Timewhatistime

I just built a version of this buggy - thanks to R0Sch's building instructions, which helped a lot. However, we have to realize that TLG did not leave much space for the driver's head. Right above the seats the cage is located, so that it looks a bit odd when one imagines how a figure could be placed in thos vehicle. So I am working on a version with a little bit more space in the driver's cabin.

Maybe the 45 degree offset is needed for the functions of the b-model... 😝

Yes, it's quite clear how the sequential funtion is achieved. The point I will have to examine in more detail is how the towing arm lifts itself. There are some cleverly mounted levers/linkages...

Yes, you are surely right. However, I'm still disappointed by the worldwide operating TLG which is able to put very professional price tags onto their products while not being able to make professional presentation photos (even worse: think of the half-photoshopped blue/red pin in the new 42146 Offroad Buggy...) Oh yes, now I see (the knob wheels's single lbg knob). Thanks! I wonder what will be its function and why the 45° offset is important for it... There seems to be another knob wheel (yellow) of which only a single knob can be seen on the very same photo (right above the lbg knob).

Yes... but I meant the 42178 Surface loader! :-)

Please tell us, where do you find the new lbg 45° knob gear? I must be blind... maybe because of the TLG photo crew's building skills: Once again there are pins not fully inserted (blue 2L axle pins at the little loading platform)...

Absolutely ingenius! I still don't get how the towing arm lifts itself just in the perfect sequence with its second (!!!) function... got to view your video some more times! You really earned the frontpaging!

Be it 13L liftarms or 15L liftarms... why don't you use "normal" liftarms instead of the still rare flip-flop configuration? As far as I see in the image, none of the vertical holes is engaged with a pin - so simple liftarms (i.e. no flip-flip) should fit as well.

Thank you, I never thought about this effect of the rounded axles - but always wondered why there are so many "too long" axles for wheels. (I'm not sure about the effect of the stop on the length: The stop slides into the pinhole, so there should be no shortening effect; however, when inserted into an axle hole (i.e. cross), there would be the shortening effect.) So in the case of the Mack garbage truck, a 5.5L axle with stop would have been a better choice for the front grabber - and besides the better clutch power at the bottom end, the stop would prevent it from sliding down as a whole.

I really wonder why the designers chose a brown 5L axle with stop (and a half bush in order to shorten the part which sticks out at the bottom end) for the rear half of the grabber... a dbg 4L axle would have done the job, too - without the extra half bush and without the part which sticks out. Does anyone here have an explanation or probable reason for that decision?

I hope that this will not be a surprising advice for an engineering student.

Ah, thank you very much for this clarification. Now I got what is the problem and its cause. It is a bit disappointing to me that the collission detection cannot handle those standard situations... for the combination if the panels doesn't rely on any flex: They are simply mounted side by side.

Yes, 42064's crane is mounted on a small turntable, which seems to be right in scale. It is driven by a hidden axle which goes through the turntable and ends at a HOG on the ship's bridge. Some contrast to the solutions in this MOC... especially the large (!) turntable seems to be out of scale.

Are there any technic functions in this technic model besides the crane lifting by a worm gear (which is similar to e.g. the official polybag set "forklift with pallet 30655")?

I don't have any clue about these computer-driven building programs... I still stick to real-life building with real bricks and beams and gears and so on. So my question might seem a bit off, but it is meant seriously: Why is there a gap shown between the tapered panels on the right side of the bonnet/hood, while there is no such gap between the corresponding panels on the left side? Same question for the gap between the center panel and the tapered panel on the right and on the left side, respectively...?

I'm glad I could manage to evoke a little discussion... :-) Without any doubt I really appreciate your engineering skills! It's likely that the way you have chosen, i.e. the combination of both, might be even harder than "pure" Lego or "pure" custom modelling. Furthermore, many of us consent to the opinion that Lego Technic's quality (including their management's decisions) is rather going downwards than going upwards. However, I don't get the point in combining high-end custom parts (like cv-joints, brushless motors, axles, hubs, wheels etc.) with the somewhat limited Lego parts (especially with the rather boring parts like beams and panels); the Lego parts don't increase the quality and could easily replaced by even more custom parts. For me, the fascination of building PURELY with Lego lies in these very limitations that are provided by the fact that NOT every Lego part we would dream of exists. The challenge for us is to overcome the limitations - for which here, in the eurobricks forum, are plenty, plenty, plenty fascinating examples.

This doesn't seem to be Lego anymore. Does anyone here know the famous brand for construction toys originating from Denmark?

You found a very nice solution for the three sterring modes. It took me quite a while to understand it. I never was a big friend of the original mechanism in 42054 because of the huge slack and inconvenient operation. Just a suggestion to reduce the remaining slack: You could replace the 2L liftarm above the spine for the rear axle by two thin liftarms with axleholes. So you could use a blue axle pin with friction (or a tan axle pin without friction ; just try both) instead of the grey pin without friction, which is responsible for a part of the slack. Maybe a red 2L axle could deliver good results as well.

Veeery nice! The 42081 is a little bit problematic for C-models because of the lack of gears. You managed that very well. I like your idea with the vertically oriented wheel hubs for the front axle a lot (an idea which I never would have had). The struggle with B-/C-models (at least for me) usually is the iteration and optimization you mentioned, given the limited parts. How long did you work on this moc? Could you please show us the articulation mechanism, maybe by a pic of the bottom side? Which mechanism is driven by the 1 L worm gear, which is located on the vertical axis? It must be something for the steering and for the gear rack, but I can't imagine sufficiently by the pictures provided.

It still looks (for me, at least) like an horizontal 2L offset between the arm's pivot and the universal joint's middle part (i.e. the linkage)... ... but I believe this is done on purpose: This arrangement contributes to balancing the bucket while it is lowered or raised. Thanks a lot for the pictures!

Yellow construction machinery is always a good choice for Technic MOCs! @ Bricksley: Is the arm's pivot aligned with the universal joint's center? The pictures seem to show that it is not... but I couldn't imagine that.

Maybe my alternative suggestions will be more adequate. I started by sticking as close as possible to your original draft. The alternative suggestions maybe will require some changes in your constructions which are not visible on the provided pictures, so I cannot be sure about that.

I suggest to replace both of the grey 2L liftarms (the +o ones) by two of these parts (1x1 brick wiht axle hole): https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemIn.asp?P=73230&in=S After that connect both with a simple 1x3 plate (a 1x3 tile will fit your requirement of ground clearance even better) to get an angle limiter. Just try which orientation will serve your purposes in a better way: There is the choice of mounting it underneath the long liftarm - so it will be under the chassis while driving and above the chassis after extension... or you could flip it over (which will result in less ground clearance after extension, but no obstacles for the picked vehicle located on the boom). It may be a bit weak because of the stud-based connection, but I hope it will be strong enough for your application. One could improve it by using two of the 1x1 bricks on each side; the connection could be done by this part (which will sit very tightly on the studs) https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?id=197#T=C Another possibilty would be a 1x6 tile placed centered (i.e. with a half stud offset). Not sure if there is a 1x5 tile... My favourite suggestion in terms of rigidity an ground clearance would be the connection of two 1x1 bricks on each side by a flat 1x5 liftarm; it's holes will sit very tightly on the studs. The connection relying on four studs in four holes should be quite safe and sturdy. You will figure it out! Btw, nice choice! I really like the 8109 mechanisms too. One can only wonder why the usage of the new 3x1 panels for the ramp's rear end wasn't discovered earlier. I believe we will see them more often in the future at these and similar places.

Hi Eurobrickers, I really like the idea of the TC 25 shrinking contest, but unfortunately I won't be able to participate. This contest will give us a lot of creative mocs. In some cases the participants will choose the same set, which will give the opportunity to compare and appreciate the entries. Nice! Back in 2017, I built a simple small C-Model of (part of) the BWE set 42055: A shrinked version of the mining truck which was included in this set. It was also available as a single set (42035) some time before - rather this is the colour scheme my little C-model corresponds to due to the yellow panel. The main challenge was that it needed 4 wheels (= 12 t bevel gears), but 42055 includes (hard to believe...) only 3 pins for that purpose (tan 2L axle pins without friction tan). ;-) So the fourth axle ist a brown 3L axle with stop. Probably it won't meet the specifications of the contest because of the electric function... ;-) https://brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=6492892 Mining Truck 42055 C-model https://brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=569964 More pictures I didn't manage to insert a brickshelf-picture in this topic, so just use the links in case of interest. :-(

I totally agree... it's annoying that they show all their lack of accuracy right from the start, even in the very first pictures. Additionally, the red 7L beams on the right-hand side of the rear part aren't mounted correctly. They need to be pushed. The plane just looks like it suffered a severe crash right before the official (!!!) photos were taken. They even mashed up the stickers which show what function are controlled by the 12t gears. It's a pity...