enough, sometimes very small (or medium-sized) and visually simple models have such great techniques you just wonder how that builder put it all together. I understand your point about photography. Honestly, I rebuild my models many times too, I build them just for myself, but when I want to share something with others - I don't have any story with photos about building process (that thing brings attention to your model). Given that I build without stickers, I can take final photos and that will be ok. All will see the level of the final product. I just want to say - if you share your creations only in stickered versions - you can lose the deserved reputation not only of a good builder, but of a good lego-engineer.