Lasse D

I knew I had another Claas Xerion lying around somewhere, so I was able to rebuild this amazing set... and show that the attachments work: The Disc Harrow obviously works. I doubt anyone had doubts about that. By adjusting the Shutter speed, the rotary tiller spins nicely from the PTO: But the most fun is of course when looking at the Hay Tedder doing its thing: Building instructions as seen in my previous post are free on https://brickhub.org

It seems off, so I took a closer look where the LEGO model is compared to the real race car. You are correct that the proportions are pretty accurate. It appears to be the missing windscreen that makes the nose look longer and threw me off when seeing it from that angle. The big problem seems to be the wheel size. They are too big, which is the reason for the right height issue and the stumped rear. Also. The rear lights should be places a stud higher:

I know where they are going with this, but it is misleading to formulate it like this, since Technic was released in 1977. Overall I'm super stoked by this set, and I will get at least 1 of them. The only downsides I see are: - Missing gearbox (as many other mention. But it would be a challenge since the real car has a 6 speed + reverse gearbox) - Missing air jacks. Why is LEGO not reintroducing this cool feature? - Rims should have been flat silver IMO. - Front overhand and proportions are off, causing the LEGO model to lose the beautiful MR proportions of the real car. (I will make a new comparison using Griddy so you can see what I'm talking about) - Wrong parts being used for the rear lights. The real car has a light signature with rings which the carpet runners completely fail to capture. - Incorrect name. This is not a "488 GTE", but rather a "488 GTE EVO". Ferrari used the EVO version in the 2018/2019 superseason of WEC which you can recognise from the clear headlights and livery.

I have created three new attachments to be used on the Claas Xerion. Rotary Tiller It can be opened: And is powered by the PTO with sides that click in a simpler way than on the official set: Building instructions for it can be found here: https://brickhub.org/i/694 Disc Harrow It is a fairly simple offset style disc harrow. I selected this style as it allows for more discs than seen on the more normal X-style. The instructions can be found here: https://brickhub.org/i/693 Hay Tedder The sides can be lifted. Please don't run the PTO when in this position: Small turntables are used to allow the wheels to be mounted below the rotating parts: And the side lifting mechanism is also fairly simple: Building instructions for this can be found here: https://brickhub.org/i/695 Unfortunately I killed my own Claas Xerion in order to get parts for the John Deere tractor, but the PTO is the same and the implements work on both tractors in exactly the same way.

It is one of my own threads, and I don't want this to become a plea like "please comment on my MOC". It was merely to illustrate a counterpoint to one of the opinions displayed in this thread. You are moving the goalpost and misrepresenting the example. The example was a rebuttal to your initial comment that a good MOC would receive feedback. Nothing else.

Yeah, that one was pretty grafting. I have another example. There is a model of a race car posted on EB which received the attention of the driver of the race car on Twitter who requested it for an official LEGO set. It received shoutouts and articles from FIA WEC (the race organisers of WEC races, including the biggest race in the World, Le Mans), dailysportscar.com (One of the biggest magazines covering the racing world), The LEGO Car Blog, Metropolitan Magazine, and SportsCar En Español (my Spanish is not good enough to know what they are all about, but hey... they made articles with shoutouts for this particular LEGO model!). How many comments did the MOC attract on Eurobricks where it was presented including the WIP photos? Zero. And according to @proran it was therefore not a good MOC. Now @proran might be right. But as I said initially. When people put in a lot of effort in their content and get no feedback, do not be surprised if they next time only post elsewhere.

I have built a second prototype with an updated driveline and the new shorter wheels (but missing the drive motors and mechanics on top): By using liftarms instead of gears, the wheels no longer fall out of alignment, and it has allowed me to add Ackerman steering geometry as well. By reducing the driven wheels from 4 to 2 enough space was freed up to allow for the new steering mechanism: However. The big issue of having the legs pull to the sides remains. For this reason I have added the long gray liftarms. The theory is that legs pulling to the sides will pull against the liftarms. By having them connected to the steering, the wheels should steer the legs back under the straddle carrier. Unfortunately the liftarms do not pull enough. My next attempt will be to have the top extend down further on the sides, allowing the "error correcting" mechanism to provide more input than in this initial setup. If this keeps on failing, I will look into "splitting the difference" as @Saberwing40k points it out. I will, however, first try to build some Mecanum wheels and see if their sideways movement will be sufficient in having the legs straighten out during normal operation.

There is another aspect which we have not yet mentioned when considering constructive feedback. Many of us do not have English as our native language. A short comment on a moc can be made with the best of intend, but cut short and be using less flowery wording simply because of the lack of experience with the language. I would rather have short an honest answers than having people keep their silence in fear for being misunderstood. And I agree with the comments regarding WIP topics that transform into MOC topics when the models are complete. I have a WIP topic which has gathered a massive amount of attention (relative to any other topic I have made the past many years) and I cherish the feedback I am getting in it. As an example, one mentions that I should consider using mecanum wheels to minimize some planar forces, and I am not actively looking into that solution. Another poster suggests that I use a part... which the prototype already uses, but that is also OK: At least the use of that part is being highlighted. In that topic I would much rather have a short and honest "Lasse. Trust me. Those legs will never align" comment from @Sariel than no comment at all. Sure, it is a stab right in the pride, but it is still much better than wasting days of building on something that will never work. That said, I can also know the other side of the coin. Some 10 or so years ago I made a comment along the lines of "You should stop encouraging this. LEGO is not strong enough as a material and the motors are not powerful enough to support a functional airplane" after 10 or so others had encouraged a member (not on EB) to continue building a very, very expensive airplane. The builder went absolutely mental and called me every bad name under the Sun. It honestly feels like the meme "Why are you booing me? i'm right!" when that happens, and he unfortunately took it as a challenge to continue the deadborn airplane.

Thanks for the replies. They actually mean a lot to me. I am also a hard critic of the windscreen solution and wish LEGO made a single piece that fit the scale as I prefer to not leave the windscreen gap open in scale 1:20 and below to my own detriment! I have now for 1,5 year had a new car which has even more impossible angles. Hopefully I can present the LEGO version of it before I hit retirement :D

This is a brilliant model. While I can see point being made about some panels being offsets less than a brick in whichever direction might make a certain detail of the design more accurate, I can also see that changing something in one place would upset something else. In other words. This model is damn near perfect for the scale and I couldn't have done it better myself. Massive kudos from my side @Rolic.

Bingo. The "0 replies" threads are extremely demotivating and will turn people off from posting more of that type... or even turn them off from posting their creations on EB. Others will see these threads and similarly be turned off from posting anything similar. Why spend days or months on creating something when people will reject it outright? I, for instance, would never post a robotic arm concept in here. It will be posted on facebook and on Instagram instead - especially videos of it since people seem to love those on these other platforms. When this happens, then you get the diversity of creations culled and people will focus on building what they can see others being interested in. Whenever you see such a thread without any replies, but a lot of effort clearly being put into both model and presentation, then think of it as you personally saying "I do not want that on here" as a very, very, clear message.

That is a huge challenge given the low availability of magnet and coil parts. I really don't see the advantage of making them work as opposed to creating realistic models with backup towers, fences, and perhaps visiting mechanics.

Thanks for the replies everyone! It is great to get so much input. Hopefully the final model will work really nicely. The first issue to address is steering and how the wheels tend to pull to the sides as shown in the video. I have created a new wheel design which is 2 units lower. Here the new design is shown next to the initial prototype (which is same height as the yellow ones: My apologies for the video quality. It will be two weeks before I can get back to my camera and proper lighting again. The lowered height will hopefully reduce the amount of sideways wandering. Another issue was gear slipping. This only happened between the mini turntables and the bevel gears. Unfortunately there is no way to brace this. One could use additional bevel gears, but that would require additional bulk with gears. I will instead try with a liftarms-based solution, which is why there is a pin in the upper right corner of the picture. Using pins and liftarms should also allow for Ackerman steering geometry similarly to on my Model Team trucks as @pleegwat mentions. Finally regarding steering. The new wheel design no longer uses the white gears. They acted as primitive differentials. With this new design I will have to add an open diff. My attempts at programming the EV3 to receive commands over bluetooth is still a work in progress. The motions when powered using smart bricks will be less jerky. For the video I hooked up some PF controllers in order to show the functions - these will be removed once I get the EV3 up and working. My next update will most likely be for bluetooth communications since I will not only be away from my camera, but also the LEGO for the next two weeks.

This topic is for discussing and provide criticism of the straddle carrier that I am working on. This is the current status: As seen in the video, there are some rather big flaws: The wheels come out of alignment and start ripping the sides away. I do not have a good solution for this yet, so please come with your input and I will try out various solutions. Using tracks would not be realistic, but it might be the most workable solution in LEGO. I really want to find a solution that has wheels mounted as the current prototype. Other areas of improvement: - Add fittings, such as the driver's cabin. - Add drivers to make it easier to align with containers - Further improve the spreader so that it can lift containers even when fairly misaligned - Increase height so containers can be stacked to 3 in height - Get the EV3 to work and be controlled using a website Functions The spreader opens and closes the hooks when lifted, so only a single motor is required to work it. If you can't see the video, then here is a sequence showing how containers can be picked up: And another sequence more close up: The other functions are driving (the four middle wheels are powered) and steering (all 8 wheels steer using the mini turntables) So there you have it. There is still a lot of work to be done on this model. Feel free to chime in with ideas - then I can try them out.

Thanks. The tipper can be balanced by adding and removing 1x2 plates on the counterweight. I have to rebalance it in the beginning of every event that I attend. Once in balance it works really well.

The car is now complete and I have made building instructions for it. The building instructions are available for both cars: #81: https://brickhub.org/i/681 #82: https://brickhub.org/i/679 See the video in the first post for how this final version compares to the one from 2018 The biggest redesign is probably what has been done to the rear The diffuser has been rebuilt to better mirror the one they actually used at Le Mans in 2018. The rear lights are now more accurate with how the curve up in the sides, and the top "lip" on the trunk is now curving outwards like on the real car. The roof has been redesigned (again). This time with stacked panels to make the white line as thin as possible. The rear window now has both grilles and an aur scoop similarly to what you see on the real car And I settled on this style of headlights: A small detail that has changed is the use of heat-resistant material behind the exhaust: This concludes the building instructions for all 17 cars from the class of GTE PRO of Le Mans 2018. You can find all the building instructions here: https://brickhub.org/i/themes.php?theme=Miniland

I completely forgot to post the update! I updated the cars with 2018 liveries, brought them to Le Mans and even got one of them signed: Instructions for car #63: http://brickhub.org/i/224 and for car #64: http://brickhub.org/i/422

Aston Martin Vantage AMR LMGTE PRO race cars from Le Mans of 2018 Building instructions for car #95 and #97, respectively: https://brickhub.org/i/677 https://brickhub.org/i/678 The difference between the two models is down to the stickers and color of the trim. However, since the 2x2 wedge plates used in the holes of the nose are not available in green, I had to redesign that section for the #97 car. The mounts for the diffusers also differ due to the availability of 1x2 x 2x2 brackets in green. The main reason for why it has taken me over 2 years to finish this car (the first prototype was built in March of 2018) would be the front: But the many revisions of the front has also allowed me to make many iterations of the other details, such as how the rear fenders are shaped: The fanciest part of the bodywork, however, has to be the single beam rear light. I have tried to recreate it as faithfully as possible in LEGO: Here is the first nearly-done version: As you can see, most details have been reworked since March 2018 where I started building this model. Back then we only had renders of the livery and it wasn't yet revealed that headlights would change from yellow to white. The race driver is Nicki Thiim, who was recently seen greeting the car after returning from Virtual Racing: Now I just have to finish the M8 and my project of building all Le Mans GTE PRO race cars from 2018 will finally come to an end.

Hi there. It seems like the images were not included in your post.

The video for the DAF XF Super Space Cab 6 x 2 has received 1000 views, which is truly extraordinary for just two months. I promised to create building instructions if that happened, so here they are: https://brickhub.org/i/643 And here is the presentation video: I am still trying to figure out a new container lifting mechanism which is safe from dropping containers. No progress worth mentioning just yet.

It is a huge project. Getting decent performance was a huge challenge in itself, but now the UCS Millenium Falcon renders fairly quickly on even 3 year old phones. I am posting performance improvements in https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-23012.html and new features on https://brickhub.org/n/ My plan is to post the library here on Eurobricks once I have proper support for LDCad generated parts, a better step editor and buffer exchange. This is the renderer that you see on the LDraw parts tracker, LDraw OMR, Rebrickable building instructions renderer and a user has uploaded many Eurobricks instructions to Brickhub with proper credits. Unfortunately many of the Eurobricks LDraw models were lost. If @M2m gets the LDD renderer to show building instructions steps, then I believe Rebrickable will be interested.

Thanks for the writeup and insights. These have helped me confirm that I will be skipping this set. Compared to the auto transporter, I can't see how LEGO can ask so much for this. They didn't even bring in something nice, such as chrome or even "flat silver" for the exhausts, bumper, or fuel tanks, which are completely missing. There are no extensions for the chute, no bodywork above the "`V intake". It is as if all of the penny pinchers have come together and gone to works on this poor model. And to add insult to injury. @Sariel published a book in which there is a LEGO cement truck in this scale which is motorised, has a brick built barrel and all of the little pieces of flair are present... and the building instructions are free. That book is 6 years old now!

5 - 1 point 7 - 1 point 8 - 1 point

I am working on a new container lifting mechanism, similar to the one you saw in the red crane many years ago in this thread. For this I have updated the containers As can be seen above, the containers now have a floor. The floor also makes them more robust, and the cost in parts is negligible. In total each container has of 11 of the big 5x11 technic panels. The Icaras container is almost unchanged. By using jumper plates, the spacing of the lines on the sides is more realistic, and by using a row of tiles on the top and bottom, the exposed technic parts are kept at a minimum. The Lunar Industries container has had the *Industries" line removed and the letters have been updated. It is a much cleaner design now The OCP container now has the same colors on both sides and I have kept it in the dark colors There is a new container with a Weyland Yutani logo. We are building better worlds, after all Finally there are a couple without logos: As you can see, there is a common theme with fictional logos as decorations. Choosing logos is, however, not easy as the canvas is only 10 pixels tall. Do you have any good ideas for logos on the two plain containers? Once I have a functional lifting mechanism, I will see if I can make a fancy crane - this time one that does not drop containers from 1 meter of height!

That's a really good looking 2000GT - the curves of the sports car are instantly recognisable. Now I say sports car, but it is arguably more of a GT car. In any case, it laid the groundwork for Toyota sports cars and has become a very important part of the heritage of the brand. This is an extremely rare sports car. I passed a couple of them last year as they were leaving Nordschhleife for the N24. They were joined by a pair of Mk 4 and a pair of Mk 5 Supras. The collaboration with Yamaha has been a great journey. It even included acoustic tuning of the first super car by Toyota, the Lexus LFA.