thor_64

I have not. If I get any time to work with LEGO projects it is just for a month or two in winter.....so unless I can sneak some time at some other point it will be the same for a while. I think think the ball joint should work well for this. Nice tight fit to avoid slop issues and the weight of the model overall will be able to move the joint without issue.

I expect to rebuild a significant amount of the lower part of the chassis to provide a proper equalizer bar mount. I plan to mount the rear of the track roller frames to the chassis in the same location that the rear of the blade pusharm connects now. The equalizer bar will used to support the front of the track roller frames. The equalizer bar will pivot at its connection in the center of the chassis; therefore its ends will travel in an arc. There will probably be enough play in the system to allow the track roller frames to freely travel up and down even though they are needing to move slightly inward, but in case there needed to be some forgiveness I created the linkage with the rubber connectors to allow the end of the equalizer bar to "extend" as necessary. The rubber connectors are not carrying any vertical load - they are only trying to keep the equalizer bar at its nominal length. Yes, the equalizer bar will need to be fairly robust.

I have not made improvements to the track tensioner. I think the pivot point of the major bogie places the idler high enough to place more of the load on the center four rollers, but will only know more when I would have the roller frame supporting the dozer. I just have the end 1/3 of the e-bar built to see if I could get the ball joint in the roller frame to meet with it and I wanted the test the side to side flex joint in case that is needed. You can see all three pictures, right?

I don’t expect to be able to take this project much further for a while so I found this thread and figured I would post this. I have some experience working with actual D11s and wanted to improve the roller frame. Main differences are linking the front and rear idler‘s with the rollers and adding one more set of rollers. It ends up being two studs longer, which when I scale out the actual machine is probably a little closer to correct anyway. The next steps in this project would be converting it to high drive and suspending the front end from an equalizer bar (versus being rigidly mounted). https://www.flickr.com/photos/195025644@N08/51864855927/in/datetaken/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/195025644@N08/51866475150/in/datetaken/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/195025644@N08/51865826801/in/datetaken

As for the 42078 - Wow, maybe others have seen pictures I have not, but if the 83 cm length is accurate a person might estimate the container to be ~40 cm long. Is it going to be all 5 x 11 panels? Will it be solid panels (vs. a container "shell" - see City 60169)? Maybe 4 long x 4 high x 3 wide assuming some beams in there too..... 56 panels + the ends? Seems like a ton of panels. Maybe a new, larger panel?

No issues with the implement raising or lowering gears slipping. I seems quite solid. One problem it does have is the wings are a little bit fast and therefore are at the limit of the PTO driveline clutch gear. When first built it would slip some and I needed make sure all the friction points on the tractor driveline were loose to avoid slippage; it is ok now. It would be nice to use the 8 & 24 gears vs. the 12 & 20 that are driving the wing linkages, but there was no space in the current design. I really wanted to add them as a second set of gear reduction, but didn't come up with a way to do it. There are two gear selectors that are stacked vertically above where the power enters from the tractor and are operated by the dark gray bushing/axle pieces (6553) via an axle directly or a linkage. The bottom one operates the wings; the top one operates the implement lift. Here are more pictures. You may notice I narrowed the design of the three rear shanks while keeping the design relatively symmetric.

Hello, first time post. I have never really had a full "dark age", but also am not "fully in light" now. Mostly having fun with the kids (2 girls and 2 boys, ages 6 to 12) these days w/ City, Friends, etc. I was fortunate enough to have a 8880 as my last set in high school and then have gotten 8258, 8043, 8110, 42009 (which I have not gotten a chance to open yet!), and most recently the 42054 in my adult life. Below my MOC C-model attachment for the Xerion 5000 Trac VC

Let me start with saying how impressed I was with the A-model overall when I built it. I grew up on a farm, so between being a realistic tractor and the tires I knew I had to get this set even though I wasn't convinced that the features would be that great. It has turned out that the features are better than expected and that the play-ability is really impressive. My two sons have had a lot of fun with it and the functions played well too. Sets like the 8258 or 8110 they can hardly play with because of the complexity of controls, etc. On the other hand, they have tons of fun with the 8043 (both A and B model) and the 42054 A-model (haven't built the B model yet). I also like the fact that they didn't feel compelled to put an engine in it. Plenty of sets have those and everything fits so nicely in this set without one. With the positive impression stated, I was rather confused/disappointed with TLG choice for the A-model. As I think I read in the "....what will the 2017 sets be..." thread, it seems like everything gets a crane arm. I can understand that on something like the 8110 or AROCS that makes sense, but on this set a crane is a seldom used attachment compared to others. Also, I think it is odd how the real tractor is designed to have the cab facing "forward" towards the hood and both the A and B models should really be operated with the cab in the secondary position turned away from the hood. With that in mind, I set out to use the pieces for the attachment to make a deep tillage tool, which would be a very common implement for this tractor with the cab in the "forward" position. I also liked how it pays homage to a the classic 8859 that was a bit before my Technic days. The result is a 5 shank sub-soil ripper that uses the "Power Take Off" drive to both raise and lower the hitch and raise and lower the wings. It uses most of the parts. It could have used a few more black pins, so I used some grays where the least effect would be had. Feel free to provide suggestions or take this idea and see how an experienced MOC'er could improve it. I think TLG could have really had a nice looking tillage tool and made a very similar B-model as the original blade and had a even better set.