TheMindGarage

Nice idea! I have a concept for a holonomic EV3 robot without using omni-wheels. Essentially, it will use beefed-up 4-wheel steering with 3 different modes: Mode 1 steers the front wheels in the opposite directions to the rear wheels (like normal cars with 4-wheel steering), allowing the car to drive like a regular car. Mode 2 make all four wheels steer in the same direction with the same angle, allowing the car to move sideways without turning. Mode 3 doesn't really steer the wheels but gives both axles extreme positive toe (wheels pointing in). This makes the car turn around on the spot. Visualised: Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 \ __ \ / \ | \ -->-- \ <-------> | | | --<-- / / \ / [black text shows the wheels, red text shows the overall movement of the car - sorry about the weird ASCII drawings] My idea is to have a gearbox (possibly very complex) which controls the steering. One motor steers, one motor shifts the gearbox. The gearbox would have 4 outputs - one for each wheel. That would leave two motors for driving. Controlling each The other main hurdle I can see would be getting a steering lock of at least 90 degrees. Perhaps I would use a pivot point above the wheel, a little like the front wheel of a bicycle. Driving the steered wheels could be done with a bevel-gear setup, Sorry for the rather incomplete concept - I'm currently on vacation and away from my LEGO (for the first time in a year :P). And when I come back, I'll be greeted with half a concept transmission (for a different idea) that I'm eager to finish first. So this idea certainly won't be built until late September, possibly later.

Cool - this could be used in real life! Good thing that I didn't build it, because knowing me, I'd connect it to my flywheel stored-energy device to make it turn at ridiculous speeds (probably thousands of RPM). Nice sprung base as well.

It wasn't modelled after the 914. It was a cross between the 911 and 918, both in appearance and in functionality. So I averaged the model numbers. I would probably have picked OTR-666 and Mission E as part of the list myself. But I'm not the judge... Are you sure you've checked all the functions? 8 speed paddle-shift gearbox? Tuneable suspension? Full suspension geometry? 4-wheel steering? I can't remember any entry that exceeded that, but I might be wrong. About the looks, I didn't have nearly enough pieces for 4 identical wheel caps, better headlights than a 24-tooth clutch gear or rounded shapes. That's what happens when you try to build from a collection made from a small TECHNIC excavator (42006?), a MINDSTORMS 31313, a MINDSTORMS Education Expansion Set, a 42043 and a couple of random old parts. No flex axles in that list, and very few curved panels. The most "Porsche" I could go is using a flat-6 engine in the rear, making the targa roof and approximating the headlights. Getting a 42056 would fix that, but since there's no way I can win one, I'll save the struggle (and money) of purchasing one and opt for the 42055 instead. Mine was also a hybrid (PF motor driving the front, piston engine in the rear). I think the judges had something against prototypes/concepts - not a single one got chosen in the top 20. If it was up to me, I'd FAVOUR prototype models (sticking to the "Dream Porsche" in the competition title).

Wow :O! Never knew anything close to 4 studs was possible! Once I challenged myself to make the narrowest possible RC car with full suspension (I used live-axle), a decent gearbox (mine was 6-speed) and a fully-enclosed body. It ended up at 11 studs wide, the limiting factor being the wheels (62.4mm by 20mm) and the electronics (MINDSTORMS EV3 brick).

Yeah - I think there should have been at least a couple of concepts such as IA's ones and my 914.5 SpyTarg. Unless of course you thought that the 20 semi-finalists were better than ALL the concepts, which is pretty unlikely... Are you sure functions were a main criterion? My 914.5 SpyTarg had more functions than any other that I've seen, and was completely original (both the Google search queries "914.5 SpyTarg" and "Porshce 914.5" return every webpage relating to my entry before anything else shows up). But due to my lack of parts such as flex axles and curved panels, the looks weren't quite as good as some of the other entries (I resorted to using white 24-tooth clutch gears as headlamps...), and I think this was why my entry wasn't selected. Is this really fair? Seems to me as if the judges are putting form far above function (as the developers did in the 42056), rather than sticking to a "Technic look-and-feel". Just my opinion.

I'm not in the top 20, and I'm pretty disappointed about the list in general. There are plenty of amazing ORIGINAL models, but they seem to be pushed aside by the swarm of 911s, 918s and 919 Hybrids . Isn't this meant to be about a DREAM Porsche, and not making a scale model of the Porsche you would buy if you had the money to. Also, I feel that functionality-oriented entries (like mine) lost out to appearance-based models with fewer functions. If it were up to me, it would be: Originality of idea: 25% Functions: 35% Appearance: 20% Showing the Porsche brand: 20% If model has been posted before, multiply above by 0. Otherwise multiply by 1. Seems like my opinion of this competition has gone the same way as my opinion of the 42056 set itself: too heavily focused on the appearance and defying expectations by attracting far more people than anyone thought. At least I've got a chance with the Maker Faire...

It's like a single-cylinder engine. The crank mechanism has dead-zones, so you need to manually turn the blades to give the system enough momentum to get it through the deadzones.

Is it neccessary to buy instructions? There are tons of instructions available for free. Besides, most MOCs need some very rare and expensive parts.

There are so many good entries that I couldn't possibly pick one. I went into this contest thinking that the functions in my planned entry (now submitted) would be at least enough to get a runner-up prize, but with over 70 entries, many of which are top-notch MOCs, I doubt my chances :P. I just hope that the judges give at least as big a weight to functionality as they do for looks.

This is my entry for the Rebrick competition. Essentially, it is a mashup of the 911 Targa and 918 Spyder (the 914.5 is the average of the two model numbers). It is built to 1:10 scale. Back in 2011, there were rumours of Porsche introducing a model between the 911 and 918 Spyder (one website did joke about calling it the 914.5), but such a model hasn't yet been manufactured (although it is being developed as the Porsche 960). The model is roughly 1:10 scale at about 58 studs long, 25 wide (27 including mirrors) and 16 high with 68.8x36mm wheels. Please bear in mind that I am a relatively inexperienced builder having only been building for 2 years and with only a few thousand parts to hand - by the end, I had completely run out of light grey parts. I went for function over form - while I am good with making ultra-compact mechanical systems such as gearboxes and suspended axles, bodywork isn't really my strong point. Sorry that the video is a little shaky - looking into getting better video equipment. Please watch it - you'll get to see the internal workings right down to the core! I haven't provided many pictures here because the detailed stuff is in the video. This is the FULL video (>1min) - the video I submitted to the Rebrick competition is a cut-down unlisted version of this. A full list of functions: Flat-6 piston engine in rear, driving rear axle. 8-speed paddle-shifting gearbox (sequential) for the piston engine. PF Large motor driving the front (no gearbox, just like the 918). Unfortunately, I don't have any IR components other than MINDSTORMS, so it isn't RC. Full independent suspension with non-zero camber and castor angles (I think it also has kingpin inclination - not sure about that). Steering wheel operates 4-wheel steering. The knobs on the front (black 12-tooth gears) and rear (hidden, accessible through rear window) control the suspension's ride height. Each wheel has its own control, so it is possible to make the car lean to one side (might be useful for oval racing). Two seats in the front with opening doors. Retractable rear wing. Folding targa-style roof. I also made a few custom stickers for this model (unprofessionally of course - just printed them out on paper). The Porsche logo is on the front, the steering wheel and the wheel hubs. The rear air intake slits (911-style) are also done with a sticker. I added the Porsche brand name and a fake model name on the back. The "Spy" and "Targ" bits were edited out of the actual "Spyder" and "Targa" logos; the "914.5" was done from scratch. The number plates aren't my own - you may recognise them from the 42043 set. You can probably tell that I lacked good headlight pieces even after searching though my dust-filled System brick collection. The best I could find were white 24-tooth clutch gears - I guess that gives it a hardcore-TECHNIC feel. Thanks for reading :D!

That thing's insane! What's it's top speed? I reckon you could make it even faster if you added some gearing (maybe 20:12 up).

Cool functions and looks great, but the colour scheme is a little, erm, Italian...

That thing is insane! The way it turns on the spot reminds me of the time I took 2 EV3 Large motors and made a bi-wheel vehicle with custom 15cm wheels (made from tank treads) and 1:5 gearing up. The result was a vehicle that could do 15-20kmph when driving straight (if you can get it to go straight...) or turn on the spot at something between 200 and 400 RPM.

I have rather limited parts so all my recent cars are light grey, possibly with black areas. With my current build (Rebrick Porsche, very nearly done), I deliberately built as much of the internal stuff in colours that I wouldn't use in the body or I have a lot of (mostly black), and save the light grey beams for the body.

I think TECHNIC should remove this colour vomit. The sets that are targeted at children young enough to need colour-coding have so few pieces that colour-coding isn't needed anyway. You don't see builders using red, yellow and blue nuts/bolts/screws/nails, do you?

So? The majority of road and race cars have slight negative camber. Positive camber is only really used on oval racing.

Interesting idea - finally a zero-emmisions car (unless you count the CO2 you breath out) that doesn't even use electricity! Looks good with the minimal bodywork, but what's the point of an engine cover in a car with no engine?

That roll-cage looks great! Can't wait for the finished car!

No, but the winner gets to go to Stuttgart's Porsche museum. The winner and the runners-up get Porsche 911 GT3 RS sets and die-cast models.

Nice! No gearbox, but the amazing looks make up for it. Is the tan 3L axle with stop on the front meant to be the Porsche logo, because if it is, that's probably the most imaginative part use I've seen!

Cool! Looks nice, but I find the gearbox a little messy. Or maybe it's because you wanted to make the gearbox flatter. Nice job, but I seriously hope you meant 1:7 scale rather than 7:1 (that would be one MASSIVE car...)

I'm not a massive fan of this system, even though it is very well-thought out. I find that I can fit far more features into the same space if I build fluidly (with little modularity). I prefer to build in this fluid style, partly because I'm a little lazy and partly because I get a more compact end result by not adhering to modularity restrictions. That said, I usually employ a "layers" system. Layer 0 is the driveshaft/differential, and the lowest layer allowed is -3 if you want to avoid bottom-scraping (this assumes 68.8x36 wheels and an average-ride-height suspension system. Highest point of the body would be somewhere between +10 and +15, depending on the car. Since most of my builds use MINDSTORMS EV3 (which has strangely-shaped motors), I usually have two choices with the gearbox - have the gearbox input at layer -2 and place the drive motors the right way up or have the input at +2 and place the motors upside down, with the lowest part of the motors occupying layer -3. As for the chassis, that tends to be made in layers of stacked "O" and "H" frames with beams for reinforcement. Usually I have a layer of frames at 0 (for suspension), -2 and +2, but on some models more layers may be needed). If you want to use the MPS, by all means use it - I still think it's a great tool. What I've said is just my $0.02 (or if you're in the UK, £0.005 as of one month ago).

Yeah - that's true. If you want a car that is fun to drive, you probably don't want any gearbox, or maybe just a simple 2-speed. Most real-life electric cars have a fixed gear - that's because electric motors get their torque right away. I tend to make cars with as many functions as possible rather than making cars that are as fast as possible (my last speed-based car was about 4 months ago, and that reached 10mph with the EV3 system and 3 Large motors). My Porsche entry (very close to finishing) has an 8-speed paddle-shift gearbox, but still reaches a decent speed. I put a Large motor driving the front on a fixed gear, with the piston engine coupled to the rear via the gearbox (you can probably guess which car I'm basing my entry on just from that). But I bet that if I tried to couple the motor to the piston engine, the car would barely move.

It shouldn't ever fry because it's protected. If the current is too high, it will shut off. With V2 receivers (the newer ones), you can connect 2 Large motors without any problems. You can do this with old receivers, but the motors will run a little slower.

Incredible detail there, and pretty fast as well! Sure, there's no gearbox, but who cares when it looks so good!