Divitis

I was thinking about the angle. I don't own the one with the fin, but it looks comparable to the new one from the images

Could it be the rational version of 87745 (which I don't own)?

#13 This won't be a technical update, but one I hope fellow noobs will find it useful to avoid some of the pitfalls I fell into. Plans are useless. Before this project, I had never used a technic panel in a MOC, and had next to no knowledge of their sizes and availability. So after starting with the 125S, whenever I ordered some pieces, if the store had red panels available at a reasonable price, I would get some just in case. Result: the car is pretty much built while the drawer is still full. but planning is fundamental. I have a habit of purchasing pieces 'just to have them' even when they seem like p.o.o.p.s or useless gimmicks, at least when compared to the simplicity of the parts lineup of my childhood. But without these two, the bodywork would have not been possible, or it would have been rather flimsy. A well assorted drawer of 'what if' bricks makes it much more easy to try out ideas and reduces the frustration of waiting for parts. How many times did you have to put a design on hold waiting for that part to arrive in the mail? It is also cheap enough to maintain, especially if one buys pieces in random (cheapest) colors. Stud.io dependency vs embracing imperfections. To me, working with Studio is less cognitive demanding than the real bricks, maybe because I play late at night. So I often find myself working on, say, a supporting structure and wonder 'will it be sturdy enough'? rather that quickly building it with real bricks. Another bad habit is always building to perfection in Studio, which results in either impossible constructions or very difficult ones that need to be put together in a special way. The 3L pins eventually became my best prototyping friends and now I no longer feel guilty using them when I know a 3L blue pin could theoretically be fit. Next up: Another (the last) gearbox revolution. Because the previous one wasn't accurate enough.

#12 Evolution of the front axle (again) I realize this is the second post on the front axle (see top of the page). Apologies if it gets boring, but the duplication reflects my struggles with it. Steering and suspension need to be developed together and the new challenges are: Offsetting the wishbone arms half a stud towards the center to allow using regular wheel hubs. Shortening the steering arms as much as possible to reduce play in the mechanism. Connecting the two, now that they are unevenly spaced. This literally drove me nuts, just look at that lime mess which was the best I could do after days of trying! Routing the movement back to the steering wheel (in yellow below). It would be much much easier if I could rotate the motor so the output is closer to the cockpit, but then the cable wouldn't reach the hub. Of course, I had to rebuild everything to find out. Minus some bracing, this is about 90% there compared to what's in the final model, where the 'transversal leaf spring' also found a way in. I'll leave it at that for this WIP thread so there's some unknown left for the eventual reveal. Learnings: The right placement of the shock absorber is right on top of the lower arm for sturdiness. When the suspension is pushed hard (In my strive for as good as possible, I'm treating this Ferrari as a Mad Max stunt car) the 5l liftarm connecting the upper and lower arm wasn't enough and the wheel hub popped out, I reckon partly because of the imperfect geometry (one arm longer than the other). Eventually, the weak point proved to be the towball pin connection to the hub. So switching to the Audi one solved the problem entirely. To your points: I am indeed proud of this system, it feels like 'overcomplication with a purpose' since it improves playability a lot. Over the course of the development this actually disappeared but then luckily found a way back in. Next up: Plans are useless, but planning is fundamental. Stud.io dependency vs embracing imperfections.

That chassis is so elegant, it makes all the engineering look simple. And I mean this in the best possible way :)

I really like this bizarre model and how you're 'engineering it on the fly'. I appreciate that it takes great skills to enjoy this sort of freedom with Technic, playing with it with the same joyful spirit of brick stacking Duplo.

On the secret switches With the failed test drive where the car could only go as fast as second gear, I started doubting that I could make it ever go fast through the gearbox, even with better bracing. And so what would it be the point of making it motorized at all? So I devised this solution: #1 Connects the motor output and the gearbox input #2 Connects the gearbox output and the drive axle #3 Directly couples the motor output and the drive axle to the wheels Then, the following is possible. The car runs through the gearbox (#1 on, #2 on, #3 off) The gearbox is fully excluded from the drivetrain for uncompromised performance (#1 off, #2 off, #3 on) The car becomes a push-along model with fake engine running at constant speed (#1 off, #2 on, #3 off) In theory the M angular model can be back-driven (it can be used as a rotation sensor) so one could even steer the car through the steering wheel, albeit somewhat inconveniently. Watch the fake engine run at different speeds while the car stays still (#1 on, #2 off, #3 off) Unfortunately I couldn't see a way to add levers to operate these switches without compromising the aesthetic. Which sparked the idea of building a base for the model, from where they can be operated, ideally with some mechanical trickery to make it impossible to turn #2 and #3 on simultaneously, which would mean disaster. I'm actually going het started on this tonight (time of writing). On the asymmetry of the car. To my knowledge, two 125s exist today and they are slightly different (one has two windshields and the other one, only one has a parking brake). So when fetching images online I got used to incongruences. But I wasn't expecting this: One of the 125 S' most interesting features was that it had just one conventional door, on the passenger's side. On the driver's side, there was a cutout in the metal panel through which the pilot jumped inside. And it's then that I begun really liking the 125S. A Ferrari made for pilots, not fat millionaires. As a perk, the one door setup should make it easier to reinforce the chassis. Thanks @karmadrome and @Paul B Technic! I means a lot reading that my updates are appreciated. And I hope this thread will help fellow inexperienced builders who want to embark on a similar challenge :) Next up: The evolution of the front axle

February 8th: New gearbox and test drive The new gearbox design has the input on the left (red) and output on the right (green) with a u-joint routing the motion back in the center (one 16t gear on the left side is missing in the image below). In order to keep the gear ratios realistic, the 1st and 5th gears need to be between 4x to 5x apart and that's easy enough. It's making sure that the gears sitting on the same ring aren't too close or too far apart however, which proved more tricky. On the right side (image below), you can see the solution: R, 1st, 3rd and 5th are geared down by a 12t to 20t ratio, while 2nd and 4th are geared down by 16t to 20t. The 'streams' merge through two 8t gears. The triangle liftarm is my favorite piece, so I was super happy to put it to good use :) On the left, some complicated gearing gears down the R gear and inverts its rotation through two clutch which spin freely at slightly different speeds on the orange axle that meanwhile serves as the main input. Looking back at this months after designing it, I needed some time to wrap my own head around it. The final ratios are: R: 0.12 1st: 0.12 2nd: 0.16 3rd: 0.36 4th: 0.48 5th: 0.6 Am I happy with the jump between 2nd and 3rd. Hell no. But it's also about time I take this baby for ride. The first test drive was a total failure. The wheels at the back pop out after less than a meter and the front custom built wheel hub cannot really stand the weight of the model and sags and bends. However, the car at least moves, even if only in R, 1st and 2nd gears. Then some of the bracing pops. I regret not having a video, but it probably happened late at night when I was the only one awake, and I cannot seem to film and run the C+ APP simultaneously. The learnings: - proper wheel hubs are a must at 1:8 scale. - gears tend to push one another apart vertically rather than horizontally. The teeth effectively push up (or down) the other gear and only when the bracing is strong enough rotational movement starts. All in all, plenty of lessons learned and a s**tload left to do! Finally, did you notice the three 2L driving rings connected to the motors and the gearbox input and output? Next up: All about them, and the belated discovery that the car is asymmetrical.

8. Custom wheel hubs As soon as I got my hands on the wheels of the Vespa I realized that my approximation was too generous, and I will have one module less of space to play with than I thought. (The wheel hub doesn't sits at the center of the tire and not offset as I had assumed. So, with the wheel hubs I wanted to use the wheels would stick out one stud and I had to swap them for custom build solutions. Instead of being frustrated, I remember how happy I actually was that more engineering would be needed. This is how the front turned out (for some reason the caster angle has increased, I suppose to make it a one stud offset between arms rather than a half) And this for the back, using the Ford GT links and new 3L flip flop beams. (some bracing is missing in the picture to allow seeing what's going on). The biggest challenge is giving enough clearance to the differential, so that it doesn't touch the battery box when the suspension compresses. That battery box is so big and pushing it even just a half stud higher would ruin the profile of the car. So finding a solution was a very frustrating process - of which I'm sparing you about a dozen iterations - suffice to say that I got really close to getting a Buwizz before devising this and seeing it work smoothly enough. Both the forage harvester and the Ford GT other parts are in the drawer now, thinking maybe I'll get around building them sometimes. So somewhat of an expensive solution. Anyway, armed with new confidence, I even took a stab at the car seat. Little did I know the end was so far away. Next up: New gearbox and first test drive. And inevitably, revolution #2.

8. Madness and Perseverance over the holidays and beyond This update won't be much technical, I'm afraid. But I want to share that I find both madness and perseverance as crucial to success when one bites way more that they can chew, such as I am. The catch is: you need to embrace their folly and turn it into calm. Lego it's a hobby Madness I'm thinking at the dozens iterations of the gearbox planned in my head during the Christmas days and lunches and dinners and gifts wrapping and unwrapping, only to inevitably find them faulty in the evening when, after putting the family to bed, I would start building. Suffice to say, this is what will eventually go into testing once the parts arrived. I could see that it doesn't look elegant, with the asymmetrical motor placement and the extra gearing between motor and steering, but I had nothing better. Perseverance (and spoiler) This happened only three days ago. I was on the couch after a test drive when, looking at the car from a different angle than usual, I noticed it sits lower at the back - my fault for building the digital model in Studio with the front suspension compressed. Ever since, I've been spending my days re-designing the rear axle to match the front. Because perseverance means that even only being sloppy once is unforgivable. To your points: The Kawasaki was still to be released then, and it won't for a while. On January 28th I'm still concocting the most bizarre designs with @Jurss. BTW, it looks like you know way more about Ferrari than I do. Did I mention I don't care for cars much IRL? The model ends up using several links, not just for the gearbox and I've been considering the new piece since I know it exists, however keeping in mind it won't be cheap! My impression is that having both options will be a great design simplifier, rather than a game changer. So far only in one case the new one proved indispensable. But then again, maybe 10 more hours of tinkering would have allowed for the classic one to fit. Next up: Custom wheel hubs

7. Sometime between Christmas and New Year.. .. I started blocking out more of the interior including the seats and suddenly realized the many things that were out of place or out of proportions. Firstly, the engine is too big. Just compare it with this incredible historic image. And it makes sense, considering that in 1:8 cars the classic engine pieces are used to represent engines of 5000cc and more. The 125s only has a 1500cc engine. Below are some explorations of a more compact design, and different ways of achieving the 60 degrees inclination. Then, secondly and more important: the cockpit floor (visible in lime/yellow in the first image) sits way too high compared to the lower edge of the door. That won't meet my accuracy standards. This car is a cabrio, so no compromises can be tolerated on the insight. My goal is to achieve a 'model team' look. So, the gearbox gets moved to the front, under the fake engine, and converted to a more traditional design, while the two L motors are shuffled about yet again, this time to where I assume I'll be able to hide them under the seats. The gearing isn't tuned yet, but the linkage to operate it through the stick makes its appearance. It's 2u tall, and the plan is to lay the cockpit floor directly on top. In fact, the missing piece is the 'flip flop' 6L linkage that was discovered in the upcoming mars rover. - @NV Lego technic Next up: Madness and perseverance.

The left one should help visualizing the geometry of the cube, but of course it's an illegal and impossible construction. The right one is a quick attempt at bracing. Depending on the forces you're dealing with you might want to connect it to the bottom of the 5x7 frame too, as now it's only secured by friction on the vertical axle. @Stereo Looks like i misinterpreted your earlier post. This should be more like what you're looking for, using the .2 offset of the headlight brick.

Not sure if I properly understood your doubts with the worm screw, but maybe knowing that you can stack two black cubes helps? Then you have more studs to support whatever is attached to it.

6. The evolution of the front axle - circa 22th to 30th of December Predictably, the steering and suspension systems evolved side by side - and the motors kept changing position. In the case of the steering, the arms are still too long and introduce a lot of play but the biggest immediate challenge was constructing a solid bracing around it all, to prevent the black cube from spinning. As it turns out, it's crucial to remove as much wiggle room and bending as possible from the system, as even a small amount prevents the C+ app from calibrating. A hard stop is required so relying on the wheels touching the fenders, for example, won't do. At the time, I created a dedicated topic for it so I won't be uploading too many iteration steps here. And these are the key learnings from developing the suspension system. Not necessarily al learnt at this point in time of course - gosh, I am still far away from the first test drive! When testing suspensions, don't push the suspension arm up with your hand. Push the wheel up instead. This is how the actual forces will work on the model. It's going to be irritating to see your ball joints pop up out but it will save you the much bigger frustration of the same happen at a later stage. How to brace suspension components or 'which way things push when the suspension is compressed'. The shock absorber (red 6l liftarm) pushes up (Blue bracing). Both suspension arms push down. (Orange and lime axle bracing) Result of the set-up above: The orange connector holding the upper arm is sure to pop out. Understanding this interplay helped me immensely with developing a reliable digital model. This 'production diary' is meant to be useful to noobs like me, so experienced builders please forgive the long excursus. In the image above you can also see how the 'unequal-length wishbone' setup was implemented. Very simply, the upper arm (orange connector) pivots one stud closer to the ball joint than the lower one (lime axle). This is what ChatGPT regurgitates: In a car suspension system described as 'unequal length double wishbone' or 'short-long arm suspension', the lower arm is the longer one. This design allows for better handling and improved tire contact with the road throughout the suspension travel. The shorter upper arm and longer lower arm help to control the camber changes that occur during cornering, enhancing the vehicle's stability and grip. Finally for the steering itself: playing in Studio, it looked like 30 degrees of rotation of the wheel hub in both directions (60 total) could realistically be achieved, and so it became my hard goal. And I never strayed however, in insight, I reckon I could have been a bit more lenient with myself. To your points: I am really glad to hear you're enjoying the read :) It is kinda fun but also some work, especially because I'm not exactly reporting on a linear development. Very often the files prove that I was experimenting in circles and so must select the relevant elements and create a narrative around them. Still, I've been spending my evenings for the past six months working on this, so now that I'm only waiting for orders to arrive and one piece to be officially released, I can spare the time. Next up: Revolution #1. How most of everything got thrown away and completely redesigned in the name of accuracy. Because sometimes three plates are too many.

5. Connections and wheel arches - circa 22th December A lot of gears are needed to transfer motion from the gearbox to the V12 (and also from the steering motor to the wheel). This is the biggest drawback of these early designs. I decided to work on the chassis and the bodywork separately. Breaking this monumental - at least for me - project in two seems the only feasible way to be able to make it. So, some blueprinting is going on, to understand how to distribute the available space in a way that won't come back to bite me in the butt later on, even if it means facing harsh constraints for the mechanics right now. In hindsight, this is probably the best decision I took in these early stages. The orange axle represents the tapering of the hood. I also wanted to define key aesthetic pieces early on. Again, to make sure there's enough space for them. The 13 long wheel arc immediately looked like the obvious choice, despite the odd connection points. To your points: Thank you for your continue support, it means a lot. And speaking of details, believe me, my hands are hitching to show you what's lying on my desk now. Next up: Fast forward through the evolution of the front axle and the self imposed rule of ±30 degrees of steering.

4. Caster angle - circa 21th December Version 3 of the Stud.io file introduces caster angle. By this time I am avidly consuming this forum, and caster angle comes up a lot. I also remember reading in Sariel's book something along the lines of 'It's considered a great display of skills among builders to include...'. So I naturally want it. And after reading that a positive caster angle was firstly proposed in 1896, it seemed legitimate to imagine the 125s had it. For the implementation, I have to give credit to an unknown user of this forum - please do credit yourself - who thought of simply offsetting the suspension arms, rather than inclining the whole forward section of the car. The bracing is still non-existent, but already the motors configuration has changes substantially. I don't advice you trying to keep track. (This is still file 3 out of 107) I was apparently also toying with some other solutions such as the one below, but they were short lived and never made it to the 'main' model. After much reading and looking at the car schematic (first post) it seems like the shock absorber is mounted perpendicular to the ground, so the first solution is the more accurate one. To your points: These are an excellent observations! What I also read is that with this set-up, if a wheel hits a bump, the vibration doesn't reach the steering wheel,becasue the worm screw cannot be backdriven. Admitdelly, the Lego one can, so this advantage is negated here. The biggest limitation I found is the range of movement of the ball joint, which is not as ample as one might think. So one has to 'multiply' it by using a long stick (from the ball joint to the driving rings). Other than that, it's mostly about fixing the joint holder properly. You're absolutely right. However at this point in time I still know next to nothing about the forces that come to play as this is the first car with a gearbox that I design. Thank you! I am quite proud of it actually. The only disadvantage is that the part is rather long, so probably out of scale in most models, including this one. An alternative solution I explored in real life was this one: + But the lack of connection points and excessive softness made me scrap it. Could be interesting for a smaller scale model though. Next up: Connecting the fake engine and steering, choosing wheel arches and general bracing.

This looks like a really cool set! I have the previous two boats and they are the only two models I haven't disassembled or just bought for parts. I really like how they have plenty of exposed functions as opposed to being hidden behind panels. Happy this one didn't disappoint and includes a stand - that catamaran is still begging for one. I might actually get it.

3. Engine, General blocking, leaf spring suspensions - circa 20th December v2 of the wip Stud.io file shows a lot of progress, let's go in order. Engine If there is one thing that screams 'sloppy' to me in both MOCs and sets is the engine angle, which is as important to its performance as the wheelbase is to the general handling of a car. So to not copy it, space allowing, is inexcusable. And yet, this piece is in vogue. Here you can see my attempt at a true 60 degrees setup, which required a change in motor. General blocking and relative size There is barely enough space for the hub in the back! I started this project thinking that in a 1:8 model I would have all the space in the world and more. Turns out, not quite. The 125s is a very tiny car, especially by today's standards. You can see it racing along the LaFerrari in the video below to get the idea. Leaf springs suspension This is another area where I think I'm innovating after worm and sector steering; I haven't seen anyone using the wishbone piece before - happy to be proven wrong of course I had the idea early on but since I wanted to make sure it is -legally- intended to bend. After checking all its usages on BL, I got my answer. It is at least in set 7002! On the right, the alternative tire I'm considering. As usual, I'm using a piece I don't own - the Vespa tire - and couldn't even find the right wheel hub in Studio so I put that in as a placeholder. A choice I'll pay a price for, eventually. To your points: Thank you! I reckon back then I was too shy on this forum to just bomb everyone with questions. Now it's all figured out. Next up: Caster angle

Of course, and well spotted! V12 60° of course. Just as Gioacchino Colombo designed it. Apologies , I was typing in a rush, the original post is now amended.

2. Worm and sector steering - circa 17th December I must have been working every waking hour in those first days, because the steering system is already present in the first Stud.io file - for reference, I am currently at version 107. I already presented worm and sector steering here: Worm and sector steering - LEGO Technic, Mindstorms, Model Team and Scale Modeling - Eurobricks Forums and in a more advanced state. So I will only talk about this early implementation. In a nutshell, worm and sector works like this: The worm screw moves the black box, to which the white gear rack in attached. The rack rotates the dark gray 8t gear and consequently the red liftarms. Eventually, I will learn which factors introduce play in the mechanism, and work to counter them. - The 8t gear itself. A 16t or 24t gear meshes more robustly with the rack. - The length of the red arm also amplifies of any slack or play. So one will want to shorten it as much as possible. To make things worst, I don't even own the worm screw yet; so I have no way of determining how many revolutions are required to steer and the range of movement of the black cube. Eventually, I'll be watching videos frame by frame to figure out while the order arrived. Finally, the angular motor seemed like a good choice not only because I have two gathering dust in my drawers, but the double output would simplify making the steering wheel work (another must, of course). To your points: I think you mean to say: Clearly you bit more than you can chew, but at least chose a real looking car. Well, I dare to say: stay tuned. Lots changes in 106 iterations. Next up: the V12 60° engine.

2. Wheels and Gearbox - circa 16th December This is a screenshot from the first .io file. It looks like I had a decent 2 views template already in place for scaling. (the front view is hidden here). The spec sheet reports that the real car has bigger tires at the rear than at the front. So I purchased 4 Vespa tires (which at 1:8 scale fall in between front and rear, I think) and 2 x 81.6mm tires to see how'd they look at the rear. Maybe the extra width will not be noticeable given how tight the wheel arcs are? Btw, I wish I had @Stereo's proficiency with doing the math needed btw. I had to ask chat GPT for clarification as 5.00-15 meant nothing to me at the time and a calculator isn't easily available on the web. I'm working with a 3 studs high chassis, which gives enough space for this gearbox configuration. The gearbox should: be manual transmit power (see the 2 L motors coupled through a differential) to the wheels have realistic separation between gears (another thing I see too often overlooked) including the R being slower that the 1st. This is especially challenging here because the 5th and R sit on the same ring. haven't seen before anyone using a ball join for the movement of the stick. It'll be still a while before I am to build the first prototype, but I can report - Spoiler alert! - it's a pleasantly realistic feeling to operate it. Recommended! I also like the idea of system bricks for the bracing, gives off an old Lego vibe that I think matches the age of the real car. To your points: Of course you are right. However, I am not a prolific builder. I build and rebuild and perfect one project to the point of exhaustion until I am convinced that I have given it all and didn't overlook anything. I would also drop a project if I don't think I can make it happen to the level I had committed to. Probably doesn't for the best learning curve... I recall thinking in a moment of sanity: Why T. F. did I pick the curviest car ever? And even considering - not sure if already three days into the build but soon enough - to only do the chassis and then give it to the community to finish things off. Next up, something you might have heard me talking about before: worm and sector steering.

With only these 1, 2 and 3 (arguably) Technic creations built in the last 8 years and less than a handful of sets assembled meanwhile, last December I abruptly decided to MOC the Ferrari 125s - the first Ferrari ever built, and one apparently never attempted before in LEGO in any scale before - and to do so without cutting any corners. Which means: a high fidelity replica of how things both work and look in a sturdy, smooth working, 100% legal way. And also motorized, since I'm at it. Why? At the risk of making enemies: too many celebrated 1:8 models I saw around here and Rebrickable seem like nothing more than a generic copy-paste chassis covered up in some lazy paneling that falls shorts of the angles and curves of the original. And one can only think 'I could do better' that many times before wanting to challenge that thought. Today, after a rollercoaster of achievements and compromises, I decided I'd start a production diary that will hopefully also be helpful those crazy enough thinking of wasting some hundreds of hours on a similar project. But enough with the intro and into the nuts and bolts of it. 1. References - circa 15th December. This is what the official Ferrari page says about this barchetta. Of course I intend to replicate it all. Also this technical drawing came up. The source is unknown, but seems legit, and it immediately proved hugely helpful. At first my eyes were on the rear axle: combining both shock absorbers and leaf springs seemed like the kind of overengineering I was bargaining for. But then, as I had to look up pretty much on the list, the steering system proved the most immediate challenge that needed solving. I promise to include the first WIP in the next post. Meanwhile, questions are very welcome. Also sharing your honest opinion on my chances of success is highly encouraged! it's important to know where one's ambition stands against reality.

I thought nobody would ever ask. https://bricksafe.com/files/divitis/miscellaneous-/Wheeler 05.io

Maybe even too small for your needs, however happy to share :) https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/topic/196891-narrowest-drive-unit-yet-steering-independent-suspension-differential-drive/

Thanks for the kind reactions. I hope I didn't came across cocky in the first place. That engine configuration is super interesting btw!