MangaNOID

That sharp corner boom looks fantastic! The whole model does 👍

I wouldn’t rely on using non LEGO motors unless it’s specified ok in the rules as I can’t even use a single 9v instead of a battery pack (doubt I’m entering but very interested in all the builds)

Sbricks are ok, can we use any battery option to power them like a single 9v battery instead of the LEGO battery pack options that are very large?

Nice job on this one! It Seems to perform quite well It would only be better if you built the Ferrari of that era Instead

Well done everyone, tough comp. Glad I didn’t try, not that I couldn’t be bothered, but lack of time was one big factor. Transforming is a difficult one! I’d probably need 3 years not 3 months

Piece count would be too hard to judge? I think a size limitation is better... bag, xyz dimensions, whatever really but it needs to be demonstrated on entry like some previous contests,

I think a poly bag contest was mentioned already, and I think that is a great idea compared to TC21 which has really pushed abilities and allotted time which no doubt a lot of us do not have much of (time, not abilities ). To save miss interpretations of the contest idea how about, like the polybag idea, the only constraint is a size limit i.e. it has to fit within X Y Z space (small area preferred for more entries) and you can just build anything you want as long as it fits in there in a normal state (so for a telescoping model it can extend out of that area if that is a function) That would really put our money where our mouth is after all our complaining of small technic sets not being functional these days (john deer thread ).

Sorry I’ll eat my words and say 3 proper transformations in my interpretation anyway well done everyone, I didn’t even try cause I put it in the too hard basket

7: 10 3: 6 6: 4 5: 3 4: 2 8: 1

Well it seems to me that there is a fine line between transforming and functions here. I really only see two entries that transform. tough gig this one with such a short build time compared to difficulty. So bravo for all that entered.

Seems like it’s becoming a bit of a in vogue thing to have your product made into LEGO, thus the looks are more important than what the product should be about. Also why would they make a green 5x7 frame? Just for this model or is there something else coming up to warrant a re colour? (Love the re colour of course though!) if it’s a re colour for this small set only, why can’t they re colour a few pins and axles every now and then to get rid of those nasty primary colours for us adults in the ‘18+’ sets.

Looks bad without stickers... I like the new parts I like how they have a big scale bike good on LEGO for heading in this bike direction but for me... I think the scale is too big for the panels and it just looks awkward and bitty... to phrase it poorly. they should have given the design team a bit longer to refine the looks or come up with some more bike friendly 1:5 scale panels that could work for future bikes also, the aesthetics is not working for me. mishmash. I’m not a gearbox person for LEGO when it comes to vehicles but as has been said LEGO need to employ better more realistic gearboxes for cars/bikes. These monstrosities take up so much room. These current gears are no doubt around to produce other gearboxes switching between functions so they have to be big and robust but in vehicles like this there is no need for so much robustness and bigness surely? Im not sold on this even after trying hard I just think 1:5 scale should be way better with more visible inner workings I mean $300+ for a shelf display... those Tamiya 1/6 bike models are looking very nice compared to this with almost the same functionality but way better shelf display, well if you can paint them right of course, Oh it’s LEGO I may miss the point here but... we’ll like others I’ll be getting the parts but not the bike. Look forward to a hopefull better next bike and all the bike MOCs that we will see soon that will be something. great review btw thanks @Milan for your time for us! well deserved to keep the set but probably not enough compensation for the time committed. Only bit I miss was the compression rate of the shocks like others asked.

the real bike has a whopping 80mm bore/piston diameter which would be a piston size of 16mm in LEGO at 1/5. Interesting to see any new bits on this one.

Looks great so far! Any videos of the operation yet? Would love to see how smooth it all etc. giing the extra but with this one and not just having the wing pop out. Although I have no idea where the passengers end up

I think f1 will have 18” wheels next year so easier to replicate with current selections?

If I had this set I’d be all over that code, well done it looks like it works a treat. And great to share it for others! this is what should come with a set like this, analogue controller and all ready to go.

Thank you!!! this saved my excavator build! due to tight space and all, I was trying to use a worm gear for final drive but that just made all the gearbox gears click. This setup is about 9:1 (or 1:9 whoever you write it) no clicking anywhere. solid as a rock setup so I’ll use this for another track setup with single motor co-axle drive also. I spaced them in 1 1/2 studs from the sprocket wheel as the tracks widen out.

I just googled the add. what a great advert! All this blokey bravado sexist crap that goes on is tiresome. Especially here in Aus. Good on Gellette to say get over this. Time to move on in humanity. Equall rights, non harassment FTW! Nothing to say regarding the thing about that LEGO thing

This is very nice! with the low friction driving ring you can ‘flex’ out the two middle tabs a little to loosen Or eliminate the friction. Is this the same as what you have posted or does your solution have more too it?

Nice work! I tried this setup as well, 2 buggy motors sbrick and servo on a 3s. The servo broke (chinese version) and the buggy motors (Chinese versions as well) hit the thermal limiter within a minute so I couldn’t actually drive it. Any problems like that for you?

I came to say the same thing but you already said it. Really hope the TBA ones are not cars also.

for anyone that may be interested ( @Seasider) I have finished the LDD file. It may have some discrepancies but I think it is very similar to the final build. Sorry there are no instructions but that is something I do not have time for at all and take no pleasure in making either! There may be some 2L axles missing in the build as LDD does not fit the 90 degree macaroni piece properly with them. Pins should be colour coded but I did not necessarily use the right pin (e.g. friction or non friction) in the right spot as I am a lazy LDD builder and usually only use it for quick construction POC during builds. There may be other gaps present especially in the Minifig but that is also because I cannot be bothered to get all the angles perfect in LDD. Its tiring to do that! Hope you enjoy (this is where everyone finds out that maybe it wasn't worth all those votes you gave it ) Hope the link works. https://brickshelf.com/gallery/MangaNOID/space886/technic886.lxf

As far as the jury debate goes, I think there should not be a jury in any future TC’s better to have it before public voting if any like discussed but I see it as a mistrust in public voters. The 50post rule helps rule out any vote rigging so we as technic builders should not be ‘mistrusted’ to vote how we see fit. There are very experienced builders here to weigh in with their vote. an average of everyone’s colIective is democracy right? I realise that maybe some entries regarding TC20 were not what organisers wanted/expected but if they still comply to the rules, no matter if they are off centre, then does that not provide interest? I still find the Jury comments About panels usage strange as there was another entry of the same model that had no panels and, well, unfortunately no votes either at the other end of the spectrum but same base model. So this example makes the jury comment and voting - ‘modus operandi’ opposite to All public voters. now the Jury have a right to their own opinions but first place getter had panels in the build also where the original did not. this is not criticism of the final outcome (we knew the voting rules and abide by them) but just a juries thought processes that are always going to be less broad than a mass of public voters. so yeah to sum up, for a collective based forum I do not think there should be a minimal jury In the future.

Something productive to show for workout home love the look. Minimal use of panels is fantastic. Lovely to look into all the gaps and see what’s going on!

Not at all! Enjoy your win it is the deserved winner! we know and knew of how the rules of voting was happening so a valid win to you no sourness no regrets sir, enjoy your drink