Void_S

Yeah, especially as you really changed it a lot. That were just my own doubts.

Thank you for the model and your efforts! And that you dare to do it! Honestly, I was looking at the non-LEGO (all kind of them, not only legal ones) models for a long time and among of well-known copies, there were some really interesting models. The story is not about the "copy - is it good or bad" but my own doubts in making a copy of some model - for sure, it's always OK if you do some reverse engineering for yourself, "for home use only". However, I still feel some ethical dilemma here: On one hand, it is great to try and explore something new, like we do for not-yet-released sets. To imagine how this and that was made and how it works using only some blurry images. On another hand, are we allowed to publish it? For LEGO sets, for sure not - we're here for a fair play and should not cross the border of "official/leaked" terms and make a present for copycats. For other ones - Rebrickable (I like their position) is made for MOCs, so it is welcomed to publish the Own models. On the third hand (well, I can't figure it better, sorry), I feel some freedom regarding the illegal brands - "so, you copycatted us, so I will you too", like a kind of a counter attack. There is a feeling only, as I really that the ice here is sooo thin.

I think, all these treads should have some ordering, like a list of included models in the first topic. Axle collection thread is a nice source or random goods but worst ever thread to find something certain... I really wish these trucks/trailers treads will not turn into that heap of random assemblies.

Historically, very first models had a fixed front axle (the "cabin" half-frame's artuculation was enought to act as pendular suspension) however it was nearly impossible to drive them 20+ km/h. So, they quickly got a suspension. I wanted to say that fixed axle will work too but only for crawler-speed machines only... Maybe, this Zetros will not be so fast?

It comes from the LEGO nature - the truck frames are made of ABS plastic, so they must be additionally secured in comparison with real-life steel ones. So try are bigger in size and have not some many space inside to put the inclined prop shaft. The horizontal one better fits the horizontal frame with horizontal pinholes

Well, with planetary hubs I see no real necessity to use new ("RC") differentials. For sure, it would be great to have them (and I really hope) but let's keep in mind as the drivetrain is speeded-up in 5.5 times it will be less loaded in 5.5 times too. So the new differentials are purposed for a heavy-duty application will bring no gain here...

So, looks like it was not a knockoff but an absorption I really disappointed with the lattes things happened to parts molds and colors: I don't care if the inner part of pins is squared or rounded, but the axle hole must be always 90-gregrees oriented. Not 89.9, nor 90.1

-

Ooh, I like this rear side, with the easiest access to the battery compartment!

Hmm, I see rear suspension))

I believe there are more factors rather than "has yes/not PF/C+ motors": Newly appeared parts (like new tire treads, new panels, etc.) may increase the total cost, so c/p will be higher. Licensed sets may cost higher due to license fees. So c/p will be higher again. Huge-oversized stets costs a lot so they may have some "discounts", as they include less extra efforts (less paper/carton boxes, plastic bags) per N LEGO parts. I don't say that it's a thumb rule, for sure, but just indicate that the difference could be quire significant and "all the abnormal things appear quite reasonable once".

I afraid it may not be possible, as this part must have a cross-shape outside (longitudinal groves to meet the clutch ring inner ledges) which matched the internal cross-shape but will make the walls so tin in case of a pinhole. Moreover, the existing pin joiners are a ticker than axle joiners and they cannot be put inside the clutch ring.

I have digged into the US Bridge Formula and this diffrence looks OK now for me. The main ides is "a bigger wheelbase can carry a bigger weight", so for 3-axle semitruck it was required to have a bigger inter-axles distance, like on real trucks. While 4-axleled tow truck or cement mixer are capable enought to have a tiny spread due the axles number. Moreover, this formula acts for inter-state hauling, whilie construction or resquie machines have a shorter range of use. But for a visual apperance, it is pity, right...

Exactly! I had a 42128 cabin and 42078 chassis, so... Again, comparing with the 42078 set, the floor is really too high here. Possibly TLG put it 1 stud higher because of such big gas tanks.

Plus to that, if the inner part rotates (powered) when outer still stopped, the tension force will easily disassemble the "spikes" made of red axles and yellow #1 connector. I would use the liftarms (solid pinhole-to-pinhole structure), which can handle the tension forces. Besides that, I wouldn't loose in mind the rule of squares and cubes - making the model x2 bigger in all dimensions, you will get it up to x8 heavier. It makes a huge sense for plastic parts!

I also counted 7 studs (6 if don't take into consideration the stud holes used by the axles themselves). 42078's "spread" does not fit here. The full wheelbase looks like that: [1st axle /1 stud] - 33 studs - [2nd axle /1 stud] - 6 studs - [3rd axle /1 stud] - 6 studs - [4th axle /1 stud]. But... being a fully correct (the wheel base is a distance between front axle and a center or rear non-steer "trolley"), the wheelbases are: 41 (40 between axles) when the lift axle is lowered. 44.5 (43.5 between axles) when the lift axle is raised. Added: BTW, some tasty recolor:

BTW, that would be great to check if it really able to lift and tow these trucks: 42112 mixer is more or less weight-distributed, while 42078 Mack is very front-heavy (due to very detailed design, ehh, I wish this tow truck was so detailed too), so I really would like to see it in the process.

In a similar scale. The cars are about 1:21 scale, like a Car Trasporter, whereas this truck seems to be more to be in 1:22 scale, like Mack. So, I would say "yes, it is", because it more "yes" than "no".

Is it going to be a 1:1 scale?

Strange to see it among the common trend of making these holes sqared, so they cannot fit the bar, when previous molds were able... Unusual step.

That makes sense, after the Mixer truck. But the tank is really required, otherwise we will have just set the valves positions and "let's roll it until the crane raises"

To have a disengaged gear staying stationary, you should rotate the axle with a clutch ring, However it crosses your idea. I like this solution. I had an idea to use it in the 6x4 / 6x2 truck with two modes: "6x4 heavy-hauler 1:1" mode when rear tandem is fully driven via the open inter-tandem (between rear axles) differential "6x2 easy-ride 2:1" mode when one axle is lifted and locked via the clutch gear. So the remaining axle rotates only and has 2:1 ratio (two times faster than the drivetrain). So, in the general case, there is a differential and the clutch ring at the fixed (constantly stopped) axle, which locks A or B differential outputs. Or leaves them both opened.

Besides the Tow Truck discussion, I wanted to raise an alternative question: does someone have any information about an alternative, the B-model? So far, the leaked image shows only preliminary box design, which may have no traces on "2 in 1" logo just because of its preliminary nature. Following the iconic "American Truck" idea of the set, I would love to see some Cabover American truck as well, for sure, with some working attachment. However, pneumatic cylinders and winches could be used in way more different model.

Great! Now I would replace the bumper with 3x4 tile-plates, to make it authentic to flat chrome panel. It worked the best for Model Team trucks and may add more places to add more orange lamps

Possibly, the 2xxx part number was a fake/wrong one, or just contained a something to tow (like to was discussed here) but later was cancelled.