.png.94a0d1c33952e15a35e0b13d13e1c498.png)
Didumos69
-
Posts
3,045 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Everything posted by Didumos69
-
.thumb.png.116032e930e483fb4ebbfdc62183bd34.png)
Because I got the impression that there is a difference between entries that simply fit the contest and entries that are 'in spirit of' the contest. @Jim, this already sounds a lot better. I think my main issue with your initial post about introducing a jury is that it sounds like you felt the need to push the contest - or at least the outcomes - in a certain direction: Together with your post in @Doug72's entry topic - a very original piece of work btw - I got the strong feeling that 'the spirit of the contest' is something different from the contest description / guidelines / rules. The fact that the jury would be an undisclosed group made that feeling even stronger. Al together this doesn't feel right to me. It doesn't feel 'unbiased'. It;s a bit strange that you - as a moderator - are not allowed to vote, but are allowed to install a jury along the way to influence the outcome. Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to having a jury in this kind of contests in general. I'm having an issue with the explanation that is given. If the verdict is that there will be a jury, then I would appreciate it if the jury members would be made public (in advance) and their votes too (afterwards). That would take out all the doubt and would also fullfill the desire expressed by several in this discussion about 'unbiasedness'. It is also quite common to make the jury members and their votes known in these kind of hybrid voting setups. -
And you have no reason to introduce a jury. But seriously, you're not responding to my arguments.
-
That's what I mean; members are perfectly capable to value an entry against the contest description.
-
If the contest description leaves so much room for interpretation that you need an extra evaluation whether an entry is 'in the spirit' of the contest, then you should have been more clear about the spirit of the contest in the first place. The community has taken it's go at this contest and its room for interpretation is generally seen as something good. Besides that, I think you are underestimating the evaluation skills of members by insinuating they rather vote for things that look cool. Finally, if my entry is regarded as 'not in the spirit of' - which is guessing right now, since the 'spirit of the contest' is unclear to me - I would rather hear that directly. In that case I would simply withdraw.
-
Cool! Thanks! I will add it to the colony! @Andy D, I added the silicon bands to the LDD-file, so you get an impression of their sizes (I also fixed the 20t gear version-issue). @Ivan_M, this morning I rebuilt the entire model with your instructions. All worked fine. Only installing the engine was a bit difficult, but I guess that part is also difficult in the photo sequence. Thanks again!
-
[TC12] Highflyer
Didumos69 replied to Leonard Goldstein's topic in LEGO Technic, Mindstorms, Model Team and Scale Modeling
Same for me! This is rediculously cool! One of my favorite TC12 topics! -
Yes it's slightly different. i uploaded the LDD file to Rebrickable, but the LDD misses the silicon bands (one red and two white), includes two different 20t gears and 4 rare cylinders. I corrected this in the Rebrickable version. If you go by the images in the LDD html-export, you should be fine apart from the silicon bands. Is this enough info? What about sharing them here in this thread? I will add a collage image of all instances to my entry when it closes.
-
[TC12] The Unrollable
Didumos69 replied to kodlovag's topic in LEGO Technic, Mindstorms, Model Team and Scale Modeling
I also think this is a design issue, it probably also causes friction in the suspension arm movement. Can't you make it symmetrical, with angled springs coming from both the back and the front, or would the suspension be too rigid? EDIT: bad idea, the rear spring would not flip along with the front spring. EDIT2: Maybe with a spring coming in from the back that is even more slanted, with the rear end of the spring centered between the outer positions of its front end. Btw, I would also try to get rid of the ball-joints in the rear suspension so there is no need for the stabilizing links. -
I never played the game and I'm also not into games. I only played Blockout (kind of 3D tetris) in those days and I always imagined there would be a version with LEGO Techic parts that can only be dropped on top of one another when they would actually connect.
-
Thank you very much @Ivan_M! I have made your instructions available on Rebrickable (copied them to my Bricksafe).
-
Is it just me or am I correct that - going by the nature of most entries and wips - only very few people make the association with the 1994 Wacky Wheels game for this contest? I guess you have to be of certain age to be familiar with the game..
-
Now that this project is practically done, I would like to thank everybody who participated. I set myself the goal to finish this project within one month and we succeeded with instructions and all. I could not have done that without your help. Here's a short impression showing how the model evolved over the last few weeks.
-
@Ivan_M, excellent work! I just followed the instructions step by step and as far as I can see there are no impossible or unlogical steps. It would be awesome if you could replace the towballs with the pins with axle and 1L beams. It would only effects step 13 if I'm not mistaken. The towballs are simply not sufficient to avoid the front tires from rubbing against the mid-chassis. But even if you won't make that change I will add these instructions to rebrickable and simply make a note on the towballs in the description. The absence of a parts list in the pdf is no problem to me. There's a parts list on rebrickable already. Thank you very much for putting in the effort to make these instruction. I'm really amazed how fast you made them . I missed this part of your post yesterday. It would be really cool if you could add to the colony. Perhaps you could use the instructions by @Ivan_M.
-
! I have just put everything on rebrickable, including building instructions by means of a photo sequence. That should also show how the silicon bands are installed. When you finish the instructions I can update the rebrickable entry with them. And of course credit you for it. I appreciate your attempt alot ! Last things I changed: I used 2L black pins in the wheel covers (belt wheels) instead of 3L ones. 3L black pins are getting rare. And I replaced the pins with towballs with 3L axle pins with 2L axles. Final LXF is here, LDR here. Finally, I renewed my video and the photo's in the entry topic.
-
That is strange. Does it have to do with the tires? Thanks! I'm actually amazed that there are not more go-cart-inspired entries besides this one and 'the unrollable'. I associate wacky wheels with a funny go-cart race game. Haha. Cool to see yet another real-life ant.
-
Cool! How does it handle? I just made a few small changes to the model. The wheels were a little close (widthwise). I tried widening the car by two studs, but that was too much, so I moved each wheel half a stud more to the outside of the wheel axle. That didn't leave any space for the discs on the axles, so I replaced the discs with black belt wheels. Here is the new LXF-file.
-
Exactly! Don't forget the silicon bands. . I'm very happy with the suggestion, the spoilers add just the right amount of face to it.
-
There is no difference as far as I know. I see the same backlash in the FST NML gearbox (when looking at the DBG paddles attached to the shifting axle). Due to play in the 9L links the backlash has little effect on the change-over catches.
-
Very cool design! It looks like something that could actually exist and I like that. As for the headlights, you could attach a set of additional big lights to the yellow roof protection frame.
-
A #2 connector does indeed not fit. I tried to support the spoiler the way you suggest, but I didn't like the looks of it. In order to move the rear spoiler in the setup I have now, it needs to slip over the studs of two firmly secured 3L axles with stud, which involves a lot of friction. Good enough imo, I only thought it would be nice to somewhat confine the rear spoiler movement, hence the driving ring. To replace the driving ring with something black you could also use two . As for the color variants; I think DBG would look better for the seat for the white, orange and black version. And the blue version would look great with a red seat. Correct.
-
Very interesting! Would love to see a video of the cannon. Why not on youtube? You can narrow visibility to 'unlisted' and share it here without making it publically available.
-
Cool! Thanks @LvdH! You seem to be a walking parts inventory index . Not rigidity but it does serve as stopper for the rear spoiler to avoid it from dropping too low. Without the driving ring the rear spoiler would rely on friction only. As an alternative you could replace the driving ring with two bushings.
-
@Ivan_M, I don't know if you use the latest ldraw.xml to export to ldraw format. This is my ldraw-version which I exported from LDD using the latest ldraw.xml.
-
I certainly don't mind, I actually appreciate your attempt. Don't forget the silicon bands.