Ngoc Nguyen

I want to try a new style of comparison. Since I don't plan to get the 42141, I will use Studio renders instead. 9 years and 141 numbers apart. Bonus: Innards comparison

They are the same design https://nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/memecreator-cdn/media/__processed__/28a/template-find-the-difference-0c6db91aec9c.jpg

Corporate needs you to find the difference between the left design and the right design.

Finished.

Using that will not fix the blade to the beams. The fix should be using thin liftarms 1x4 (+OO+)

Mathematically, the connection points on the blade's direction are two axle holes, so the whole build is a right trapezoid: DC = 1, AD = 2, and AB = 1.5. AB is the cam piece. The diagonal BC is larger than 2 but is forced into a length of 2, which are 3 holes apart, in the bottom liftarm. It's even more confusing that this problem can be avoided easily through the use of thin liftarms 1x4 instead of 1x3. In that case, the angle between the cam piece and the blade's direction, which is angle D in the figure, will not be locked at 90 degrees.

Yeah that may work in real life, given that the builder in the speed build video managed to do it. The problem is that it shouldn't fit, and therefore the cam piece is slightly twisted out of its 3rd axle hole. And that is by definition an illegal build.

Apparently there's an illegal building technique at the back, according to the speed build video. The bottom axle hole of the cam piece theoretically can't fit into the pinhole, but the builder is instructed to put an axle hole through it. @kbalage I think you may wanna cover this in your review!

There is none. The body is hollow, like that of the Ferrari 42125.

Thank you very much. Thanks to R0sch's custom parts, I was able to start building this model in Studio. This is the end of bag 2.

Can you create the other side as well? The mirroring function doesn't mirror it.

@R0Sch How do I download the .col and .dat files? They just open into new tabs that contain strings of texts.

@R0Sch can you create the 1x2 small panel extension as well?

Can you share the Studio file for this? Also, I think the part has an axle hole, not a pin hole.

Apparently it's a real logo of a real company, and maybe that resemblance is intentional. Since TLG has to reproduce the logos of all the sponsors, I don't think they can do it any differetly

TLG @ Technic panels this year: You get an extender, you get an extender, everyone gets an extender!!! *insert Oprah's car meme"

I did some trials yesterday and found out a compact pentagon connection design that doesn't require any special connectors. It's not entirely legal but it is solid enough. The mathematical foundation for this design is a right triangle with an angle of 54 degrees at the base. I tried different numbers for the sides, and found out that when one leg is 1.5, the other leg is 2.065, which is close enough to an integer. Based on that, I built this pentagon with a side of 4 studs and a perpendicular distance to the center of 3.065 stud, and then use frictionless pins and axles to bridge the .065 decimals. I test built this design in real life and it worked. I'm gonna use this in a small scale Airbus H175 model I'm working on. It's also an alternative model of 42113. I intended to wait until there is a shrink a model contest is announced to talk about this, but apparently there isn't going to be anything like that in the near future.

Or maybe it's only gonna be replaced with a screw version, just like the C+ hub.

Fun fact: This set has exactly 1 more piece than the Silver Champion. The former has 1432 pieces, while the latter has 1431.

TLG on how to make Technic sets appealing: - 2010s: cool functions! - 2020s: new panels! new connectors! licenses!

I got this problem too and I don't know why.

Where did you get this from

Looks like a 3x11 black frame

We don't talk about links no no no

I think I saw 5x11 shell panels on the side