nerdsforprez

Yes... TY again Jim and others. I am excited to see all entries, but there are several I already know I will have to judge with a fine tooth comb. Lots of good-looking, and very functional entries out there....

Interesting. Well, that is actually very cool. I have not yet seen that...... I will have to keep my eyes peeled.

Both great comments and I think really summarize things well. I feel I am partly to blame for this thread because of the comments I made on the CAT D11 thread. I won't bore folks with the details, but in summary as specified there... I never meant the reasons specified by @allanp (age and versatility of Lego) as justifications to muzzle anyone regarding the direction Lego decides to go in. Rather, feel free to comment/complain all you want, but I do see a value in differentiating between preferences as opposed to true faults in design in a set as specified there. The topic of specific debate in that thread was having each function motorized versus having gearbox which is not a fault of a set. That is simply a difference of opinion. Folks complaint about colors of a set, which functions they like, on and on. One cannot litigate preferences but they debate preferences like their choices should drive TLG decisions. Which is silly IMO. I can't think of many examples that portray one's self-centeredness more. This is different from voicing concerns about a set in which has a more objective fault. And before folk's point out the fact one cannot always tell the difference, while true, I think we have enough examples (faulty gearboxes, poorly attached doors, color variation in parts, etc.) that the point is simultaneously accurate AND irrelevant. This is a rather liberal interpretation wouldn't you say? I have lived in the US for nearly my entire life and been to dozens of Target stores. Adult sets are grouped together, on a different part of an isle from other Lego sets, but still on the same isle. I certainly would not say this constitutes a different "section" of the store no more than I would when I separate my dark socks from my light socks in my sock drawer. Not to mention virtually every store in the US does somewhat the same thing which I image is similar elsewhere (just wanted to clarify because there are many members not in the US on this site).

Or clanking around in the dryer ..... Literally, up early getting ready for work, getting out laundry and there they are.....

What stuff do you use in/for MOC-ing besides Lego? I actually started a thread years ago for instruments or tools I use as I build. I find they are very useful. @shadow_elenter also created one. I also created a video years ago about using a spark gauge feeler. I find it another of my favorite tools for building. Search "tools" in the searchbox (titles only) and there are at least one or two more threads regarding tools. Environmentally - what helps you MOC? Separate desk? Wall of organizers? Any kind of music that helps you work better? Or podcasts? I have actually thought of this quite a bit. I used to always have something in the background. Music, a show, podcast...etc. But now, I find I just enjoy the peace and quiet. Especially if I am involved in something that is really complex and needs all my brain power. But for organizing or simply building someone elses MOC or an official set I always have on a show, documentary or talk. For organizing there is also alcohol. I detest organizing... and need as much music and etoh as possible to get me through it What software do you use? For digital building PDF editting Image editting Video editting Probably not worth much of a response from me here. I work at a computer nearly all day with limited contact with others or the outside so I try to limit time on software to help with my building as much as possible. I understand this slows the process for me (haven't even produced anything for several years... mostly due to other factors but still) but I enjoy working with actual bricks so much more. Still, if I can't wrap my head around something without a digital image, or don't have the visual memory to remember everything as I tear something down to rebuild better, then I just use our simple LDD. Image editing I use GIMP. Nothing much for video editing ....

You bet. And my apologies if my comments offended anyone. That is never my intention. I will PM @allanp when I have a moment to clear the air. He seemed to take my comments personal. @Bartybumand I may disagree, but I did not sense he took personal issue with them. I certainly hope not. I will say this though.. my comments hinged on @AVCampos's comment regarding the gearbox vs. every function motorized debate. And I stand by my support for his comment. When considering AFOLs complaints on a set I do think it worthwhile to distinguish between objective criticism on a set (like failed gearboxes in UCS supercars, color variation, poorly attached doors, etc.) where there are obvious failings versus simply stating one's preference. This color or that, the gearbox vs. every function motorized debate, etc. Please recognize there is no right or wrong answer to these issues, you are simply stating a preference and there are no ends to those. No one person's preference trumps another's nor does it provide evidence that TLG should go in your direction versus going with another's preference. To keep things pertinent to this thread, like Milan says, one should consider this to keep the utility of the thread. If not, we simply get a thread regarding a flagship model that is over 100 pages long with 80% of folks simply stating a preference for something and only 20% really dedicated to the objective aspects, good or bad, of a model. Of a member of EB for 7 or 8 years now, I literally have seen dozens of threads going this direction, and it simply decreases the utility of it. No one has time to sift through 100 pages of preference-stating to get to the meat-and potatoes of a model. That's all I meant. You are right they exist, but with time you will realize TLG really tries to keep things secret until an official reveal. This has a purpose. It creates hype but also stalls, for a moment, copy-cat companies from stealing the design of a set and reproducing it cheaper. In the last few years TLG has really been up-ing their game and keeping things secret. I am sure we will not see them for quite some time.....

Quite common in copy-cat versions of 42056. If I remember correctly, the Lep*% version of 42056 had rims in this color. Oopps.. I noticed this had been answered already....

i really enjoy your upgrades. i did not know 1.9 tires fit on the LR. I will have to try mine as i have several versions.

Admittedly, complaining/discussing is the operative phrase here... but read your statement again. I don't want to sound snarky. I really don't. But when you read your statement I don't think it is much of a defense to your position. I won't say it, but it does not appear it reflects the type of age demographic EB is supposed to have as its members. Or..... they do what I mentioned. They understand that Lego is a kid's toy, or at least a toy for worldwide consumption, and that there is no way possible to appease everyone, so if there are aspects or elements that don't fit their needs they recognize ITS LEGO and they can modify or change anything they want to. Peace of mind settles in, and they sleep well at night. Its okay... not worth getting angry or anything over. I'm not. I admit it can be amusing though. But I am also of the opinion that "reviewing" Technic sets that are about 10 bucks (USD) and less than 200 pieces (even more clearly meant for children) is even more amusing. Why an adult would ever do this truly baffles me (unless it is just for YT views). Which clearly makes me the anomaly here because we are seeing an increasing number of folks doing it. But I recognize I am the minority here. I would never, ever get on one of the threads reviewing these sets and voice my thoughts even though I could simply package it as an "alternative voice." You see, it is quite possible to have a different opinion or interest in something, yet not feel the need to express it. Having a different interest or thought means you have to voice it on every single occasion it does not.

Not me. I love the comment. Packaging complaints as "interests" is sneaky, though I don't think that many will fall for it. There are many who read of an official Lego model, think, "well, this is not for me, I am not in their target group" and don't complain about it although they fully recognize it does not meet their interests. I share the poster's sentiments; the amount of complaining regarding what a set does and does not offer is rather amusing. Especially given that many on this forum hold advanced engineering or other STEM-related training. Especially for a forum audience who self-proclaims themselves to be "builders". The whole idea of deconstructing and rebuilding to one's specific please seems like a far-fetched idea to many.....

Oh this is beautiful. Great job. I also see you made quite a few changes to the bodywork. Wonderful job....

Love all the digital renders and images..... and looks are promising. I would love to see this suspension in a Lego UCS someday... but that will likely never happen. I will follow this closely as well...

Gives color vomit a whole new meaning.......

Or 42113. I am sure that is still a bad taste in their mouth given it was so recent. I agree, no way they include it...

Wonderful job... as others have said and great functional fluency. I also really enjoyed the video and the shoveling bricks into the dumper from multiple angles. Lots of hard work. Thanks for sharing!

Oh man I see the front differently. I think you hit it right on. Looks great!

Yes, this is more or less the same calculations I came up with. In fact, if we use your image, then the ratio of cab to boom would be 11/8 (cab is 10.9). That means the boom is nearly 75% of the cab height. However, as can be seen here in @Blakbird's own render, I don't even need to see the instructions to see that the cab in the Lego version is much taller than 10 studs. Easily 12-13. I count 13. If that is the case then as I said previously our current version is off by quite a bit. 6 studs high whereas the cab is 13. So not even 50% as high. 75% versus less than 50% so indeed there is room for a much taller boom. If increased to 8 studs high...then a four stage boom is possible. Wondering if there are any takers tot try it out. I am in the middle of a different project but if I get some time perhaps I will. But would have to figure out the string issue first.....

I did more research and it looks like I am not the only one with questions on how to route the string. This diagram helps. If I understand this correctly, the attachment points for the last stage are both at the back? (the skinniest part) Where they connect with the first stage, the thickest part, is easy enough to determine

Also..... I am looking at the instructions for the superstructure and boom but I don't see where it shows how to set/manipulate the string. I understand the principle on how it works, but there needs to be an outlet from where it connects with the last stage to the first stage. Any help?

I have enjoyed watching folks’ builds of this crane. Probably the most extensive and collaborative project we have here in this forum. There appears to be several different renditions. Carrier with and w/o suspension, booms with or w/o Y guy arraignment, different superstructures, etc. One thing that is common though is the boom. Seems everyone more or less builds the same one. Six studs high and three stages. Seems to me, by looking at blueprints of the real thing, that the boom is too small; at least if we use the carrier height as a reference. And not by a bit. Looking online (not the actual instructions) looks to me that the cab is 13 studs high. Give or take a few. If the boom is only six studs, then boom is not even half as high as the cab. I pulled the actual plans for the crane and by my calculations, in centimeters, the boom should more like around nearly 75% the high of the cab. Seems to me that it easily could be increased in height to eight studs. If this is the case, I think also it could be built with four stages, not three. Anyone else see the same?

Not sure I would agree with that. I like the distinctive look of the three macaroni elbow pieces. It gives a lined appearance that is unique. Also, the edge is rounded. With the edge panel you would have a sharp edge and the gap would not be as flush. Also no distinctive lines created by the current solution.

Another theory is the amount of stress that might be on parts. Admittedly, many of the sets I have taken apart are very large Technic sets that weight quite a bit. My last dismantling was of a 7 axle, 5,000-ish piece size (same scale as our beloved Grove 6400 crane) set. Many broken parts from that set which as mentioned, admittedly might be because of the stress on the parts.

+1 ............times a thousand times. I was going to make a post about this very issue but didn't because I know we have discussed this before. Time and time again. But now I think the floor is open for a little venting and story. And this is coming from someone who usually is a Lego apologist. So maybe it carries more weight. Or perhaps not. Perhaps I need to create a whole new thread for this. Perhaps not. Either way, here it goes. I also care less about color variations. 'nuff said. But as to the quality of parts..... I have readily made public than in the last year I have moved. New home, had to move collection, etc. As I am working on my Lego room and unpacking old sets, I am noticing the same as @Collibosher . Many of my sets I an dismantling b/c I don't care to display any more and I can really examine each piece. I would easily say that 25-50% of my pins have lost some of their stick. Many barely stay in pinholes. 70-90% of the my connectors (like that shown by @Collibosher are cracked. Thin lift arms? Yup, probably 50-70% are cracked. To just name a few. There are certainly other culprits. All sets are in the 2010-present time frame with the majority just after 2015. On average I would say 5-6 years old. That is NOT a long period of time for sets that often I paid in excess of 200 USD for. If the vision and philosophy of Lego is to build and rebuild, create rather than assemble then this is a gigantic problem. If the vision and philo. is to assemble and leave on shelf then it is not as big of deal. But we all know what Lego is SUPPOSED to stand for. Former rather than the latter. THerefore IMO the lack of quality, or simply the decrease in ABS because of changes to element molds is a huge problem. Tie this with very high prices and you have a concerned customer. Again, this is all coming from someone who has served as a Lego apologist for years. My enthusiasm for the product is waning. This is especially concerning to me because my enthusiasm for the concept, interlocking blocks, is increasing. I have more time to hobby and build than ever before, and I am loving it. I do not want to derail the topic - but that being said, the decrease in quality in tandem with the outrageous prices for Lego leaves customers wanting. And with Lego copy-cats on the rise and flourishing, this seems to me all the more concerning. Just saying.....

With that much juice going into the yellow axle you might also want to use two wedge pulleys instead of one.....Looks like it should be possible. Things might pop loose with just one..

I also love this. I liked the juxtaposition of "christmas tree of doom" against the woman at the beginning saying something like "its kinda cute" - the three levels of "spin" are brilliant. The pic at the beginning of the post certainly makes the build look ominous. Doom indeed. Thxs for sharing...