SaperPL

Eurobricks Citizen
  • Content Count

    264
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About SaperPL

Spam Prevention

  • What is favorite LEGO theme? (we need this info to prevent spam)
    Vehicles
  • Which LEGO set did you recently purchase or build?
    42109

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Extra

  • Country
    Poland

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm prototyping physically mechanical principles of the model first, then I try to build it in studio, iterate and make it look good. Then I build a physical prototype based on the design and so on. A tick-tock process, kind of like intel. Sometimes I go all physical though if mechanics are most of the build.
  2. I made the test to validate the PF version and option to go without the new two-piece differential
  3. Thanks guys! It would be awesome if others picked up this chassis for a build of his own semi (your own cab and trailer design). Another tease, this time the back with some quickly made fifth wheel/trailer hitch: Would you be interested in a kit version of this from https://buildamoc.com/ (the instruction would still be available for free)? If that's a yes, then would this be a semi only (you design your own trailer) or you'd rather have it with whole set for the trailer at similar level of quality?
  4. Thanks for info. I should check this option - maybe this hub needs specific settings for the motors while the new one doesn't.
  5. @imurvai Do you have any ideas about what could be wrong with my Hub NO.4 setup? Does anyone use HUB NO.4/88009 with this app? I bought this hub specifically for smaller builds and I like to use pre-configurable steering angle without range test which can break steering in some smaller builds, and also I prefer tactile controls.
  6. Just a tease of the upcoming complete model:
  7. @imurvai I finally took my time to capture the issue with HUB NO0.4 / 88009. Sorry for taking so long. I don't have the same issue with big Technic Hub nor with Sbrick on the same phone/gamepad/app setup so it's either that there is an issue with the app or with my HUB NO.4. The jitter visible with PoweredUP! app is just because the motor is not locked in place/is really negligible in comparison to what happens when using your app. I haven't tried this with any other phone as my previous phone has issue with connecting to the XBO gamepad. I may have poor BT controller in my phone though, but it works a lot better with Technic Hub / Sbrick.
  8. Thanks! Meanwhile I managed to make instructions for PF/buwizz version of this chassis. I'm preparing this for my upcoming Semi model to be available for both PU and PF configurations. I have not built this physically so proceed with caution, but I made it according to my knowledge. Inspect the instructions and make some prototype before making orders based on this. https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-86691 Sneak peek of the instructions:
  9. The Lego Car Blog: https://thelegocarblog.com/2021/08/30/half-size-supercar/
  10. Really cool build, I'm glad I checked the TLCB today :) The way the front wheels are attached is really cool - great job on figuring out this technique.
  11. I started playing around with the idea of European style semi truck again. I built a prototype to test the chassis design with motors side by side. The core idea here is that both motors are oriented towards back so you can put the medium Technic frame on top of them as well as have cables managed up front. Prototype showcase: It'll take some time before I'll finish the whole semi truck build, but I prepared the instructions for the chassis so you can build it. Instructions are available for free on Rebrickable: https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-86118 Sneak peek of the instructions:
  12. Smaller doesn't always mean simpler. Recreating something with different medium perfectly at limited size is really challenging and with bigger models you often have a lot of "legroom" to spare and try remodel specific parts of it. In smaller model changing one piece that is crucial for the look may often end up with whole structural remake of the mechanism inside. My model was indeed really simple as the vibe of the original set was that it was a simple entry set for Technic set, but shaping the hovercraft's skirt wasn't something that obvious it'll work out that good and often tricks like you did with those panels are defining factors for whole small builds like this while in bigger models such tricks are just smaller accents/details unless reused in multiple places. If there was a small model size class then, by just roughly skimming the amount of votes not point, the indy transport could be first, your hovercraft would be second and the red forklift or blue fury would be third if I'm not mistaken.
  13. @dickylaban when it comes to popular vote here the only thing that you could really pick on is that the votes were public across the whole voting period, but I'm not sure if that really affected the voting here. There were so many great entries and quite a lot perfectly executed ones as well, that it did boil down to which ones people liked the most. And yes - people will vote for bigger models with more functions, but it's not like we were forced to make smaller ones - the only thing here that we can do is to ask either for future contests to have strict size requirements or separate size classes, but that's a separate discussion. Considering your submission, if people really took the vibe of original set vs the recreation consciously, yours is slightly more opaque and feels heavier so it feels a bit like a generic formula race car and the idea was for the recreated model to be instantly recognisable - you simply might've picked something that's hard to remake to be true to original without going 1:1 replacing beams with liftarms etc - @Samolot's truck was on the other hand instantly recognisable albeit filling in some gaps with panels because it has a unique cab shape in the original set. @msk6003 the contest was about classic remake, no doubt about it. Also your remake had a messy shapes all over apart from using a lot of system bricks on the front which was explicitly stated in the rules not to do. You picked wrong set to remake because it wasn't classic and it was really hard to do the shape with Technic pieces while retaining the original functionality. Winners picked sets that had lower amount of/less complicated functions and executed the remakes perfectly by the rules which should come first over scoring bonus points for creativity/complexity/amount of mechanical features.
  14. Can we have a contest that is about something useful in the making of MOCs in general? Like for example actual useful small automatic gearboxes (the execution of the event would be hard though here to check it) or axles with virtual pivot etc? And make it fixed size and add fries to it :)
  15. The idea is good and exactly my point, but seeing the amount of high quality builds or bigger sized models that did not win in this contest, you can clearly see that outside the pool of people who already won there still are people who will build big high quality models that are going to discourage others from competing. But it somewhat makes sense to not have same people scoring the prizes, so it also makes sense this way.