Bublehead

@Erik Leppen, you don’t need to invent something unknown or new, but innovate a way of doing something with a Technic solution to an existing problem that has never been done before... like maybe a competition to build a working Technic can opener, bottle opener, pencil sharpener. Electric toothbrush... or apple or potato peeler. Don’t think of it as inventing something that doesn’t exist, think of designing an existing device using an innovative Technic solution. Scrambled egg making machine... a machine that loads bread and unloads toast from a toaster... this was the reason I liked coaching a First Lego League team. The kids were given several problems they had to solve by building and programming a single machine to solve multiple complex tasks.

I liked the format of TC14, and the theme was a good selection. I enjoyed the freedom of creativity. But there was a small chasm between the top 3 entries and the bottom 7 in terms of ambition, design, and execution. And although functional as all the entries where, real innovation in mechanical design was limited to either dealing with size, dealing with motion, or dealing with control, or some combination of the three. What I would like to see is a build competition that would challenge us to innovate interesting things. Solve mechanical problems, design interesting functions never seen before in Technic. We have seen super cars ad nauseam, and the only innovation they usually bring to the table is a new gearbox, a new way to open the boot or bonnet or doors, some form of steering, full independent suspension, or hide away headlamps, and fake working motor and pistons, all of which were on the 8880. Now I enjoy a good supercar build, but as a platform of innovation, the selection of functionality that a designer has to work with when faced with building yet another point A to point B vehicle is very limited. I have to build something new that does essentially what every supercar has done since TLG released the 8880 almost 25 years ago? That’s not innovation, that is stagnation.

@Erik Leppen, +1, I agree. Where you have been filling the gaps with custom printed parts is exactly where I think the gaps are in the Technic element catalog. We need more and different frame type constructs to give us more options when framing our MOCs . I use the frames and the panels as structural integrated components, and use connectors to “hang” the fruit of functionality on them. This makes strong but slightly flexible constructs that are then combined to create whatever I want using beams to hold it all together and aligned. This is more like unibody construction in the automotive world, and it can be very advantageous to limit weight while improving rigidity yet allowing for some flexibility that can benefit the drive train by not introducing binding due to misalignment or loading stresses.

I have used the stuff before. The stuff in the tins seems to be the best, you can also heat the tool up in an oven after dipping it to accelerate the cure, and you can dip it multiple times to build up a real thick layer. This stuff is used with a special coin purse shaped metal plug to make those soft rubber oval coin holders. Almost everyone in middle school had to make one back in the ‘70’s here in the US.

@Seasider, +1 on some limited scope, either by limiting use of third party controllers, or total number of motors, or C model or combo C model format (set A + set B = Model C) where you have a limited (smaller) known piece count and elements to select from. This isn’t a dig at the over the top builds we see in competition, i enjoy them, but the younger members may not have access to the seemingly unlimited resources of some of us older AFOLs. The list of motors from the last winner’s entry alone would bankrupt the average builder. We need either categories or classes to let junior members compete and actually have a chance of winning. I enjoyed the freedom of TC14’s unlimited scope, but I would have liked to have seen more entries. How many members choose to NOT participate in a contest knowing they are going up against some pretty massive private inventories and collections from our master class builders?

@shadow_elenter, I’m more interested in the moc in the background...

@Techniccrack, do you use the same bearing design for the center hub as the 42082 RTC?

Anyone else notice in the tear down pictures that the unit looked like it is either bonded or sealed and they had to damage the case to get it open? The edges look rough like they were pried apart and we’re bonded besides having the screws to keep it shut. Not cool if you want to change out the batteries with larger ones.

Buy it or get building instructions. Is what he meant.

Looks like you could replace with 4000mah (2x2000mah 14500 lion) cells as drop in replacements. Adds $10 to $20 to the price.

@Goldenmasamune, ditto on pretty cars. Not my thing either, currently rebuilding my Claas as I type. But they had me at the wavy catch on the Bugatti and I got a good deal on a used Porsche.

@shadow_elenter, once a black pin has one of its ends cracked because you pulled it out using your tool and you didn’t pull it straight out, that pin is dead. You killed it. So what do you do with it? Take it outside and give it a proper burial? How many will confess to what usually happens when they break a piece? It becomes a swizzle stick. You end up with it stuck in the corner of your lips and then you start chewing on the end of it, then before you know it, you have crushed the little pin flat, pulverized it till it’s just a flat piece of flat abs plastic. You toss it out in the trash. On the day of reckoning, all those poor little dead pins are going to rise up and come looking for me, I am certain of it.

+1 on interesting techniques and big, but to the defense of smaller models by some designers, their ability to pack more into less is mechanical engineering porn. I give the 42008 as my example, I didn’t expect the amount of satisfaction that build would bring. Flagship grade design in a medium model, yeah give us more of that...

@Eaglefan344, my advice on super cars, get them if you like them. From a build perspective, they are all a very similar build, the functions are usually very similar, steering, drivetrain, etc... I buy them used (usually) and only spring for a new one in the box when it has a new element that piques my interest, such as the wavy catch in the Bugatti. I don’t tend to build MOC super cars, so my desire for super car parts is pretty low. Ymmv. I do buy sets as parts packs, and sometimes super cars may have an abundance of an element I want more of, but ever since the amalgamaters on BL bust up and sell the parts (usually) reasonably priced, I have lately been buying sets as display pieces more than parts packs. With the exception of the Arocs and the Claas and BWE which are awesome parts packs imho.

I like big complex flagship sets...max piece count isn’t a factor, functions and realism to existing real life machines, wether that means it does a function exactly like it’s real life counterpart or that it just performs the same task, only by way of a Technic engineered solution that fakes it. Like the steering modes on the Claas tractor... I doubt it has the same mechanical underpinnings as the Lego model, but the Technic solution of moving the fulcrum may be how they accomplish it on the real tractor, but in a more compact and implemented design. Then again, it may drive by wire and be a hydraulic marvel... I have no idea. That they simulated it fairly well with Technic was what makes it a neat model to me, and features and details like that are what I look for in a official TLG product. I liked the RTC, not for it’s bloated piece count but that it was a satisfying build overall, has most of the features of a crane, and had a decent color scheme that wasn’t aqua, teal, sea foam green, chartreuse, or my favorite, Almost Black Blue.

I think he is talking about the actual lithium battery inside the BB... if that is poor quality, we might still replace the cheap battery with a better one.

@grum64, I was glad to hear this time round your experience was savored and not gulped down. I was lucky to find a copy of this beauty used and in great shape and it is a great set. Classic flagship. What’s not to like?

I understand the desire to not damage your parts using a non-Lego tool, but let me just say, from somebody who has owned Lego for more than 45 years, the amount of damage you put on your parts depends on how often you use the tool on them, which means how often do you take your MOCs apart and reuse the pieces? Studded Technic beams will crack on the 1L sides and loose their grip, axle holes on lift arms will break off, half bushes and whole bushes just rain off your models if you shake them. There is way more damage occurring due to time than I could ever put on my parts with a tool and that would even be true if I took my models apart all the time, which I tend not to do. For all the young builders out there, don’t worry. Once you make it to the “A” of AFOL, or the advanced stages of “A” like myself, your disposable Lego budget will grow along with your collection. I used to worry about teeth marks and scratches and tool marks, but what I have learned is, with a small collection, the damage always looks worse and so you go all OCD about it early on when you have a small collection. By the time you get to my advanced state of “A”, your collection should be big enough and your desire to protect every piece low enough, you could pour yourself a big bowl of pins and 2L axles and eat them like mueslix. I try not to damage my parts, but my experience is, you waste too much build time worrying about damage. There was a time when I cared about every part and treated every part like gold. That was back during the BBL when we ALL treated our parts like gold. Now, since we live in the ABL, I actually don’t care about damage at all anymore. (Hint: BBL is Before Brick Link) So my philosophy on tool usage and damage is, what’s a few scratches or jaw marks or a tooth mark or two amongst friends?

I decided to try one as well, I like the idea of 4 channels out of a rechargeable BB using a dedicated controller. If the quality is high enough, this may be my answer to PoweredUp if it is a powered letdown. Since @Jim has already jumped the gun and volunteered a mini review, I guess I could wait and see if he has fun with it, but for $36 I thought I could be having fun with it too, so... even if it’s megabloks quality, I have spent way more on a simple rechargeable BB from TLG and this isn’t a clone of an existing TLG product so I don’t feel that bad about it. Not sure the BuWizz guy is that happy about it, though, unless it doesn’t perform well or catches fire

I use a curved nose set of hemostats like this: http://www.cotrancorp.com/en/kelly-hemostat-713.html they let me surgically remove pins, route PF cables, align two pinholes... push pins and axles out with the nose and grab axles and inch them out if you have no more than a half bushe width of exposed axle to grab a hold of. Yes, it can leave marks on the axle, but pins and axles take the brunt of damage when building Technic models, and sometimes you can get something put together that went together well, but will not come apart easily. This tool solves those difficult to extract problems (usually at the cost of destroying the pin but they are $0.01 a piece and a consumable in my opinion) I know, the heresy.

Looks like card manipulation, physical dispensing that is, is a two step process to stage the top card first then kick it out. Not sure if you are using this exact approach but if I was approaching the problem, it would use wheels to move the top card or cards (if two or more stick together) staging them towards a second set of wheels. The card or card stack of stuck together cards are then sent through two sets of wheels that pinch the cards, with one going twice the speed of the other in the opposite direction, this then rejects the bottom cards (by pushing them back since bottom roller wheels are traveling in the “back into the deck” direction, the top roller wheels pushing the good card in the “out of the deck” direction at a higher speed and either out of the machine or through a constantly running set of final pinch rollers that send the card totally out of the machine at high speed. At least that’s what I would try first. It’s the similar mechanism used in printers to select a single sheet of paper, one at a time. Your process looks similar, but you are also manipulating the top card (or stack of stuck together cards) up and down, but this may just be to push the cards up to engage the topside roller or down onto the bottomside rollers. But please share your solution, it seems to work very well. Interesting project. Well done.

I want to thank the moderators, @Jim and @Milan for running this competition and to all my fellow entrants and their wonderful creations. I do believe the best three entries won the top three spots, they were my top three votes, so well done to @shadow_elenter, @Erik Leppen, and @HallBricks. To the rest of my fellow participants, thanks for the stiff competition, and may we all do better in TC15.

If you hate long boring posts, let me stop you right now and save you 15 minutes otherwise enjoy this little tale... Back in the days before the internet and all the amalgamaters and set busters, my personal advice to myself was always buy sets for their parts first, how cool they are second. You kept track of all new parts and elements and when sets would come out with a brand new element, you had to decide how many of these elements you may need in the future, then purchase the smallest number of sets with the largest piece count of that element. Biggest gripe I had was when they would put out a new part but it is only available in a very large set and the number of new elements per set was one. Yes , a single copy of the new part out of a cast of hundreds of others... sort of like the orange wavy catch element 6227330 from the Bugatti, (but at least they give you two). Back then, if you wanted multiple parts without breaking the bank, your only real option was contacting Lego customer service and claim you were missing the part from the set, or that you had broken the part and needed a new one. This deception was good for a couple of parts but what if you needed a LOT of parts? There was a car MOC my brother built that used a double differential, twin motor drive system that provided an infinitely variable output. He went through almost every 14 tooth thin bevel 4143 gear I had, splitting them in two, trying to transfer too much torque in his transmission. This was before we had the white slip clutched 24z gear. I ended up having to call customer service in Enfield Connecticut and explain how my brother had busted all of my gears and I needed to replace them all. She said how many do you need? And she was just a little incredulous when I said well, I don’t have a exact count of how many I owned, but then I started listing off all the sets I owned and how many gears were in each set and that my brother had broken all but 6 of them and did the quick math and finally said “Well, if you send me a couple hundred, that should do it.” Silence on the other end of the line... then “Did you say a couple of hundred?” And I said, well I expect he will break at least another 100 before he gets done, so... yeah a couple hundred should work just fine... oh, and I will pay for them, whats say 10 cents a piece ought to do it, no?” More silence... Then- “Ok, sir, your parts should be in the mail tomorrow, at least as many as we have on hand here right now. Not sure we have 200 of those in our spare parts inventory but I will try and send you as many as we have available.” I thanked her, hung up, and then waited patiently and about a week later a small box shows up, inside, in a little little ziplock bag, was 200 brand new bevel gears and a note from Susan Williams, thank you for your patronage and support of the Techic Lego Brand, no charge (this time). Now the sad part about this story was not that I had to lie to her to get the 200 bevel gears, or that I lied about how many I owned, but that this was all true. My brother did break all my gears and I really needed to replace them. Now, A day later, my brother rebuilds the MOC and adds a torque release module that uses the friction of 4 studs to keep an idler shaft in place that would kick out when torque reached gear splitting levels. I asked him why it took the lives of 200 bevel gears before he engineered the release module and his reply was, “well you had 200 of them! When I got down to the last 6 gears I was using, I had to do something to prevent one of them from breaking.” <Face Palm> So 194 gears died a tragic death all because I had them to kill.

@KevinMoo, very well said and very insightful. Thank you for sharing your experience in China.

I bought 3 Arocs. Only one Unimog. Wish I had come out of my self induced mini dark period when Unimogs were under $250. My recommendation is buy used, buy cheap, or buy on discount two of everything you can afford. Keep one in the box unopened. Wait. Sell your doubles for profit. Repeat. Play with the other one and put it in the parts bins. Your collection grows, your Lego bill goes down. Win win.