Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'offroad'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Frontpage, Forum Information and General LEGO Discussion
    • Guest Section - PLEASE READ BEFORE YOU REGISTER!
    • Frontpage News
    • Forum Information and Help
    • General LEGO Discussion
    • The Embassy
  • Themes
    • LEGO Licensed
    • LEGO Star Wars
    • LEGO Historic Themes
    • LEGO Action and Adventure Themes
    • LEGO Pirates
    • LEGO Sci-Fi
    • LEGO Town
    • LEGO Train Tech
    • LEGO Technic and Model Team
    • LEGO Mindstorms and Robotics
    • LEGO Scale Modeling
    • LEGO Action Figures
    • Special LEGO Themes
  • Special Interests
    • Minifig Customisation Workshop
    • LEGO Digital Designer and other digital tools
    • Brick Flicks & Comics
    • LEGO Mafia and Role-Play Games
    • LEGO Media and Gaming
  • Eurobricks Community
    • Hello! My name is...
    • LEGO Events and User Groups
    • Buy, Sell, Trade and Finds
    • Community
    • Culture & Multimedia

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


What is favorite LEGO theme? (we need this info to prevent spam)


Which LEGO set did you recently purchase or build?


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests


Country


Special Tags 1


Special Tags 2


Special Tags 3


Special Tags 4


Special Tags 5


Special Tags 6


Country flag

Found 65 results

  1. Hogwartus

    [MOC] RC Buggy

    After 42099 and the whole new PU system, I'm here with a MOC that uses something a bit older - RC system. After all these years it is still the most powerful 100% LEGO solution. Watch it in all its glory: Features: RC drive - 2x RC motor, geared 3:1 (slower output) RC steering Front suspension - double wishbone, soft, long travel, positive caster angle, 7 stud ground clearance Rear suspension - floating axle, soft, long travel, 5.5 stud ground clearance Please watch the video to see this machine in action and for more details. I hope you liked this model.
  2. Good people of Eurobricks, let me give you my first take on the planetary hubs: Please excuse me for the lenght of the video, it's meant to show the developement stage by stage. I had big expectations towards the new hubs, since they've been announced. I realised, these hubs will solve the problem of the stress on drivetrains, yet will raise a new challenge. Due to the increased torque on the wheels, the frame (chassis) and the bracing of the suspension will be the new weak link. A wanted to have a finalized rig to the date of the release of the hubs. The backbone of the design came from a five years old chassis concept, it was a non motorized chassis: To mimic the geometry of the new hub, I've used the old ones with some extension, so it can be easily swapped, when time comes: The concept of the chassis came together quite well, thanks to using techniques well practiced in my early years. But there was still a long time till the release of the new hubs. Driven by curiosity, I've planted two PF XL motors in the middle of the chassis, making them drive two axles each. One for the front axles, one for the rear ones. No additional gearing has been added, the motors were connected straight to the differentials. Of course it had to be tested, hat's the part around one minute into the video: https://youtu.be/PGQpUrOS-NQ?t=59 Came with a surprisingly satisfying result, despite the usage of the old cv's and hubs, yet it was understandably far from being a "crawler" it meant to be. Also at this point I was short of claas tyres, so I've used some similar size rc tyres on the front 4. Got the tyres eventually, still a lot of time till the hubs coming though. As the final design was gonna use 4 buggy motors, time came to make the change: Same principals, like with the XL motors: No gearing added (slow output used), 2 motors drive the front, other 2 for the rear axles. Now feeding that much buggy motors would require 4 buwizzes. Or one well sized rc lipo that can comfortably supply 2 sbricks. 4 buwizzes cost about 400-450 pounds, while the lipo comes for 30 pounds. Any question? At this stage (still no new hubs) it was an obvious, yet pretty crazy idea to hit the tarmac. So I did. That's what you see at 2:16 in the video: https://youtu.be/PGQpUrOS-NQ?t=136 I had a lot of trouble that day with the bluetooth connection, brought a head on crash int o a container. It was heart-, but no plastic breaking. Finally the hubs came by the post and the picture got full. I've also planted another servo for steering (2 in total now) Indoor durability test at 3:27 https://youtu.be/PGQpUrOS-NQ?t=207 Climbing test (60 degrees) at 4:18 https://youtu.be/PGQpUrOS-NQ?t=257 Hereby I apologize for the dark enviroment at this recording Peek on the suspension at 3:12 https://youtu.be/PGQpUrOS-NQ?t=191 Lego should not be used outdoors... ahm, okay... Outdoor test from 4:55 in the video. https://youtu.be/PGQpUrOS-NQ?t=295 I came to the verdict, that the new hubs worth their money. In a usage that abusive, you see in the video the hub-cv connection definitelly require some lubrication. I've been using silicone oil and no downside appeared so far. Here is the difference it makes: That's it so far, a little spoiler at the end of the video. Hope it's gonna catch some expert eyes...
  3. I present to you my Lego Technic Chilli Crawler! This is a complete makeover and overall improvement from my previous Carrot Crawler: http://www.eurobrick...howtopic=112037 Yes, I know. This is the second crawler that I named after a vegetable; expect more! Features: - Triangulated 4-link live axle suspension using 4 soft, black shocks. - 4x4 with one PF XL motor mounted parallel* to each of the two axles. A final gear ratio of 1:5.001, yes this may seem slow, but the enormous Super Swamper tires make up for it. - Speaking of that, 4 RC4WD Super Swamper tires. No, they are not Lego, I got them from a nearby hobby shop. - One L-motor for steering in the front axle, geared down via worm gear to 8 tooth gear, then a 12 tooth gear to a 40 tooth gear. The 40 tooth gear drives another 12 tooth gear that moves a 13L gear rack. - Portal hubs for all four wheels. Standard Lego Unimog for the rear axle for rigidity; custom triangular plate portal hubs on front axle for a steering pivot point closer to the center of the tire. - Good articulation, about ~55-60 degrees. - Controlled with an SBrick. - Powered by a Lego rechargeable LiPo battery. - Green Chilli Stem** * The mounting of the drive motors parallel to the axles was a must for this crawler. By doing so, I have not only eliminated gear slippage as there are no perpendicular gears, but there is also a ton more ground clearance in both the front and rear axle. The rear axle especially as the motor is actually on TOP of the axle. Crazy, huh? ** Makes the crawler look so much cooler. Challenges: - As with all 4-link suspension setups, the mounting and placement of both the links and the shock absorbers proved to be a rather annoying, tedious part of the process. I have, however, managed to make a VERY rigid triangulated setup where the shocks are not bent or warped in any way. - The mounting of the two lower links on the front axle was also difficult as there was virtually nowhere I could mount these links onto. I was able to (somehow) securely mount both the lower links and the shocks of the front axle onto 7L and 9L beams on either side of the motor. - Mounting the motors parallel to the axles proved to be hard, but actually somewhat straightforward when it came to the rear axle. I had been so used to having drive axles perpendicular to the axle like on my previous crawler. The mounting of the front drive motor was difficult in the fact that its power is transmitted through various gears and the motor itself is connected to the axle by two plate beams and a pin or two. Although the front drive motor is still not completely rigid, I have had no problems with gear slippage whatsoever in either axle. Some pictures: And finally, here is the youtube video: I welcome any suggestions or comments you may have. I will, however, say in advance that I DO NOT plan on making a body for this crawler as I designed it for performance purposes mostly, a Lego "comp-crawler" as you may call it. Thanks, pt
  4. Hi, ___ EDIT __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ HERE ARE INSTRUCTIONS FOR CURRENT VERSION: (description later in this topic) https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-28281/Horcikdesigns/offroader-for-overland-adventure/#bi ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ This is my latest attempt at building offroad car. JEEP Wrangler Expedition by Horcik Designs, on Flickr Introduction and Motivation I built it for the Kostky.org TROPHY, adventurous event and AFOL meeting that is inspired by Camel Trophy series, and was held by Kostky.org (CZ+SK LUG) at 5th August 2017 for the very first time. It was awesome day, and I hope that there will be more. Here is the the official video from the event. There were really great cars there. The car itself The car was built to fit the rules of the competition. That means reserve "fuel" in the car during whole race before refuelling, remote control (no wire connection between truck and controller, S-bricks allowed) and representative appearance. So I decieded to go with the force, and installed two XL motors for the drive, geared down in 3:5 ratio, and two L motors, each for the winch (1:8) and steering (mini LA). I also reduced gearing to the minimum, due to minimal energy-consumption. (I nearly did the whole race to single Li-Po BB) The car is not perfect, it is very heavy (approx. 1500g), so it does not allow to use CV joints in the front axle for smooth wheel rotation. They managed to withstand the race, but in the finish (before the big uphill from the first video) they were strongly damaged, mostly because of big steering angle. Well, I hope that the video will say enough, if you have any questions, feel free to ask me. :) Photos: JEEP Wrangler Expedition by Horcik Designs, on Flickr JEEP Wrangler Expedition by Horcik Designs, on Flickr JEEP Wrangler Expedition by Horcik Designs, on Flickr JEEP Wrangler Expedition by Horcik Designs, on Flickr JEEP Wrangler Expedition by Horcik Designs, on Flickr
  5. Ninjago - Cole´s "sandsquatch" ATV Whenever there are vehicles involved,the black Ninja who is also the Master of the element Earth, always seems to get vehicles for rough terrain. So what´s better for rough terrain than a menacing, fourwheeled ATV? Pretty much nothing, that´s the reason i build one using parts from the bin and from one of his newest sets (yes, that awkwardly oversized bike) IMG_20190610_164125 IMG_20190610_164100 IMG_20190610_164041 IMG_20190610_164016 IMG_20190610_163944 IMG_20190610_163909 I tried to incorporate a few design features and the color palette so it will fit his character. Hope you guys like it as much as Cole does.....
  6. Hello dear friends! Please let us (yes, today - we are both with ADCchannel are the authors) introduce the latest MOC - today this is Mercedes-Benz G-class 6X6 Trial edition. This truck (definitely it is!) is our common project. I was always dreaming of creating my own implementation of this greatest version of legendary Gelandewagen. I build the body with pleasure and know that ADCchannel riched senior skills in building chassis for truck trial, so I offered hiw some kind of collaboration. Luckily, he immediately agreed. The main difficulty was that we are living in different cities, but not far from. So, couple of month were spent truck is ready. To be honest body itself is absolutely new. From my previous G class Mansory edition I took only front view and side doors. Roof, interior, body frame is completely new. Mandatory point was to create easily removable body. So, you can split body from frame removing only six axles (easy to remove). Some description, though :) This monster is propelled by 3 XL motors - one per each axle. M motor for steering and we decide to power truck bu Buwizz. But it's ready to use regular Lego IR receivers. Suspension has 3 portal axles like original Mercedes. We use 7 Claas tires (actually 6 + 1 third party). Everything what can be opened - is openable - hood, doors, trunk. Unfortunately there were no room for any V8 engine due to front suspension construction. First purpose was to build truck suitable for trial. Here are the two different(!) videos. Feel free to watch and comment. Any critics would be highly appreciated. Dimensions: - Wide - 25 studs, - Lengh - 72 studs Here are some photos from bricksafe page: https://www.bricksafe.com/pages/Aleh/mercedes-benz-g-class-6x6 Pictures will be uploaded in a couple of hours. Some technical issues for now.
  7. I started this project because I wanted to share my experiences building various offroad models over the last decade. This topic is meant to guide the builders with comparisments, suggestion and best building practices, It is however not a place to find already finished and perfected designs - that's up to you. Various aspects of the design of the vehicles will be split into several subgroups and explained in details. 1. Number of wheels First thing we need to know is how many wheels our design will have. Most common setups are as following: 4x4 Setup Advantages: 1. The simplest and most widely setup 2. Having only 4 wheels means lower weight and higher performance 3. Higher manoeuverability 4. Simple suspension and driveline design Disadvantages: 1. With only 4 wheels the suspension has to be designed to be as flexible as possible to get the most out of the wheels 2. In a case of a mechanical failure of a single wheel, the whole model's performance is greatly affected 6x6 Setup with double rear axles Advantages: 1. Two rear axle provide more traction area, especially when going uphill 2. Usually 6x6 vehicles are longer than 4x4 and therefore less likely to tip over 3. Since the front and second axle are usually closer than in 4x4 setup, there is less ground clearance needed between them 4. Greater redundancy in a case of a mechanical failure Disadvantages: 1. Lower manoeuverability due to a longer wheelbase even with rear wheel steering 2. More complex driveline and suspension design is required 8x8 or more wheels setup Advantages: 1. Having 8 or more allows for much greater traction area 2. Ability to drive over ditches 3. Because wheels are usually much closer there is much less chances of getting stuck on top of an obstacle 4. Excellent redundancy in a case of a mechanical failure 5. Better weight distribution 6. Less suspension travel required per each wheel as with 4x4 or 6x6 and hence better stability Disadvantages: 1. Lower manoeuverability even with rear wheel steering 2. Powering 8 or more requires a very complex driveline 3. Depending on a driveline, combined torque required for powering all 8 wheels can destroy gears if a single wheel gets stuck 2. Type of wheels and tyres Now that we decided on how many wheels we want for our offroad beast, we have to look into what type of tyres and wheels we want to use. I will hereby cover only the bigger types of tyres and wheels. 1. 94.8x44R Advantages: 1. Low weight 2. Good thread design 3. Low rolling resistance Disadvantages: 1. Low traction, these tyres are prone to slip on the rim at high loads 2. Due to its rounded shape the tyres tend to slide off obstacles when crawling over them 2. 94.3x38R Advantages: 1. Low weight 2. Medium traction 3. Low rolling resistance 4. Realistic design and proportions Disadvantages: 1. Shallow thread pattern 2. These tyres are very hard and don't adjust to the terrain 3. 107x44R Advantages: 1. Low weight 2. Medium traction 3. Very deep thread 4. Currently largest tyres by diameter Disadvantages: 1. High rolling restistance and vibrations due to the thread pattern 2. These tyres are a bit hard and don't adjust to the terrain 4. Power Puller tyres Advantages: 1. High traction 2. Good thread 3. Largest Lego tyres ever produced 4. Deep wheel offset Disadvantages: 1. High weight 2. Hard to use, they require complex hub assemblies 3. Very rare and expensive 5. Outdoor challenger wheels Advantages: 1. Very high traction 2. Very good thread pattern 3. Deep wheel offset 4. Over 7 studs of space inside the wheel Disadvantages: 1. High weight 2. Hard to attach to the standard axles 3. They require a lot of torque to use them at their full potential. 6. Tumbler wheels Advantages: 1. Low weight 2. High traction 3. Very flexible Disadvantages: 1. Low thread pattern 2. Small size 3. Expensive For the 94.8x44R. 94.3x38R and 107x44R tyres we have a choice of two wheels: 1. Racing wheel large Advantages: 1. Good mounting option with axlehole and pinhole 2. Available in multiple colours 3. Cheap Disadvantages: 1. No inside wheel offset means steering pivot point can't be placed inside the wheel. 1. Futuristic wheel Advantages: 1. Deep wheel offset allows us to place steering pivot point inside or closer to the wheel than racing wheel large 2. Slightly larger wheel size stops the 94.8x44R tyre from slipping on the rim Disadvantages: 1. Limited mounting options, with only one axlehole 2. Hard to find 3. Hubs Now that we have our wheels and tyres we need a way to mount and power them. Here are the most common currently available options: 1. New standard ungeared CV hubs These hubs are usually driven by the CV joint counterpart which pops inside Advantages: 1. Low steering pivot offset - usually at the edge of the tyre: 2. Firm wheel mounting 3. Readily available, easy to use and to build on. Disadvantages: 1. Low operating angle - the CV joint can operate to a maximum of about 30 degrees, which limits steering angle. 2. Very low torque transfer - the CV joints are prone to deforming and popping out even with low torque applies to them 3. Low ground clearance 2. Old ungeared CV hubs Advantages: 1. Low steering pivot offset - usually at the edge of the tyre 2. Firm wheel mounting 3. Better ground clearance than newer hubs Disadvantages: 1. Very low operating angle - the CV joint can operate to a maximum of about 25 degrees, which limits steering angle. 2. Very low torque transfer - the CV joints are prone to deforming and popping out even with low torque applies to them 3. Hard to find and expensive 4. No other mounting points than 4 ball joints 3. Built cardan ungeared hubs Example of a hub using a cardan joint to directly transfer the power to the wheel Advantages: 1. Low steering pivot offset - usually at the edge of the tyre 2. Easy to build 3. Can transfer higher torque than a CV joint 4. Higher steering angle Disadvantages: 1. Mounting relies only on the axle and is not as firm as standard hubs 2. Not capable of transferring high torque to the wheels 3. Low ground clearance 4. Standard portal hubs Advantages: 1. Easy to use and to build on. 2. Can transfer very high torque to the wheels when using 8z and 24Z gear combination 3. High steering angle 4. High ground clearance 5. Firm wheel mounting Disadvantages: 1. Very high steering pivot offset - requires stronger steering mechanisms and more fender space for wheel to swing 5. Built portal hubs Advantages: 1. Easy to build. 2. Can transfer very high torque to the wheels when using 8z and 24Z gear combination 3. High steering angle 4. Higher ground clearance than standard portal hubs 5. Low steering pivot offset when using futuristic wheels Disadvantages: 1. Wheels are mounted and held only by one axle, not as firm as standard hubs 2. Hub relies on friction of the components to keep it together, which can slide apart after prolonged use 6. Built planetary hub Advantages: 1. Highest gear ratio of all other hubs, 1:4 2. Firm wheel mounting when using futuristic of power puller wheels 3. High steering angle 4. Lower steering offset than standard portal hubs Disadvantages: 1. Requires old turntable, futuristic or power puller wheels for best results - all are hard to find 2. High number of moving gears 3. Least efficient due to the high friction caused by the large surface contact area and number of moving gears 4. Suspension Suspension is the mechanism that will keep our model's wheels in contact to the ground and will be supporting most of its weight. Most of the designs cover 4x4's Following factors determine the type of suspension system we will use: 1. Weight of the model - The heavier the model, the stronger the suspension components have to be 2. Speed - Faster models require more responsive suspension systems with low unsprung weight 3. Flexibility - The higher the obstacles you want to climb over the more flex and/or wheel travel suspension has to provide 1. No suspension I have yet to see and offroad vehicle without any type of suspension (except for maybe 42070, 42081 and 42082), but I will list my opinion regardless: Advantages: 1. Simple design - having no suspension simplifies our design...and that's about it Disadvantages: 1. No flex over terrain means, there are only 3 wheels at once touching the ground 2. Low stability 3. Poor weight distribution 4. No shock absorption at high speeds 2. Pendular suspension This is the simplest suspension you can put on your vehicle. It basically means one or more of your axles are free to swing about. When using this suspension I suggest using the small turntable where drive axle enters the axle. This will keep the drive axle from carrying the weight of the model, which causes unnecessary friction. 42030 is a typical example of this suspension system. Advantages: 1. Simple, robust design 2. Using this suspension on both axles can give the model very high flexibility 3. If there are no springs used, the model can have perfect weight distribution on left and right wheel Disadvantages: 1. Large unsprung weight, poor responsivness at high speeds 2. No shock absorption means this suspension is not suitable for high speeds 2. When using on one axle, the stability of the whole model relies on the unsuspended axle. 3. When using pendular suspension on both axles springs or a transfer mechanism are required to keep the model upright 3. Single torque tube suspension This suspension became available with the release of the 8110 Unimog. Best examples of this suspension are 8110, 9398 and 41999. It is the simplest suspension which also allows for vertical suspension movement. Advantages: 1. Simple, robust design 2. Universal joints can be placed inside the ball joint, allowing power to be transferred to the axle 3. Easy to implement Disadvantages: 1. Large unsprung weight, poor responsivness at high speeds 2. Axle requires a some kind of a linkage system to keep it cenetred (panhard or parallel links as seen above). 3. Using this suspension on the front axle usually results in negative caster angle which causes higher rolling resistance 4. When used on rear drive axle, the suspension has the tendency to cause oscillate, especially with soft suspension and high power 4. Hard to connect springs to the chassis 4. Double torque tube suspension This is an evolution of the single torque tube suspension, which uses two ball joints to drive each wheel side respectively. It is my own original idea. Advantages: 1. Simple, robust design 2. Universal joints can be placed inside the ball joint, allowing power to be transferred to the axle 3. Easy to implement 4. Self-cenetring, since axles are connected in the center there is no need for linkages to center it 5. Can carry power to each wheel side independently 6. Drive torque compensation Disadvantages: 1. Large unsprung weight, poor responsivness at high speeds 2. Using this suspension on the front axle usually results in negative caster angle which causes higher rolling resistance 3. When used on rear drive axle, the suspension has the tendency to cause oscillate, especially with soft suspension and high power 4. Hard to connect springs to the chassis 5. Parallel floating axle This suspension uses linkages which keep the axle parallel to the chassis of the model. For best functionality and reliability the lengths of all links and that of the double cardan joint should be equal. Also all the linkages and drive axles should be parallel. Advantages: 1. Keeping the axle parallel to the chassis reduces the oscillations effect 2. Better responsivness compared to the torque tubes 3. Neutral caster angle when used on front axles. 4. Self cenetring when using A arm as upper link or 4 link setup 5. Can be configured to carry power to each wheel side independently 6. If configured to carry power to each wheel side independently the drive torque can be compensated. 7. Easy to connect spring to the chassis Disadvantages: 1. High unsprung weight, less responsive at high speeds 2. Increased mechanical complexity, double cardan joints required to carry the power to the axle 6. Half axle independent suspension This is the simplest independent suspension you can build. Best example of such suspension are Tatra and Pinzgauer trucks. Advantages: 1. Independent suspension with low unspring weight, suitable for high speed 2. Robust design with low number of moving parts 3. Easy to connect spring to the chassis Disadvantages: 1. Changes of the caster angle as the wheels travel up and down 2. Hard to implement a drive system that does not carry the weight of the vehicle 3. Hard to implement steering system 4. Wheels tend to drag sideways on the ground when suspension travels up and down, reducing efficiency 7. Trailing arm parallel independent suspension Personally I have not used this suspension yet, but I did use a normal trailing arm suspension which does not keep the hubs parallel. Normal trailing arm suspension which does not keep the hubs parallel acts similarly to torque tube suspension. For the prallel version of the trailing suspension I imagine the following: Advantages: 1. Independent suspension with low unspring weight, suitable for high speed 2. Robust design with low number of moving parts 3. Long links allow for high suspension travel 4. Very easy to connect spring to the chassis 5. Can be configured to carry power to each wheel side independently Disadvantages: 1. Hard to keep the wheels from sagging under the weight of the model. 2. Difficult to transfer power to the wheels 8. Double wishbone suspension This suspension uses two A-shaped arms to keep the wheel hubs in place. As of late it's my favourite suspension system due to: Advantages: 1. Independent suspension with low unspring weight, suitable for high speed 2. Very customizable design with lots of adjustable characteristics (suspension arm lengths, caster angle, camber angle, steering geometries) 3. When build correctly it is far more robust than live axle suspension 4. Increased ground clearance compared to live axle suspension, especially when used with portal hubs 5. Can be configured to carry power to each wheel side independently 6. Extremely easy mounting of springs 7. Very stable compared to live axles 8. Frame holding the suspension can be part of the chassis, therebye lowering the center of gravity Disadvantages: 1. More moving parts as live axle suspension, increased mechanical complexity 2. Limited wheel travel - Lego wishbones allow a max. of around 25 degrees of suspension angle 9. Multi-link suspension To be updated when I build my first multi-link offroad suspension. I can assume the following characteristics: 1. Independent suspension with low unspuing weight, suitable for high speed 2. Extremely customizable design with lots of adjustable charactersitics (suspension arm lengths, caster angle, camber angle, steering geometries, virtual pivot point) 3. Large steering pivot point compensation 4. Increased ground clearance compared to live axle suspension, especially when used with portal hubs 5. Can be configured to carry power to each wheel side independently 6. Very stable compared to live axles 7. Frame holding the suspension can be part of the chassis, thereby lowering the center of gravity Disadvantages: 1. Very high amount of moving parts, increased mechanical complexity 2. Limited wheel travel - Lego wishbones allow a max. of around 25 degrees of suspension angle 3. Hard to connect springs to the chassis 10. Spring types Listed below are the most common types of springs available: 6.5L Soft shock absorber Advantages: 1. Small, easy to implement Disadvantages: 1. One stud of suspension travel 2. Low spring rate, can't support heavy models 6.5L Hard shock absorber 1. Small, easy to implement 2. High spring rate, can support heavy models Disadvantages: 1. One stud of suspension travel 9L soft shock absorber When using 9L shock absorbers I suggest you do not use the default offset upper attachment point, but use an in-line attachment point instead. This will reduce the friction and allow for better high speed performance Example: Advantages: 1. Two studs of suspension travel 2. More attachment possibilities than 6.5 L shock absorber Disadvantages: 1. Default attachment points create friction 2. Low spring rate, can't support heavy models 9L hard shock absorber Advantages: 1. Two studs of suspension travel 2. More attachment possibilities than 6.5 L shock absorber 3. High spring rate, can support heavy models Disadvantages: 1. Default attachment points create friction 2. Rare and expensive 11. Attaching springs to live axles If we start with basics, the first things we have to check is how position of springs affects suspension of live axles. The closer you place the springs together, the more flex the suspension will have, but it will also be less stable: I suggest you to keep springs at a distance of around 1/2 of the total model width. When placing springs you should keep them in-line with the wheel bearing in order to reduce friction. First example of bad spring placements: And example of good spring placement: When using multiple springs make sure to place them symmetrically centrred to the wheel hub: When attaching springs to torque tube suspension, you have to allow springs to tilt in two planes: You can also attach the springs to the suspension links to increase suspension travel. This technique is especially common on Trophy Trucks: 12. Attaching springs to independent suspension Independent suspension allows for much more flexible spring placement. Generally the closer you attach the spring to the main suspension arm pivot, the higher spring travel you get, but lower suspension force. Examples going from the hardest suspension with low travel to the softest with high travel: You can also attach springs inside the suspension arms: Or horizontally: As with the live axles make sure springs are in the center of the wishbones. Example of good placements: And an example of bad spring placement, which causes excessive friction and suspension binding: 5. Steering Steering is the system which allows our model to change direction. Generally there are two types of steering system used: 1. Skid steering Advantages: 1. Very simple to implement and control with two separate motors for left and right sided wheels. 2. Does not require a dedicated steering motor Disadvantages: 1. Not efficient, since wheels have to skid to steer 2. Power had to be reduced or even reversed in order to steer. 3. Not very accurate 4. Not very effective offroad 2. Classical steering with steerable wheels Advantages: 1. Efficient, with minimum loss of speed 2. Accurate 3. Does not reduce the power of the drive motors 4. Can be used in front, rear or all axles for tight steering radius or crab steering 5. Effective offroad Disadvantages: 1. Requires more complex hub assemblies 2. For best steering accuracy you need a dedicated servo motor. Examples of a simple classical steering system for live axles 1. Parallel steering system for live axles Here both hubs are always parallel. Position of the steering in the front or rear rack has no affect on the steering. Advantages: 1. Very simple and robust 2. Easy to build Disadvantages: 1. No Ackermann steering geometry 2. Steering rack moves inwards as it steers, requiring more space. 2. Ackermann steering system for live axles This system allows the hubs to steer at different rates. The steering arms are offset inside so they form a virtual steering point where at the point where lines meet. Advantages: 1. Better steering performance Disadvantages: 1. More complex assembly 2. Steering rack moves inwards as it steers, requiring more space. 3. Steering system with diagonal linkages This system acts similar as Ackermann steering system by using diagonal steering links. Advantages: 1. Better steering performance 2. Steering rack only has to move in one direction without sideways movements 3. Can be configured to be used in front or the rear of the axle. Disadvantages: 1. More complex assembly 4. Simple steering system for independent suspension 1. Very simple and robust 2. Easy to build 3. Can be even more robust when using double steering racks and links 4. Steering rack only has to move in one direction without sideways movements Disadvantages: 1. No Ackermann steering geometry 5. Ackermann steering system for independent suspension Advantages: 1. Better steering performance 2. Steering rack only has to move in one direction without sideways movements Disadvantages: 1. More complex assembly, less robust. 3. General steering tips 1. When using independent suspension always make sure your links are paralel to the suspension arms, otherwise you may end up with wheels which are not parallel and are causing excessive friction: 2. When using standard portal hubs make sure your steering system is robust enough to deal with the forces generated by wheel driving into obstacles. 3. If possible use servo motors which allow for high steering precision and return to center. They are especially useful at high speed models. 4. Most efficient way to steer the wheels is using the steering racks. 5. Build axles in such way they have positive caster angle, example for direction of travel from right to left. This will self-center your wheels and reduce rolling resistance. 6. Drivelines Drivelines are the responsible for transferring the power from the motors to the wheels. There are various drivelines you can build, here I listed few with their characteristics: Driveline types 1. Permanent 4x4 Advantages: 1. Simple, centralized, low mechanical complexity 2. Wheels are always powered, great offroad performance 3. Light weight Disadvantages: 1. Poor steering radius 2. Tyres have to skid when steering, lowering efficiency of the model 2. 4x4 with open differentials Typical example of this driveline is 42070 Advantages: 1. Differentials allow the wheels to so spin at different rates when steering 2. Very efficient since wheels don't have to skid when steering Disadvantages: 1. If one wheel loses traction, all the power is transfereed to it, poor offroad performance 3. 4x4 with lockable differentials Advantages: 1. Differentials allow the wheels to so spin at different rates when steering 2. Very efficient since wheels don't have to skid when steering 3. All differentials can be locked, so wheels are powered for great offroad performance Disadvantages: 1. Higher mechanical complexity 2. Dedicated motor is required to actuate differential locks, higher weight 4. Axle mounted motors Typical example of this driveline are 9398 and 41999. Advantages: 1. Differentials allow the wheels to so spin at different rates when steering 2. Very efficient since wheels don't have to skid when steering 3. If one wheel gets off the ground the second axle can still pull/push the model. Disadvantages: 1. Higher mechanical complexity 2. Usually the rear axle motor is more loaded than the front, especially when climbing uphill, the motors can't "help" each other. 3. Worse offroad performance than permanent 4x4 5. H drive: This is my favourite driveline due to the following reasons: Advantages: 1. Motors allow the wheels to so spin at different rates when steering 2. Model can skid steer 3. Very efficient since wheels don't have to skid when steering normally 4. Having 2 drivelines allows you to carry more torque to the wheels 5. Redundancy, even if one drive fails the model can still move 6. Wheels are always powered, great offroad performance Disadvantages: 1. Higher mechanical complexity 2. Slightly higher weight 6. Wheel motor drive Each motor powers a wheel independently. Advantages: 1. Motors allow the wheels to so spin at different rates when steering 2. Model can skid steer 3. Very efficient since wheels don't have to skid when steering normally 4. Redundancy, even if one or more motors fails the model can still move 6. Lower mechanical complexity Disadvantages: 1. Motors can't "help" each other 2. Higher weight due to a higher motor count Transferring power axially When transferring power via axles, you can reduce the flex by using connectors instead of simple "bare" axle: Use axles with stops to prevent them from sliding out of gears: Where possible always brace tooth gears from both sides: Transferring power at an angle Where pairs of U joints are used, make sure to align them to eliminate vibrations: Brick built CV joint which can transfer high torque at over 30 degrees angle Brick built cardan joint which can transfer extremely high torque up to 15 degrees angle Brick built flexible drive which can transfer medium high torque, extract and retract, suitable for low angles Transferring power perpendicularly The following perpendicular gearboxes are the best suitable for transferring high torque Avoid knob and worm gears, because they waste energy Gearboxes In my models I generally use the following gearboxes: 1:3 differential gearbox Advantages: 1. Very high gear ratio between low and high gear, 1:3 2. Capable of transferring high torque 3. Very efficient since only 2 gears are used at any time Disadvantages: 1. Takes a lot of space 2. This gearbox requires a good housing to brace the gears properly Compact two speed gearbox Advantages: 1. High gear ratio between low and high gear, 1:2,77 2. Capable of transferring high torque 3. Very efficient since only 2 gears are used at any time 4. Very compact design Disadvantages: 1. Requires two of the rare 20 tooth clutch gears 2. More complex shifter assembly. Diagonal gearbox Advantages: 1. High number of gears 2. High gear ratio possible, over 4:1 2. Capable of transferring high torque 3. Very efficient since only 2 gears are used at any time Disadvantages: 1. Takes a lot of space 2. Input and output axles are not parallel. 3. A complex shifting assembly is required for sequential operation. Driveline effect on suspension Transferring torque on the wheels can affect the suspension, especially when live axles are used. The following photo shows how the torque causes one side of the axle to push down and the other to lift up: In order to minimize this effect I suggest the following: 1. Make sure to have most if not all the downgearing inside the axles, so you do not need high torque going to the axles. 2. Make sure your models have a low center of gravity 3. You can eliminate this effect by using two counte rotating axles which cancel each other's torque, example below: 7. Motors and control Following are the most common types of motors used for Lego models. You can find more info here: http://www.philohome.com/motors/motorcomp.htm My personal favourites are L and RC motors due to the balanced output speed to torque ration and great mounting options. 1. PF-M Advantages: 1. High speed output 2. Smallest available motor 3. Cheap and available Disadvantages: 1. Low torque 2. Poor mounting options 2. PF-L Advantages: 1. High speed output 2. High torque 3. Cheap and available 4. Great mounting options Disadvantages: 1. Odd shape 3. PF-XL Advantages: 1. Very high torque 3. Cheap and available 4. Good mounting options Disadvantages: 1. Slow speed output 2. Large form factor 4. PF-Servo Advantages: 1. Very high torque 2. Very precise output with 15 positions 3. Good mounting options Disadvantages: 1. Slow speed output 2. Output axle can move a max of 180 degrees 3. Large form factor 4. Hard to find 5. 9V-RC motor Advantages: 1. Most oowerful Lego motor 2. Very high speed output 3. Good mounting options 4. Two output axles with different gearing ratios 5. Drive axles can pass through the motor Disadvantages: 1. Low output torque 2. Low efficiency 3. Power hungry 4. Odd form factor 5. Hard to find and expensive Power options 1. PF - AA battery box Advantages: 1. High capacity 2. Good mounting options 3. Works with rechargeable batteries, but with lower performance 4. Cheap and easy to find Disadvantages: 1. 750mA current limit - not enough to fully power RC motor 2. Heavy 3. Has to be removed and opened to replace batteries 4. Wasteful 5. Odd form factor 2. PF - LiPo battery box Advantages: 1. Small form factor 2. Light weight 3. Easy to recharge Disadvantages: 1. 750mA current limit - not enough to fully power RC motor 2. Low capacity 3. Studded design 4. Expensive and hard to find 3. RC control unit Advantages: 1. No current limit - can power 2RC motors at once 2. 3 Power levels 3. Has integrated steering output with 7 positions 4. Good mounting options 5. Easy battery replacement 6. Radio based control Disadvantages: 1. Poor quality, prone to breaking 2. Limited angle (45 degrees) and torque from the steering output 3. Has to be removed and opened to replace batteries 4. Very large form factor 5. Expensive and hard to find 6. Heavy 7. Required dedicated antennas and remote Control options 1. PF receiver and controller Advantages: 1. Receiver is easy to integrate into the model 2. Controllers have physical feedback 3. Cheap and easy to find Disadvantages: 1. IR based, low range, useless outside 2. Lack of PWM motor control, unless using train controller which is awkward to use 3. Odd form factor for use with steering 2. RC control unit See above 3. Third party options such as BuWizz and Sbrick Advantages: 1. Smaller form factors, easy to integrate into model 2. More outputs than PF system 3. Smooth control of motors 4. High range thanks to Bluetooth control 5. Higher power available with BuWizz 6. Customizable profiles Disadvantages: 1. Smart device is required 2. No physical feedback 3. Sbrick is limited by PF battery box 4. Price 8. Chassis Chasis is the backbone of your model which olds everything together. For chassis I suggest you to use the following components in order to make it strong and robust enough to deal with the stresses involved when crawling or driving at high speed: Some flex in the chassis might be a good thing to improve offroad capability, but only if id does not affect the driveline and cause friction on the drive axles. Remeember to use diagonal support, since triangles are the strongest shapes. You can also use panels and motors as structural support. Interlocking your chassis will keep it from slipping apart. For good examples of chassis designs I suggest you check the instructions for 9398 and 42083.
  8. Hey Eurobricks, PunktacoNYC back again with another rock crawler! This time it's called the Rocket Crawler and it is my largest, fastest crawler yet. Youtube video: Features: - 4 L-Motors for drive (one per wheel) - Ackerman steering with custom virtual pivot system to maximize steering angle - Rigid, triangulated 4-link suspension with 100% Lego-legal original, extra large links - Very minimal, light bodywork, and a cute rocket atop the cab - BuWizz for extra power and SBrick for a great custom control scheme - RC4WD 2.2” Bully Competition Tires The initial inspiration for this crawler was twofold; I wanted to build a RC competition super-class-like crawler, what with giant relative wheel size, slim body, and high articulation. I also really wanted to make use of RC4WD's quite large Bully competition tires. This project has been in development for over a year thanks primarily to issues with the front axle. The problem with the front axle was that Lego universal joints simply could not handle the high torque required to spin such large tires. I tried using custom Lego universal joints custom dremeled brass remote-controlled boat u-joints, and even knob gears at the pivot point - nothing worked. So, I mounted the motors directly to the wheels, all within a virtual system to move the steering pivot closer to the center of the wheel for a better turning radius. There is approximately 90° of articulation between the front and rear axles: Easily adjustable suspension height: (high) (medium) (low) The chassis: Wheel comparison: Concept 1: Concept 2 (later): This has been my favorite project. Let me know what you think. P.s. I got a snupps page (nice idea, Sariel): https://www.snupps.com/punktaconyc
  9. Hi, I've built a stupid simple truck. As you might have guessed already, it is largely inspired by iconic Soviet-Russian truck Ural. Driven by two L-motors and steered by a servo, it doesn't have any other motorized functions. The fifth wheel rotates in 2 dimensions and has a simple locking mechanism as seen in a recent 42078 set. However, I doubt it will function properly due to natural tendency to lean backwards under the towing force. Overall, this project is a failure. The initial goal was to built a 6x6 truck with differentials and none-ball-joints suspension. Although the goal was achieved, the front axle turned out to be a complete disaster. First, I had to swap a 6-link for a rather awkward system in order to make the front wheels steer for at least a bit . Second, this truck can't overcome even a tiny obstacle, cause the driving gear in the front begins crackle hysterically. This happens because I don't have the new 6145859 wheel bearing parts, so in order to fit the steering bar with the old ones I had to elevate the axle center 1 stud above the 5x7 frame. And the result simply do not sturdy enough to hold the affecting forces. However, I'm going to figure out a better design later in LDCad. Hopefully this MOC will mark my return to regular building, so I'm looking forward for your comments.
  10. I think anyone who ever used the portal hubs came to this issue. The hubs simply have the steering pivot point so far from the center of the wheel, that you need to either reduce the steering angle, or have a model with large fenders. Today I came up with this simple mechanism to compensate for that by simply turning the whole front axle in the opposite direction. The two tilted 6L links are usually used to keep the axle from moving forwards/backwards. In my case they are attached to the steering rack at a high angle. Moving the steering rack will cause the geometry of the axle to change - rotating it to (mostly) compensate for the large pivot point: Of course this is just an idea for now, but it should be easy to implement on a real model. The wider the axle, the better the compensation. Of course the axle has to be designed in such way, that suspension, drive and steering system will be able to work with this degree of movement.
  11. Hey Everyone! Here is the successor to my Lego Technic Chili Crawler, the Cactus Crawler It took about half of a year of design and revision to reach its current state, of which I am proud of. THE VIDEO: youtube Features: - 3 L-Motors for drive (two in the rear axle, one in the front) - M-Motor and a small linear actuator for front steering - Rigid, triangulated 4-link suspension for the front axle, with large, soft, black shock absorbers - Extremely rigid 2-link rear suspension with ball-joint pivot point on top of the axle, similar to that found in the RC "Mantis" crawler - 100% Lego-legal custom curved rear links that, with how the main cab is shaped, provide exceptional ground clearance towards the rear of the crawler, allowing it to climb up relatively large vertical structures such as street curbs - Very minimal, light bodywork - BuWizz for extra power and SBrick for a great, custom control scheme Note: By the time I finished designing the cab and it's battery enclosure, BuWuzz had not yet come out with the update for their iOS app that allows a single joystick/slider to control multiple outputs, so I was forced to use an SBrick with the BuWizz, providing the extra power from the BuWizz, but with the ease-of-use and great custom control profiles of the SBrick. When used with the SBrick, the BuWizz does in fact still provide more power than the standard Lego 8878 LiPo battery box. - RC4WD 1.9" Krypton scale tires - Two green pieces so that I can call it the Cactus Crawler ;) LXF hopefully coming soon, the tires can easily be found with a quick google search of their name. YES, I know, there is no body. This is meant for performance, meaning I made the cab as small, light, and rigid as possible. I will be able to reply intermittently throughout the day. I figured I'd put this up now anyway! pt
  12. So here's the idea: seeing as all large and complex Technic submissions have failed on LEGO Ideas so far, I set out to create a very small and simple, yet fully functional 4x4 crawler. This is the result, which can be considered the 9398 set on a budget ;) as it offers pretty much the same functionality in a considerably smaller package. If you're willing to give this project a shot at becoming a set (a Technic Ideas set would be nice, at long last), please support it here: https://ideas.lego.com/projects/ba4cebf3-1f80-497d-9ecb-faee2dbc1df3 Photos and description: http://sariel.pl/2018/11/4x4-jeep-wrangler-trailcat/
  13. Hello everyone, here again with a new MOC. Nissan Patrol GR II (Y61). (Updated - body lowered by 1 stud and some panels replaced by plates to reduce weight. Fifth generation of patrols before restyling is my favorite. A lot of experienced offroaders love it too, not without a reason. Update - outdoor trials video: This is a 3-door version which is much less common than 5. All the dimensions are strictly scaled 1:10. Taking into consideration that the real 42 inch tractor wheels definitely require suspension lift and are 106cm long. Also it is 3 doors and not 5 just because of the scale I've chosen. 5-doors would be something around 80 studs long, considering paneling and other stuff - that would be too heavy for an offroad vehicle. Dimensions: 45cm long x 18.5cm wide x 22.5cm height. Weight on the video: 1750g. I wanted to build a working vehicle, not just a standing brick, so I had to sacrifice some things to get it into optimal weight condition. The front is the visiting card for Patrols (imho). Think I caught the main features. All photos: https://bricksafe.com/pages/gate/gate-lego-technic/nissan-patrol-y61-suv The most effecient gear reduction was this one (no reduction from XLs to the transmission): In my previous MOC Ural 4320 I used a similar reduction, but 1:3 slower in the gearbox. It was really slow and couldn't compensate the speed with torque. Resulting - it could go from an obstacle steadily, but not climb it - if it was a large hill. Not only this one is faster, but has a shorter transmission, which is always good for models. No strain axle - steering ball joints is at it max bent position, giving a nice clearance. Always a minimal height limitation when using 9.5l shocks. I could cut off a stud here and there, but this position I liked most of all. The body is fully modular - axles, engine part, chassis and panels: Took it for a hard outdoor drive and of course made some pictures: Think I have failed this MOC, because: - I wanted both front and rear axle diff lock, but just couldn't find space in the front with winch on top (Update - actually not a problem at all. If it doesn't sit on its axles, it moves out of almost every situation (with winch 100%)). - This model literally wouldn't drive with many other gear setups (originally tried 2PF L and 20 beavel gears locked differential, but may be because of the weight, may be something else - couldn't make it cross obstacles without gear crack). - The weight is not distributed evenly between axles, with an overweight on the back. As you can see in the video I've taken some parts from its back to more or less stabilize it. - Design has some holes and is not so smooth - result of purpose of this vehicle - which is offroad. Many small detalization parts were falling off. So with quite a few rebuilds was getting rid of them up to this point. With 41999 for scale: Summing it up, I like it a lot. Really enjoying using it for direct purpose. It rolls over, crashes, but is extremely satisfying. Feel free to criticize.
  14. Today I want to show you my newest and fastest ever car. Ariel Nomad British light weight car based on twin brother Ariel Atom - one of the fastest road cars. Nomad like buggy cars have only rear wheel drive. During construction I recived also BuWizz brick for review . I decided to put it in the vehicle and show the diffrence between Power Function and BuWizz when presenting new model. It allowed to increase its power and simultaneous weight loss. Technical data: -Lenght 29cm -Width 18cm -Height 13cm -Weight 810g (Buwizz) -2x XL motors -1x Servomotor -1x Extension cable -Buwizz or small BatteryBox + IR tower In my car, I tried to reproduce the best possible vehicle mechanical construction. It has a independent suspension which on the driven rear axle turned to be a quite a challange in medium size scale. In my model I dont use differential to bulid drivetrain. Power is transmitted directly with a ratio 3:1 from two XL motors. Despite small size of BuWizz I failed to put fake engine, but I am happy with weight of car because it was possible to have weight under one kilogram. For me, Buwizz is the most practical third party controling brick. It offers everything in one practical case. My only small objection is the inability to use gaming pad to steering but I think that it will be possible in the future. Some photos: Flickr for more: https://www.flickr.com/photos/142980798@N05/sets/72157673238594798/with/29638046247/ I am also invite you to see trailer: If you like this Subscribe me with notification. Enjoy!
  15. Greetings, ladies and gentlemen! I'm glad to introduce you a modification of @Didumos69 Greyhound buggy Yeah, "Mad Max" inspired vehicle again First idea was just "increase durability and add some crawler abilities", but result exceed all my expectations. Adding planetary gear reduction 4:1 to all wheels increase offroad capabilities to sky high (keeping in mind perfectly working suspension of original) And final step - I decide to prepare for summer offroad Lego event in Moscow and for future festival, so I reworked exterior in postapocalyptic style. Other photos Here is LDD model of front hub with planetary gear reduction I used in my modification. Rear hub is done similarly, except for black connectors to suspension arms and without U-joint. Bonus: video from "King of the Hammers" race event in Moscow and photo from "Summer Brick" Lego festival in Taganrog, Russia Thanks to @Didumos69 for his amazing buggy and instructions, and also to @Shurik & @VerSen for cool photos! Hope you like this rusty piece of metal!
  16. Hello everyone! Since TLG released 76023, I had been waiting for affordable Technic set which includes so-called Tumbler Tires. So I jumped at 42050 Drag Racer. I also bought some extra tires separately, then revived old project which had failed three years ago. Avtoros Shaman 8x8 Building instructions: Rebrickable Weight: 2550g - 4x L motor for 8 wheel drive - 2x Servo motor for 8 wheel steering - M motor for switching steering mode (AWS and crab) - M motor for winch - 3x LED for front and rear lights - 2x SBrick powered by 2x 8878 rechargeable battery box - Independent suspension for all wheels - Working steering wheel - Openable hood, doors and roof hatch Back in 2013 As you may know, real Shaman is which can go through almost any kind of terrain. It has three steering modes and can scale 45-degree incline. On top of that it is amphibious. Seeing pictures and videos, I instantly fell in love with it.When I started the project, I was too ambitious to realize all features above. Sadly I could not build even steering mechanism while keeping all wheel drive and independent suspension. So I changed the project to building another 8x8 vehicle. It ended up as my Tatra 813 Trial Truck, but that is another story. Focus on characteristic features Two months ago, I suddenly came up with an idea that enables both normal AWS and crab steering. In the case of four-wheeler, you can do it by switching rotation of second Servo motor for rear axle. But in eight-wheeler like Shaman, you should change turning radius of second and third axle. In normal mode, the steering angle of inner two axles is smaller than outer axles. But in crab mode, all axles should be steered at the same angle. This is the basis of steering idea. I used the way of fixing/moving pivot of steering linkage. A: There are two 7L steering racks connected to 7L beams. Front rack is connected in the middle of beam, rear is one stud backwards. Both ends of beams are connected to steering arms of each axle. B: In normal mode, rear rack is fixed by 12T bevel gear. So the fixed pivot of 7L beam is its 5th pin hole. Which makes front end of beam moves twice as rear end does. That means the steering angle of 1st axle is twice as 2nd axle. C: In switching crab mode, 12T bevel gear moves one stud forward and fix front rack. Fixed pivot is 4th pin hole of beam. Which makes both ends of beams move equally. That means the steering angle of 1st axle is the same as 2nd axle. And there is one more twist. D: I put main steering rack (moved by pinion gear) on one stud forward of 7L beam's front-end (which means 9L beam’s front-end). Seeing from the pivot point, this rack is connected to farther than the point of front steering arms connected. So front steering arms always move slightly shorter than main rack does. When Servo fully turns 90 degrees, pinion gear moves the rack in one stud sideways. Steering arms move less than one stud. This was necessary for keeping CV joint (connected to steering hub) rotate smoothly even when fully steered. Challenge and compromise First of all, this MOC is NOT amphibious. It is too heavy to float. And because of driving motors of low position, chassis is not waterproof at all. So it is not recommended driving it through even shallow water pool. My aim was to achieve decent crawling capability. But I had to lower the bar because there was no room left for portal/planetary hub reduction. Without them, heavy load from 81mm tires directly goes to 12T half bevel gears. First attempt was using two XL motors geared 25:9. I put each motor for left/right side of axle. The result was unsatisfied. Even when climbing over small obstacles, bevel gears often slipped and got damaged. So I replaced them with four L motors geared 3:1. Each one drives a pair of half axles. Thanks to their good speed and smaller torque, new drivetrain proved to be more reliable. Although bevel gears were still slipping a bit, I accepted overall performance. The picture above shows two L motors for driving right side of axles. The power functions switch for changing rotation of rear Servo motor is synchronized with moving steering pivot mechanism. In crab mode, rear 4 wheels steer opposite the same direction as front wheels. As always I used few of non-Technic parts. Big roof tile was used for saving weight, curve slope parts were better choice for filling the gap. LBG axles sticking out the roof are visible indicator for steering mode. They are mechanically connected to switching mechanism. In the video you can see how they work. Instructions available at Rebrickable. Building it in red is possible by using red parts instead of white. I hope you will enjoy building!
  17. I' ve decided to make an alternative model for 42054 CLAAS XERION 5000 TRAC VC set. I' ve wanted to design something different from all those excellent c models already made, so I made a truck capable of off-road conditions, with crane and many other functions. The result: Functions: rear axle drive with 4 piston engine steering live axle suspension side outriggers cabin tilting rear PTO (power take off) crane arm rotation crane arm 1st stage elevation crane arm 2nd stage elevation grabber closing/opening Please watch the video to see this machine in action and for more details. This model is powered by one m motor with rotation direction selection. It powers main selector, crane selector. and PTO. Main selector switches between worm gear powered functions and arm rotation. When worm gear functions are selected, there is another switch to choose between outriggers and cabin tilting. The crane selector switches between 1st and 2nd stage elevation. I had to use some interesting (I think) solutions because of parts selection in 42054 set: Piston engine There are no piston engine parts in the set, so i made them from some connectors. You can see it working in the video. Suspension There are no shock absorbers or wishbones too. So I' ve made a suspension based on twisting axles: Every wishbone is suspended independly. 3 of those connected to axle make a well-working long travel soft off-road suspension: Grabber There was a grabber in original set, but when building the grabber I've already used the worm gear for more important functions, so I' ve designed a different locking mechanism: Turning the green axle makes the red grabber frame move up and down and becouse of engaging the blue knob gear with h-frame opening and closing blue grabber. Instructions Instructions are already available here on rebrickable! I hope you liked this model.
  18. Hello everyone. This is my first MOC that I am not ashamed of showing;) Ural 4320 on a shortened 4wheel basis. - 2 XL paired for driving - m motor for steering - m motor for 2step gearbox - m motor for rear differential lock - openable hood and doors - live axles with portal hubs - flexible flat body-chassis - powered by Buwizz 2.0 Total weight is 1800g. Length - 0,52 meters. Width - 0,26 meters. The idea was to make a trial truck in a bigger scale but still capable of handling heavy offroad. The model was inspired by Madoca's Jeep Concept and has the same general idea. Including paired 24x8 low gear and a 16x16 fast gear. Plus the portal hubs. But it is 4 more studs wider and ~10 more studs longer. It has live axles and a flexible body which results in a really stable construction. As of a few hours of heavy outdoor testing it didn't roll over once. As it was the first MOC I focused on the functionality rather than on design. Feel free to give me a punch for scarcity of design;) It looks odd but drives really well on a low gear. On a faster gear the 2 paired XL motors start chewing on the gears while offroading, On the flat surface it's fine though. Originally it just had a straight m motor to the 8x24 gear for steering, but due to heavy tension the gears or the motor were going off its clips. So I decided to make a steering through the small line actuator fixated in every possible way. As a result it was super sturdy and stable. The chassis (looks pretty compact without tractor wheels): Gearbox: Hope you like it Let me know what you think of it!
  19. LEGO Tatra trucks are dime a dozen, but whenever I see them, they are either very large, complex and sluggish, or they are small but don't really have the unique Tatra suspension, nor drivetrain, nor steering. So I set out with a simple goal: make the smallest Tatra model I can that has it all: the suspension, drivetrain and steering just like in the real Tatra truck. This is the result:
  20. TechnicRCRacer

    [MOC] Crossover Vehicle

    Current: Just scroll down, it's not that far! (Just kidding! This will be updated soon!) Hi! I have another WIP car that I am building! I am still not sure what to call it, but it kind of reminds me of the newer Toyota RAV-4. Here is the chassis and part of the front end! (Sorry for bad pic) I borrowed the shaping from my Supercar X for the front panels. It is powered by a buggy motor and a servo. The newer battery box with new batteries and V2 receiver work great with the buggy motor! Here is a shot of the rear suspension: Thanks for viewing! -TechnicRCRacer
  21. I' ve made a scale model of this russian all terrain vehicle. I've tried to make it as detailed as possible. Video: Functions: - 4x4 driveshaft with differentials (XL motor) - Steering: brakes that block wheels on one side of the vehicle. (M motor) - Working differential lock (M motor) - Working LEDs - Tires from 42054 - Openable front and rear hatches and windscreen, working wipers Everything is controlled remotely using SBrick. The drivetrain with differentials and portal axles: The steering mechanism is, I think, more interesting. Wheels on one side of the vehicle may be blocked using the driving ring. Than differentials transmits all the power to wheels on the other side. (that red connector represents driving ring) And the differential lock. The driving ring connects right and left differential outputs. And photos of side without wheels and the underside: Please watch the video to see this machine in action and for more details. I hope you liked this model.
  22. Hello! My latest MOC is a re-creation of unusual Jeep model. Jeep Mighty FC Concept -Weight: 2125g -2 XL motors for propulsion -Servo motor for steering -M motor for 2 speed gearbox -M motor for locking rear differential -M motor for winch -3 LEDs for front and rear lights -2 SBricks powered by one rechargeable battery box -Portal axles -Openable doors and tailgate -Shallow bed with fold-down sides -Detachable roof -Alternative tube doors The chassis is not realistic, but has decent offroad capability as heavy Lego model. My goal was to make a sturdy and powerful crawler having propulsion motors and gearbox on the center of its chassis. Which means the drivetrain contains two universal joints - weakest points - for transmitting the torque to front and rear live axles. To save U-joints from damaging, I adopted two stage reductions after differential on both axles. The gearbox is similar one to my previous FJ40 Crawler. I doubled the pair of 8T/24T gear for higher durability. High gear is three times faster than low gear. You may wonder why rear ball joint is connected lower than front. That is for avoiding body roll caused by high torque of hard-coupled XL motors. Seeing from the gearbox, the rear output rotates in opposite direction to the front one. So the front and rear axle are equally forced to rotate in opposite direction to each other. Thus the center chassis with heavy body does not easily roll left or right even when climbing steep incline. (...at least on paper. I admit the complete body is a little bit too heavy to prove the theory above.) Steering angle is good, but turning radius is not so good. Because of the lack of center differential, it cannot handle different rotating speed of front and rear axle in tight turning. On slippy surface, like in the video, it can be steered without any problem. Rear differential can be locked instantaneously. The role of 8T gear on top of red changeover part is to make a tiny gap between 16T clutch gear and driving ring in locked position. Thanks to the gap, 16T gear is not pushed against outer structure. That helps to decreasing the friction. Front winch is powered by M motor geared 9:1. I used two pairs of 8T/24T gear instead of worm gear. It is smoother and surprisingly powerful. The hook can be manually pulled out by switching the lever under right seat. The body looks a bit squarish comparing to the real Mighty FC. Maybe I could replicate trapezoidal shape of its cabin. But I thought angled pillars and roll cage would be wobbly. So I decided to build simple yet sturdy. Instead of realistic appearance, I managed to realize easily detachable roof and doors. Although the whole MOC is built for using Unimog tires, Claas tires also fit well. But the maximum articulation of axles would be smaller because bigger tires possibly touch the chassis and fenders. It would be necessary to limit suspension travel or slightly modify the chassis. I hope you will like it! I will make building instruction. But I have to finish the instruction of Pickup first.
  23. Afte the success of the Jaguar XJR19 Le Mans prototype (of which I will still to the photos of the complete model, and instructions) I decided to do a new WIP. Again it's a model I've prototyped over the last month and will now do the second, hopefully better buildup. And again, I will use a photo of an existing vehicle as my inspiration, but it won't be an exact scale model. I use the photo as inspiration and will deviate where needed for the functions (and it will be needed, because i want a 4-function switch box similar to 8258). It's this truck. It's called Foremost Delta 3 Wheeled Carrier and it seems to come in several configurations, one of which has the crane below. On this picture, it's not finished, because outriggers seem to be missing. Several other pictures of the same model show that it has one set of outriggers near the crane. My other source of inspiration will be set 42070. I want to make something with a similar size, which will be in a way "my own take on that set's theme", i.e. "off-road truck with crane". (That's all I will use from that set). So I'm thinking of something in the range of about 2000 pieces. (In practice though, it will always turn out to be more.) Another thing: the colors will be very different. My first prototype was obediently yellow, but when I arrived at the cabin I wanted to deviate a bit, so I threw some less-used colors in the mix, and went for Dark Turquoise with Black for the cabin, and consequently also for the crane and bed. The chassis will be Dark Gray and for the body I am torn between Yellow and Red (main reason being the colored axles I want to use, for example for the ladders). I will be copying the crane from 8258 (with different colors), because that one seems perfect for the scale and type. But everything else will be different. I will be using Tumbler wheels. The profile is not exact but the shape and size seems fine. Also, currently I have only 4, so I will temporarily be using someting else for the front (interestingly, the Porsche wheels have the same diameter and width). I started with two important modules: The one on the left is the 4-function gearbox and crane base, and the one on the right is the rear axle unit. What I like personally is how a 4-way gearbox and outriggers using the new gear rack pieces introduced in 42043 fit in a pretty compact module. Here's the gearbox unit from below. The dark-gray axle joiner is the motor input. I plan on using my newly acquired L-motor. Here's the rear-axles module: Each axle is mounted on two 1x5 suspension arms and two 1x6 links. These 4 keep the axle in place and nicely horizontal. The free ball-sockets near each wheel will connect to the springs. Also, as you see, with the parts used, doing this part in dark-gray seems impossible... Of course, the 15L beams will be replaced by the chassis. It will be a challenge to get this strong though, because the gearbox module has some gears in the way, so little room to connect things firmly. The functions I want to have: Manual steer and drive (so no RC) Electric crane rotation Electric crane first boom element Electric crane second boom element Electric outrigger horizontal deployment Manual outrigger vertical deployment (similar to many sets) Suspension It's not as impressive as 42070's six electric functions in three modes and four nice large-range outriggers, but instead of that, this will have suspension. Next up will be connecting the two modules, and doing the front axle and steering modules.
  24. Madoca 1977

    [MOC] Jeep Wrangler

    Hello everyone! This is another Jeep which I built while leaving some unfinished projects on the shelf. For three months I have had no time for LEGO mainly because of my nursing job. (Did you see Wolverine taking care of Professor X in the movie "Logan"? I do something like that ) I really needed to take a new step forward for my motivation. Instructions of former two MOCs are still work in progress. I am sorry to keep you waiting. Jeep Wrangler Weight: around 1100g (with hardtop) -2 L motors for propulsion -M motor for steering -Front and rear open differential -Linked pendular suspension without shock absorbers -Openable hood, doors and tailgate with lock -LED for headlights -Detachable body The chassis is not realistic at all. It was new to me to build the suspension without using shocks. It even doesn't have sway bars. Suspension travel is long enough for this scale. It worked fine when driving over small obstacles. But on a steep incline (40+ degrees), it became unstable and tended to roll over sideways. That move was understandable because it had no anti-roll mechanism. I tried to put the battery box close to the center as possible for better weight distribution. Passenger seat was sacrificed for it, but the whole model with hard top is still slightly rear-heavy. Jeep Wrangler is known as one of the most modifiable vehicle on earth. So I made a few options such as 2-piece hardtop, tube doors, bumpers and another color scheme. But the best way is building more realistic chassis for this body. Unfortunately I could not make it this time. Maybe in the future... Building instructions for red version with those options above available at Rebrickable. I hope you will like it!
  25. Hello Eurobricks AFOLs, I am Engine and this is my first post here on EB forum. My friend HorcikDesigns told me, some of you here want to know more about my last MOC. My pleassure! Original Vehicle: As some of you noticed, my MOC should be scale model of Ghe-o Rescue. It is a Romanian rescue vehicle designed for extreme terrain, with a capacity of up to 11 people. Dimensions are: 5.2 m length; 2.7 m width (even wider version exists); 2.4 m higth (without rooftop carrier). The weight is 3.2 tons. Under the bonnet, more engine types can be monted, with the most powerful one with 500 hp. Live axles are used for suspension, both equipted by lockable differentials. There are also built-in water tanks for 620 liters for fire extinguishing. Another specialty is the possibility to mount tracks to rear wheels or pneumatic "pillows" on wheels for floating on water. Tires are also special. It is Arctictrans 1300x700-24 (diameter 1300 mm and width 700 mm). The manufacturer shows off an independent test in which they won over Avtoros and Trecol manufacturers. Here you can see several cars built on them. And because the tire diameter and width exactly match the 1:16 scale to the LEGO "Tumbler" tires Ø81.6x44, the scale of the model was decided. So far I do not know any other LEGO cration of Ghe-o Rescue. MOC: The MOC was designed for Kostky.org Trophy Competition, organized by our technic race event guru Peter. And the task was to build a drivable, remote-controlled, off-road vehicle that would be able to travel about 3 km. And at the same time, it should be as beautiful as possible and with design matches to original vehicles. Terrible task. The dimensions of the model are: 332 x 168 x 168 mm (41.5 x 21 x 21 studs), weight 1.2 kg. The drive is permanently 4x4 without differentials. Axles are not sprung. But thanks to the torsionally soft frame of the vehicle, decent axle crossing is achieved (some LEGO trial experience here). Inside, there is a functional winch with a length of 2.5 m. Good lighting is a necessity for the expedition special. The control is provided by sBrick. The propulsion is made by 1 x PF XL motor with a total gear ratio of 1: 1. Schizophrenic steering is provided by the PF Servo. The winch is driven by a PF M motor via a worm gear (8: 1 ratio). Five pairs of PF lights really shine in front of the car. Electrical source is a battery box with 6 AA batteries. The whole MOC is pure LEGO exept of: sBrick receiver, high strength thread as winch rope, threaded cardans and event mandatory stickers. Drive ability: Drivig speed corresponds to a pleasant walk. Off-road capabilities were adequate to the track. Tire traction did not limit offroad capabilities, but a small power of e-motor did. Then the winch becomes useful, that is able to lift the entire weight of the vehicle. And if it was still not enough, the other "competitors" were there to help. A minor issue was the steering. Thanks to the loose in steering mechanism and occasional insensivity in the mobile app, sometimes I sent it out of the way. A major issue was energy consumption. Within 1.5 km, I drained out three sets of batteries (2x alkaline GP Ultra Plus, 1x rechargeable GP 2700). And yet I do not know how to solve it. But most likely it is caused by PF Servo motor, as we disscussed after the event with other partipiciants. ----- Thank you for comments and questions. Pictures are here in my gallery. Original post on Kostky.org.