Crtlego

This is my motorized oil platform. After having built the oil rig with the intention of motorizing the linear actuator within each leg, it was extremely hard to convert to pnuematics (the gearing required to motorize each leg would have been too heavy, bulky, and would not have been able to support the weight of the frame I had built). Hence, the last day was dedicated to this major revamp. I think it performs much better and although that aspect is no long motorized, I feel that there are plenty of other functions to make up for it. For one, I wasn't planning on motorizing the turning of each leg originally but after removing all the gearing required for the linear actuators, there was enough room to add in two XL motors for the purpose of steering each of the legs in unison. This can be thought of as being a sort of "stability control." Each leg is lowered and raised by one piston and has an "air shock absorber" to cushion any rough waves. The spacing underneath is REALLY tight so it more of a miracle that everything fit without previous planning (more pictures will show just how miraculous this build really was.. It was actually crazy!) The main drill arm can lower via one M motor and a second M motor powers the spinning drill head. On the side of the battery box, there is a small crane with a seat and a winch. This is for loading and unloading materials (or visitors) from below. Here are the final pictures (no photoshopping or color-editing -all done with a Canon Eos Rebel T3) More pictures on Flickr

Thanks! Yes, that is the article I was looking for. I will have to contact some Bricklink sellers to see if they know where their parts are from.. These new ones stink!

I recently received some of those small sprockets from Lego Direct but they don't seem to mesh well with the tracks. Is this just me? I remember seeing a picture a long time ago that had two different versions (minor design change) of this track pictures above.. Could this have something to do with my problem? I have the tracks from the 8043 Excavator and the large sprockets work fine on them.

As a student in a tech and science school, I thought I would meet many people who have (or used to have - prior to facing the work of school) an interest in lego technic. Unfortunately, I have not yet met such a person and my hopes are dwindling. I can confirm Blakbird's statement about conventions here in the U.S. From the one BrickFair I had MOC's in, there were only one or two tables (~3' by 6'?) that had technic MOC's on display -and there were between 60 and 100 tables in total. Is it possible that it is not the mechanical portion that discourages people but the price instead? IMHO, beginner models are cheap but unless you are as creative as Grohl in repurposing smaller MOC's, I don't feel like Technic is interesting until you have a large enough parts bank to actually build intricate MOC's. This might not be the case though since NXT's seem to be rather popular in the U.S.

How does the ackerman steering affect the black bevel gear's ability to move the steering rack? It was always my impression that the steering would be stiff and limited since the rack tend to line up with the gear but I guess I need to try this out myself.

I don't how I can help you with words but I figured I would post a picture of a MOC I have not yet released. Each steering arm has independent suspension. The only problem with my setup is that the entire vehicle weighs so much that, occasionally, the front wheels (being plastic instead of rubber) will slip and the car will not turn as much..

I'll do the same.

My thoughts exactly. :)

As andythenorth already said, I too believe that there is a risk for damaging parts with this setup. I actually find that the portal hubs are appropriate for the speed and torque but that, if any gear were to break, it would be either the "differential lock" gears or the small bevel gears in the differential will break. I decided to build the Tumbler last year and I haven't gotten around to producing a video of it or uploading any pictures.. I hate myself for this.. I do, however, feel I should share my experience with the rest of you with this simple picture. This was pre-portal hub-era and the Unimog had not yet been revealed, and thus, there was no "perfect" way to add in that last minute gear reduction (like that of yours after the differential). The setup did provide speed and torque to the rather large and heavy Tumbler. In fact, every time I accelerated forward, the entire vehicle jerked.. I like to think that it was because of the "significant torque" but I think it is the setup of the suspension instead. Not visible in the picture are the four 8297 balloon tires I used for the rear axle. Also, beneath the black 12t bevel gear, there would normally be a 20t bevel gear; it is missing because it can only be held in place by the axle built into the tires themselves.. <--This is a flaw because this gear, along with a half-bushing on the other side, are the only things preventing the heavy axle from slipping out from the car/tank/Tumbler.. Also, I have yet to purchase the longer springs and I feel that with the new portal hubs, ball joint (the one in the Unimog), and some nice suspension, my MOC could have turned out a little nicer.. Obviously, I have not disclosed any pictures or videos of it so you don't know what I'm talking about..

I can't speak for the rest of you, but I am absolutely amazed by the performance of that crawler.. Don't get me wrong though.. the9398 is nothing compared to what AFOL's have built, but for LEGO, this is an enormous step in the right direction. Personally, I couldn't care less about the colors of the truck (yes, they do look kind of bad), but the fact that they have built a motorized offroader that runs at a relatively quick speed and has such incredible agility is marvelous!!! I am pleasantly surprised by this, and I do credit most of the crawler's performance to the "portal hubs" which allow phenomenal after-steering gear-reduction! Our suspicions of a new motor are confirmed?? What are those dimensions? 3 wide, 5 long, and 3-4 height?? I can't wait to see more of those motors.. I don't know about the set though. In an alternate universe where my wallet was overflowing maybe I would buy it, but considering I already have most of the parts (except for those of unique color scheme) and 8 of the wheels (I still want those black rims though), I don't think it would be a good investment for me..

I could be wrong.. But I think that piece is simply a technic triangle.

I have not tried building this setup, but it seems, in my humble opinion, as if the drivetrain will suffer from the use of the four black bevel gears. My past experience with heavy load vehicles tends to look down on small gears, especially those formed at an angle.. I agree

Brickshelf Youtube Channel Flickr My brother and I recently uploaded our website. There's a Lego section!!! Its not much, but I hope to post more there and here in the near future. Also, don't feel that I have forgotten about you guys; I will be posting my Moc's on here as soon as I get a chance! Kayrus.com Good idea Timr!

I recently purchased the receiver and remote from the supersonic rc so that I could use the 3 buggy motors I have at their full potential. My first and most simple design mimicked the setup of the actual supersonic rc and used the same size tires. It goes really fast. When using the plastic tires, it is harder to reach full speed without drifting, since they tend to slip and slide. This does, however, make it very fun to drift with. Before this purchase, I often tried using the receiver to power one or two of the motors and the PF receiver would always turn off. Using one motor-instead of two-did not completely prevent this problem. I was more successful when controlling a PF switch with an M motor and attaching the RC motor to the switch than I was with attaching it directly to the receiver. This did make it uncomfortable to drive as the response time seriously lagged (especially since the motor was so fast in the first place). Have you personally had this problem? I was hoping to try out the RC unit with more than two RC motors, but now I don't think it is worth the risk (considering the time I have been waiting to purchase this piece)..

I forgot that I had purchased the 8043 excavator, which was a very nice set. I am surprised that I could have forgotten that set so easily.. But other than the 8043, the few Lego sets I have purchased in the past 4-5 years have all had wheels in them.

Oops.. Yes. That makes sense. For some reason or another, the "L" triggered memories of the RC motor and caused me to ignore the naming convention. It is obvious that an L motor would be faster and less torque that XL but slower and more torque than M. I must of confused myself with the RC motors since I have been spending a lot of time thinking about them and my order for the Supersonic RC parts..

It is possible, but in accordance with what Cwetqo mentioned above, this would probably require a new remote control AS WELL as a new Receiver as the "current" one cannot provide enough "current" The L motor would probably be similar to the RC motor from the Supersonic RC (same motor.. not casing) with an obviously redesigned shape and different gearing. Maybe we will see a new Receiver but this is expensive as well. I am not sure what they will do at this point.

It is very interesting to see these preliminary pictures.. I actually like the Helicopter a lot.. but I've almost never (the 8043 excavator being the only exception) purchased a Technic set without tires (ACTUAL tires, not tiny ones for landing gear) Now for my take on the Rock Crawler/RC Offroader. WOAH.. RC = Rock Crawler = Remote Control???? Coincidence? I THINK NOT!! Firstly, I believe the tires are those from the 8297 as they fit the size and the curve shown in the picture. The use of these tires and not the smaller ones from the Telehander means that it will have to have significant gear reduction should Lego wish to preserve their Customer Service.. Or they could make "awesomer" parts instead? Secondly, I think that there will be a new motor, probably the two for drive (since those are under a more constant strain versus the steering motor). This also brings up the durability of ABS plastic in such a scenario. I AM NOT QUESTIONING THE ABILITY OF THE AMAZING TRIAL TRUCK BUILDERS!!! I am simply saying, unless Lego "hired" or searched Brickshelf, it is unlikely that they will build such sophisticated and secure drivetrains as the professionals here on Eurobricks. But I am not criticizing Lego either. Lastly, I, personally, would be very happy to see this as their flagship model of 2012, because it symbolizes their "feelings" towards this model. Could this mean more RC driven vehicles? I would hope so, but that also removes a potential mod opportunity for us MOCers and drives up the prices with each motor they add. Even if this set is not packed with functions, I think that a step in this direction is welcome and I am anxious to see what they will provide us with.

Like many have already mentioned, if I had two Unimogs, the first thing I would build is an awesome offroad 8-wheeler with full suspension, drive, and steering <-- Those two sets alone provide more than enough parts to do this. Secondly, I would put lots of random functions on the body like a winch, crane, motorized lift for cabin?

Thanks for the responses. I called lego to check the price on the extra-stiff suspension again and I have confirmed its expensive price of $3.00. That is certainly an interesting idea.. I only have 4 of the large cylinders so maybe on my next 4x4 I can try that. On that note.. I also happened to ask them the price of the large pneumatic cylinders and they replied saying that they are only available in a "pneumatics package" that costs $25. I was not aware of this. Thanks for the advice. I think I will wait until prices lower though before I buy either the shock absorbers or the Unimog tires.. which is a shame since they would be so perfect for my upcoming project.

I remember having nearly a week off from school because of all the snow and ice. It was perfect because it took most of my teachers by surprise and stopped them from giving us too many extra assignments.. meaning more time for LEGO!!!

Thanks again DLuders!! Not only for the ID numbers but also for pointing out that great website! I wish it was snowing in Washingtion D.C.!! Hopefully my RC stuff will arrive before the snow so I can be ready for any possible winter storms (hopefully one like last year's so that I can miss more school as well!)

Thanks DLuders! I decided that the price for such an "antique" was justified and thus I spent a total of $65 on the receiver, remote, and two antennas. I think I will find myself happy with this purchase.. and the fact that they should arrive for winter break! Another inquiry about part numbers.. Does anybody happen to have the Lego part number for Tyre 68.8 x 36 ZR (44771) or Technic Beam Split 2 x 6 Towball Coupling Half Slope (32195b) (last found in the 2007 599 Fiorano)?

I have also had much success with Lego Direct which is why I am planning on making another order in the next few days. But in response to original post.. Does the mini turntable spin freely? Do the gears mesh well (especially at the 90 degree angle pictured)?