nerdsforprez

It seems like I might be running solo in terms of concern whether or not it will be available 1 AUG in the US Anyways.... I called multiple stores here in the US and they all confirmed that they WILL have the set on 1 AUG. I am on a business trip in the St. Louis area..... I truly hope the only shop around me is true to their word and will have it when I make the trip.

Nice idea.... I would like to see a video of it functioning. How the track connects to your sprocket design looks like it might be very clunky. Also, if what you are building is limited by your parts available, you might have to spend quite a bit for this track. The triple axle pin (perpendicular, part 63869) is not cheap. All the pieces will add a lot of weight to your model......you will have to take this into consideration.

Perhaps we need to begin an "availability" thread for this set as well as there have been many questions regarding it. I just checked the Lego S@H in the US and it has not been updated. I know others have said to not worry but other sets that are coming out in AUG are there..... plus, even the new Disney Castle, that does not come out until SEPT, is there. So.... I am kinda becoming worried that we will not see the set (in the US) in the month of AUG. Anyone with further information? Interesting video. My hypothesis confirmed! These tires work best in mud and sand. However, I still do not think they replace third party tires...... and on the secondary market will likely be just as expensive or more so. However, for purists, they are a great addition.

I realize I am likely an anomaly here.... but just a perspective from an outsider. I think one of the hallmarks of a great idea for a set is something that those who may not have mechanics, engineering, design, or the like involved in their everyday profession may have never heard of. I personally work in a totally unrelated field to mechanics, etc. and coming here, learning and building anything mechanical is certainly a refreshing break. As a result, however, I had never really heard of the Xerion Claas. Bringing it to my attention was awesome..... and therefore I will definitely get the set. I knew of BWE, but never really taken the time to research and learn of them, until now (because of 42055). Super cars, backhoes, etc. are more mundane and commonly known and therefore offer no new surprises. But.... IMHO..... sets that challenge one and makes one learn of new mechanisms or machines are great recommendations for future sets.

I will also wait for updates here. I happen to be a huge fan of these cranes, and would indeed love to see yours complete, functional (lifting a 42009? YES PLEASE), and more complete photos. Wonderful job so far. Although unsure...... I still have an inkling that your may be the largest mobile technic crane out there if it can be completed......

See the thread on Sariel's review. It appears to be definitely due to the clutch gears. This seems to be a theme in Technic sets...... and I think as AFOLs we need to be better at identifying it. Many are saying that the lack of "power" stops the buckets and is a deterrent to buy this set. I said it on Sariel's thread and I will say it here. It is NOT due to lack of power. XL motors break axles, gears, etc. It is the clutch gear. Many clamored the same thing when 42042 came out (blue crawler crane) .... said that is had no power. But simply removing the clutch gears allows one to lift plenty (with only a L motor). Same thing was said about the reviews of 42009 when it came out. People actually said that they would not buy it b/c it could not do its primary function.... which was lift. I think this is somewhat unfortunate b/c a simple little change.... exchanging the clutch gear for a regular 24 tooth gear, yields wonderful lifting power (this is my heavily modified version..... but only a L motor is inside. Clutch removed. Lesson remains the same). And I agree with others that clutch gears are not added for safety. Sets such as these are meant for 14+ if not primarily adults. It is likely due to avoid damaging parts. Can you imagine the nightmare for Lego if they produced a set that actually damaged parts b/c of its power? They already send tens of thousands, if not millions of free parts to people who genuinely have missing parts and those are just "missing" parts (we know they are out there). What if someone gets a set, builds it, and say.....doesnt know that you cant have the motor stall for minutes on end with out damage? They would call and just say their motor broke and they need a new one. But..... if one is an experienced builder, and knows to be careful of stalling motors (stalling a motor for just a few seconds will not hurt it. Just be vigilant and turn it off or disengage it as soon as possible) then, IMO, buy these sets, take out the clutch gears.... and build away!!!!!

In terms of the bucket-digging.... I also think that we are comparing apples and oranges here. Most people that are going to be trying to pick up some bricks have a measly pile of bricks on the ground. Think of the geometry here. When using the BWE to just pick up some measly pebbles on the floor one is primarily using the bucket in the "6" position (standard face clock). The material being picked up is too horizontal relative to the buckets. Real BWE dont just pick up a few pebbles from the floor. THey move whole mountains. There is dirt/material not just at the "6" position, but also the 4 and five, as well as the 7 and 8 position as well. Even the buckets at the 3 and 9 position are used. The dirt/material is much more perpendicular/vertical to the buckets at these positions.... and therefore much more likely to remain in the buckets and not fall out. And it is not just the amount of material that causes this difference. Even if you had a cazillion little bricks to pick up, b/c they do not stick together, they would fall to the sides and create just a larger and larger pyramid-like mound. Really hard for a BWE type build to get to use it's buckets in the 3, 9, 4, and 8 position for a job like this. However, real earth sticks together. Real BWEs to jobs where often the earth they are cutting into is completely vertical/perpendicular to the buckets. Much, much easier to really maximize the cutting/picking up potential of the buckets when used to excavate material such as this......

Gotcha. Thanks for the clarifying. I didn't think of it from a child's POV. Yea.....this would really drive them nuts. Yes..... but like Sariel responded, this stoppage is b/c of the clutches. Easy fix. The trick will be making the change but not damaging the motors. I think a first and very easy modification should be to switch out the clutch gears for regular 24 tooth gears and see how the digging works. Wondering of any other reviewers, Jim, etc. could do this in their review.......In my experience (I usually change out white clutch gears, I get why they are produced, but I never use them) if one is careful, you can do away with clutch gears and you won't damage gears. I redid 42042 (blue crawler crane) with out the clutches and lifted around 800 grams no problem. Lego motors are tougher, IMO, than many give them credit for.

As always, Thank you for a wonderful review. Couple of thoughts though. You list the slow speed at the beginning as a "con" - but later offer an explanation (you don't want something this large speeding through your home) as though this is a "pro." Also, the slow speed is accurate. I am not sure about BWE's, but large crawler cranes have a top speed of less than 1 MPH. There are many reasons for this, but among them is that it stops the superstructure from bouncing back and forth. I just completed a large Crawler Crane in Feb. of this year and geared it very very slow. Any faster and the thing would be bouncing all over the place. I am thinking the same of this model.... so wondering if the slow speed is really all that bad. If anything, it is accurate. The same can be said about the superstructures rotational speed. It is supposed to be slow. Perhaps not fun for playability, but as for accuracy, it is spot on. Any faster, especially with all the backlash from Lego, and then thing would likely be more catchy and bouncy. I think the rotational speed might also be spot on. --- Lastly, and this is just a question. When the bucket stops b/c it hits something.... is this a product of the white clutch gears or is the motor actually stalling? If due to the clutch gears, this could be an easy fix. Wondering about space for a second XL motor for coupling or something...... however, damage of pieces could become a real concern.

Well.... perhaps at least my response will offer a comic relief. The OP initially incorrectly embedded the video, so I thought ZBLJ's video perhaps was just a correction of the incorrectly embedded video. I admit I watched and paused at 1:25 and didn't find ANYTHING that resembled the Xerion's tires..... :classic: -- I stared at the screen for like 30 seconds or so until I realized something was amiss.... :laugh:

A lot of people are going to be tempted to put these tires on any technic trucks/crawlers of the past. Although this will still be super cool, IMO, there are RC tires still better suited for stuff like that. These are not true crawlin' tires as much as they are paddled tires, like true tractor tires should be. I think one the best applications for such tires is a common application in "redneck" trucks used for "muddin"or like sand dunes - where individuals truly take the tires from their tractors and put them on ol' clunkers for abusing in the mud or sand. How fun would this be! That is my first application of such tires.

My vote would be just to wait. Your reviews are worth it.

Thanks for the tip..... I guess I should be more transparent though.... I knew of all this but I work from remote locations all too often. Occasionally this means being away from an internet connection..... like in the instance of the mentioned posting...... this being the case I have not updated LDD for some time and therefore still lack many parts.....

I would not hold your breath on this. That would be great if it were available in the US 1 AUG........ but traditionally we get these sets (2H) later than everywhere else......

Here is perhaps an improved version of my former recommendation for the calipers in the front. To curve the rear calipers is fairly self-explanatory...... just use a bracket and the curved slope in the picture. Both are available in yellow. I like this design better than my other one..... you get to avoid using two 2L axles and don't have to deal with 1/2 1x4 liftarms. Pretend that the black piece (not the pin) is actually this piece: http://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=15100#T=C I could not find it in LDD

Just looked at the inventory. Man, you really know a set is "unprecedented" when the availability of certain parts will likely alter even BL prices. Just like Sheepo's mustang nearly bankrupt the worldwide inventory of #4 red connectors, this set will likely decrease the price on several highly wanted parts. 5x7 frame, 15L DBG liftarms, 3x3 perpendicular pin connector, etc.......

. Yea.... Many of the shortcomings of the set you discuss have already been improved upon. Kinda a moot point to complain about them now. Check out the link pointed out by @didumos69 for details.

Yes, but in the US? I know that if not in the US, you can't really answer this, but release dates for other locations other than the US is no help to me as the release dates for US and other places is almost always quite a bit different.....

I think the whole drive train would have to be redone..... perhaps not. Need to look at the gearing. Don't have time to do it now..... but someone should compare the gear ratios of 42056 to Sheepo's Mustang. Both have around the same piece count (Sheepo's Mustang actually has more) and have two L motors for propulsion. Sheepo's Mustang is not going to break any land speed records.... but it looks like it runs just fine in all gears. Having built his model myself, I can also attest that there is a lot of friction in the gear box, just like 42056. Also, his has more motors...(steering, brakes, etc.) so I assume it would be heavier than 42056 yet runs fine on two L motors. My guess is the main differences are in the gear ratios......

I second this question. Funny, I came here to ask the exact same thing. I leave for a work-related temporary assignment and will be away from my personal collection for two months. I will have a nice hotel suite to build in, but I need LEGO to build! I am taking 42056 with me, so that will keep me occupied for some time, but I was hoping for the BWE and Xerion as well. Aside from work and out-doorsy stuff.... I need something to do! Do we know when such sets will be released in the US? Is S@H different than in stores?

Front end is perfect. I love how your got the angles coming in at all different slopes........

I am aware of Huib van der Hart's models, and they are indeed amazing.... but I am not sure they are the largest. Here are some figures: the 24x43 tires are around 82 mm, the PP tires around 106. 9 axles with tires in diameter of 82 gives us a length of 738mm. Now, this is of course very crude, basic, and perhaps a little simplistic..... but you get the idea (and doesn't consider rear end, cab, etc.). The yellow cranes tires are RC tires.... I don't know the size so it is difficult to calculate those. The model with the Unimog tires is indeed large..... and if there are nine axles on the model and it is complete it likely would be the largest. But judging by the video I am not sure there are nine axles or that there have been updates. Bricktrain's crane uses 6 axles using PP tires. PP tires, at ~ 106 mm x 6 only equals only 636 mm....so (crudely I know) it is likely shorter than Huib van der Hart's. However, the width of the PP tires are around 60mm compared to only 23 mm of the 24x43 tires. This is nearly 3x as large (in terms of width). In addition, the PP tires are more than 180 grams, compared to only 60 grams of the 24x43 tires, making them like-wise all that more bulkier. I think people underestimate the size of the PP tires. The PP tires weight really doesn't matter much here... but the width sure does. I would wager the width of the model I presented (bricktrain's) is much much wider than Huib van der Hart's. perhaps even more to compensate for the differences in length. if we use the metric of overall piece count, bricktrain's model may have enough width to create enough pieces to make his model the largest. Perhaps not in length but in overall dimensions and piece count......as we all know a model's width is as important as its length in terms of piece count if it is built in Lego

my copy has finally come. I have been working on it when time allows. Thanks everyone for the changes and improvements that have been made thus far. I intend to make my own "ultimate" version, with many of the changes implemented thus far by others. My hat goes off especially to @didumos69 for quoting my recommendations and also for all the changes he has recommended. Couple of questions: we are all aware of Blakbird's recommendation on step 5. Great stuff. Something I implemented for a better working gearbox. However, quick question is that why should we be adding bushes anyway? I understand the contact is minimal, but using two full bushes still has some contact and therefore friction: Now, I understand that this is usually done to avoid any gears or the 5L pin to slip/move, but really I see this as a threat only in a motorized model or something under significant duress. I don't see it as a threat for this model. Wouldn't it make more sense just to brace the pin with a 1/2 bush, such as this? Here there is no contact whatsoever. Again, I know the above contact is minimal, but as we can see in Blakbird's original recommendation, even small decreases in friction have great results in the overall effectiveness of the gearbox. Also.... and forgive me because I have forgotten exactly where this was posted (with so many posts and attention to this model, it is easy to forget where ideas are posted for the same model), but the brake calipers have gotten some flack because they do not resemble the shape of real calipers. TLG sought to rectify this with stickers. I, as with many others don't like this solution. in fact, does not seem like a solution at all. Someone, somewhere recommended this piece http://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=93273#T=C and to my this seems like a good, obvious choice, but I don't think it was ever attempted or actually implemented to see if it would work inside the new wheel hub. I played with this a little, not alot, and likely there are better solutions, but using a 1x2 bracket (non-inverted- inverted will not work) this is what I came up with. Forgive the poor coloring on the bracket and 2L axle ends, I colored these in GIMP because I couldn't find these colors in my collection - although they are inexpensive and available in real life so it is something easily reproducible. What do people think? Is this an improvement or not? I am kinda mixed..... I certainly like the shaping better, it is more realistic, but don't really like the black axle ends showing through.

Very Very cool......first of something like this I have seen on the site..... very jealous -- :def_shrug:

Exactly. My own has eight, but not with PP wheels. Not even close. I have seen several large cranes with Unimog wheels, but with 4-5 axles (from memory) and Unimog wheels are quite smaller than PP wheels.