Jump to content

Bartybum

Eurobricks Dukes
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,628

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Bartybum

  1. Bartybum
    On a total curveball I'm gonna switch the discussion to pneumatic cylinders, because your comment got me thinking about them. I apologise if this is better suited to the future set wishes thread, but I wasn't sure because this is only talking about individual pieces rather than set ideas. I'd really like to see TLC redesign the 2x7 cylinder, as well as design a new 1x7 cylinder. I've found that it's very difficult to brainstorm smaller sets within the V2 pneumatics part suite, because the only cylinders we have now are the 1x5, 1x11 and 2x11. It's really only small and large cylinders at the moment, with nothing in between for models that don't fit the current lineup. I'd also like to see some method of tightening the hoses to help them conform to bodywork, be it a curved hose with a straight version of the T-junction, or something else. 7L pneumatics could be used for small excavators, knuckle cranes, compact outriggers for larger models, and I imagine a lot more that doesn't currently spring to mind. I'd be interested to hear others' thoughts on this.
  2. Bartybum
    Ah I see, ty! No problemo, it’s always nice to see people designing gearboxes
  3. Bartybum
    @suffocation You'll have to forgive me, but my brain is too smooth to understand. Do you mean the 8z gears in each portal axle?
  4. Bartybum
    Looks good, but is it a good idea to have the 8z gear driving the differential? Aren't they generally pretty soft and fragile?
  5. Bartybum
    @Erik Leppen I’m inclined to agree with you here, in that this is largely a problem that doesn’t exist. Which makes me happy
  6. Bartybum
    Yeah I just tried it out, I don’t think there’s a way to have a one stud instep
  7. Bartybum
    It’s technically possible since the company that powers this forum service, Invision Community, also powers the Kerbal Space Program forum, which does have a liking system. I think it’s just a different service tier, so whoever pays for Eurobricks would probably have to fork out even more money.
  8. Bartybum
    Again, excellent post as always hehe. Yeah I figured that might more or less be the answer. This is beating a dead horse by now but since the reviews I've always thought that independent steering in both axles would be far better than lockable diffs, especially since there's no high speed gearbox to accompany unlocked diffs. Do you think there'd be room for a two speed gearbox linked to the diff locks in the chassis? I assume by bigger tyres you mean the CLAAS ones yeah? I've seen pics of that from Kbalage (I think?) and I gotta say that they do look odd in my eyes, but hey. If you're interested I might be interested in designing an offset rim for 3D printing with the regular tyres. It would end up going against a purist solution though obviously.
  9. Bartybum
    I think a 'like' button on comments, and/or a star rating, could be handy for this forum to encourage participation. It's simple enough that people who can't be bothered to write a comment can still express appreciation. I imagine it's beyond Jim's and Milan's powers though, since I don't think they're the ones who pay for the forum service. I don't think anyone expects that here though.
  10. Bartybum
    @Attika Hell yeah good buddy, excellent work Now for the next redesigns lol What are your thoughts on the possibility of an axle design with drive, diff locks AND steering?
  11. Bartybum
    Why not here? It’s called “LEGO Technic and Model Team” after all
  12. Bartybum
    Well yes, we know that (unless you’re posting it here to inform others). I’m just expressing my opinion that I think it’s an arbitrary choice to keep enforcing the old rules, now that you’ve decided that they’re obsolete.
  13. Bartybum
    Before all the snowflakes here get riled up over being told that it’s good to be nice to others, I’m gonna address this point. Unless something happened really recently and I missed it, then the last time this happened was MONTHS ago. The last time the forum had an argument over this the consensus was that yes you can criticise, but in the spirit of maintaining a welcoming environment you should also compliment people for their work. I VERY MUCH disagree that the general mindset here is what you claim it is, and I think you’re misrepresenting the opposing side. I don’t remember ever seeing people say that criticism isn’t allowed. For example, if someone were to pour their effort into building a MOC that they’re proud enough of to go to the effort of taking photos and posting them here, and all you can muster up is “The wheels are too small” or “This doesn’t look like X” without so much as an effort to make them feel welcome for contributing to the forum then sorry but that’s just behaving like a rude piece of shit. As for your other points, I really feel for you. I find it stupid that they’re arbitrarily enforcing posting rules that are obsolete even by their own admission. If SMF is to be merged with Technic, then just hurry up and get it over with. Lock SMF up and move the active posts over. Now that Milan’s let the cat out of the bag by admitting that they will indeed be merged, maybe he’ll realise there’s no reason to keep enforcing the rule. Is it really that difficult for you to compliment someone’s efforts to hopefully encourage them to post more often?
  14. Bartybum
    Great work @Attika and @efferman. Any chance one of you would redesign the front axle to have tighter steering?
  15. Bartybum
    Oh man this is incredible, great work I love cyclics
  16. Bartybum
    You'll have to show me examples of people saying they wanted all types of new parts. So wanting a set that will perform adequately is now the same as wanting the best possible off road performance? Come on, seriously? It's painfully obvious that this set doesn't even give adequate performance, otherwise so many people wouldn't be complaining about its very real flaws.
  17. Bartybum
    I've never heard of anyone being disappointed that their Lego doesn't fly. It's almost as if different set types have different reasonable expectations. Off-road cars are not particularly demanding, compared to the extreme examples you've listed. Regarding 42064 (I assume that's what you meant), look to the bottom left of the box - Model does not float. The set performs poorly: its turning circle is huge, its ground clearance is poor and the differentials and therefore diff locks serve no purpose. Nobody expects the impossible here, so stop acting like they do.
  18. Bartybum
    I'm gonna throw fuel on this bonfire bc screw it, why not? The fact that the vehicle fails outdoors is absolutely relevant, because it'll be no different than failure in an indoor course that has obstacles of the same shape and sizes. Crossing tree roots should absolutely be trivial. The only difference will be dirt damage and loss of traction.
  19. Bartybum
    Holy hell I vibe with this so much lol. Stacked liftarms and connectors hurt my soul
  20. Bartybum
    For some reason both the XL and L PU motors have the same power so there's no point going for the XL motor
  21. Bartybum
    Regarding the steering, I'm playing with the hub in my hand, and I can seem to get roughly 30 degrees of steering lock before the hub starts getting any friction. I definitely hope someone figures out how to improve the steering angle
  22. Bartybum
    Yeah the volvo really needed dual drive with suspension, not some pointless gearbox.
  23. Bartybum
    It’d make more sense if the steering weren’t so godawful
  24. Bartybum
    Ford probably wouldn't dictate the price or piece count beyond going 'yeah make it a similar size to the blue one'
  25. Bartybum
    Damn, everything about that prototype just straight up looks better shame that the orange one is what they're offering
×
×
  • Create New...