Void_S

Do you mean the front ones? They may match this design so good, for sure if the size fits...

They can, if the scale or details level (non-USC) allow omitting the gearbox or engine crankshaft (they could be easily replaced with some interestingly rotating sci-fi looking stators or other "high-tech electric motor" parts.

Conciderimg a huge play in these ball-to-link joints and relativelly small steerign arm length the pivot offste is not the biggest problem: the arms should be much longer, or have some allignment link which hold the hubs in parralell. The current setup has too much play in all connections. Ideally, the "steereing rack ratio" should be as high as possible, so even signiticat turns of the pendular suspension will have no any countable effect on the sterrign angles. Or, follow Jeroen's idea but with some additional embrasement.

Well, the wall you're hitting is very thick and strong - for real-life trucks not so many companes dared to try making steered and driven axles with double tires. Just due to the same limitations you faced here: Quite limited space for steering hubs and arms due to tight placemet of "underfarme" assemlies. Nearly impossible to meet requrements for load capacity - it must be durabke enught to hold an impressive per-axle weight. Otherwise, it is pointess to keep double tries (and all related limitations due to them) for light-loaded axle. So, you can be proud that you're not doing some questionable work but triyng to beat really hard challenge. Even harder concidering the LEGO parts imitations. Added: may we know wich modification it will be? If I'm not mistaken, US trucks normally have fixed dually/single-tired axles or steered/self-steered (self-alligned) single-tired axles only. I just can't recall I have ever heard about steered+driven+dually axles, which are commonly too overcomplicated for US trucks. So, your mod looks promissing to be a uqinue one .

Actually, it really is. Our district purchased one for roads cleansing and washing a few years ago, and its height was a huge surprise for me. It is like a full-sized truck but on a short tiny chassis. I cant describe it better....

Sounds somehow simialr to 9398 color scheme...

I think it may requre a steeper with a ratched assembly, a-la Big Porche shift padders, so the gearbox shifts when the servo rotate at 90 degrees and does nothing when the servo auto-returns. So each servo activation will mean the chage to a higer or lower gear.

Yeah, it is quite a strong point - I also noticed that all the parts I was trying to use in lime are exists (for sure except the small arches, yet ), since were presented in the latest "Cian" set. The only thing I bear in mind - will they be ll lime, or some "lime-shaded ones"? Well, you know...

Hmm, nice observation - bright and vibrant colors are common for sportscars and supercars. Here may be some red and white ones but I believe there are a lot of more "utility" vehicles in these colors. Should we wait for some new USC supercar to see its color? I think it makes sense

It's my version (even draft of it yet) of this set - I just wanted to try to replicate the 2019/20/21 version "in pieces" and dared to publish it here. For just a "facelifted" muscle car from 42098 Car Transporetd set (no suspension, no extra features yet, just the same V8-"trumphet" engine, HOGed steering and rear differential) it aproximatelly includes about ~550 parts, so for the offcial set made of 544 parts it is one more prove that it should be "Corevtte-sized" set. It is not a draft nor prototype nor any leaked image of the set. Just my own personal attempt to imagine how it may look like, which may be totally wrong.

@Rebel_Lego, is there any chance to see these models at RB in some future (paid/free - no matter)?

Well, 8229's transformation was more a modular rebudilg process, like some sets (mostly cranes) where the B-model was a differnt superstructure on the same chassis. However, unfortunatelly, I does not deny a possibility of re-relaese of such or similar set...

Is there a way to bring some pictures here, may be some screenshots? The site is not reachevbe for me even via various VPNs

Perfect trucks, I love such high-detailed and well-functioned models as perfect result of of the biggest challenges to fit everything in a limited scale (1:8-1:10 are not so limited by parts-to-model size).

My idea was to beat @desert752's famous "desktop step", a square-shaped levels rise/drop as an example of the most challenging "indoor" obstacle. Has only a pure-vertical surface Has a minimal possible traction The idea is to put the foremost sprocket higher than the obstacle, so it "takes a step" moving higher than the obstacle, and then, when the middle sprocket comes closer to the edge, it retracts under its weight and all-way flat tracks just move forward. I will try to book some time and build it to see how it works. In a dedicated off-top topic, for sure.

Alternatively, it may be just can be a more simple scheme with a "bogie" tandem arm holding the front upper and bottom wheels: Normally, the arm is horizontal, so all three sprockets are flat-lined (both front ones, that act as front+middle, and the rear driven one). When some obstacle is here, and the attack cannot climb over, just bumping and pushing it, the bogie arm rotates due to pushing from behind, and the front sprocket goes up, while the middle one is pushed down. So, the tracks become temporary triangle-shaped, until the obstacle is passed. Red - bogie triangle arm Black - bogie mount point Blue - a driven sprocket with "pushing" static arm Orange - the tracks

Do you mean the bottom-sided shapes of the front splitter? It looks quite similar is shape but I afraid will make the nose (ok, the front overhang) overproportionaly long, and even worse, it may make the steering impossible... I still beleive it may be made of the regunalr conenctors. Like that:

Real-life trailers usually have a counter-bend when empty, so they become flat when loaded. Unfortunatelly, I don't think it is possible to make it of Lego parts without loosing the construction firmness. 🙁

https://bricksafe.com/files/Void_s/studio-models/42078%20A-Model%20Mack%20Anthem.io

I whish it had parralel levers to keep the forks leveled but afraid that it could be impossible to implememts it together with telescopic feature (so both levers must telescopic ones) having the limited scale and parts number.

Possibly it was menat not the rubber (EV3-mindstorms, right?) attachemnts but the chails themselves, e.g. "Caterillar's caterpillers" (I was waiting for it, he-he ) but in black? I have no idea what might mean "transformation" here, but having the fact of "two chained treads/caterpillers + a seat inbetween them" we may have two options: transformation of some body parts or attachemets (whatever it could be - doors, hinges, etc.), or a some variant of a constcution tarkes vechile which may have "transport" and "working" shapes. transformation of tracks geometry, which may be more tasty for RC-controlled toys - like, let's it be said, a "ripsaw" variant which may have flatened long tracks to run on more or less flat surafces (like A models of 42095 and it's precessor) and high-rised all-terrain crawler able to climb over the high obstacles (B-models, hello!).

Now I see it is nothing than a full truth

Building the rear Tatra, the motors should be placed above the main drive shaft. Maybe on the sides of authentic model of V- shaped engine?

I just tested some assemblies and the crown and holder parts start moving (slightly) only when the axle which rotates it, was about to be twist-broken. Just wanted to highlight that my "new heavy-duty" differentials keep the parts assembled so hard, so I think I can't disassemble them with no screwdriver or other tools (like PF or PU motor cases). May I propose that yours can be disassembled even manually, e.g. lost its "connection strength"?

Well, I suppose all the gear connections must be embraced accordingly to handle high torque. Otherwise, they will skip and click, no matter if they are differentials, bevel-angled, or normal gears. Have you tested the same setup but with a normal differential? I guess the "have-duty" application of the new one is to not to be damaged under the high torque, first of all, while the old one will chew its single-bevel thin crown quite easily.