Jump to content

AVCampos

LEGO Ambassadors
  • Posts

    1,475
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by AVCampos

  1. It wasn't me who made the video, it was a fellow PLUG member who is dabbling in the PU protocol (amongst other electric LEGO things). He describes the procedure here (in Portuguese): http://www.plug.pt/forum/index.php?topic=11097.msg152388#msg152388
  2. Yes, it's possible:
  3. The 9397, 42042 and 42054 (not sure about the 42055, as I don't have it) also lack self-locking in their superstructures when disengaged. I believe that's intentional, as it's tempting for kids to rotate those large structures by hand, and a locked mechanism would break gears in that situation.
  4. The description for the 42080 almost says it all: "Almost" because they forgot lime green.
  5. What about the boom lifting? Does it have the same problem as the 8043 and the 42009 due to symmetrical bevel gears driving the two LAs?
  6. I semi-agree. The 1H sets were at most "meh" to me, but the 2H ones feel a lot more promising. Yes, even the 42080's BOLOCs nature, as to me sets are mostly to absorb building techniques and serve as parts packs.
  7. Also, the speed will be constant regardless of the gear selected via the paddles.
  8. It's not the size of the inventory, it's what you do with it. Having said that, it does lose value as a "parts pack".
  9. Have you spotted any new moulds so far? (I consider those introduced in the Chiron as also "new")
  10. Actually, it's the opposite: when spinning the wheels the pistons should move slower and easier in higher gears; what you said is true when powering the engine and watching the wheels.
  11. I'm not sure about that... what's the national Dutch drink? Other than the "special" muffins, which aren't drinks anyway...
  12. What about the 42078 Mack truck? The 42079 forklift also appears to be well headed.
  13. A partial justification for the 42082's size compared to the 42009 is that the former has two gearboxes in total (one in the superstructure and one in the carrier) and the direction is controlled by the battery box, whereas the latter has one gearbox per function (the levers switch between forward/neutral/reverse) and the battery box is always on in one direction, like the 42042 and the 42054.
  14. It's possible that this is due to unbalanced U-joints at steep angles in the slewing mechanism:
  15. Yes, the issue was first identified in the 8043. I didn't know the 42009 had it as well.
  16. What about the 42079? From the reactions I've seen, it appears to have been well accepted.
  17. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ForkliftFu
  18. Besides being able to carry stuff uphill without spilling the contents like I wrote earlier, maybe it's to be able to "take a dump from high ground": as the pile of material on the ground grows, it needs to "raise its butt" to allow for the rest of the material to be dumped and not get clogged by what's already out.
  19. Most likely it's the same as the antenna on the Mine Loader: the "sword" (I don't know the correct name) of the Musketeer CMF.
  20. I was wondering that myself. Maybe the rear lifts up to be able to climb slopes without dropping the payload behind?
  21. I agree. Yet, between stickers and printed parts, to me the former is the lesser evil, as that gives me the option of not applying them and therefore making the parts more usable for MOCs.
  22. If it has nice traction, suspension and off-road capabilities, and the RC is provided by PU elements, I'm not complaining. The 42065 also only drives and steers, and IMO it's a great fun model and parts pack.
×
×
  • Create New...