dhc6twinotter

This is a 16 Cylinder Radial engine with variable pitch propeller that I built a while ago. I slapped it together in a few hours to see if it would work. If I had known how many views the video was going to get, I would've used newer parts with a stronger structure. I have a version 2 planned, but I haven't bothered to build it yet. I also want to build more realistic 7, 9, 14, and 18 cylinder versions, but they all had odd number of cylinders per row, so the geometry is a bit awkward.

Very nice truck! I like the smooth operation of the pneumatics. (edit: part of my comment removed because I failed to read everything above.)

Not a bad set, but I'm really not a fan of how the rear suspension is set up. The geometry is not correct at all, and this setup just puts stress on the parts. 9398 was the same way. The 6L links are being stressed, and LEGO would've been better off just using a single 6L link as a panhard bar. Otherwise, a descent set. Working suspension, steering, and a fake V8 engine in a set this size is nice. The blower setup is pretty neat looking, especially with the chain.

I think the 1:3 gearing with an XL motor, plus worm gears on the mast would be fine. Personally, I'd probably gear it down a bit more just to make things a bit slower (plus you get more torque), but that's just me.

Off the top of my head, this would be my vote: 8043 Excavator (the only full-RC set that includes a gearbox to multiply functions) 42043 Arocs (very realistic model with full suspension and twin steer functions, plus pneumatics) 42054 Class (Very unique set with multi-mode steering and rotating cabin---this was the last Technic set I've purchased) 8258 Crane Truck (Uniquely designed gearbox with gear and axles mounted vertically--my first set coming out of my dark ages) 8109 Low Loader Tow Truck (One of the most underrated sets, IMHO. I bought it on sale, and really ended up liking the set. The lowering suspension was unexpected, and the tow forks had a very clever retract/unfold mechanism) 42009 Mobile Crane MKII (fun build, five axles, multi stage boom, etc. The slow and problematic stabilizers gave the set some negativity, but it's a fun build with lots of gears) I haven't purchased a Technic set in a while now though, and I can't really comment on any of the newer sets. I don't build stuff just to display, and I find I have just about all the pieces I need to MOC now. None of the newer Technic sets strike my fancy anyway, and they've just gotten to the point where they cost more than I want to pay.

9:10 18:6 15:4 23:3 19:2 1:1 Voting based on creativity, functions, execution of functions, build techniques, appearance, and what I feel would fare the best in a Mad Max world.

Nice effort there, but I think there are some things to consider: 1) Your driveshaft linking the two axles together like this will force your axles to work in a more pendular manner in relation to each other. Is this your goal? Your original idea of using the mini turntable may work if you are willing to offset the steering shaft to one side or the other (see below, however). 2) Your steering shaft running from one axle to the other will not work in this configuration. When your axles pivot around the driveshaft, your steering shaft if going to move in every direction. If you are going to use a steering shaft rather than linkages like victormendoza mentioned, you are going to have to use a u-joint and cv-joint with probably at least a 6 or 8L axle between the two. 3) Your steering configuration will cause the axles to steer in opposite directions. Is that your goal? 4) Your knuckles need more bracing, and I don't see a pivot point. The knuckles should have a pivot point in line with the CVs. 5) Your springs are mounted in such a way that doesn't provide much articulation. You'd be better off rotating the mount 90 degrees, but even that isn't optimal. 6) I would suggest removing the 6L links. This configuration will cause binding on the driveshaft, unless you use u-joints and cv joints on the driveshaft as well. Great render, and I wish I had those rendering skills. Have you built a real version of this suspension? Some thoughts to ponder: 1) How many connection points does each axle have to the suspension arms? It looks like each axle only has two connections, and this won't work. Maybe there is a mount somewhere else that I'm not seeing? Are the two axles physically connected to each other in any way, other than a driveshaft? 2) The driveshaft is going to have a lot of friction, and probably bind up if you are using it to keep the axles in line with each other. The center driveshaft will probably slide out of the pinion gears when the suspension compresses, if you don't have anything else keeping the two axles together. 3) Those red connectors are going to be pushed out when the suspension compresses. 4) The steering linkages are a good idea, but the configuration of the pivot points is going to cause the axles to steer in opposite directions. Digital renders can be a great tool, but I think physical builds are almost always needed to understand the geometry and forces at play, especially for suspension designs. :D

I really like the idea behind this contest! Sounds great! I haven't built anything in a few years, but I might have a go at this contest, if time permits.

Those two are probably some of the best episodes from Top Gear (along with the Vietnam special). Speaking of the backhoe, that is probably going to be a must-buy for me. I haven't purchased a Technic set since the Xerion (stuff is just getting too expensive, especially considering I prefer to builds MOCs rather than sets). I always told myself that if LEGO offers a legitimate backhoe or tow truck, I'd buy one. Otherwise, I don't see much Technic set purchases in my future.

I'm seriously thinking about just using the Spike Prime hub for my Mocs instead of the PU Hub. The six ports will come in handy, but even then, having to now find room for two battery boxes is going to be a real pain. I'm not even sure I want to invest in the PU stuff, especially if there isn't going to be any extension cables available. With the PF stuff, I've port stacked on every moc I've built that was RC. I never once had an issue with over-current protectors kicking in. The new PU stuff is nice, but there are some major drawbacks.

I light element with programable light patterns would be pretty sweet, especially if more than one pair of lights can be connected to it.

I hope there is a way to stack outputs, but it doesn't look like this is the case. Most of my mocs use two drive motors, and I've always stacked the plugs on one IR port. Now, it looks like I'll have to use two ports on the hub, and I presume there is a way to link outputs together in the app. Adding lights and such can use up ports pretty fast too! What I used to do with one BB and 4 IR Receivers may now require three bulky hubs! I really want to see some way to stack port outputs! The new PU system really seems to take up a lot of space, and I'm not a fan of having to have a whole new set of batteries for every four outputs.

I don't know that the new turntable would offer much of a difference versus the old one in this regard. It has more space, but I don't think space was the problem with getting three functions through the center of the old turntable. The issue was how to get three shafts spinning around each other without getting in the way of each other as well. This might help: The new turntable doesn't really solve any of these issues, other than maybe give a bit more space.

Personally, I've never build a B model in my life, so I would prefer TLG spends more development time on the actual A model. That's just me though...

Well, I think it was kind of a collaborated idea, and I really like what I'm seeing so far! There is some neat stuff!

I'm on the fence with this set. There is no reason why a set this size couldn't have a three section boom or pendular axle. The functions just seem pretty basic to me, although I do like the multi-directions gear boxes. Too bad about all the color vomit and extra dribble. I don't really see a need for things like tool boxes and such on a technic model. That just pads the part count and jacks the price up. The crane might be my only Technic set this year, but I dunno. Maybe I'll hold off.

Just out of curiosity, do the new valves move any easier than the old ones? The old ones could get a bit stiff at times.

Great looking model!

The great thing about the new selector is that it acts a bit like a worm gear and locks the driving rings in place. It would be very hard, if not impossible, for it to be back driven. Plus, it's more compact and easier to incorporate into models. Win, win, win all around. This is the best new part in ages.

The "W" engines that VW, Audi, Bentley, and Bugatti use have four cams and one crank. When looking at the block from one of the ends, it looks like a V. The two cylinder heads are really wide though. These "W" engines are basically designed around two VR engines mounted together (The VR engines are very narrow 15 degree V engines used in many older VW vehicles. Despite cylinders/pistons being in a V configuration, the VR engines only have one cylinder head). Bugatti did use "W18" engines that did have three banks of cylinders (three heads, three exhaust manifolds, three intakes, etc) in some of the '90s concept cars, but I don't think any made it to production.

This is very nice! One of the best looking Technic long-nose trucks I've seen. This looks far better than the Lego one just released.

If there is a new valve, I hope it's not as stiff as the current valves. This is pretty exciting though. I'm going to put my road grader on hold until we hear more about these valves.

I guess I'm a bit late to the party, but I quite like the rally car! The Mack on the other hand, I don't like at all. Far too many system bricks mixed with the studless parts. I've never been a fan of this, and It looks terrible. I'll be passing on the Mack, but if the price of the rally car is right, it's a must buy.

Differential, particularly the older ones. There are some pretty awesome mechanical things that can be done with them!

Personally, I think having to manually select functions on an RC set defies the whole purpose of having RC. Aside from the adventure bike, nothing in this year's Technic lineup appeals to me. I'm hoping for some new drivetrain parts in that tow truck though. It looks like I'll be focusing more on the Creator line this year.