marcus2388

Eurobricks Vassals
  • Content Count

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About marcus2388

Spam Prevention

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

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    photography

Extra

  • Country
    Deutschland

Recent Profile Visitors

273 profile views
  1. There are surprisingly few transforming vehicles in “real-“ or “movie-life”. Those few vehicles which can be built in Lego, have already been built dozens of times in Lego… Like KITT, or the submerging James Bond Lotus Esprit… or of course the Back To The Future DeLorean. There are mostly those vehicles left, which were only able to “perform” their transformation with camera trickery and different cars… like the flying car from Phantomas: https://www.wheels.ca/news/citroen-ds-rocket-powered-flying-car/ they had one car with no wings for driving… one additional car which slides way too short wings from under the car to the outside… and a final car which had longer wings (with additional moving wing extensions) to finalize the “transformation” and do the “flying”-scenes. So – there is no chance to build an accurate scaled down version of that car… because the main part of the wing (without the extension) is already longer than the wheelbase of the car… in which that main part of the wing should be stored when driving. Also: the most annoying thing when doing “transforming vehicles”-research is the vast amount of Hollywood Transformer-nonsense. That moronic franchise makes the google search totally useless.
  2. Not at all a dumb question. Quite to the contrary: it shows you are keen on having solid drivetrain engineering. In theory all your thoughts about this are true. In perfect conditions – and close to extreme situations (high speeds, tight corners) – you would notice a difference between an axle with a differential and an axle with two individual motors. In reality though you barely have perfect conditions… meaning: whenever you lose traction on one wheel – you lose 100% power on the whole axle when using a differential. And there are plenty situations when this happens… body roll, body flex, bumpy underground, slippery underground, rapid breaking, rapid acceleration… Only due to friction in the drivetrain and mass moment of inertia of the moving car you keep on “rolling” into a better traction situation… So using a motor on each wheel helps you to reduce the power loss of 100% down to 50% in such not-ideal situations. In the rare moment when you have constantly 100% traction (with sticky third party tires, perfect smooth and grippy underground) you are going to experience understeer. To compensate this, you could either do, what ESP does (slow down the wheels in the inner part of the corner via brakes (maybe mechanically linked to your steering axle) – or you do what Torque Vectoring does: program your power unit in a way, that [IF STEERING LEFT] happens [POWER MOTOR LEFT] is reduced to 80%... or you do – what from the looks of it nearly everybody does: assume there will be nearly never perfect traction between the car and the ground – so just do not care about it.
  3. marcus2388

    [WIP] Aston Martin Valkyrie

    maybe something like this?
  4. marcus2388

    F1 Front Wing

    I think they are talking about something like this: Either sword - or propeller
  5. marcus2388

    [TC20] Indy Storm (8445)

    maybe something like this?
  6. marcus2388

    [TC20] Indy Storm (8445)

    why don't you use the panels on the wing also for the nose? Lego did the same thing on the studded model by using the brick in both places. this might help achieving a more similiar (and thinner) look.
  7. Actually... you can still buy the car in the civilian "professional" version - even as a PickUp-truck... https://www.forcegt.com/news/mercedes-benz-introduces-g-professional-cab-chassis-workhorse/ and it is still a very well selling military car. The 6x6 started it's life "just recently" as a special request by the Australian army... and got converted into the portal axle monster we all know afterwards. When it comes to the G-wagon - there is nothing off limits...
  8. I can assure you: if you want those tires on your G Class – the factory is going to sell it to you. The whole G-Wagon project was started in this spirit: the Shah of Iran wanted to have a Mercedes for his military.
  9. The upcoming G 4*4 is not only about big tyres^^... unlike the previous model it will have Portals only on the back axle - and very long independent liftarms on the front: https://www.mercedes-fans.de/fotostrecke/mercedes-erlkoenig-auf-erprobung-neuer-mercedes-amg-g-klasse-4x4-bei-testfahrten-auf-der-nordschleife.6159.1.html This should allow much higher Autobahn Cruising speeds... hence they are testing it - on the Nürburg Ring.
  10. A different approach could be: not relying on the ring-modules for rigidity. Also: minimizing the use of connector-connections… You could use frames… Maybe (not necessarily) reduce the space for movement by interlocking them even further… And to gain hight you could go for liftarms, or panels… But I’d prefer bricks. They are super strong. This should allow to stack quite high… And it would leave a lot of free space – always in the same spot – to maybe run elevators through it (if your intention would be to build a tower of some sort)
  11. Hi, quick question regarding the size of the buwizz3.0: how far is the pinhole away from the ground? I'd love to build a dummy to already include it in ongoing projects... and the dimension between the bottom of the device and the first pinhhole is likely to be the most critical factor. (because due to cable-management there should always be space above the top of the device) I am using this mock-up right now... but I am not sure, if I guessed the distance of two plates under the pinhole correctly:
  12. oh no - the modular car concept is such an amazing idea for the contest. I'd be super thrilled to work on something like this... preferebly with bodywork as well (or at least allowed to do bodywork, but not as a part of the contest-judging)
  13. I just saw this on Facebook... The link refers to: https://www.renaultgroup.com/en/news-on-air/top-stories-2/victory-in-alpines-dna/?fbclid=IwAR0CfuktiHF1stB5OrXt8k-bWYQE0ysig4Oa-Dq0qQjPHxS455fegjyjA1Q not sure why the person in the image is building Lego... Maybe a new set in the making? Seems like a teaser for a marketing campaign... and talking with "co-branding experience" - just to be allowed to show products of another brand, you need to do "a lot of talking"... mostly signing contracts before doing so. any thoughts? :)
  14. It looks like this structure would tear itself apart. It’s hard to describe… different colours for the side panels would have helped – but I’ll try to name the pieces :D The green brick which is closest to the red motor… directly on the left side of the motor… if that brick is being moved one stud more to the left – as well the opposite brick would be moved since you synchronized always two side panels with each other. But if this movement occurs the other green brick (with the black panel) would be stripped apart from the construction since it already touches the black technic liftarm. Same is true for all other sidepanels actually… they could only move one stud in one direction from neutral – but never in the other… which they would need to be able to do. The panel on top of the construction can’t move downwards – and the panel in the back can’t move in the direction of the centre of the cube… Actually – this might be the best wording: there are three panels which can not move towards the centre of the cube – but which they would need to do, because your image is showing the neutral-position. This is true for the backwards panel, the top panel and the right panel… hence it is true for all three movement-pairs.
  15. Amazing Unimogs! Espacially the 437 is spot on. I'd be super interested in your take of a 6x6 Zetros. :)