Timewhatistime

"Bewegliche Zylinder" shows the authors' technical competence. It's not the cylinders moving, it's the pistons...! And like every real "Super Sports Car", it has two cylinders. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trabant_601

It is pure speculation, but maybe two of these pins https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=61184#T=C (combined with two black 2 L pins) are used instead of the two blue 3 L pins at the rear... two brake light could be attached to them. This would increase the number of parts used.

Apart from all the well-deserved praise...: Is this considered a legal connection/meshing?

I see a lot of possibilities to strengthen the fake engine... Dashboard end: Maybe a connection on each side to the grey connectors attached to the blue biscuit part... Axle end: Maybe some more connection to the yellow No. 6 connectors or to the black 13L beams... Depends on the available space which is restricted in the next building steps... The official way the engine is mounted is truly not the way I'd prefer personally. However, maybe the wobbly mounting is kind of intended for the Nissan. One could speak of realistic motion of the engine when it unfolds its high performance in this sports car... just a thought... I don't like it, too. (And we all know, the real reason is half-baked engineering and saving costs...) Thank you very much for the praise. You're welcome. I like this kind of tasks.

Yes, the differential will interfere with the second flip-flop beam, so the setup shown in the image will be the right one as soon as the differentials are put back into the car. The space needed for the differential is the initial reason for the weird construction with the quarter-ellipses mounted to the steering rack.

@thekoRngear Yes, that was exactly what I meant. I'm sorry that my advice with the half-pins doesn't work... I overlooked the axle holes. One final idea for ultimate rigidity: Use the flip-flop beam with two 3x3 T-shaped liftarms (connected by two black 2L pins each) - not in the manner you used the Ts in the image! You have rotate the Ts by 90 degrees. So the outmost pinhole of the T will sit where once the ellipse's pinhole was - and so you may use the original 4L ball joint steering links. (I imagined a similar solution before, but didn't think of the mighty flip-flop beams. Once again, they are a gamechanger!) Sorry, my fault: By "control the length" I meant "check the length" (not: "adjust the length"). As you already might have concluded, I am not a native speaker of the English language.

This is a normal and unavoidable effect and no reason to worry. If necessary, the stability in this example is achieved by additional parts which hold the blue liftarm in place.

I propose to turn the red perpendicular connectors. Fix them to the steering rack by a red 2L axle each and by a black 2L pin to the quarter-ellipses each. Moreover, a grey/blue half-pin in the quarter-ellipse's pinhole on each side beneath the steering rack should fit into the steering rack and provide additional stability. This little mod should minimize the slack in comparison to the "official" setup. And another idea: Control the lengths of the new black 4L balljoint-links by just mounting them directly onto a liftarm. Maybe they are a little bit too long... Regarding their quality control, we should't rule out any flaw in 2025's LEGO...

In my 42082 set there weren't any Pneumatics, so I will have to write a complaint to Billund and ask them for the missing parts.

A lot of "magic" (not included in 2 sets of 42082) will be necessary to stabilize this colossus moaning under its own weight.

Does the yellow gear (located right beneath the white 24t clutch gear) really belong to 42082? Same for the grey (!!!) 20t double bevel gear... What is the carrier supposed to carry? Are there enough (and the right) parts for a proper upper structure?

Is this really the setup from the digital model - with four 36T gears and one 12T gear situated in the same layer and supposed to mesh with each other?

TLG once succeeded in delivering better-looking models - in the 1980s/1990s (at least in terms of colour vomit). I can't remember if we had any problems arising from absence of colour-coding in these days... actually, don't think so. Yes, I know, once there weren't that much different pins, gears and so on as nowadays... but one could trust in the costumers skills and intelligence... or at least make better colour choices than green gears and brown axles (colours which aren't often used in the Technic Universe and so really stick out). @kbalage I really like your videos with your comments on the building stages and well-balanced judgements; always looking forward for news on your YT channel.

Fair enough, but on the other side one shouldn't go so far to claim that blue/red/tan pins, red/yellow axles and green/blue/red/tan gears contribute to an asthetic look for display models. So the question remains... why, TLG???

What I simply don't understand: How can anyone (in the TLG management) think that cartoon-ish multi-coloured gears, pins, axles are appropriate for this pretentious 18+ line with its so-called 'display models'? Same thing with the building instructions, which are rather 4- than 18+... For display models a clean look should be the very first priority. The intellectual level of instructions adding only 2 or 3 parts per page shows what TLG thinks of their adult 18+ customers...

Thank you for understanding and caring about my mental sanity. Strictly speaking, this trick involves third party pieces. I'm not quite sure if it thus conflicts with the Lego purity law... However, I see your recommendation in terms of parts quality.

Pantasy used "IIV" as a 7. It is located between 6 and 8, so I take it to be intended as a 7. Call it what you prefer, I consider this number as wrong.

That makes it even worse, and one is compelled to look at the wrong Roman numbers (without the option to simply not attaching the corresponding sticker). Don't get me wrong: Even as a long-time die-hard fan of TLG I cannot ignore the downfall of their products. However, I couldn't find any pleasure looking at a clock's dial with these flaws in Roman numbers. Call me "Monk", but this kind of ignorance would drive me crazy.

And the Pantasy-7 is rather a false 3 than a proper 7. Doesn't look like a well-designed high-quality product.

If I was able to create such a tiny little beauty, I would have preferred a panel as well. However, I see the advantages of beam stacking: Clear lines, no holes, a smooth surface (superior stability, if this is considered important in this scale and size). Using a 3x7 panel would still need some beams and/or connectors, and so it wouldn't provide that clean look.

Of course it will.

As far as I know, there are even two drivetrains. The one with the white 3L linear clutch (part 46834, 46835 https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=46835#T=C) provides the rotation of the rear wheels while they are lifted. It is geared up a bit, so that the rear wheels rotate faster than the front wheels in order to mimic a burn-out/drifting effect. The second drivetrain (sitting below the first one) is more or less fake as it provides only minimum torque via the usual arrangement of (friction?) pins and axle connectors. When the first drivetrain is engaged, both drivetrains even rotate at different speeds.

However, as the german description indicates, the steering works (by tilting) on both axles.

By this historical document, the tracktor has gained some (nearly) true roots from the great 20th century technical progress. What a nice coincidence that this footage could by found in the video vaults just when needed!

The driver looks like a weird scientist or a quirky inventor from a Jules Verne novel. He fits the vehicle very well.