Jump to content

Didumos69

Eurobricks Dukes
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,045

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Didumos69

  1. Didumos69
    Good idea! I will put one on my desk too. The real model turns out to be just as cute as the LDD-version.
  2. Didumos69
    Just built it.
  3. Didumos69
    I'm affraid I will , but only after building your version.
  4. Didumos69
    Come on, give MRP_ a chance! Like Jim said he has no bad intentions and has probably learned from his mistake. If this were my thread I would also like to forget about it and start with a clean slate. My suggestion: Let's all be quiet on this thread now, so it will move down the timeline. Sssssshhh.....
  5. Didumos69
    Thanks for the credits, I feel honoured . Nice to see another use case of the 90 degree limiter. I like your stepper idea. It reminds me of something similar posted by piterx a few month ago. His solution could also be combined with the 90 degree limiter: I'm wondering whether it would be possible to use a 3L lever instead of a 5L lever in your stepper. Did you experiment with that? And maybe the LEGO red silicon band could replace the green one. Anyway, thanks for sharing and have a nice holiday!
  6. Didumos69
    I got the following question: Does the LXF-file for the 'ultimate version' include the errata or should the errata be applied separately? The answer is that the 'ultimate version' also includes the errata, but some fixes have been implemented differently. For instance the gear-sequence fix turns out differently, because I also switched the gears at the back of the diff with the gears in front of the diff. If you want to build Box 1. and Box 2. using the LXF-file for the 'ultimate version' you should take into account the following pointers: You need to make sure each individual axle that is part of the shift or drive train runs smoothly, with the least of friction. Make sure gears don't rub against liftarms, especially the red clutch gears need some play. When you replace the knob gears inside the PDK-unit with bevel gears, make sure the axles keep their original orientation. A knob gear mesh implies a 45 degree orientation difference. Also check the changes to Box 2; for instance the way the vertically placed black panel in front of the rear suspension module has been secured to adequately lock up the 20t bevel gears used for the rear HoGs. The LXF-file contains groups. In each group there is a subgroup representing the old structure and the new structure. Both new structures and old structures are embedded in a version of the chassis. By clicking on a group or subgroup in the group tab you select all parts in that group. Now when you invert the selection and then delete the selection you see a cutaway of the group, which allows you to inspect the group thoroughly. Use Ctrl-Z to undo the delete after inspection. This way you can inspect the differences group by group. I also have a parts list available with the extra parts needed for this version.
  7. Didumos69
    I think the dust has settled again. You could consider starting a MRP_'s workshop / attic / pipeline / shed / corner / saloon / studio / whatever topic where you can feel a bit more free to post what you think is worth posting. Meanwhile I'm anxious to see more.
  8. Didumos69
    Now also on rebrickable with parts list etc.: https://rebrickable....-911-gt3-rallye. I also ordered the parts myself so I will soon be able to build it.
  9. Didumos69
    Lovely little creature!
  10. Didumos69
    Well, that's a very valid use case! Good to know that PF-failure can - in many cases - be avoided with these kind of tricks. Sadly enough it also shows I'm not the only one this brilliant .
  11. Didumos69
    Even though I tried this, I decided not to use it eventually. Let me explain why. For me building Technic constructions is like solving complex puzzles - or at least I like to think of them as complex. If I would arrive at a point where I would need this kind of compromise solution, my conclusion would be there is something wrong with my construction and regard the puzzle as yet unsolved. You could for instance use this to avoid a pin from being pulled out of a pin-hole when the construction is stressed. However, if a construction relies on a pin this way, I tend to think of the construction as being no good. The construction should be such that forces are applied orthogonal - not longitudinal - to the pin-connection. For me the only useful application of this would be to eliminate slack in, or add rigidity to a - already properly designed - construction. Not to fix a poor construction.
  12. Didumos69
    These are of course useful too and I would also prefer using a pure LEGO option if sufficient. My option becomes useful if you don't want to have something sticking out of your pin or want to completely eliminate slack in the pin-pin-hole connection. I've read posts where people wanted to glue parts together or drove real screws in pins. In those cases I think this is a more elegant option.
  13. Didumos69
    It adds stress to the pin-hole but nothing that causes damage or deformation. Also no temporary deformation while the screw is inside. Btw, I drove in the screw no further than to make a flat surface with the outer edge of the pin.
  14. Didumos69
    I have one, added it to the OP.
  15. Didumos69
    I'm not a big fan of using non-LEGO parts, but I tried this a few months ago and I thought it's worth sharing. To firmly secure a pin in a pin-hole without making the pin or pin-hole useless after disassembly, you can drive a small set-screw (I used M4x3) into the pin. I used the back-side of a knife to avoid the pin from rotating while driving in the screw. but be careful not to damage that end of the pin. I drove in the screw no further than to make a flat surface with the outer edge of the pin. EDIT: Even though I tried this, I decided not to use it eventually. Let me explain why. For me building Technic constructions is like solving complex puzzles - or at least I like to think of them as complex. If I would arrive at a point where I would need this kind of compromise solution, my conclusion would be there is something wrong with my construction and regard the puzzle as yet unsolved. You could for instance use this to avoid a pin from being pulled out of a pin-hole when a construction is stressed. However, if a construction relies on a pin this way, I tend to think of the construction as being no good. The construction should be such that forces are applied orthogonal - not longitudinal - to the pin-connection. For me the only useful application of this would be to eliminate slack in, or add rigidity to a - already properly designed - construction. Not to fix a poor construction.
  16. Didumos69
    One more thought about fully manual or not: I think the original paddle shifters also operate electronically, while yours operate completely mechanically. So it's not strange to operate the seats mechanically as well even when the original seats are operated electronically.
  17. Didumos69
    Awesome car! I would also stick to manual functions only. Especially when it means more elegance in the chassis. With the HoGs and paddle shifters it's essentially a manual model anyway. I also thinks it's a good thing to be able to put this model in the same category as Pvdb's Koenigsegg One:1 and other amazing full manual models.
  18. Didumos69
    "Patience serves as a protection against wrongs as clothes do against cold. For if you put on more clothes as the cold increases, it will have no power to hurt you. So in like manner you must grow in patience when you meet with great wrongs, and they will then be powerless to vex your mind.” ― Leonardo da Vinci
  19. Didumos69
    I get it. I'm looking forward to reading your report on your final version :-)
  20. Didumos69
    I wasn't completely serious of course and there's no universal definition of 'working properly'. Still, when I watch , I see (at timestamp 1:45) a clear resonance in the rotation speed of the gears. This resonance could also be seen in Sariel's video review. This resonance indicates friction somewhere in the drive train.About the trick to never lift the chassis until the marriage is complete...and test every single gear each and every single step... That can surely not be the intention of any model. My statement is: What can be messed up before the marriage, can be messed up after the marriage. It shouldn't be needed to treat your finished build with so much care that the slightest displacement of beams causes it to stop working properly. And even when you build your model with utmost care, you will never avoid the friction introduced by the pin joiner in the D+N+R-gearbox and the friction in the unnecessary red clutch gears.
  21. Didumos69
    Haha! I would like to add to that: Anyone who claims to have build a properly working 42056 without having made modifications, immediately disqualifies for any mechanical engineering-related job
  22. Didumos69
    Maybe the difference was caused by The Coriolis Force, which operates in opposite direction in the Southern Hemisphere . More seriously, maybe FireAnt didn't notice steps 267 and 269 show the bottom side of the chassis...
  23. Didumos69
    This looks really cool, although I still don't fully understand it's operation yet. Does it switch from opposite-direction-steering to same-direction-steering at a certain point? I see you don't have any vertical arms tying the upper and lower suspension arms together. Aren't you affraid the shocks will push the lower suspension arms out of the lower ball joint after stressing the suspension a few times? Anyway, this works deserves some embedded images, would be nice if you could embed them. EDIT: For my ultimate version I eventually moved the HoGs to the front holes of the same panel so they directly mesh with the 20t bevel gears at the front side of the rear suspension module. This made the HoGs better reachable and more simple, but it required a minor change to box 2 as well: The vertically placed panel in front of the rear suspension module needed to be fixed better so it would better lock-up the 20t bevel gears to avoid the HoGs from slipping. See this post: http://www.eurobrick...5#entry2600883. If you would use the same HoG setup you would have even more space for you're rear wheel steering.
  24. Didumos69
    It seems you have missed a few pages on this thread. Perhaps you're living in a different era. What date do you have? It's August 14, 2016 here.
  25. Didumos69
    @Jonfensu, you have been 'on' the Porsche contest all the time with knowledgeable posts and responses. It's nice to see that someone like you sees the qualities of this entry. I second every word of the above.
×
×
  • Create New...