Appie

Well, embedded YouTube video's on forums like this would still create a community, but on YouTube itself, it is very, very dead with no links and comments. Pretty much making YouTube a 100% video hosting provider and nothing else. Forums could thrive on this, but randoms asking questions or getting here through a link under the video will be over. Changing to a different platform might work for exposure, but it could also be that YouTube by now is simply "too big to avoid". Will have to wait and see if another platform steps up/more communities flock to than just AFOLs and becomes as mainstream as YouTube is now.

Thank you, I'm glad you liked seeing it in real life and also thanks for the chat

In today's world? Yes. The reviews that come first, get the views.

Sorry, that part of my comment was actually meant more in general to some replies in this topic, not you.

I took this fact into consideration when I made my comment, you even mention it yourself a few times after the apology I quoted from your reviews. Other reviewers that also had to deal with this fact, still had their reviews out faster. While the reviews are solid, sets with a MSRP of €450, €230 or whatever price add up for a company like Lego if the review is launched 2-8 weeks after the release of a set, it's simply part of a marketing budget. Eurobricks might not even be the only site to have lost review sets. Stuff adds up fast then. As for complaining about them maybe taking a business approach, we all know what happened when they pretty much operated as a charity in the late 90's and early 00's. Stuff like micro motors being sold in sets under the value of what it cost to make them. I don't think anybody here wants to go back to those nearly bankrupt days. Sariel and a few other reviewers don't shy away from harsh comments either. For example, I think alot of reviewers were expecting to never recieve review sets again from Lego after pretty much bashing the Porsche 42056 (and rightfully so). They still get sets to review to this day from Lego.

While Catalinanmb could have been a bit more civil, he does raise a valid point and not just for one review. I remember 1 or 2 years ago where Jim outsourced some of the sets he recieved from Lego for review to others, because he didn't have time. And while you can counter alot of the linked reviews except one from Catalinanmb, the linked reviews all show a pattern in the first sentence: Let me be clear, I really like Jim's reviews and he is very thorough with great photo's, but in my experience his reviews always came after the reviews of other people's like Sariel. And sure, Sariel's style of reviews is different, but he does all of them, does them well and does them fast at or before release. And Jim has valid reasons to need 1-2 weeks and also personal life is more important, but it could be that it is one of the reasons why Lego isn't sending sets atm. They are a business after all: if the same provided set can create more buzz at release elsewhere, they will send it elsewhere.

The advice I read from experienced supercar builders is to start at the gearbox (if you want to add that to the model anyway) and work your way from there. Meanwhile, to keep the MOC in scale (and figure out where to place the gearbox for example) use Sariel's scale tool: http://scaler.sariel.pl/ Personally I can't work outside-in (body first then internals), but working from the inside out while having a general idea where the bodywork will go is much easier for me.

Doesn't matter, they are using the Lego name to highlight their own products. That's not how copyright laws work. In order for a company to keep their copyright and trademarks, they need to maintain a zero-tolerance policy for people who wrongfully use their name. Lego doesn't need to ask first when stuff like this happens, this isn't their first time with copyright/trademark infringement and it won't be the last. Lego's legal division is doing exactly what it is obligated by law to do. And the reason why they have to use a zero-tolerance policy is also simple. Once a company stops protecting their trademarks, even on the smallest of matters, it leaves the door open for big players (Megablocks/Knex etc) on the market to use it against Lego in a lawsuit concerning Lego's trademarks. They will use it in the case to say: "but you allowed that website/shop or whatever to continue their business for weeks/years, you don't really care about your trademarks". A judge will weigh such situations very heavily and that won't help Lego.

He can decide whatever title he wants, but there's a legal term for wrongly accusing somebody or a company of something they didn't do as well: slander. And personally I expect people to do some research before accusing people or companies of something. I personally wouldn't wish to wrongfully accuse somebody of something he/she/it didn't do. Held Der Steine didn't have a leg to stand on, Lego was defending their copyright, that simple, so of course he didn't go to court, he would have surely lost the case and money.

Like I said in that same post (perhaps you missed it, since I edited 2mins before you replied) Efferman already mentioned it is related to the name and not the parts itself. And if you try to be sincere, again, the title of the topic should reflect that. You're now pointing a finger at Lego for something that at best is half true.

Doesn't matter, plenty of reports in this topic alone to change the title to something that is actually true. Or instead of jumping the gun and making a topic with a title that at best is only half true: wait and see/investigate yourself why they actually took it down.

This is all there is to this topic imo and the title of this topic should be adjusted to reflect that. Lego is not on a crusade against custom 3d printed parts, they are on a crusade to stop people from using their name to make sales, which they are obligated by copyright laws (and common sense) to do.

Thanks, I actually scaled the MOC on the front tyres, also for width edit: sorry this was wrong, I forgot what I exactly did there and just checked again. The rears are about one stud too narrow and the fronts are about 1 stud too thick. As for the 42000 tyres, I forgot about those until the car was almost finished and then I just decided to leave it as this.

Thanks all. These are from the BMW F1 car, set 8461.

Thank you all. @Jeroen Ottens Perhaps these pictures show it better, poor lighting so I cranked up the images to see the black parts well. rearhub1 by Appie NL, on Flickr rearhub2 by Appie NL, on Flickr The balljoint pin at the hub is locked into place from the bottom, since of course it has a tendancy to pop out otherwise. I used a 3L axle with stop and a bush. This creates the right height for the balljoint pin to be locked into place while still functioning for the suspension. See picture below: rearhub3 by Appie NL, on Flickr Another goal I had with this car was to make hubs as flush with the (shallow) wheels as I could. So that's also a reason why it is build like this is and also why I don't have caster at the front suspension. At the front I couldn't figure out a way to mount balljoints from the hub to the wishbones without using suspension arm parts that are longer than I want. As for the red and yellow, I haven't actually, I thought these were pretty close to the real deal, but perhaps the yellow from the 42099 would fit a little better? I don't think we get a darker red for the Technic parts I used. Could switch to a brick solution for that of course, though that would cause problems at the front where the red liftarms are part of the structural integrity.

Ah ok, thanks for the information. And wow such a camera feature would be awesome!

I do apologize if this question has been asked before, but I am currently using this app on my Galaxy S7 with an ipega controller+2 sbricks and it works perfectly so no problems there. Thanks for the awesome app, love the customazation options. I don't have much experience with bluetooth, but I think my issues is more with bluetooth in general, but I can't seem to find a fix online. What I wish to do is, have the brickcontroller app running on my phone and use a different app (like the camera) at the same time. It seems to turn off the brickcontroller app at that time and break the connection. If I reboot the app it works again perfectly, so it's probably some setting I might be able to change on my phone, but I don't have a clue where to look. Or is it simply not possible to have my example of the brickcontroller app and camera running at the same time? If that the case, I can stop looking. Another wish I have is to keep my phone locked with the app running, but that seems downright impossible from googling.

Thanks guys :) As for the halo,I agree, they look like flip-flops, but I did consider it in the build to make it easy-ish to remove if I chose to go for the classic look later.

So here's the latest project I have been working on. I am actually waiting for 5 parts to arrive (4 tiles on the "boomerang" at the bargeboards and the exhaust in flat silver instead of LBG), but otherwise it is finished. I tried to recreate a F1 car with 2019 specfications with "typical" Red Bull stuff in mind (rake and pullrod in the rear for example). I took some liberty here and there. All the freaking winglets on these cars in real life+Technic=meh. So I went for a pretty basic flow of panels and wings. Another reason I also took some liberty was because trying to find blueprints or other good images for size reference of the 2019 or even 2018 cars were hard to come by for any of the teams. Or I just suck at searching, but I'd find it understandable if it is actually hard to find, since teams wouldn't want that stuff public. 20190921_135837 by Appie NL, on Flickr Functions are: - 8 speed gearbox (used didumos' and JB70's revised Chiron gearbox again, that I made 3 studs shorter again) with V6. - HOG steering through the T-cam and working steering wheel - Pushrod suspension front, pullrod in the rear - Had to sacrifice the driver's seat for a very basic gear selector mechanism due to lack of space elsewhere. 20190921_135940 by Appie NL, on Flickr 20190921_140038 by Appie NL, on Flickr The point at which the nose goes from angled to flat is too far towards the front of the car compared to real life, as the curving point tends to be right above the axle of the wheels. I am aware of this, due to the suspension setup in that section this was the best I could do. 20190921_140228 by Appie NL, on Flickr The diffuser isn't looking too good from this angle, the only good angle is looking right into the rear of the car. Couldn't figure out a better one with the limited mounting options in that section and the diff+suspension. 20190921_140301 by Appie NL, on Flickr 20190921_140342 by Appie NL, on Flickr In case you were now going: This belly shot sucks! Got you covered! (pun intended :D) 20190921_140422 by Appie NL, on Flickr I wanted to make a similar floor at first for my Rolls too, but dropped it because I am not going to be flipping that model very often to show the belly. And having to uncover it too after flipping, would be troublesome on that model. 20190921_140610 by Appie NL, on Flickr Close-up of the pullrod suspension in the rear and my crappy DRS system. Due to lack of space to route some controls for DRS to the cockpit with a diff, suspension, V6 and gearbox blocking alot of the way, I opted for this instead. 20190921_140645 by Appie NL, on Flickr Should have angled this pic more on the cockpit, but oh well. T-cam for HOG, yellow knob gear in the headrest is to flip the gears. 20190921_140956 by Appie NL, on Flickr Since Red Bull is known for the rake they have on their cars I had to mimic that too. It's a small angle, but it's there and pretty close to real life I think. In case you wonder, the car weighs about 1.7kg.

Indeed gray gear, currently building a F1 car in this scale as well. I pretty much avoided that part and this one in the suspension setup since they can break easily.

@pleegwatThe 3L pin is probably chosen for ease at disassembly of the set. As for why Lego placed the 20T clutch gear there in the first place hasn't been answered afaik, besides the "excuse to get another one of these new parts in the set" anyway.

Stunning work and at this scale

@Attika Ah ok, now it makes sense to me. I just now noticed you mentioned the new hubs earlier (last week), I missed that sorry. I suppose that's the "recommendation" you meant. Yeah, no desire to mount those

Thanks! Could you explain to me why a geared down and well braced gearbox (not trying to be arrogant, but it isn't my design, so I can say that ) would have trouble moving a 10kg car? It's a manual driven model, so the only issue would come from what it is given from the wheels. I can understand if the car would be bending or RC driven that it would strain the drivetrain, but that isn't the case and I think I also mentioned I pushed it around the living room to see the gearshifts work. So I am not sure where your initial doubt comes from, but perhaps you simply missed those messages or there's something else I am not thinking of?

@Attika and @Gray Gear and anybody else who wanted to know. I actually put the car on the scale and first of all my apologies, I seem to have completely misjudged the weight of this car . It isn't even close to 10kg, it's about 4.8kg Quite a big difference from my estimate, I used to be good at guessing weight, not anymore I guess.