Eurobricks Counts
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by 2GodBDGlory

  1. 34 minutes ago, Reisess said:

    Yea exactly. Also I borrow 3S package (so around 11,1V output) and on that package it has no chance to even start ride. So to summirize:

    • 3S (11,1 v) - not even start on one/both motors
    • 2S (7,4v) - start sometimes on both, start often on one motor
    • Normal battery from lego box - start on both/one but with very limited power and speed

    So... I have no idea wtf is wrong here :hmpf_bad:

    I'm still thinking it's the fact that you've only got one SBrick, but that's just from judging from what I've seen others do.

  2. 37 minutes ago, Legotyres said:

    Just noticed this post and for anyone interested, I’ve finally managed to create a true FWD transverse MOC (front end chassis). I’m hoping to squeeze it into the front end of a Classic Mini or maybe a Golf Mk1 when time allows (it might be a while though as I’ve been messing with on and off for five years now)

    It has a transversely mounted 6 speed sequential gearbox (R-N-1-2-3-4), fake 4 cylinder engine and differential. Steering with my own macpherson suspension. The gearbox selector allows you to access all gears via it from what will be the inside of the car. 

    Be aware, it’s just a chassis, but thanks to the new Z20 and Z12 gears, the issues with friction with this type of gear box is gone. There are plenty of YouTube Clips and Shorts on my channel to which show some of the evolution over the last five years too.

     As far as I’m aware, this it the very first true Front Wheel Drive Transverse MOC just like a rear car created out of none illegal lego building

    YouTube clip of a genuine FWD transverse MOC

    Nice work! True transverse drivetrains are certainly interesting to model, especially given how common they are in real life, and how rare they are in Technic! 

    I'd be curious to see some more details about the gearbox, since anything with 6-speeds tends to be quite challenging to make! (Lately I've usually built 4x2 8-speeds and just ignored a couple gears)

  3. 2 hours ago, Davidz90 said:

    If I can add my 2 cents, base-10 approach might actually be easier with Lego. Binary mechanical calculators are a rarity, and compared to base 10 ones there is usually much more parts. Binary numbers are simply bigger (more digits), so there are more carries etc. Less precision is needed in the sense that all is cool as long as 0's are not mistaken as 1's and vice versa, but in electrical system it means that the signal in the circuit is amplified to proper level every few logic gates.

    That makes a lot of sense, good point!

    2 hours ago, Davidz90 said:

    How about simply gearing things up so we have a rotary dial with 10 numbers, but inside the calculator 1=1 rotation?   That could be easily processed in a differential for addition/subtraction. It is hard to get a backlash so bad that output is full rotation behind input.

    Interesting thought; I'm having a hard time knowing what my thoughts on that would be, simply because I tend to work myself into a "calculator-design-brain-mode" when I build calculators, and then kind of let that all go in off times. My thought, though, is that it would be challenging to limit the shafts inside the calculator to amounts of rotation above one full turn, but it could be an interesting avenue to explore.


    EDIT: After consideration, limiting it that way actually looks really easy and helpful, and I'm working in a prototype now!

  4. 4 hours ago, aeh5040 said:

    Amazing work - thanks for sharing! Sufficient precision and torque are of course the eternal headaches with things like this. I hope you are not discouraged by the difficulties, and continue to work on this awesome project.

    For a slightly different direction, have you considered trying a binary (rather than decimal) system? Obviously it would not be so convenient as a calculator, but it might help overcoming some of the challenges.

    I haven't thought too much about doing a binary system, though I do imagine it would be a lot easier. I guess I just made it an arbitrary goal to make it work in base-10!

    I was trying a new line of attack, in which numbers would be stored via linear motion rather than rotary motion, and made a fairly successful calculator that could add two single-digit numbers, but I guess I never got around to posting it anywhere. The linear concept has the advantages of minimal backlash and a greater possibility of incorporating multiplication and division, but it'll take more development to reach this level of functionality.

    Maybe I'll try to get that calculator up soon, but I'll have to see when/if I get enough time to give this new concept more of a try!

  5. My latest progress has mainly been on the front section. The plan is to make it look vaguely like a classic semi truck cab, which is obviously anachronistic for a spaceship, but then so was a lot of the Space Police III lineup that I'm mainly inspired by, so I'm going to go with it.


    Anyways, I slapped a few plates on a little frame at the rear to rough out the "sleeper" area, with extra crew seating. I'm not sure I love using these System parts, but I'm running low on black panels after using them on the bottom of the container, so they might have to do. The lattice plates do have a nice connection to the window stickers on the Space Truck Getaway set, and I think some extra details should help make it look more complete back there. Most of my progress has been on the front, though. I added a "hood," that is split down the middle and coupled with gears so it can fold down, revealing a massive gun!

    There's also a little hole in the grille so that the gun can shoot before dramatically revealing itself, if necessary. This gun is mounted on a turntable, and while it doesn't have the greatest range of motion, it can be controlled for rotation and tilt with a two-way joystick.


    I'll be working on hooking up a control for the firing of the 6-shooter part, but I'm quite pleased with what I have so far, for the simple reason that rather than holding the DBG housing in place and rotating the yellow trigger, like every Lego set I know of, I've fixed the yellow trigger in place and driven the housing, so the shots will always come from a fixed place at the top, and the whole thing spins dramatically.


    It was a little tricky to figure this out, but I got it figured out. The housing is driven via a 28T turntable, and the center is fixed using a 3L axle with stud stuck into a 1L beam, with a 1x1 plate on the other end. This plate is stuck into the LBG part of the turntable, locking it in place on the square profile there, and then allowing me to lock that yellow part in place.


    Anyways, I'll be working on figuring out the cab and firing controls, and then potentially landing gear, locks to hold the container in, and generic detailing.

  6. 44 minutes ago, JoKo said:

    I don't get what 8t gears you are talking about? don't have any 8t gear in the model.

    Nice to see it on someone else's desk overseas !

    Bigger centrifugal devices are more consistent but this small butterfly gets the job done! And you'll have to find a way to ad steering somewhere. On this model the steering rack is just behind the bumper.

    I would be pleased to have feedback!

    Yeah, it'll definitely take some mods to put into a steered axle, but the theory should all be down!

    Now that I look at this model, I see that you've got the mechanism integrated more nicely than in the mock-ups you had earlier, so you don't have those 8T gears anymore either. I was copying from this image that you shared in the other thread, so my modifications are relative to it:


  7. I just built that lock, and I'm as impressed as ever! I did take the liberty of compacting the centrifugal mechanism a bit, and removing that 8T to 8T gear connection, though possibly at some cost of durability (I haven't had any failures yet, but my testing hasn't been too intense)



    Now there's a part of me that thinks I need to make some super-maneuverable, 4WS crawler to use this lock design...
    Perhaps after TC24 is done?

  8. 17 minutes ago, Michael217 said:

    Thanks! This motor is from a Russian developer, the size is like an XL motor, but a little longer, in power like 2 buggy motors and has a standard PF connector. 

    Wow, that's a lot of them in that picture! Would it be a good inference that those are 3D-printed cases housing motors of the style seen in the rear left of your picture, but with planetary gearing added?

    I 3D-printed a case for one of those motors once, but adding the gearing would be a super useful touch.

  9. 2 hours ago, Reisess said:


    I have some problem to make my car properly drive :hmpf_bad:.

    So I'm using 7,4V 25C LiPo package with sBrick. About gearing I'm using 2x lego 5292 (sadly not original one but replacement) on one axle, they goes through 2x 16th (so 1:1) to gearbox with 1:1 and 1,67:1 and then to differentials so 1,4:1.

    The main problem is to start this stuff, cause if it even start at begining it looks like bunny jumps (I have to use 100% throttle to do this), but in most cases I only hear squeak's from engines and it won't start. Ofc If I use reverse, then forward few times it finally start ride but it should not looks like that :wacko:. Also I checked if whole drivetrain move fine from finger (placed when engines are) and I don't find any issues here.

    I'm not sure if problem appear cause of bad gearing, or some electric issues.

    So, if I understand correctly, you're saying that trying to start the car results in either a slow, jerky start, or just stalling/power cutting?

    The gearing you have sounds fairly reasonable, unless your car is fairly heavy, in which case you might want to try gearing for more torque.

    Are you using only one SBrick, though? I've never used them, but most models I've seen use at least one SBrick per buggy motor, so that might be limiting your current output quite a bit.

    25 minutes ago, Jurss said:

    If not mistaken, lego 5292  needs 9V. As there ar two, they will draw much power, so in best case there will be 7V, so it means -22% of needed voltage. That is a lot.

    Well, I wouldn't say that motor needs 9V. That's what it originally ran on in official sets (until the batteries started to die), but I've ran them at 7.4V lots of times without trouble. Also, it sounds like a torque problem, and cutting voltage affects speed a lot more than torque, if I'm not mistaken. I wouldn't be surprised if it is a current supply issue, though, because those motors require pretty beefy electronics backing them up.

  10. 2 hours ago, artemisovsky said:

    For example, pneumatic motor should be cheaper than an electric one

    I kind of doubt that it would be able to be any cheaper. In a sense it ought to be, being quite a bit simpler than an electric one, but we're at a point where little electric motors are being mass produced, allowing them to be a lot cheaper than they would be otherwise. Because pneumatic motors would be so niche, they wouldn't be able to benefit from that scale.
    They sure would be cool, though!

  11. 46 minutes ago, Zerobricks said:

    I think there was somewhere a topic of how different colors seem to have different mechanical properties. It would make sense, I had more yellow perpendicular connectors broken than black for example.

    I believe The Unofficial Lego Technic Builder's Guide suggested that red was the weakest color, while yellow was the strongest. Most of the evidence for these different things is probably fairly anecdotal, though!