Berthil

@Brickthus It's getting annoying how you promote your Ideas setup via multiple threads, and thus are hi-jacking other MOC builders threads with your advertisements. Please stop!

It is very kind that the EB staff asks us for our opinion, but if EB staff is willing to continue after the discontinuation of LEGO support, I would leave things as they are and continue as is without the clone brand restriction moderation and see what will happen. I feel majority is here for LEGO and a major change is not to be expected after the TLG decision. If one change, only in Technic about CaDa. So, Carry On ... (without contest prices).

The amount of (active) accounts that do not vote are for me a louder voice than the few ones that have voted (till now). EB staff should decide as they have to put the time (and money) in to maintain it all. No matter what few of us have to say here, including me. LEGO made clear Eurobricks is off the table for them, which started some time ago with not making sets available for reviews anymore. I wrote my remark before seeing yours.

Agree to that. It's different times. Patents are not in place anymore, LEGO has shifted focus, Other brands are equal quality, also with respect for LEGO patents still in place. A lot is happening. It's up to builder what to use. I'll stick to LEGO but also have an attic stacked with sets I designed for other brands. Now that Eurobricks is 'free' of LEGO, it can do whatever they want. I'm interested in other brands, but it should be clear with what something is build, either by tags or forum topic separation. Up to the Eurobricks staff. Either way it will be a lot of work for the staff. Kudos upfront if Eurobricks can do such a transition.

@aFrInati0n Tagging would also be fine. In the end it's up to moderators like you. Are we going to check tags or checking if it was posted in the right section? I was the lead for a popular car community (website) for 12 years, I know how it is. I'm an innocent bystander in this topic and will see where it will go :)

Because personally I like to know what parts were used to achieve an effect or building style. Since the distinction between Studio or real MOC is already now not always clear, imagine what would happen if brands are mixed. I have designed sets for UrGe, Mould King and CaDa. I have enough brick from other brands at home but I'm building with LEGO, I don't mix them. If somebody would mix up 6 brands in a build, I won't be interested. You might as wel start 3D printing your own parts. The challenge is in the available palette of bricks for me. The discussion part about sets is different. But as I said, there are not so many MOC builders left on Eurobricks, they switched to social media. Look at how many designs are posted everywhere in the BDP programs? How many of those MOC builders we know from Eurobricks? Almost none.

I feel that this forum has moved from a creator forum to a discussion forum in the past years. Although in many discussions the same people are seen. If a discussion forum, it should be by brand. If it would be a creator forum, topics by building style would be okay. A mix would be very confusing. We already have a CaDa thread that nicely separates it from the LEGO topics. Interesting stings are happening there that could have their own thread in a CaDa section. There are almost no MOCs in the CaDa thread, probably because of the brand rules as enforced in the past. I would still prefer MOCs per brand, and a mixed one is also okay. The future will tell in which brand the most MOCs discussion is, but at least it will be clear. Personally I don't want to look at a set or MOC and wonder what brand it is and what special parts were used. That should be clear from the brand it was posted in. It already annoys me looking at 'MOCs' build in Studio. I'll be building with LEGO and post in the LEGO section, but I'm interested in what is possible with other brands. But by brand.

@CONCEPTBRICK Thank you Yong for the clear explanation! I'm looking forward to testing them.

@Toastie After a full charge the trains run less long, about 50% less. From 4 to 2 hours.

If you need a tester for prolonged use, I would probably be the one. I run the PF Akiyuki trains with own GBC modules in the upcoming LUG public event day in August and 7 days at LEGO World in Oktober. The rechargeable PF battery boxes that I use now are starting to fail, so I need to find a replacement. This seems a good solution if they have about the same runtime or longer. I would need to redesign the train but that is no problem. I can provide comparison against the PF rechargeable box since I know from experience how long my trains run with what GBC modules. Here are the trains at work, at events I run three of them in a bigger layout while three are recharging. Edit: May be I should just buy them, I see they can be put in serial for prolonged battery use and I think I can fit three in a train, or at least two because the connecting wire also takes up a stud in space. Since these have 4 times as much mAh, I could run the trains all event day without worrying they will be empty and I have to build less trains. I also have all PF motors including the Buggy motor to test with, and I can do video reviews. But it would be easier for me to just buy them, instead of making video reviews with all motor types and GBC, because that will be a lot of work. I would need two packs of 4 to run three trains and have one on standby :)

@Blakbird Thank you for the insights in the model from Grazi and I enjoyed reading about your TXT-1 build. Sorry to read that it was destroyed. With my TXT-1 model I'm going for maximum power and speed that would fit the behaviour of a monster truck as much as possible within the limitations of the LEGO eco system. As for power, the Prime hub can do a lot I have noticed in previous builds, and Pybricks does a very good job in controlling it. The Technic system has changed considerably since 2009, especially electronics. But there are a lot of similarities between my build and the Grazi model while not knowing the existence of it and 17 years age difference, that is interesting and thank you for sharing.

@Blakbird Thank you for your comments and good to see you back! I have 16 RoscoPC F1 models of which you made the instructions for a lot (14 visible here). So sad to hear of Luca's passing but am grateful for your and Luca's work. And you did a lot of great work in the Akiyuki GBC thread that got me into GBC building after I made contact with some builders while exhibiting the F1 models at LEGO World Utrecht. For all the GBC's I design, I also make instructions for free, you were a great inspiration! Thank you for all the time that you have put in and hope to see more from you in the future! The model of Grazi looks great and indeed similar in the suspension setup with the 4 links and indirect shocks. I haven't seen that one, thank you for posting. That seems to be at the time when I was in my dark age but was trying to get my son into Technic with a 8466 4x4 Off Roader for Christmas. I failed, he liked castle more :)

That doesn't look very complicated and could easily be reverse engineered. Some Mould King sites are not the official one. Yes, they also get copied.

@2GodBDGlory Thank you! I finished the engine and happy with the way how it functions and looks. The spaghetti exhaust was challenging but such a recognisable part of the Buggy VW engine, that it had to be included. The engine is functional but not driven by a motor because all permitted motor slots in the TC31 competition (4) are taken by the two XL drive motors and two L motors for steering. I don't see a way to get an axle to it from the drive motors, but it can be moved by hand and commonly Tamiya RC models don't have powered fake engines so I'm not bothered by it :) Next to that I added a central hard spring in the back suspension. It doesn't limit the large travel by the side shocks, but keeps the model up while it is getting heavier. The 'back seat' cover in 'Tartan Style' was also added, and flips up to give access to the Hub. Since I'm not really used to build with panels, and thus don't have a lot, I now have to wait until orders arrive with panels to continue with the body and fenders.

I forgot the 22484 fits in the other end of the ball pin. I used it a lot in my mechanical gearbox for this GBC, 5 years ago and forgotten :) . Indeed a useful part.

Good progress and very compact! I'm looking at the connection of the links at the red gears with one stud in between. I see a ball pin at the right, but what is at the left? Is that a piece of hose sticking into the ball pin or how did you manage to have two link attachment points with one beam in between?

Very nice and compact model so far. It will be a challenge to put the electronics in such a small space. Or will it be a push model without motors? I could not find the plans for motorisation in previous posts, but may be it's not planned at all.

I've updated the title now that I know what the final model is going to be. I ditched the idea of having exchangeable bodies, they would become either bulky, too high, flimsy or too heavy or a combination of all mentioned. By making a solid model, the functional tube chassis is also used in an optimal way. Here's a video of the suspension working, and I got the PoweredUp Essential Hub working as a remote with 3 modes via gestures. Mode 1 is 4WS, mode 2 is 2WS and mode 3 is Crab Steering

The remote also works as intended. With Pybricks, no devices needed and proportional, 100% LEGO hardware solution. Only need to think of a clever way to switch between steering modes as it is capable of doing crab steering. This should be possible with 'gestures'. The remote has the same color as the Buggy Body so half is won already :)

Many body designs went through my head and researched some via part availability and design feasibility. Among them were a dark green Unimog, a T - Ford Pickup (black of course), A Willy's Jeep (somebody is already making a Rat Rod) and a Toyota Land Cruiser 20. I settled for a Meyers Manx Dune Buggy. On the quest for white rims that fit the new hubs and large tractor tire, I found that there are none! Yes, the 2998 rim of the 8880 super car might fit, but it will wobble on the hub and finding a decent one that is not yellowed is hard. So I used the Vespa rims and wheel sprockets with some chain links to make them fit. It think it will hold.

Happy to report the chassis is driving and steering very well after updating the 4-link geometry for more ground clearance and enabling a sharper turning angle without the tires hitting anything. It really turns on a dime as a Monster Truck should do. The maximum speed should be enough to make some jumps with a ramp. That will (hopefully) be in the presentation video. From here on I'll be refining the programming for the remote for optimal control via Pybricks, and start with a body design. Which one I don't know yet. I like the idea of making several since the body will be detachable but not sure if that is feasible.

The axles have been attached to the newly build chassis. The supporting tube chassis is still there, but less long and wider to house two steering motors to enable crab steering and more tilt. The 4-link axle attachments work great, the chassis can tilt a lot in all directions. The linked suspension has a lot travel and also works great. Where needed the links are secured in place. This makes me feel I can drop the model from 50cm and it will stay in once piece. I'll test when the wheels are on but so far very happy with the progress. Next is to make the TXT-1 drivable, for this I need a few beefy LBG steering axles which are on order. But I won't be sharing video's until the model is finished. The body should be easily detachable like in the Tamiya TXT-1, and as 'lightweight' as possible. Since all 4 allowed motor are used, I won't be making any additional functions although I had some nice ideas. But the Tamiya also does not have them so it's okay. Another possible body design has come up while taking a shower, that makes 3 in total. I'm not sure which one it will be in the end.

After many (many!) axle rebuilds I have a working version with links only, without fixed pivot points. This is not needed because it mimics the link geometry of the Tamiya TXT-1 and that works. Sideways movements is absent and there is lots of room for wheel movement. After this picture I made some more small improvements to help the sideways stability. This is a new axle design from the ground up, no re-use of existing designs and uses new components that became available recently, like the 4L links. For steering I use the older 8L gear rack. I hope with this it will 'turn on a dime'. The half stud offset from center has been corrected and actually makes the inner wheel turning radius smaller than the outer wheel, which will help making the turn radius smaller. As for power, I'm going for speed instead of crawling power. I hope the XL's will cope. Backup plan is gearing down with the red diff gear, or even the 1:5.4 hubs, but then it will be a crawler. I will be using the large Mindstorms hub, I have positive experiences with that one when it comes to weight and power. The tubes will stay, but the chassis needs to be two studs wider so needs a rebuild. The shock absorber attachment points are spot on for the axles. This opens the door for an extra steering motor for crab steering, but I'm not sure if I will do that.

You are right. I thought it would be easier to create a shaped tube chassis (not only 90 degree angles) with the new connectors. But still adding and subtracting the connector angles from the desired structure angles did not work. Compensating for length differences was also not easy. There are some small gaps and some parts have little bit of stress, but not enough to deform them. The stress actually helps in creating the rigid structure and I expect the gaps will go away when the build is on wheels and weight is added to the structure. Some gaps are also there because I used LBG frictionless pins to color match the tube chassis. Frictionless pins leave more wiggle room.

It was a long time wish for me to build a Monster Truck with a tube frame. Doing it for [TC31] seems the right time, also because of new Connector types issued lately. I took inspiration from the Tamiya TXT-1 Monster Truck, rather than trying to build a real world model. Although I started just a few days ago when the competition was announced, I was already able to build the tube chassis with a steering motor and connection points for the axles. The shock absorbers are mounted as in the Tamiya model, although a bit different because of design and space restrictions. The tubes are more or less part of the structure, so not entirely 'faux'. The suspension is working. It feels solid as a brick, but not so heavy. Next is designing the axles with power and 4 wheel steering. The motor will be on the axles. Since I like to keep everything 100% LEGO, I'm using PoweredUp. So it will not be high powered like the original Tamiya model, but more like a crawler. If there is room I want to add a manual diff lock. But another route could be using genuine black LEGO RC motors if they fit better as I have some. Not sure yet. As for the body design I was thinking of a removable and minimalistic Unimog design. I like the GT7 version but studless dark green will be out of the question. If that gets too heavy, I might revert to a smaller classic and clean two-tone pickup truck design.