Bublehead

I am planning on finishing it for the competition... a couple of really long nights are coming though. I will confess, I had a moment of pure frustration yesterday when I was getting the lift mechanism to work reliably... the mount to the upper turntable would hold until the ride would get almost to the maximum lift position then two pins would slip out and the entire upper turntable would buckle, the scissor jack would rip free from its mounts and the whole thing would crash down on itself. The problem was the upper turntable mounts, although pinned, the connector https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=92907&idColor=11 was free to rotate on the beam ends. This rotation allowed it to slip off the pins and self destruct. After adding a couple of 4x2 L shaped lift arms to prevent the rotation, everything was fine. However, during a “collapse” and in frustration, I ripped the top turntable off, ride cars a-flying as I ripped the battery box and IR receiver out and threw the whole mess across the table. It’s amazing how far something will spontaneously disassemble itself when you get angry at it. A little more on the design elements- the upper turntable, cars and superstructure had to be strong but light as possible, this was to keep the load on the lifting jack mechanism as small as possible. I originally tried a single set of scissor arms but ended up doubling them up to increase stability and spread the load across 8 beams instead of 4. The L motor is reduced through two sets of 12 to 20 tooth gear meshes to drive both LA. The L motor to drive the lower carrier is through three, 90 degree distribution meshes to drive a 20 tooth gear that drives a 12 tooth idler gear that mates to the ring gear of the curved racks. The torque and the speed that this gives the lower carrier was better than I had hoped for. Both of the L motors were chosen due to their mountablity, their torque being the icing on that cake, but the LA’s do need a lot of torque to lift the whole upper turntable structure. What is really interesting is this mechanism could be used to build several other amusement rides, the “chain swing chairs” being the one that jumps out at you. This is the exact mechanism that is at the top of that ride, and the lower rotation of the carrier could drive the circular covering on the central tower. Any ride that you would want to rotate and elevate like Haley’s Comet could also use this mechanism. The double turntable using the RTC bearing construct is a thing of frictionless wonder, though, even though there is a real Technic turntable at the heart of each bearing. The performance of roller bearings is so missing in Technic Lego. It is the friction that kills some of the really interesting things you could make if each journal bearing didn’t have so much of it.

Tilted... Untilted.... So this is my WIP so far... having to use the big banana gears as a turntable, you really have to redesign the original ride to incorporate them, but the weight of the ride requires the RTC bearing design to have any performance at all. The real ride also uses a rubber tire motor drive on the upper turntable that is located on the outer rim of the ride. With Technic, there is no creating a large round “rim” for the tire to ride on, so I incorporated the curved racks to make a cylinder that the tire can ride on, but to match the scale of the ride, this makes it a inner ring not an outer rim. So this changes the entire geometry of the design, where the original had a high mounted and offset central hub and used the natural inclined shape of the carrousel to allow the lifting mechanism some room underneath, this design doesn’t have those things going for it. So the height of the inner hub had to allow for the lifting mechanism. It uses an offset scissor design to produce a virtual hinge point that is located outside the diameter of the carousel so that when it starts liftng, the outer edge of the carousel doesn’t dip down into the platform surface. I use two large LA to operate the scissor lift driven by a L motor. The lower rotational housing is driven by a L motor directly geared to the gear racks inner ring gear. A Buwizz would have been the preferred method of controlling and powering the whole ride, however my order got delayed and so I am having to use 2 PF IR receivers for the contest. The upper turntable will be driven by a M motor, and a medium motor will drive the safety harness mechanism.

Well, no pictures until tomorrow, the wife said come to bed, but I got the ride working, the lift mechanism working, the lower turntable drive working. I still have to motorize the upper ride turntable, but I did the prototype drive mechanism during my proof of concept model so it should be easy to add to the final model. I have to rebuild the seat restraints to allow me to motorize them and add the drive motor for that. I foresee two more complete rebuilds before I’m done. So far the performance of the lower turntable is beyond my wildest hopes, that coupled with the upper turntable in the same spin direction and stomachs will be emptied. My hopes are this performs like the real ride, doing everything from banyan curve to the Mexican hat dance forwards and backwards, the bucking bronco, dolphin ride..... all the phases of the turntables mixed. So turntable base fwd/stop/rev and turntable with cars fwd/stop/rev. I am using the train IR controller to give me stepped speed control on the turntables. So you can control the ride like a real carny. Kind of impressed with the performance so far.

The tires on a real Bugatti Chiron cost $250,000, that’s for speed rated tires mounted on new rims. You have to send the rims to the factory to have the tires replaced, and they only can be replaced twice on a set of rims and then you have to buy new rims. Are these rims on this 1:1 model real Chiron rims and tires? That alone would set you back the $250,000 for a set new, so hopefully Bugatti had some end of life rims laying around and donated them for the cause. @Jeroen Ottens, the bricks that are scrapped during the design process, are they recycled locally at the factory or are they sent to a plastics recycling company and processed outside of TLG? Also, did they care if designers kept any of their scrapped bricks and add them to their personal collection or was that considered a company policy no-no?

I took one look at this and then glanced at my own entry to TC14 and I had to fight the gut reaction to just take it apart, put the parts back in the bins, take one long, last drag on the day’s last cigarette, tossing back the last bit of beer in my Pilsner glass, turn out the lights, and go to bed. I have the means and I might even have the parts to compete with that laundry list of PF elements, but sadly, I don’t have any third party controllers (5 Sbricks!?!?) and there is no amount of gussying up that can be done to put it into this realm of competition. My hat is off to you, sir, and may the fleas of a thousand camels infest your nether regions... or any other suitable torture And to think, I thought 4 motors was going to be a bit excessive...

Interesting concept, and there are times when it was a momentary wish of mine. There are 4 pins in my moc where a 4x2 lift arm was removed from the design, leaving 1/3 of the pins exposed. To disassemble and replace those 4 pins was a complete rebuild, almost all the way back to the frame. How I wished for unstopped 3L blue pins right then. So they are still there if you look. I decided not to care and left them for “future improvements”.

Ok, been working on this in both real parts and in my head (the fastest place to build things is in the minds eye) and I think I might be able to pull this off... a marathon build session is coming Sunday night... will have something to post Monday I hope...

@Mylenium, this is similar to my approach, a model has to function flawlessly and be within the bounds of believability in form, even if there is no real machine to compare it to directly. I felt I had done a pretty good job of making exactly what I set about to make, I enjoyed it, I enjoyed the challenge, and I enjoyed the resulting model to the point that it will sit on my shelf and never be taken apart. That’s a statement in itself seeing the amount of $$$ wrapped up in Technic parts it represents. The list of donor sets to build it was 2 Claas tractors, 2 Arocs trucks, 3 telehandlers, a hovercraft, a BWE, plus more than several BL orders for rare parts like 16L and 32L axles, 3x11 red panels, 7x3 curved black panels, the more than 150 different other panels for the cars, platform, ticket booth and Porta Potty, the giant sign, plus custom stickers, etc... This is a hobby of passion and obsession.

Guys, don’t shut down, just ease back a little... yes I started this thread to civilize the conversation, so just do that an we are good. You have a right to say what is most important for you about Technic building. Say it and leave it. Accept others take, agree to disagree... but respect each other, ok? That’s all I am looking for here. Your take on what’s important to YOU. If you want to debate the subject, go back to the original thread please, so the rest of us can learn what others opinions are on the matter and discuss it without the drama. Thanks.

@nerdsforprez, Hey I lived down “game changing” and learned my lesson a long time ago. My goal is to support Technic and all things related. I would rather focus on creating more great MOCs and showing them off. If someone is critical, I will answer back if I don’t agree, but not to engage, only clarify my thinking. I can agree to disagree and move on. The lesson I learned early is it doesn’t help you around here to self promote. Just be honest and cordial, respectful, and kind. Present your model, let people say what they will, take what they say with a grain of salt. Act on things that make sense, disregard those that don’t. Relax and have fun. When coming here stops being fun, we all lose.

@I_Igor, agreed, this made me laugh... I also enjoy a little recreational inebriation when I build sometimes. To stay on topic, however, I will answer my own thread with what matters to me.... and the answer starts with a quote from The most important aspect of Technic building is function comes first. Form comes second and relation to real world third when building a model that functions like the real world object. I would use the BWE as an example... this is nowhere near the right scale, but it’s functions are dead on when compared to the real world machine. It rotates, it excavates, it moves the dirt to the the truck, it can move, it can rotate. It can lock the exit conveyor or sync with slew. It’s form comes next, in that it looks like the machine it represents, and thirdly, it matches an exact real world BWE which it is sadly undersized to represent. So this fits that mindset. Now if we move to let’s say the Chiron, here it was Form came first, since it has to LOOK like the real car, and then they squeezed in some functions to make it a Technic model and not just a Race theme licensed set like the Ferraris of the past. They did an ok job with most of it, knocked it out of the park on the rear end, and made the transmission interesting by introducing the wave catch piece. If my goal is a replica of an existing object, form has to outweigh function, and function would come actually last after you have met all the form of the body, the features of the real world car, and finally the function of the running gear. So the answer is it depends on what my goal is when I start. I built my big moc using function as my guide, form as my second, and real world equivalency as third. There is no real world duplicate of my amusement ride, but there is an amusement ride that it was based on. So it had to function as the real ride does. And it does that well. All the other features are my added fantasy because I wanted the ride to be able to be set up by a one armed man- so everything had to be motor driven or powered. This is my usual approach to Technic modeling... it’s why I liked the RTC flagship this year. It has functionality, looks, and matches a real world machine well enough. It also sticks to the single motor, multi function gearbox mantra that makes Technic sets, especially flagship sets, what I enjoy building. As a matter of fact, non motorized Technic sets are the last sets I usually buy from a specific years sets, or mid year selections. I have more PF battery boxes than I know what to do with... that’s another reason I used 2 in my moc.

With the other “discussions” that have been raging in another topic, I though I would start an alternative discussion on what people think the most critical aspect of Technic modeling is? From the other debate, it has been stated that scale and proportion are very near and dear to the hearts of some builders and others feel function trumps form, or if it has the functionality of said object, then it can be called that object. I’m not to keen on ensuring every part of a model is to scale, or that my proportions are not totally out of whack, but I try and keep things looking relevant to each other. You can either say, my tires are the right size and the model is too tall, or my model is just the right size, but my tires are a little small. Which matters more? Is having the right size tire for the actual height of the model really make that much difference? Especially since we have no control over the tire offerings from TLG? Or do you say, it looks close enough, the tires are a little small or the model is a little tall or a little of both, but it looks cool, and it represents a real world object, so I am going to call it good? So what aspects of Technic modeling do you consider to be the most important? Is if functionality and how well it imitates the functions of a real world object? Is it proportion and scale, it has to really conform to the original object dimensions as close as possible? Or is it some other subjective or unmeasurable quality that you strive for when making MOCs? Or is it simply having fun building models without glue and paint? Would really like to hear from the crowd what aspects of Technic modeling they feel are the most important.

Where’s the popcorn, this is getting good...

I am going to wade in here and give $0.02 worth of advice if anyone cares. First off, I could care less what someone calls their MOC, and I don’t care if somebody called a moc a specific brand and model of a crane even though a blind monk could see the difference. I have seen three bricks of Lego put together and called a Model 1911 Colt pistol that didn’t look anything like a semi automatic handgun. But boy did the kids have fun “shooting” each other with it. Let’s not get too upset on either side of this argument, shall we? I think criticism needs to be level headed, respectful, and taylored to the recipient. Personally, I thought we were all here to share in a common hobby, the building of neat models using Lego Technic. I accept criticism when offered, and praise when offered as well. I offer criticism and praise too. I do it with respect, with some thought, and always with the intent of making people feel accepted and part of a community. I think it’s that last part of the sentence that EB forums tends to ride roughshod over at times and especially to new kids on the block. So, I respect someone’s right to call their MOC what ever they want, and I respect someone’s right to critique that name selection, but can we do it with a little more compassion and a little less authoritarianism?

@Goldenmasamune, you can put your lego in a delicate garment bag (small opening net or mesh bag) and send it through the dishwasher or washing machine on delicate cycle, that’s what a local Lego buyer does with huge dirty used lots he picks up at garage sales and estate sales. It comes out nice and clean and not too scratched up. Soft toothbrush and warm water otherwise. Use mild soap, nothing real harsh. If you can’t get the cat smell off of them, use a very diluted rinse with a capful of bleach. That’s all the cleaning advice I got.

As a user of Technic since its invention, let me add this piece of wisdom. The amount of time and effort you spend keeping your bricks and elements pristine and unscratched, unnicked, unbroken, unexposed, etc... will eventually stack up to a lot of wasted effort, because they are going to get scratched, nicked, broken, dusty, and plain old “old” and you can not stop it. If you do as I do, and keep them mostly clean, covered, and sorted, you really can’t do much else except play with them and enjoy them. Don’t leave your models assembled if you don’t want broken pieces (eventually) because they will crack and disintegrate, even if in complete darkness. I don’t apply stickers to models that I know are going to be disassembled and used as donors for MOCs, but I do apply them to models that go on permanent display on my shelves, or if they have been applied by the previous owner (I buy a lot of Technic used) but the main point here is, you can go to great lengths to limit the scratches, and the sun exposure, and the two year olds chewing on them, but it is not going to extend their useful lifespan much longer than 40 years. I know, I have original sets from back then that are disintegrating, cracking, peeling stickers, parts falling off models. My advice is this, keep collecting new elements and keep playing with your bricks and elements, throw the broken ones out, and buy replacements as needed, and don’t worry about how long they are going to last. As with everything, they will not last forever.

Except the inevitable DNA on it from holding it, there is nothing on my Lego, but I don’t teeth on my Technic. I keep it in cases, bags, bins, and displayed in models.

@emielroumen, I was looking at that space as well, but not sure what to do there. Didn’t want to add another motor but some kind of use of the space. Was also looking at the space in the superstructure on the right side to see if I could add a tilting cab mechanism with a lockable drivetrain to synchronize movement with the boom tilt. So it is either moved independently with a manual knob, or if switched to “synchronized” it moves with the boom tilt. I think that is very doable. As a matter of fact, that is what I am going to do tonight and see how far I can get with it.

I have an amusement ride that dwarfs them all...

@Ngoc Nguyen, they didn’t have to upsell me, more like downsell... I just finished my build of RTC, now do I want any other 2H2018 sets? Probably. I first need to pay off the second mortgage I took out on my house to buy the Chiron and this crane though. My take overall is I liked it. And if you compare to the 42070, I liked the RTC a LOT more. Once you get past the carrier symmetry, the superstructure build and crane arm were pretty fun. I agree with most about the outriggers not actually stabilizing, and I felt this was an issue they could have addressed. What I really liked was that there were some nice sub module constructs. I really enjoy non symmetrical adaptations and skinning the superstructure was an exercise in how do you make it look symmetrical on the outside when what’s underneath isn’t. Although you can’t help but judge new sets by the standards of older models, on the whole, and as a stand alone model, (other than the kind of lame B model), I like this set a LOT. It has some flaws, but as a model of an RTC, it hits all the right notes for a flagship Technic model: Outriggers- check PF- check String and winch- check Fake engine and pistons- check 4x4 drive train- check At least 4 monster tires and rims- check HOG steering- check Multi-function gear box(es)- check $hitload of stickers- check Cost > your budget- check It’s BIG- check Large(st) piece count- check Throws you shelf space deficit into true perspective- check So what’s not to like? Ok, the rubber band gee-gaw to fill the gap on the top, yeah, didn’t like that.

Isn’t the red curved 7x3x2 panel a part in a new color for this set? I was only pretty aware since I had to use black ones in my MOC. These are the first ones I knew to be available.

Just finished book 1 in my build of it... ok I understand all the comments about repetitiveness due to symmetry, and yeah, it does get a little boring doing all “x2’s” . Overall, I like the lower carrier, but the open engine compartment is very unrealistic in my view, but then you wouldn’t see the pistons working otherwise, but that didn’t stop them from putting the engine of the 42030 behind panels, did it?

@Magical Duck Yes, that is the ride. Other names of the Wipeout/Trabant are: the Mexican Hat, Hully Gully, Sombrero, Wagon Wheel, Casino, Razzle Dazzle, Super Satellite, Roulette Wheel... I think it is #9 on the White Trash Carny Favorites list... http://thedod3.com/whitetrashcarnierides/trabant/

Ok, So I am in the midst of building the Rough Terrain Crane (RTC) and just got done building the mega turntable with roller bearings. I don’t think I will be entering the TC14 contest, but my mind will not let go of how easy a Trabant ride would be to build using this mega turntable as the platform for the undercarriage. The parts for the RTC lend themselves to building the lift mechanism, and If I can do it with a single L motor driving the whole contraption, I think it would be a decent entry. Just don’t know if I will have the time to get it done for the contest and focus on making it fit the rules, or just build it like I did my Twirl and Hurl, as a flagship MOC. Either way, it will be my next MOC and this thread will be where I post my updates. Stay tuned for more amusement ride fun...

Just watched your reviews... made me lol. Who will not like this set? Buyers who value their money... Made me almost spit take my beer. Thanks for the reviews. In the middle of the RTC build right now. Enjoying it, but it makes me want to MOC something better.