nerdsforprez

With the downfall of mocpages all (with the exception of one) of my pics in my signature block were erased because of broken links. Now I would like to reassign pics to my sig. block, but when I do so it seems they are always added vertically, not horizontally, which is just to obstreperous. I see many horizontal pics in signature blocks, and I used to have many. How do I fix this? It seems like ever since the move to the new server, and the loss of MOCpages... I can't do this without everything being shifted downwards.

Just found this thread. Nice to know I am not alone. For me it is not the bots, but rather a certain banned user that will not be named....

The screaming buggy motors sound like thousands of screaming, applauding, women as it drives by. At least that is what my immature mind heard. Great build. Thanks for sharing...

Yea... tried that. I don't think it looks good at all. I know it is a common technique used by many to simply place a wedge belt pulley on the outside of a 49.5 rim... but I have never been a fan. At least in my opinion, this was the best solution for the look I was going for....

Thanks! My bad.... I thought I had shared this. I think I did in some other thread.... but not here. In looking to see if a crane at this scale was possible, in keeping the larger boom to scale, I found indeed it was, with the 49.5 mm tire. However, although the tires are to scale (more or less) they do appear small. I believe this is because the side wall seems too thin. On the real crane the hub is relatively small compared to the side wall. So, with this rendition of the same tire (because of scale, but using a different rim, it gives the appearance of a bigger sidewall while maintaining the overall diameter of the tire. Created using Lego parts (4) Technic Wedge Belt Pulley, (2) "....." rubber belt, six gray 2L pins (without friction ridges). Kinda part heavy for one rim but they work well and solidly hold the tire in place. Before and after pics below. Here are actual pics with the standard 49.5 rim. I don't like it as much for the specified reasons..... but nice to compare.

Agreed. The question is asked as if a "technic only" restriction is something desirable. I am not sure it is.....

Agreed. Perhaps I should have been more specific. My take is that it gets appreciated in terms of all the "OOOoooos" and "Ahhhhhs" but dismissed as "aesthetic" and not-Technic. My recent epiphany indicates, at least to me, that bodywork can be mathematical and technical, as well as aesthetic, all at the same time....

Yea... its going to be a no from me. Couple of reasons: 1- the rest of the body work has the typical Lego look and feel with some gaps and subtle oddities that one would expect from bricks.... and then BAM! model-like quality. Just does not fit. Something looks amiss. 2 - I have come to realize that Technic body-work is under-valued and under-appreciated. Listened to a lot of the feedback by the community and I see that there is praise for the internals, the gears, the mechanisms, etc. and a complete dismissal of the bodywork. But here is a recent experience of mine. Right now I am finishing up the Centenario (@T Lego's version) and I must say, building the bodywork was not tedious at all. The angles, the geometry, the techniques used to get there were just phenomenal. Wonderful building experience. Actually led me back to my model of the McLaren P1 (Bruno Jenson's creation) and I realize the same. Looking over @Didumos69's hammerhead supercar (which is in my Lego room another model I have built) and there aren't even any panels, it is all liftarm geometry and angles) and again I am struck by how proper bodywork is not only amazing, but it very much is STEM-related. Angles, geometry, etc. I think we get the notion that mechanics, gears, functions, etc. are all "Technic" whereas the bodywork is not. I am no pro here, don't even work in the STEM field, but I have a different notion. Bodywork, when done right, is all about angles, geometry, etc. which certainly falls in the STEM arena IMO. COming up with a single part that may aesthetically look better but takes away from what I just wrote about.... well, not for that at all... Thumbs down for me...

Overall a great build. As with others, nice to see the new elements functioning well. Thxs for sharing.... But I really like the above comment. A while back we had a thread that asked something along the lines "when do you know a MOC or build is completed?" I like this approach to building. Since there is an infinite amount of tinkering that can be done, perhaps it best to begin with a few goals in mind, and when those goals are achieved .... move on. If the goals are super-duper lofty, then perhaps endless tinkering is needed since it is required in the goals. But if the goals are finite, succinct, and well-defined once those are achieved and don't know why one would not move on.

No.... I meant this picture. It seems to me that the second from the left (the problematic gear you identified) the four inside corners are much more worn and atrophied compared to the other gears. If you put an axle through this gear I am wondering if we will see any daylight on the other side. If you take it with this red background that should make it easy. If you really want to be high speed, take a pic with the second to the let gear with an axle through it, then one of the other ones, and we can see the differences.....

Take a pic with the axle through it. Wondering if there would be gap seen (red background through hole with an axle through it....

Agreed. And....I'm not going to take the time to find it, but I know this has shown up here before. Such a tired debate...lego can fly...and I can build like @Sariel

Lol.... when I worked in academia I actually had this in my email signature block. The dean of the college did not like it too much....

No question it will be fully supported by the community in no time. As it well should be. Great model with true potential for Lego Ideas. Question is on TLG's end.....will THEY support it... Great job, thxs for sharing..

This is a good point. This is the other side of the coin that is important to consider. One man's "constraints" may be another man's liberations....

Yea... I am probably the unpopular opinion here. Even if I was talented enough to be chosen (which I am not) I think it would be a horrible fit for me. I have been pretty vocal about all the impositions placed on official Lego builders. While I don't have any in-depth or front-line knowledge on the issue, we all know there are all types of impositions. Deadlines, limitations on part and building techniques, things one can build, etc. I actually think it would be horrible..... Anyone who thinks building for a multi-million (billion??) dollar company is like happily building in their own home with cozy socks and beer needs some serious rethinking the position...

+1 Mi likey this comment....

20 out of 5 will complain about the price....

ohhh.... I dunno. Tires look too small with the longer wheelbase.

I can't imaging TLG hard-coupling its motors (its modern, more powerful ones, not the old weak ones). If history says anything about them, they are intensely worried about legal actions/possibilities of hurt kids/adults, or damage to their elements. Just look at all the recent cranes. 42009, 42083, and many many other were all limited in lifting power b/c of clutch gears. Not to mention countless other models. TLG is intensely worried about folks misusing motors, burning them out, then calling and complaining for new ones. And don't kid yourselves... although their customer service is great and typically they don't question complaints about damaged parts, etc... we ALL pay a premium for that. One of the outstanding complaints about Lego is its high price.... well their abilities/willingness to ship out new parts without the slightest hint of questioning the integrity of their customers at least somewhat reflective of that price....

I think tractor tires are much better. These are grippy... but as I understand it tractor tires, with their linear walled treads push mud away from the tire. Almost like paddles. The tires from 42124 would not do that...

"hopefully" ?? - So there is questions about the validity of this video? Not even 3,000 views in nearly two weeks? This isn't really groundbreaking news..... I would have thought this would be bigger news than what the video shows. Does anyone else other than me have questions about how valid this video is?

Obviously I tried this. However, this is not precise enough for me. As a practicing clinical neuropsychologist, I am more than aware of the evaluative inconsistencies that can accompany sensory perception. It is anything but a straightforward process. But, as laid out by others, I think the question has been satisfactorily answered by others.....

oh wow.... very useful information everyone... Especially the link to the study that was done @Milan. I thought that horizontal orientation would be the strongest...

Hmm..... I would have thought just the opposite. My rational? The arch is one of the strongest shape configurations out there. If holes are oriented so you can see them from top and bottom you don't use the arch. At least from a vertical plane which for most MOCs that is what you are concerned about (not bending the chassis up and down, no one really cares about side to side).