howitzer

Yes, the old turntable is higher, but mine is still going to be set somewhat higher than the original. There's no way to I could make it lower without compromising either the differentials or the original slewing mechanism.

I also briefly considered this set, as it's interesting and functional and probably the best ever set in its category, but then settled for another. Looking forward to your progress.

The perspective makes my model look bigger in relation to the original than it is. According to Technicopedia, the original's length is 58 studs, which translates to 40,6 studs with 30% reduction and my model's length is 41 studs from the front grille to rear bumper. The front and rear parts are also somewhat misaligned as they're not attached into each other in any way in the photo. I'll post better comparison when there's more to show.

No, it was in disassembled state for at least 20 years, after which I gathered the parts and reassembled it. Now it's missing some parts for being cannibalized to other projects but I intend to fix it for proper comparison photos before the contest ends. The plate with gear rack does indeed align with the piston, at least according to my 3D model. I don't have those cylinders though, so I'll have to wait for my BL order to come before I can finish the assembly.

Some progress. Fitting the turntable and associated mechanism is a challenge and I had to resort to some weird half-stud offsets to manage it. I'm a bit worried about the structural integrity of the build (it has to withstand the presses of the pump), but we'll see about it as I get further into the physical build. One of the first things I designed was the two white tanks in the side, the best scale would be three stud diameter but it was really difficult to come up with something that has this diameter and is round and also buildable. The best I came up with was the Hero Factory weapon barrel, attached to rotation joint and capped with a dish on one side and round tile on the other. I'm not entirely happy with it, something smoother and completely white with dishes on both ends would be great but those rotation joints don't come in white and I couldn't find a way to connect another dish in place of the tile. It's a minor thing though. The photo should give a sense of scale and shows some of the structure below the turntable which is going to be attached to the two black pins on the topmost liftarm. There's also some progress on the structures around the engine compartment.

Official word is that they should become available at PaB three months after their first release in sets, but sometimes it's much later and for some parts it's never. Official word is that they should become available at PaB three months after their first release in sets, but sometimes it's much later and for some parts it's never. --- As for the set itself, I think @Erik Leppen nailed it earlier: The price is insane and the main boom is much too short. Other than that I don't see much of serious problems with the set, though it's still kinda possible that something significant is revealed when the reviewers get their hands on the set. The price puts me off, I don't think I can justify spending more than 500€ on a Lego set. I thought long and hard about getting the Cat bulldozer but in the end decided against it, as 350€ was too much. The crane is much more interesting though, so if I find it for a really good price, I might just be convinced...

This is one of the two big sets I had as a kid (the other was 8868) and your version is instantly recognizable despite the huge reduction in size! I fear it might even be a bit too big reduction, no way to fit in most of the functions.

Having the same source material is fine, Hopefully we'll both finish our models properly and get to compare the results! Yep, it's a great set, one of the best ever.

Looks great so far! It'll be interesting to compare our entries, I aim to keep all functionality and make them as close to the original as possible, which forces somewhat larger scale than you. I've been busy for the past few days and I'm itching to get back to the build, hopefully tomorrow I'll have something more to show...

Well, near-largest anyway. Much larger than one would see in a typical construction site.

I think the main problem here is that the trend in TLG's choice for flagship construction models has been "biggest in the world" with first the Liebherr R 9800, then Cat D11 and now this. The other two were easy enough to convert into Lego, but a crawler crane' proportion are so different that it's really difficult to make one that has at least somewhat correct proportions while also being stable, playable and safe. So yeah, the choice of source material puts designers into an impossible place, can't really have a good looking thing that meets the required standards.

Differential can't really be made narrower, except maybe as a 2L width factory-assembled part with specialized internal gears. That would probably be too expensive for these small low-price sets. The 2L width would also require some weird half-stud offsets in assembly.

I'd buy that instantly if it was an official set.

There's at least 20 of those new frame pieces in the booms, and at least 14 of the A-frames, both of which are going to be pretty expensive in PaB. My guess is that something like 100€ of the price can be attributed to these two parts alone. Still really expensive though.

I thought you might not have counted the Liebherr, as it's not on shelves yet.

Yep, new parts are great. The electronics could indeed be improved though (physical controller...) but other than that we're well off as far as parts are concerned. The sets on the other hand are seriously lacking, there's too many cars but the cars are also not that interesting. There's very little in the way of innovation there, mostly the cars are just repeating the exact same functions over and over with some models having slightly more and some having slightly less of them. I'm still waiting for the generic family car with FWD transverse engine with stick-shift gearbox complete with four doors and trunk. John Deere isn't heavy equipment? Or the Liebherr crane? On the other hand, we got an airplane and even a space vehicle, so I don't mind the relative lack of heavy equipment.

I'm with you here. With the better photos it doesn't look nearly as bad as I thought based on the leaked box photo earlier. I mean, of course the proportions are off, but as someone said, it's a toy and not a scale model and as such it has to meet standards that scale model doesn't. What I find most off-putting is the price - so far it doesn't seem like there's anything revolutionary inside and the new parts aren't that notable either, nor does the electronics justify the price. 50% off and I might just be interested but not as it is.

Your ambition is commendable. I hope this works out, I want to see it in action.

@Jim I'm also having thoughts about adding functions or changing aesthetics compared to the original. The rules require construction in studless style, so that in itself imparts a significant change in aesthetics if the entry is based on a 90's or older set. So would "modernizing" an old set (fill gaps with panels, add minor functions like openable doors, etc.) count for or against in scoring? Personally I don't mind either way (stay as close as possible to the original, including shortcomings, or modernize the set by adding stuff that would be expected if similar set were to be released today) but it would be important to know this before starting to build.

I briefly considered 42145 as well, but the main attraction for the set is the collective and cyclic pitch control, which are really hard if not impossible at reduced scale so I decided against it. I don't think this is a good candidate for this contest, as dropping the most important functionality reduces it to a generic helicopter with not much to show off.

@Jim One question: are B-models and all universal set models allowed?

Shrinking the BWE by 1% might actually be much harder than shrinking it by something like 25% or 50% But I get your point: there should be a significant amount of shrinkage, to make it clear that the entry is not about just replicating the functions and looks of the original but also about fitting them into a tighter space while keeping as much as possible of them in the build. I also believe that swapping linear actuators for pneumatics or vice versa would be against the spirit of the contest? Anyway, I have a couple of ideas, I've got to think which set to choose and if I have enough time to actually build it, considering it's summer and there's a lot of things to do and places to go...

Also check out http://technicopedia.com/index.html where you can find explanations for all parts up to 2016.

Increasing the aperture enough will surely allow the elements to flow freely, but that will of course affect the runtime. I believe part of the problem is the fact that Lego elements are not spherical but have many edges which get caught on each other and perhaps on the sides of the hourglass clogging the flow. One other element that comes into mind which you could try would be the antenna base 4592 which is small and somewhat more spherical than the others you've tried. Then there's the minifig ring 11010 which has rounded edges so it might not stack up as easily as half-bushes. Gathering enough of those might get pretty expensive though.

So it would seem, I stand corrected.