dhc6twinotter

I agree, my thoughts as well. I just wish LEGO would hurry up and make this part with the axle and pin holes in opposite locations. Pin holes at the ends and an axle hole in the middle. Every moc I build, I wish LEGO had such a part.

I would love to see some new power puller sized tires. If we are indeed getting a rock crawler flagship, I have my doubts that it will be RC. I think it would be something similar to 8466. You never know though....

The airplane is a bit better than I anticipated, but I'm still bummed that, besides the elevators, it doesn't have any other working flight control surfaces. The opening canopy is a nice feature, and the rack mechanism used for the swing wing is unique. I guess the price will determine whether or not I will buy this. The crane is a must buy for me. Those new triangle pieces are great! Much better fit.

Could you keep the switch within the system and move the switch position to the port without a hose connected to release the air? If you connect the pneumatic cylinder to the switch's center port and the pump to either the right or left port, you can use the remaining port to release the air from the cylinder without dumping air out of the whole system. Or, you could install a T connector between the cylinder and pump. Pump pumps air into the T, and one end of the T goes to the cylinder, the other to the switch. You would then have two vent ports on the switch. I suck at explaining stuff, so hopefully that makes sense.

I have a few that don't work very well. I bought them on bricklink. I think I bought one on ebay too. I have become very weary of buying pneumatic stuff on bricklink, ebay, or anywhere else online. IMHO, LEGO Education is the best place for pneumatics.

Very cool. That color scheme is really nice. I like all the chrome too. We don't have those kind of log trucks here in North Carolina (ours are standard semis), but if I remember correctly, those are popular in Oregon and Washington States.

I don't think Technic builders need an engineering degree. I don't have one; my degree is in Geographic Information Systems. For the time being, I'm a contract vehicle driver on a military installation. Gear ratio basics is the only thing I can think of that people need to know when designing a Technic moc. The rest just comes with experience.

Congrats Sheepo! Well deserved! About the time frame for models to be built: I have spoken in person to the guy responsible for the Technic Challenge. I too was under the impression that the moc submissions could only be built within the contest time frame, but after I asked specifically about this, he assured me that it was perfectly fine to submit models that were previously built. Any moc could be submitted, regardless of time spent building it. All that is required is the "Technic Challenge" sign in the picture. I have no problem with people submitting project that took a while to build, and If I get a chance, I'll probably submit some of my mocs as well. I agree.

Thanks for the extra pictures! I'm guessing the differential and PF switches are part of the 3 stage lights? And the pneumatic cylinder and spring are a pressure regulator? BTW, what video editing software do you use? The video is great!

Awesome! I'm going to have to get cracking on my moc then....I'll have some tough competition this time.

Great looking car! Paul is a great builder and a great guy to meet. Maybe I'll get a chance to see this at BrickMagic.

This is awesome! You have done a great job so far. I'm looking forward to the rest of your build. My Toyota 4Runner has a drivetrain similar to yours. Body on frame, V6, 5spd tranny, part-time 4wd (no center diff though), solid rear axle, and independent front suspension. Are you building a Toyota Land Cruiser Prado? Or maybe a Nissan Patrol or Pathfinder? Maybe a Mitsubishi Pajero? Looks great! Nice to see another Technic builder on the forum.

Excellent! Nice job, and quick too!

Yup, the motor that switches the gearbox uses knob gears. The motor just stalls once switcher hits it's limits. It's not a design I would use in my mocs, but I guess it works ok. Welcome to EB!

Nico71 is da bomb.

Marcus, welcome to the forum! 8053 is a pretty good set. The build was interesting, and a bit different than some of the other sets. It was fun to build. 8258 is probably my favorite Technic set that I own, but I have yet to buy 8110. 8043 is also a great set. Also, your english is very good. English is my first language, and I can't even get the hang of it.

Awesome! I'll have to pick up the crane when it is stocked in stores. I need that mini turntable for my project. The tow truck is a bit more expensive than I anticipated. I'll have to think twice about buying that, or wait for a discount.

Looking great! I wish I had some of those pneumatic brackets.

Very cool. I like the fact that it is 7 wide. I get to drive these buses every now and then at work when we are doing mass movements. The ones we drive look like the one dluders posted, except for ours are white with seperate low/high beam headlights and no caution/stop flashers. Our buses also have AC, barn door luggage area in the rear, and some have airbag suspension with knealing front ends. Ours are Cat and Cummins powered. They are fun to drive, on the rare times that I get too. Anyways, nice work there!

While the timing and valve system isn't realistic, solde1 has created a clever and compact system for moving the valves back and forth. Pretty cool!

Thanks for the review! This is an awesome set, and one that I really wish I had. I hope LEGO makes another plane in the future.

I'd like to see PF remotes/receivers using RF instead of IR. I vote for servo motors. A PF pneumatic valve would be nice as well. Having 4 channels doesn't really bother since there are ways around this. Models become more complicated with more than 8 functions, but that is all part of the fun.

I don't get what the rubberbands are for???

Hey, hey! It's nice to see a Technic model on the front page! The Technic forum is getting some love after all!

I like it! I think the only change I would make would be to switch the position of the pin and axle hole, so that the pin hole is the lower one. The pin and axle holes could also be used for outrigger mounts, but I think having a pin or axle hole mid-way on the cylinder would be much stronger. Having a pneumatic cylinder outrigger supported only from one end would be too weak, imho. I actually don't mind the 2 stud wide base of the cylinders. I do like the idea of a 1 stud base, but I think having the base narrower than the cylinder may, in some cases, make it harder to mount. Just my $.02.