Gee

Seems like the next logically evolution to me!

Not in the UK unfortunately... ;-(

Crikey! Great engineering, but I wouldn't wanna get in the way! Could be turned into a fab "intruder deterrent" if linked up to a motion sensor on your front door!

Ah, I see what you mean, that makes sense, thanks for the tip. I've run out of beams now anyhow! I'll bear it in mind for when I get some more parts.

Here's the latest attempt at a simple RC vehicle: I used the return to centre steering idea form Mahjqa's Flickr (there's a photo of it in an earlier post). this one works really well actually. For a while I couldn't get the RTC to go fully back to centre until I worked out that I had used friction pins in the steering joints where I should've used non-friction. It's little things like this that I'm learning from building these simple vehicles. I also got round the problem with not having any workable diffs by going to single wheel drive. The car is very maneuverable and has a small turning circle. I'm fairly happy with this one and if I had different wheels and tarted it up a bit with bodywork, it'd look OK. I'm also learning a lot about gearing with these little projects. The beveled gears' teeth grind together sometimes when starting off or if I get stuck on something. How would I get round that? Gear down more? As always, your thoughts are most welcome!

Looks interesting, I'll keep tabs on this one. Bowler's are highly capable bits of kit!

Fascinating stuff and this discussion shows everything I love about Technic and LEGO as a whole - it attracts inquiring, creative minds!

I like it! I'd like to see more photos of the suspension setup and I look forward to the video.

But can it wheelie?!

I second that, that Big Rig looks sweet!

So today I sat down to have another go at making a simple RC car. This time, instead of using studded parts, I used the only studless liftarms I had - from set 9391. This was quite constraining and there's much better ways of achieving some of the things I have done, but I just don't have the parts (yet ;-) ). Here it is: My thoughts on this: - It looks and works better than the studded one I did before. - Building studless is more 3D than studded (if that makes sense). - It's hard to get used to the odd number of studs (I'm used to even). - It needs a differential (I haven't got one that would work). - The steering works but needs some tricky set up to get the right tension on the elastic band (note to self - buy a servo motor). - 8 tooth gears are really weak! I broke one when I had this geared 8-24-24. - When geared 24-24-8 it's plenty fast enough (especially with these big wheels). - It's now geared 16-16-16, which is a good compromise. I'd be pleased to hear your comments and criticisms. Please do bear in mind that this is my first ever studless MOC and I'm very new to this sort of thing.

[uSED]{AUCTION] - Technic Job Lot http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Massive-Lego-Technic-Job-Lot-8295-8436-8145-8445-8288-More-All-Complete-/231117805191?pt=UK_Construction_Toys_Kits&hash=item35cfb1d687

Deleted.

D'oh, yeah I see that now! I assume that this could also be manually wound? Of course it'd probably be painfully slow!

I could be wrong, but this picture shows negative caster, not positive.

I love this! Having just come out of my dark age I became interested in the developments in RC'd vehicles but then I stumbled across GBC and I was absolutely mesmerised. Modules are fascinating things and I could watch the YT videos of them on loop all day long! Out of interest, what's the need for 2 medium motors in this module? Would it work with 1?

Gotcha.

Aye, I've seen that video, explains it perfectly. I just wondered about caster angle specifically for crawlers.

Nice! I really like the positive caster angle. You see lots of 4x4s and crawlers with negative caster and also a few sets as well (8110 and 9398). Do you think that the positive caster will be an improvement over negative in terms of performance?

I've still got the boxes for 8865 and 8868, but that's only because my Mum used them to store the parts in between me losing interest in my teens and when I had them back a couple of years ago. The boxes are battered about and really seen better days. Now that I'm getting back into it I have sorted the pieces into plastic boxes/trays and the boxes will get recycled. I am finding it hard to let them go though and that's more down to nostalgia than anything else. Our knowledge on resource use and recycling has really come on since the late 80s, early 90s and this is why it makes more sense to make the packaging as eco as possible. If someone is adamant on keeping a set stored MISB as a collectors item then it'll make little difference that they're a bit more flimsy; think of how flimsy the packaging on some of the collectible metal cars and trains from the 30s and 40s was, but collectors still kept those mint.

My take is that the boxes may add value in the future for rare sets, like 41999. But then, what's to stop people from buying a box and instructions from eBay, Craigslist etc, filling it with the parts from their collection or BrickLink and then advertising it as the "original" boxed set? LEGO parts are just that: parts, they're not highly individual, one-offs or special on their own. Even the rare pieces are produced in the tens of thousands. The only way it becomes so is if the set is MISB, but what's the point in that? LEGO is meant to be played with, stripped, rebuilt and played with again ad infinitum. With that in mind, I'd like to see the boxes made as eco-friendly as possible.

Hmmm, not sure what to make of this. I'm most in awe of the engine and the fact that it can power something that large. The body, whilst impressive, is probably less so as it is just massively upscaled. Sometimes working on a large scale can be easier than working a lot smaller - easier to fit detail in etc. Would love to see some more shots of the drive train etc.

This is gonna be monstrously huge! Look forward to seeing the progress.

An interesting point.

Since I joined the forum I've searched it extensively and it really is a mine of information. As I think Jim pointed out in another thread, the best way to search the forum is to go to google, type in what you are searching for and then add this at the end "site:www.eurobricks.com". What's the score on reviving old threads? Sometimes I have gone through and found an interesting post from 6 months - a year ago, but not been sure whether to comment or not? Surely this is better than starting a new topic on the same thing and jamming the board up.