Jump to content

W3ird_N3rd

Eurobricks Vassals
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    42

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by W3ird_N3rd

  1. W3ird_N3rd
    "Deadline date is November 30th, 2014. Contest will be closed on Monday the 1st, so you will have the entire Sunday to build." Can be done at any time before the contest ends. Some prefer to wait for the very end so nobody can get inspiration from their builds, but it's up to you.
  2. W3ird_N3rd
    Yes you can! However, you'll need to own the Tractor with Log Loader (http://brickset.com/sets/8049-1) to do it. http://brickset.com/sets/9641-1 is an educational set and probably not allowed, every single other pneumatic set is either older than 2005 or has more than 600 parts. If you use the tractor, the only set you could possibly use as a second set (if desired) would be http://brickset.com/sets/8418-1. If you want to "cheat" (it's allowed), and this goes for anyone, you could simply use pneumatics + any other part that can also be found in 8049(+8418). You don't have to own the actual set(s), although it's much easier if you do. Same way one could use PF, as long as you only use parts that are only found in the hauler (8264-1). No need to actually own the hauler.
  3. W3ird_N3rd
    For me, it's just a really odd hobby. Should indeed be getting to building though!
  4. W3ird_N3rd
    Very nice! If you could figure out a way to allow for manual steering (on a friction pin), that would be amazing - but possibly a stretch given the number of parts.
  5. W3ird_N3rd
    Interesting.. So 9686 and 9628, despite their contents, count as "Education" sets and not as Technic sets, did not know that! In that case it looks like the only way to use PF will be the 8264. There simply doesn't seem to be any other set that would qualify. http://www.bricklink...em.asp?S=4895-1 is just 11 parts over the limit (and not Technic), http://www.bricklink...em.asp?S=8052-1 is 86 parts over the limit. http://www.bricklink...em.asp?S=9665-1 and http://www.bricklink...em.asp?S=4094-1 are from 2003 and probably don't qualify as Technic sets either. Here's an amazing video for C-models with the 4094 though, I have to share it, may provide some inspiration seeing 25 different things that can be done with a mere 254 parts: .Thanks for clearing it up! Again, great contest!
  6. W3ird_N3rd
    I'm slightly confused. There is a rule that says "you can't use that motor set". And another rule that says "you can't use that other motor set either". But I see no rule that says "can't use PF dude!". So these sets would still be allowed? http://brickset.com/sets/9686-1 http://brickset.com/sets/9628-1 http://brickset.com/sets/8264-1 All have PF, after 2005 and <600 parts! I suspect it's a loophole.
  7. W3ird_N3rd
    9V lithium batteries do exist, but they are not rechargeable. Also, they are expensive (at least €6 and usually more). 2x14500 Li-ion would be only slightly larger and probably more sensible if you want more power. That's just what it says on the tin. Did you actually test if it delivers this amount? Many manufacturers (unknown ones even more so) wildly exaggerate this spec. While interesting, it doesn't really quantify much because we don't know how you play with your models. Some good numbers that can be tested would be better. Charging time, runtime for various motors/lights. Also runtime when the battery has been stored away for a month. That's a difference between theory and practice. In theory, if your 9V block holds 280mAh it would offer roughly 9*280=2,52Wh, let's just say 2.5. Now in theory, if your microwave oven requires 2000 watts to run, you could run your microwave oven from the 9V battery for about.. 2000/2.5=800 and 3600/800= four and a half seconds. (for the sake of argument assume we have a 100% efficient DC-AC converter) In practice, I foresee a talking microwave that asks a 9V battery: "Do you feel lucky, punk?". Available maximum current depends on both battery cell size and chemistry. Lithium-ion and NiMH Low-Self-Discharge provide a fairly high current down to when the battery is near-empty, NiMH provides less current, alkaline provides decent current but declines more quickly. Especially alkaline may be useless with a Lego motor far before it's actually empty. (a clock or remote control may still be able to operate for years when the block can no longer power a motor) A 9V block usually contains 6-7 very tiny cells, so the current is quite limited as it depends on cell size, not battery size. (actually that's putting it a bit simply, but it goes too far to explain everything here) So EBL? From the top of my head, that's a Chinese brand. (correct me if I'm wrong) If you are importing this from China, there's a very real risk it's not even actually EBL. Yes, they even knock off their own brands. For the batteries it's mostly a matter of quality, but if a dodgy charger goes haywire the consequences could be far more serious. Yeah, USPS is pretty expensive. Given the small numbers I can't really think of a much cheaper option for this particular case. Just want to say I appreciate you doing this, just be careful. No, it really won't. Actually tested on Mythbusters, they dunked a whole car door plus car battery underwater. Half an hour later they could still roll down the windows. Fact is the voltage is simply too low to create a short circuit underwater. (various other problems would still occur in the long term though, so don't start driving your car underwater now)
  8. W3ird_N3rd
    Great idea, but I see some problems.. 1. A 9V battery will give you roughly 200mAh. If you connect a motor to it, I predict it won't last that long. Also, it's current is limited, so the motor might run slower (especially when the battery gets near-empty). 2. Alkaline 9V (when compared to alkaline AA) has a far worse money-to-power ratio. You just get less power for your hard earned cash. Same for NiMH. But granted, it's more compact. 3. (this really bugs me) 9V is a b* to plug in and unplug. And considering the limited capacity, you'll have to unplug it.. a lot. 4. I don't know where you'll source your 9V chargers and batteries, but be very, VERY wary if they come directly from China. In China there are many manufacturers of both fake brand (some very poor quality battery with a GP logo on it) and ludicrously-bad brands that will happily sell you a 30mAh 9V NiMH battery or something.. But it'll be marked as a 500mAh battery of course. 5. Same for the chargers. These can often carry fake safety-approval test marks. They have probably never been tested and if somebody's house burns down.. Well I wouldn't be able to sleep if I sold those. Again I don't know where you buy these, I'm giving you the warning just in case. Personally, I think it would be more interesting to have a cable that converts PF to 5.5x2.1mm female power jack. And also make some 5.5x2.1mm power jack 9V sources, like indeed a 9V battery, but maybe also a 3xCR2032 holder (very little power, but very small), 6xAAA, 6xC or 6xD (for all your heavy duty machinery) and 2x14500 (requires a special charger, but might actually be an interesting fairly compact option). Maybe 2x18650. Or even a 9V solar panel, why not! And obviously, it could be connected to a simple 9V adapter, powering it directly from the grid. With 5.5x2.1mm power jack, you could hook your creation up to anything! And while I'm at it, since we're on Eurobricks here, it kinda bothers me kickstarter projects always charge quite a bit extra for shipping to Europe. For last words, if I sound negative, I do get why you're making a 9V block PF adapter, but at least personally I'd rather have a more universal solution. Chances are I'm not your target audience, I would probably make my own cable when I decided I need something like that.
  9. W3ird_N3rd
    Something similar I just thought of: what about things like rear-view mirrors? Or extras, like the shovel on the 5510? Simply put, is the 15-studs rule just for the main chassis? [edit]Milan, I overlooked that, thx![/edit] I think an acceptable translation would be "truth be told". And I agree!
  10. W3ird_N3rd
    Sure: http://www.eurobrick...50#entry1965060 Thanks.
  11. W3ird_N3rd
    Sorry for the kick. Following data is the number of points divided by number of voters, as requested by Doc_Brown (http://www.eurobrick...25#entry1964247): 1 2.8513513514 2 2.6029411765 3 2.5692307692 4 2.4444444444 5 2.2564102564 6 2.0882352941 7 2.1 8 2.3333333333 9 2.0476190476 10 1.5555555556 11 1.85 12 1.85 13 1.7058823529 14 1.9333333333 15 1.8666666667 16 1.6666666667 17 1.5384615385 18 2 19 1.5714285714 20 1.4285714286 21 3 22 2.3333333333 23 2 24 3 25 1.25 26 1.3333333333 27 1 28 1 29 1 30 1
  12. W3ird_N3rd
    Someone who has a lot of money also has unlimited parts available, so personally I wouldn't disqualify on that basis. I think a digital build already carries a disadvantage because it doesn't look as good as a well-photographed real model can look. I don't know how strong the ties between this forum and TLG are, but would it be possible for TLG to offer some set at a slightly discounted price to contestents for a C-model, on the condition that they must enter the contest if they use the discount? I'm asking because I've seen something like that before, where a manufacturer offered a product with a discount if people joined a contest with it. It's just a form of advertising.
  13. W3ird_N3rd
    I agree with polo-freak and Milan, it's akward to be building with an uneven number. Also, do wheels count in this? If one were to make a model with a chassis that's 16 studs wide, but the wheels/threads stick out a bit, will it be disqualified?
  14. W3ird_N3rd
    What if by freak chance the runner up doesn't want the 5580? (I'd love it but I'll never even make the top 10 ) Also, there's no height limit? Somebody puts a skyscraper on wheels it'll be okay?
  15. W3ird_N3rd
    I understand that. At some point in the late nineties, shortly before I grew up and had a long break from Lego, I got that green barcode truck. 8479 code pilot thing. I'm sure I've used the parts, but I never really liked the code pilot thing that much. I don't think it was programmable with functions other than the barcodes that were printed, making it next to impossible to incorporate it into a MOC. This Edision-thing looks pretty cool though. I won't buy it however. I would have to pay €20 tax to customs for importing this into my country.
  16. W3ird_N3rd
    The only rule is that the total must be 20. Could I have given one entry negative 2 points and distribute 22 points across the other entries? Total would still be 20! There's no rule that says points have to be positive! Any vote containing a dot would be rendered invalid for exceeding 20 points.
  17. W3ird_N3rd
    Congratulations to the winners, well deserved. And thanks to Jim, it was nice to see all the detailed results! Not that I expect anyone to care, but I wondered to what degree any of the entries had a smaller number of strong feeling fans or a wider less extreme audience, I wanted to divide points by number of voters: 1 4.1125 2 3.6470588235 3 3 4 3.2962962963 5 3.1860465116 6 3.1136363636 7 3 8 3.4324324324 9 3.5151515152 10 2.5 11 3.48 12 2.5 13 2.5 14 3.55 15 2.7083333333 16 2.48 17 2.24 18 2.5789473684 19 2.7647058824 20 1.7391304348 21 3 22 2.6428571429 23 2.4666666667 24 2.7692307692 25 2.3333333333 26 1.9444444444 27 2.4285714286 28 2.4615384615 29 2.5 30 1.9230769231 31 2.0909090909 32 2.5 33 2.8571428571 34 10 35 3.8 36 2.5714285714 37 2 38 3 39 2 40 1.625 41 3 42 2.2 43 1.8 44 2 45 2 46 1.4 47 1.1666666667 48 1.4 49 3 50 1.3333333333 51 1 52 2 53 1 54 1 55 1 56 #DIV/0! 57 #DIV/0! The only ones that stand out are 34 (hotrod), 35 (Muscle Car) and 49 (Port Crane). Muscle Car and Port Crane don't stand out that much and are probably flukes, Hotrod is either a fluke or a couple of friends voting. Other than that the number of points-per-voter goes down very gradually from top to bottom. Here is some scatter: Showing mostly that there's nothing fishy going on.
  18. W3ird_N3rd
    [edit] This post could have been considered offensive. [/edit]
  19. W3ird_N3rd
    [edit] This post could be misinterpreted by some. I didn't mean anything negative by it. I'm sorry to anyone who feels it was offensive. It's gone now. [/edit]
  20. W3ird_N3rd
    Would be an excellent excuse for me to buy the 42022 Hot Rod. For a very low-budget C-model competition I think 42020 Twin-Rotor Helicopter would be the best set. It has four wheels, rotors and a few gears. And enough axles/pins/liftbeams to be able to make other things. And it's pretty cheap. On a higher budget than Hot Rod I'm guessing 42023 Construction Crew would give quite some possibilities. Obviously any set would work, but in my view these would be very versatile. What would also be fun is that anyone (who has the set) can build the creation of someone else. In the last MINI contest, that often wasn't really an option as you would almost always be missing some parts. Simply a set of common parts also sounds great.
  21. W3ird_N3rd
    I don't know if it has been suggested yet, but I think it might be interesting to have a C-model contest, possibly restricted in size (small, medium and large?). It's exactly what you think it is: you can only use the parts from an existing model to create something else. As for the voting discussion, I like having 20 points as I can better distribute them this way. I think it would be fair to limit the maximum number of points per entry to 3-4 instead of 10 because a few people giving out 10 points now indeed pushes a model far ahead.
  22. W3ird_N3rd
    1:3 8:1 19:1 21:4 31:2 40:1 41:1 42:3 53:2 55:2 So many to pick from! Some short comments: 1. Truck with Trailer and Wheel Loader: three models all with functions in 200 parts, and looks like it has great playability. 8. Service Truck: Got a soft spot for studded technic, looks like a fun build. 19. Tumbler: I'm not really a Batman-fan (batfan?), but I gotta give you a point for making a tumbler with more functions than the official one. And it looks good too! 21. Ladybird: beautiful, original, clever and elegant. 31. Menck Cable Bucket Excavator: Nice technical build, looks like it has good playability. 40. Submarine: Love the "programmed" pneumatic functions. 41. Mini Robot (8852): Nice redux of a classic. 42. Silly Fat Penguin: CUTE!! 53. Mobile Crane: This is the kind of thing I would have wanted to make, but I couldn't have done it so well. 55. 5200X - Robot Arm: with PF I would have given 4 points, but for the contest I have to judge it without PF and I feel that hurts playability, so just 2. Still an amazing piece of work. I'm a new member so Jim should decide if my vote counts.
  23. W3ird_N3rd
    Yeah, I understand that. I'll just cast my vote and see if it'll count or not. Alternatively it might be an option to have a rule where new members could cast a maximum of 2-4 points per entry (so they would be forced to give their points to many entries). That way it would be nearly useless to vote for yourself this way as you also have to give lots of points to other entries.
  24. W3ird_N3rd
    Same question here. I'm not a contestant myself, I considered it but the quality of my models just wasn't up to par. Some of the entries are superb though and I'd like to show my appreciation.
  25. W3ird_N3rd
    This is a great entry, I'm amazed you could squeeze this in 200 parts! Just one but.. I suspect the playability without PF isn't all that great. (there's no video that clearly depicts playability without PF, is there?) With PF it looks awesome, but for the contest only the model without PF should be judged so that quite hurts it. Having said that.. I would give you some points if I were allowed to vote.
×
×
  • Create New...