2GodBDGlory

Eurobricks Counts
  • Content Count

    1221
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by 2GodBDGlory


  1. Yeah, this thing is sweet! Massive functionality, and good looks. I do think it looked a bit more refined before you added the rotating cab, with the pneumatic outriggers, but I think this unique function is worth it. If possible, I'd like to see the outriggers appearance change a bit, though. The arm itself on them looks a little too simple, so if you could add a foot or something, I think it would look better.


  2. 35 minutes ago, Gray Gear said:

    That would suck... Increasing wheel size without adjusting the brake discs will cause the brakes to look small which is not pretty at all.

    For 99% of models you'll be right, but having a larger gap between rim and disc will allow for more options to make the brakes functional, which could be neat to see in MOCs. I tried once with Porsche rims in a model, but it was very challenging and didn't work great. This could at least be a side advantage of the disadvantage!


  3. 5 minutes ago, lmdesigner42 said:

    The new rims for the Ferrari have fivefold symmetry with the five spokes. It also looks like there's a black pin/pinhole at the base of each spoke. Is it possible there are new hubs with five pins/pinholes??

    It's possible, but I think it's more likely that those black spots are just decoration on the rim itself, representing the five lug nuts on the real car.


  4. 3 minutes ago, Jockos said:

    I'm not so happy about the limited edition:laugh: Though it would be fun to have some major alteration on the mighty few (like a convertible in a brand new color ), but it's a bit of a pity to not offer to the wider audience.

    At this point, I wouldn't expect it to end up as a limited edition. It seems like bad business sense for Lego, and would just be a break from tradition. Sometimes we hear a lot of strange things in early leaks, and I wonder if this might be one of them. It sounds like the real car is a limited edition of 599, could confusion have come from that? Who knows, though!


  5. I'm back with the third installment in my drivetrain model series, in which I build interesting drivetrains, without the annoyance of putting bodies around them!

    800x600.jpg

    For this one, I modeled the drivetrain of the Ford Raptor pickup truck, which allowed me to do a few interesting things. For one, this truck has a ten-speed transmission, which would be a challenge to replicate. Additionally, it has an unusual 4WD transfer case, allowing for RWD, AWD, and 4WD modes, with the AWD allowing some slip to the front half despite lacking a central differential, and with the 4WD locking it up completely. Finally, it has a Torsen limited-slip central differential, which I've been wanting to put in a model for a while. In the end, my model has these features:

    • V6 piston engine, with an unusual build to allow for a 60 degree cylinder bank, and driven by a PF L-motor
    Spoiler

    I really wanted to make this as realistic as possible, so I aimed for a 60 degree bank and 120 degree intervals between pistons, but I was sadly unable to get the 120 degrees I aimed for. The 60 degrees is still cool, though, and makes it distinctive in a world of identical engines.

    800x600.jpg

    800x600.jpg

    • 12+4R sequential transmission. There's several gears more than necessary, but you can always ignore those and pretend it's a 10+R like the real truck. Strangely, it's actually easier to build it with the extra gears.
    Spoiler

    This is a variation of an old 12-speed I made a long time ago. I rebuilt it from the instruction video I made here: 

    , and then started thinking about how I could add a reverse gear to it. The original gearbox was in the form of a close-ratio four-speed multiplied by a wide-ratio three-speed that would shift every time the four-speed got through a cycle. I tried a bunch of complex things to try to get the reverse in, and then found one so laughably easy to work in that it should have been there from the beginning. All I had to do was add a 20T clutch gear on a string of three driving ring extenders (the new low-backlash ones were great here!), and it worked perfectly!

    800x600.jpg

    ^Gearbox

    800x600.jpg

    ^Here you can see the 20T I added for reverse, meshing with the 24T side of the differential housing. It's likely going to be a weak connection were this an RC MOC, but it works perfect here!

    The transmission was controlled by the knob in the lower left of that picture, through a worm drive. A stepper mechanism caused the 3+R gearbox to cycle once each time the 4-speed cycled, making this a 12+4R transmission! Ignore two forward speeds and three reverse ones, and we've got a realistic 10+R

    • Hi-Lo transfer case
    Spoiler

    800x600.jpg

    This was extremely simple, and can be seen on the left side here. It was independently controlled by the knob below it.

    • RWD/AWD/4WD transfer case
    Spoiler

    800x600.jpg

    I learned about this transfer case from an Engineering Explained YouTube video (Basically the only non-Lego guy I watch much of), which, as I understand it, has three modes. RWD, AWD with the front axle connected by a fluid coupling, so that it can slip a little bit to avoid the binding that would normally occur without a central differential, and 4WD, with the fluid coupling locked up. I simulated it as you can see in the image. One side of the driving ring drives the front wheels through the 24T clutch gear to simulate that fluid coupling; the other side locks it up for 4WD, and the middle is simple RWD. You can also see my simulated half universal joint on the back as my rear-wheel output.

    • Torsen front differential
    Spoiler

    The differential is driven by a universal joint shaft from the transfer case. I've been intrigued by Torsen limited-slip differentials for a while now, but it was the design I used here, from Lego Technic Embodiment on YouTube, that got me to finally understand how they worked (Engineering Explained also helped). This design is surprisingly compact, and seems like it could possibly have legitimate use cases in RC vehicles. Come to think of it, it'd be an interesting swap into the Top Gear Rally car or PU Buggy... Anybody want to test that? Here it allows for one front wheel (or rather universal joint half) to rotate slower than the other side, as when steering, but will not allow it to stop moving, as in a slip situation. It's really cool, and I'm glad I've finally put one in a finished model, even if it has no practical use at all.

    800x600.jpg

    Images at: https://bricksafe.com/pages/2GodBDGlory/ford-raptor-drivetrain-model

    Let me know how you like the new format I'm trying here, with a bullet-point outline with more details and images in spoiler boxes. It seems neat and simple to me, so it might be what I do going forward.

    Overall, I was happy that everything worked nicely, and it was overall a pretty painless build that allowed me to try out some fun mechanical concepts!


  6. 3. Compact Mobile Crane

    Functions:  

    • Steering-wheel linked front wheel steering
    • Two-function distribution gearbox, with inputs below the turntable and outputs above
    • Manual synchronized outrigger extension and lowering with knob
    • Manual superstructure slewing with knob
    • Manual winch with knob
    • Manual boom lift with knob, through distribution gearbox
    • Manual boom extension (two extending stages) with knob, through distribution gearbox

     

    Dimensions: W x L x H: 13 x 48 x 16 = 9984 cubic studs

    800x600.jpg800x600.jpg800x600.jpg800x600.jpg

     


  7. 28 minutes ago, amorti said:

    Funny you should say that. I'm fine with using 7l alternating beams, but I can't quite get over filing stuff. Different types of purist?

    Yeah, perhaps. There is a difference between allowing commercially available, refined non-Lego alternatives and willingness to use just anything. Think Buwizz versus a hand-soldered custom battery rubber-banded to a liftarm, or 7L pliftarms versus rough 3D-printed parts. I guess the difference here isn't so much one of principle, rather just a preference for having everything look professional!

    And to be fair, I've got a pair of AliExpress buggy motors myself, and I've never filed that down (though I never realized it was a problem), and refrained from cutting out part of the housing to fit a large motorcycle tire inside it, though I was tempted.


  8. 31 minutes ago, Gray Gear said:

    I think it would be smart to use the new gears everywhere where the bevel is not needed. I mean, whats the point to keep using the bevel version? They cause additional friction and have to benefits in return. But somehow I feel like this isn't going to happen.

    From the AFOL's stand point, you're right, there is no point in continuing the bevel version where it isn't needed. After all, we've got heaps of the old ones we can use whenever we need the bevels, and there's enough supply that they should remain cheap indefinitely on Bricklink, no matter how little they get used in sets going forward.

    The only issue I see is for people building from a more limited supply of bricks. Switching to less versatile gears would be a pain for young builders working from only a few sets, and also be annoying to AFOLs building B/C models for sets.


  9. I was just taking a look at the Bricklink inventory of the old Black Cat Model Team truck (5571), and I noticed something strange. I'd always assumed that that set used the same 62.4x20mm tires that are common these days, in, for example, the 42043 Arocs. However, it turns out that while they look very similar, they are actually slightly bigger, at 68.8x24 mm, and have their own slightly different rim. These old tires only appear in this truck and the 5563 Racing Truck Model Team set, and are quite expensive (I suppose because of the desirability of the 5571 set).

    I was very surprised to realize that I had never heard of these tires, and so I checked out Sariel's wheel chart, and found that the old one was nowhere to be found, so I guess I'm not quite as ignorant as I thought.

    Are any of you folks aware of these tires? Have they ever come in handy on a MOC?

    32003.png

    Old^

    32019.png

    New^


  10. Great writeup as usual! Placing the battery that far forward is a really interesting solution that I may have to try someday! The suspension is also pretty unique. One detail I quite liked was the way you secured the yellow crankshaft part that the steering actuator connects to. The moment I saw the render, I worried that that part would pop off immediately thanks to their very low clutch power, but then I saw you had placed the 1x2 Technic brick overtop of it to prevent that. Nice solution there!


  11. 1 hour ago, Erik Leppen said:

    This has to be the model I least expected. Proportion-wise it looks a bit like a caricature, but it seems to be the most functional thing in existence. It totally doesn't feel "small" as the contest intended, but if it fits in the box, it counts. Though I must say everything about the model screams "I just wanted to fit as much in the box as possible" rather than "small-scale construction vehicle" ;) But oh well. I think it's quite the result because of this :)

    Note that the model is 48 studs long, not the 44 that was claimed, meaning the volume is 48 x 13 x 16 = 9984. Still counts, and shows you really found the limit of what's possible :)

    Yeah, I think you're right that I'm kind of stretching the limits of what the contest was meant to be, for better and for worse! Good catch about it being 48 studs long; I knew I designed it to be as big as possible, so I do recall thinking it odd that my final volume had that much leeway. I must have just miscounted at the end, so I'll fix that in the post. Thanks!


  12. 1 hour ago, Nazgarot said:

    I don't think the boom is to big compared to the real thing, but making it very square has made it look very dominating. If you could use the rounded panels it would look a lot less massive. 

    11954.png

    https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=11954#T=S&C=3&O={"color":3,"iconly":0}

     

    Also the area between the cabin and the crane base looks kinda skinny... Might do it some good to beef up / cover up this area.

     

    But I love the functionality! Really good work!

     

    _ED_

    Thanks for the feedback! You're right, those curved panels could have looked good. Unfortunately, I've only got two of that multi-hole type in black, and only one of the fewer-hole type in black, and I don't think I have enough in any other color either, so square it must be!

    You're right about it looking skinny between the cab and the superstructure, but this was done intentionally. As pointed out in the video, when the boom is lifted, because of a poor pivot point location, the rear end of it sticks fairly far down, causing it to interfere with rotation at times because it will hit the top of the outrigger mechanism. Because the boom needs this extra space, I left it empty there to allow the boom to swing through that arc while raised up, but I don't recall ever actually doing that maneuver once it was finished! Perhaps it would have been better to use that space to reinforce my sagging cab and just rule out that option, but I'm probably not going to change anything at this point. (Too much trouble to take more pictures :sceptic:) Good observations, though!


  13. 20 hours ago, Thirdwigg said:

    Well done with all the features! There is so much packed into this MOC, which is becoming a bit of a trend with you @2GodBDGlory. The proportions are a little wonky to me, but it must be the price to pay for that huge boom!

    Thanks! I do like focusing on features. I'd agree that the proportions are odd, and I think you're right that it's the boom's fault. I believe its length is correctly scaled to the crane I was basing it on, but I never scaled the height of the boom part, and I'm assuming that in order to get the multi-stage setup inside, I had to exceed the height it should have had, cutting down on space below.