nerdsforprez

my man..... you love buses! This is a great addition to your building portfolio. In addition, great pics....

Agreed.. Front is horrible.

Agreed...although I do like the idea. Many have needed larger, more robust turnable. Make those simple changes and I think your new element will be well received.

In line with the OP's introduction title "still the coolest ship in the galaxy" -- Lego MF has even made it front and center (now old news) on popular photo sharing site thechive.com. http://thechive.com/2016/01/10/the-lego-millennium-falcon-then-vs-now-24-photos/

Perfect. Thanks for the responses everyone. I have my answers.

Hello All, First time poster here on the train forum.... long time user on the Technic forum..... quick question on the part in the topic title. Can this part fit into the center of a black 2L Technic pin when it is already inserted into two Lift arms? I know that bar pieces can.... is this part roughly the same diameter as a bar element?

Great job Tommy...... love the cut-away photos....

It is fun to informally test materials like this. Great contributions......

Too funny. As I was looking at the photos I was thinking the same thing

Holy crap people......stop putting personal email addresses on this post! Almost tempted to send them all to some marketing/advertising sith to teach ya'all a lesson. Bad form Jack....bad form!

Very nice truck. For what is worth, I don't mind the fender. I don't think it is a problem.

novel idea. I like it when people think out of the box for MOC ideas. Well done...

:classic: Totally respect your taste in hobbies and fanfare mate.... but gotta be honest.... to not like SW but have it as a pic in your signature block looks kind of funny.....

Although I have posted this before.... (I am not trying to be redundant... I promise!) this applies so well to your question I will post again. Years ago I did exactly what you are proposing. I rebuilt Lego 7965, much, much bigger. and then built a mount, mostly out of Lego Technic .... additional details to the mount can be found here: http://mocpages.com/moc.php/398186 but essentially I just bought a small tv mount from an electronics store and built the mount from Technic from there. It hoplds very very well and I have never had a problem with it (well.....not from the mount anyways). I used NO Kragle sauce, and things have held fine for years. One small caution, however, is that it may be easy to assume that wall anchors are not necessary because..... well... it is only Lego and therefore does not weigh much right? Wrong! http://mocpages.com/moc.php/386710 (hyperdrive is DOWN) The only problem I even had with my mount was incorrectly assuming that I would not need anchors. The above is the result. Rebuilt the Falcon from memory, remounted the mount with anchors and never had a problem again. I have since moved, remounted the beast again, with anchors, and again have had no problem with this holding the 3,000ish pieces of the build. Feel free to browse my pages for more info. or PM me if still have questions. again I need to reiterate that the above is NOT a problem with the mount, but the fact that originally I did not use wall anchors. IMO mounting an MF on the wall is a great way to show off your model and very safe.... Just remember to use wall anchors! :wink:

Holy incredible! But ** Gasp** new member and first (??) post? - this makes it even more amazing! Not only did I love watching the whole thing work but the finished product is just amazing....

It is doable (most things are ) and even preferable. Although most cranes have a near infinite number of configurations most cranes have the guy lines closer to the top.

As other have said, this is an excellent looking model. I love the springs as well. In terms of the gear choice (12t bevel gears) I actually think that the current configuration may work. Understandably, XL motors have ruined gears in the past.... but I used a similar gear configuration in this build: and the gears held. Now..... my crawler does not weigh anything close to the OPs creation.... but I placed it in some incredibly precarious situations that even stalled the motors frequently. Gears held just fine.....

Wonderful job here... and adding instructions? Superb. I truly hope some will take advantage of these instructions and improve their own personal versions of the MF. As a little note, IMO this set is highly open to modifications and enlargement. If you have the cash, so many things can be done to it without altering it too much. Years ago I discovered that the 7965 (and now 75105) are actually built with a fairly flexible diameter in mind. Think of it.... the main body is made of polygonal shapes. Each one is, like 12 studs in length (rough estimate, might be slightly different). The center, that houses the rotating turret is like 10 studs (again, rough estimate) for a total of like 34 studs in diameter. If you increase each polygon panel by four studs (to sixteen) and the center four studs (14) you get the exact dimensions of 7964 and 75105, only larger. You can then build your own, larger, version of the Falcon. Even the slopes of the polygons remain the same, so it all encloses real nice. The above figures might be slightly off....I am spit-balling here.....I still have the plans from the model below that I built years ago....I will have to look 'em up, but I think the above is correct. Increasing the diameter just ten studs increases the overall piece count tremendously, (roughly doubling it) but if you have the pieces or dough it is fun to do. Here is my version below...... I added an interior along with working pneumatic landing gear along with the increased size. Obviously other things have be be increased as well to scale (the center column that houses the turret is raised, I think, two studs), but you get the picture.... More at http://mocpages.com/moc.php/369901

Sariel's book is great.... But you can learn so much just from the internet. Do a little research. Sites like rebrickable.com, brickshelf, and others are a big help. Or just google some pictures. Study them. Research them..... Lots to learn..... The Lego community is quite extensive.

Thirded..... ... and perhaps to be a little more constructive in feedback.... I like your goals of building something that can be played with by small children. ALthough I don't think that they will appreciate all the details and accurate mechanics to a real vehicle the fact that you can accommodate to both adults and children is admirable.

I'll be honest..... with all the talk about third party tires.... and their obvious superiority (and even lower cost) I don't continue to see the hype about PP tires. Third party tires are gaining popularity and are new. PP are old, expensive, and at some point they are going to face some degree of material deterioration. I would sell them for these reasons..... I am not sure the hype of PP tires with continue. It has not for me......

Nice looking truck. I especially like the use of 1/2 bushes on the front grill

Dang it..... we wanted to keep debating.... :laugh: all joking aside.....glad you have an answer.....

Agreed! http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=117666&hl= But I also agree with @moz....... although this is fine and dandy as a means of personal fun.... when it comes to a Lego competition one should stay within the confines of Lego.

Great discussion.... lots of good comments. To summarize my general thoughts on the topic of Lego purism: I think we need to keep in mind that we are dealing with different definitions of an abstract concept; "Lego building." Taken literally, this probably appears to be easily defined by Lego purism. If taken literally, building My Own Creations in Lego.... then I understand the concept of purism.... and can see the point of view of purists. However, as one poster acutely pointed out "only Siths deal in absolutes" Another way to look at it is to look no further than the title of the company itself ..... "Lego". We all know what it means... almost seems insulting to spell it out.... but the insight of the original founder of the company to "play well" is a definition, that IMO, defies purists approach to Lego. "Playing well" allows Lego to defy strict categorizations and broaden its audience to include so many; that is why it is the most popular toy in the world, and the one that is most marketable to adults. Everyone's idea of "playing well" is so different. To some, it is to see who can build the most visually appealing model in bricks, to others to build the most functional; but all within the confines of what Lego provides. Great, wonderful. Others are builders first, and primarily use Lego because they simply have found that Lego is the best medium for them to do this.... but, if something better comes along, even if it is a simple piece or part, then they will use it. Many don't even build at all! I know people whose idea of "playing well" is simply buying and selling sets, investing, etc. There are whole websites dedicated to this. And if you think that these are people who engage in such a practice for the money...... think again. It is for play (I am one of them....... I love building, and always will, but I also love investing in sets, watching trends, guessing which sets will be popular, which not, etc. (I have boxed, mint, a UCS MF set, UCS Imperial Shuttle, UCS Death Star, etc....). Many are on BL as a source of income, others to fund their hobby, and others still because they simply love the art of business and find Lego a fascinating medium to engage in something they love. IMO we are just discussing different definitions of what it means to "play well." Kinda like a psychological experiment where you need to measure some abstract concept for the purpose of the study, but know that YOUR definition of that abstract concept is not an absolute, just one possibility out of many. You may think that your definition IS the best out of the known possibilities, but thinking your definition is the best does not preclude awareness that it is not the only one. Those who check out my builds know that I am not a purist, and regardless of the fact that I may think that is the best way to go does not excuse me of being aware that there are many, many different ways of defining what it means to "play well"......