Jundis

Thanks Eric! Pneumatics in RC models are always a little more challenging, but very rewarding if it's working right :-)

Sry @Outdoors02 but I just found a side pic showing what I mean :-/ Please don't get me wrong, I am really not the "hater" person, but from an IP, I expect more...

Very cool reverse engineering so far! Can you guess, why the rear axle is black (two 4L?), while the middle one is a LBG 9L?

If the front wheels also drive a fake engine, I have no issue with this. Actually, why should the header move when its in up position? ;-) Another thing that strange is, that the chute is off-center...? I mean you can easily switch between left and right feeding, but still, this seems somehow odd.

Hmm some people (including me) had just higher hopes in this model, as we expected to be more based on the real machine ;-)

@2ndgen For example this layout from sariel

It's actually not than new of a concept, only the placement of the valve, which is a newer version. As this piece is still missing from stud.io (even though it was introduced in 2018...), there is a mock-up in the colored internal pic some posts above.

Thank you guys :-) It's really fun to play around. The only thing that bugs me a little bit is the track tension. In my first design, the rear sprocket wheel would have been a stud higher. But with that heavy weight from the battery box, I lowered it. Thus, the track gets a little more tension and the soft springs are nearly totally compressed. Sometimes, the tracks have a slightl resistance when moving with low speed.

Are they directly attached to the wheel axles? O_o But maybe the wheels spin free while the axles (4L with stop I suppose?) are somehow connected to the rims and keep them steady.

Ok this is a very big let-down for me. My guess is they tried to do a bigger scale but failed and settled for this. This looks like a technic designer started it and a system designer had some pieces laying around... I mean I get the wheel arch but other than that, there are so many things wrong here: - tractor tires missing at all - bodywork looks way too generic, I don't see any resemblance to the original. I mean, look at the rear? Didn't they look at the original at all? - too many system parts - no folding of the corn mower - wrong direction of gears To sum my rant up: If you can't make a convincing IP model of an existing machine, just make a generic one and don't label it.

Hmm maybe in the distant future the human civilization will split into the bigger drivers and the smaller researches, when I look at the 42180...?

Exactly my first thoughts! So cool they implemented it :-)

Gladly, the community will come up with plenty :-P

Hmm this pales in comparison to the 42148... At least a rear ripper could have been attached. Also the red gears stick out too much for my taste.

:D Actually, this is an easy but cool mechanism and the 42164 looks cool, too. In the third function pic on the lower backside, is it just a door or another function?