chorlton

That's nice. I like the use of the small LA for steering. Can I ask, was this an inspiration at all? I ask because when i saw this pic posted in the 9398 thread my first thought was "That would be a great MOC" :) edit: IGNORE ME! I just realised it was you who posted this pic in the 9398 thread

13!? Than that's even more impressive. Well done!

I was struggling to picture the text description so went searching on google. sunskytechnic search for uni directional gearbox just over half way down.

Pssst. You've said you DO use the hockey spring above. I think you meant "does not".

You're having way more fun than I am!

Very good. Nice detail and balance of looks/function.

Thank DLuders. I fully acknowledge it doesn't have the 'grace' of the original, there's a lot of bulk in the middle that I'd like to have avoided. But I'm fairly happy with it as a first public model.

Hi. I've been a member on Eurobricks for a while now, making the odd post, but it's taken me this long to create my first MOC. I picked up set 8428 on eBay recently and was very impressed with the style - midway between studded and studless. I hoped that I could start with something easy as a first MOC and just add a couple of PF motors to it as my first attempt at straying from the boxed instructions. This didn't work as the torque from even an M-motor could rip out axle mount points held on using studded construction. I therefore chose to try and recreate the set using modern, studless construction techniques. So here it is. Length is 33 holes + flex-hoses at front and rear. This is the same number of holes as the original but results in one stud length less. Width is 15 studs + flex-hoses and wheels. This is one stud wider than the orginal and a result of the original being an even-number width. A 5-wide XL motor will throw that off. Weight is 825g. Return-to-centre steering is based on Sheepo's Return to centre type 1 design. Drive power is from 1 XL-Motor geared up through 24:8 * 20:12 * 20:28 = 9600:2688 ~ 3.5:1. I should try again to replace the 20:12 gearing with another 24:8 but had a lot of clicking and slipping during the build when I tried this. It might be held together a bit better now but it's a pain to get into the gearing now. The original 8428 came with adjustable suspension, moving from an off-road buggy configuration to a "sleek street-roadster". This is now also motorised and uses a small LA. Steering I mounted the gears "upside down" so that they hang underneath the chassis. At the time I thought I needed the space immediate above the motor but it turns out I could turn this assembly round and raise the gear wheels. Something to do when/if I try to increase the gearing up. Link to my brickshelf folder is here: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=504696 You'll also find a work-in-progress folder with some earlier versions showing how much I changed as I went. The build process was very much a case of having something working early on, but then pulling out the steering to make the assembly half a stud shorter; moving the XL-Motor from the rear-wheel section to the main body and using a uv-joint. (I broke a couple until I geared it up); mounting the battery box on the rear before I decided to implement the adjustable suspension.

It depends how free you really want the rotation. You could use the 24t clutch gear. Using the motor this would drive the claw rotation. When the motor is off, you would be able to rotate the claw by hand but it would not be very loose. Otherwise, could you fit a small clutch yourself to disengage the motor when not in use?

It's actually made out of Lego, and his son is very, very small.

Yes, but knowing the size of your previous models, you'll attempt it at 1:1 scale

Steady progress. Nice work.

There's a link here to some different ideas. I've used the type 1 model recently. Once I had the basics, I've ripped it out and rebuilt it a couple of times already. I added another elastic band so that it was more balanced. Speaking as a beginner (although slightly older than 7) it's dead easy to start reworking things once it's in front of you and in your hands so no fear!

I'm just attempting my first 'creative' build too, and it's a constant process of ripping stuff out and trying it a different way, and it gets more robust and rigid each time. Good luck!

For any Americans on the forum, Rodeown's video shows what a real cockney accent sounds like and not the travesty of Dick Van Dyke's Bert in Mary Poppins!

In no way doubting what Sariel said but here's the official line: Lego's Fair Play Policy There's an entire section on "How LEGO® Enthusiasts May Refer to LEGO Products on the Internet" which includes "The LEGO Trademark cannot be used in an Internet Address"

I suspect you're right. I had already added a disclaimer out of politeness/common sense but never considered that using it in the web address might be a bigger bad. I chose "Good With Lego" because my initals are GWL. All ideas for replacement names are greatfully accepted! Good With Littlebitsofplasticconstructiontoythatarentknexormegablox ?

Bugger. I just did the same thing Good point, never even thought of that.

I'm at work at the moment so just a quick reply - but if you check the forum I'm sure there's a fix for the dropping arm. Extra tubing to close off the open valves is involved as I recall.

Apart form trying to keep the motor leads tidy/flat/compact.

I asked a similar question about stressing the motors for RTC steering in another thread. In the end I've just gone ahead and tried it. It seems OK for a fast buggy where it tends to 'jink' and be in the right direction very quickly. If you are trying to position a truck however, particularly if you fancied reversing with an articulated trailer, then I could imagine you spending a lot more time at full lock, and so straining the motor for longer periods. A clutch gear would prevent this but you'd need to ensure your RTC spring mechanism wasn't too strong. For powering the trailer - a real trailer would be hooked up to a power and hydraulics feed from the tractor unit - so a battery box in the tractor with motor in the trailer, hooked up when connected would be the most 'authentic'

13) 3 8) 2 1) 2

TechnicBricks on coolness vs realism

Replying to myself but here goes... Most MOCs seem to use the PF XL motor for driving the wheels. As I don't yet have any XL motors, would an M motor be powerful enough to drive something the size and weight of 8428. My first attempts have ripped parts of the drive train off its mount points where they're held in by studded construction, so have yet to have a successful test drive. I can see now some of the limitations of Lego encountered by MOCers that you don't run into when just following the instructions

I notice that the jeep doesn't use return-to-centre steering. Is that more usual for trial vehicles which tend to run slower and perhaps need the fine control when climbing uneven surfaces? I ask because I've had one abortive attempt at a RTC system for motorising 8428 and wondered about the pros and cons of having it vs. not.