marcus2388

So… if I vote for the entry which I like most… and there is a good chance this ‘liking’ is based on a brilliant colour scheme of the model – that’s a bad thing? And if the majority of forum members likes this exact model also best… that’s still not a valid reason to win the contest for the best model? Even though it managed to obey to all the contest rules. This seems like the perfect setup to lose sight of the “trending Zeitgeist” – especially if it is directly ignored. I do not understand why this seems to be a recurring motif here… for instance: why are you annoyed about “soooo many cars” – instead of celebrating it as the major lifeline which kept Lego (and the interest in it) alive? I am aware of the principle of qualified Jury voting… but I believe this can hardly be applied to judging Lego Technic Models. There are simply too many different approaches to “what makes a great Technic Model” of which a Jury is not able to fully incorporate. Like/Dislike Electronics Styling VS Function VS True Scale Playability / Robustness / Exotic Building techniques … As an example: I do not believe a great Lego Technic Model of a real life car should have a gearbox the size of a hot tub (if converted to real size)… especially if it’s always the same gearbox design. It’s a much bigger (and from the perspective of MODEL building: important-) job to focus und true-scale appearance. I accept that there are (very) different opinions to the one I just voiced – hence I would not feel comfortable seeing my decision as the sole reason for naming a winner of a Lego Technic contest… But I would love to see how the Zeitgeist develops… what’s currently appealing to the Lego-Technic-loving majority and what’s not. And if there is bias - which there will be - I would rather try to understand it (& use it) instead of trying to ignore it.

Hi & Welcome! Have you considered breeding cats as well? They seem to be more popular on the internet. Are you sure you want to motorize the Sian? By keeping the gearbox, you need to find space for the electronics in the cabin space… and obviously: by keeping the gearbox you should come up with a motorized clutch as well – which will cost you a lot of space and power. And getting even more meta: the gearbox is a device that is not necessary in an electric vehicle (unless you want to have ONE SPECIAL gear… in an off-roader: ultra low range… in a speed-build: high-speed gear)… having more than two gears will only grow the death-count of molten parts by the BuWizz motors… which – to be honest – will never be 0… even if you get rid of all the gears. Maybe it would be best if you could tell us what you are trying to achieve… - A super fast car which provides lots of fun racing it o You shouldn’t try to achieve this with Lego… unless you are willing to permanently change parts… not only axles and gears but also parts bearing them… unless you need to make videos for selling BuWizz-power-units this endeavour is not suited for Lego - An interesting and complicated motorized build with Sian-aesthetics o Keeping the gearbox will make the built very complicated/crowded and from a purely engineering standpoint a bit dull… because… why would you, when using electric motors? o Getting rid of the gearbox will give you the space to achieve at least a good-looking motorized car… but chances are: it’s either not as fast as it looks… or it will burn rubber and plastic - Something totally different?

probably 2

"Everyone is Awesome" - very Lego - fitting to the times we live in - long overdue to be celebrated in Technic - challenging enough for anyone who needs his/her creativity forced

is this like... the essence of the new contest? just asking because GT7 servers are still down

I’d try to do a compromise… by making a 1:8,2 car with only slightly too small wheels (1:8,4)… 1:1 Car Length: 3950 Millimetres; 493,75 Studs 1:8,0 Car Length: 494 Millimetres; 61,71 Studs 1:8,2 Car Length: 481 Millimetres; 60,21 Studs 1:8,4 Car Length: 470 Millimetres; 58,78 Studs 1:1 Wheel dia: 577 Millimetres; 72,12 Studs 1:8,0 Wheel dia: 72,12 Millimetres; 9,01 Studs 1:8,2 Wheel dia: 70,36 Millimetres; 8,79 Studs 1:8,4 Wheel dia: 68,69 Millimetres; 8,58 Studs You’ll be only 1,5 studs off of the 1:8 car in length (at a 60 studs long car)… and your wheel arches can be closer to the real thing and give the smaller wheel more room to actually move around.

...if you are trying to simulate a ship maneuvering in water... then it might be a good idea to get rid of that part of the hull which is usually under the water? including the rudder and the propellers... otherwise there's a high risk of "looking just strange"

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.

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.

maybe something like this?

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

maybe something like this?

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.

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...

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.