Cumulonimbus

Based on the interval between similar sets, I predict a new 8051 scale motorbike in 2015.

Can we make an educated guess why the universal sets never went back in production after the dark ages? Was it about sales or is there a shift in the way kids play? We will never know sale figures, but I can imagine that kids nowadays want more "finished" models? On the other hand, Creator and Basic sets are based on the same principles.

Does it have to be one universal set? I like the idea of reviving themed universal sets. My wish-list would include: - Gears pack: like you described, all types of gears, including rack and pinion parts, possibly including the two types of a linear actuator? - Suspension pack, several types of wishbone parts and springs, some wheels might be needed to make a model. - Pneumatics pack: different sizes actuators, manual and compressor-type pump, switches, hoses and an airtank please. - Engines & gearboxes: enough fake engine parts to build different geometries (V-engines, boxer engines, etc), including gearbox parts - Hoisting pack: different types of hooks, cables, pulleys and spools Similar to the 80’s sets, each pack would come with a sets of beams in a specific colour, preferably the more the rare colors, (orange, lime, light blue might be nice)

On a related note: what do we know about the developing process of Lego itself? Based on stuff I saw and read in the last years, the following list is what I can reconstruct: What to build. Nobody exactly knows how a machine is chosen by TLG, but there are some indications: A. Popular machines get repeated every few years. For example: about every 3 years a Technic bike is developed, in the last decade street bikes and dirt bikes are alternated, so about 5 years a new generation is designed. So I predict a new street bike in 2015. B. Additionally, it is apparent that some machines such as cranes, shovels, fork lifts and trucks are very popular with the target customers (aka kids). Scale. TLG must design sets for each price bracket each half year and the target price will determine the scale (mainly determined by number of parts). Mock-ups. In complex cases, a proof of principle is made. For example the RC system of the 8043 Excavator was demonstrated with a crude mock-up. Prototypes. Several prototypes are made to be able to decide on crucial aspects such as pneumatic vs LA’s, tire choice, color scheme, etc. Most famous example is the 8110 Unimog where different prototypes were displayed after the final model was launched. I have also seen images of the 8291Dirtbike with different color schemes for the body panels and rims. Rebuild. I read somewhere on the Technic site that the designers rebuild new models up to seven (I think) times, until they are fully satisfied with the functions, structure, amount of parts, etc Launch. As TLG is a commercial company they must also develop the rest of the processes (manuals, box art, packaging, marketing, distribution, etc)

You are right, the interface between the modules and functions is the tricky part of this method. I simplified the explanation a bit when I explained it, in reality, many iterations are needed. Often I start with the most challenging module and once solved continue further with this module in mind. It’s hard to explain, but I see designing a Lego set like a mathematical problem. You have a number of variables (model functions, orientation of parts, …) and a number of givens (available parts, scale, stud thickness, ...). With the huge amount of variations, I assume that there is always a solution possible. The fascinating thing is that this is not an unique solution, hence the many variation of MOC’s and MOD’s people can make. In other words: during building I seem to have a collection of boundary conditions in my head while searching for a particular solution. For example: “I need to guide the forces from the rear wheels through this module, while keeping the frame max 5L wide”. I go back and forth while building until I get a eureka moment where the thing I built complies to all requirements. Now and then I get stuck as there doesn’t seem to be a solution fitting all the requirements. Then I either set the building to one side to let it rest (inspiration comes at the most strange times and locations) or reduce the complexity by eliminating a function for example. I must confess, the learning curve of building studless after my dark ages was quite challenging, but learning how Lego does it was a great way to start. The 8258 set was a real eye-opener for me in this respect: The chassis consists of similar modules, for example the part where the crane sits on.

I design my MOD's and MOC's in a slightly different way. As an Industrial Designer I have been taught to divide a design problem into sub-problems. In Lego I apply this technique as well: after choosing the machine and the scale, I divide the model into functional units or sub-problems. I solve the challenges for each unit before building them into a single model. Often, I make a mock-up of the body so I can fit all the modules in it, while not have to worry about the inadvertently changing the proportions. The advantage is that in the first stages, I’m independent of the available colors and I can try different versions or solutions and interchange them in the model. It also allows me to make quick iterations until I find an optimal solution. Eventually, I have a model which is a collection of solutions for each sub-problem in a mock-up body. This should look and work like the final thing, but it can be over engineered and is a collection of available colors. Once I have a completed model, my last step is to use this model as an example to completely rebuild it. In this step, I choose a color scheme, integrate functions, simplify the construction and add rigidity if needed. The drawback is that you need a lot of parts, as at any given moment you need about twice the amount of parts of the final model. Especially with rare parts, this can be an issue.

In the topic about Efferman's parts on this forum we discussed the U500 wheel covers he designed and I bought. It became apparent that Efferman and I had different visions about the look of the covers. I did some searching and started to realise that there are many combinations possible on the real U400 and U500 Unimogs. The question is what do you guys (and girls) think the 8110 should look like or was intended to look like? I made an overview as reference: The top row has closed centres, the middle row show examples of rims with open centres. I would like my 8110 to look like image 4 or 5, version A comes closed to this but miss the open centres. The Efferman covers were designed with image 2 in mind (so version C is the best match). We are interested in you opinions and thoughts.

You're right. I guess you have this in mind: or even this: http://www.fan-gallerie.de/autogalerie_picture.php?path=Galerie/Nutzfahrzeuge/409_unimogu500black/mbgalerie_1645167_2.jpg&filename=mbgalerie_1645167_2.jpg I'm curious as well what other Eurobrickers think.

Hi Efferman, yes, that could work. I'm not really sure if all my suggestions even fit in a separate cover. The image below shows a bit what I have in mind: The centre of the rim is deeper than the ring which protects the bolts. There seems to be some details inside this recess as well, but I can't find good images, anyone here has an U500 at home? As said, I can image that this isn't feasible in a cover, since you need room for the axle hole. My guess is that a cover with these features could become 1 and 1/2 stud thick, three times the current version. This might reduce the flexibility you want. I could draw you a cross-section if you want.

As promised, some images of the U500 covers, painted and mounted. A short review: - As mentioned, the size of the axle hole needed to be increased slightly to fit on an axle. You will need a set of small hand files for this. - The texture of the surface is grainy, typical for a 3D printed part made with this particular technique. I sanded them lightly with 400 grit sandpaper. - I spray painted the covers, but I'm not too happy with the finish: 2 came out matte (as intended), two ended up glossy. I blame the spray paint, which was a left-over. - They fit perfect on the 8110, I played around with the offset (as shown in the image) and settled with a 1 stud offset to get as close to the look of a real U500 as possible. - Compared to the real deal, the covers could get some more definition: the ring could stick out a bit more, slightly curved background would be nice and a recess in the centre of the cover. Google some images, you will see what I mean. That said, my 8110 look much better with the covers (ignore the WIP tilting bed). - The covers are 1/2 stud thick, I would prefer the mounting point to be 1 stud thick, similar to the Lego covers. The verdict: These covers are a really nice addition to anyone's 8110 if your not scared of a little bit of handy work. Worth buying!

My order came in today: four of your U500 covers. They look good as well, I made the axle holes a bit bigger and sanded the surface lightly. This weekend I'll paint them and put some images here of the finished product on my 8110.

Tough question. I own a 8258 and I absolutely love it. I modified it and plan to make the crane RC operated. It a huge, fascinating an realistic set and in my opinion it was an instant classic. However, would I pay three digit money for one now if I didn't own one? .... Tricky. I don't think the set is worth more than say €180, but the demand has pushed the price way above this. So my strategy would be to be patient and keep an eye open for a bulk sale which contains one, or somebody who doesn't know what it is worth. Luckily I got mine cheap when it was launched thanks to the discount of a webshop, in hindsight, should have bought two.

Yes sir, I like those very much. Maybe one side (the back in you images) could have some additional mounting points? Or don't you want to sacrifice the symmetry? Those are at the 8110 scale, right? A similar part for the 8258 scale would be brilliant as well.

I like the idea, but I'm not quite sure how more than 2 of these would be mounted to the existing panels due to the maximum pin connector length of 3L. Axle holes might make it possible to connect several on a long axle, but how would it then connect to the pin holes of the existing panels? Alternatively, two extra holes might help.

I ordered my Unimog U500 covers. Since the 42030 is not available yet, I guess it's rather pointless to order covers for it now. I'm curious about the quality and strength. This is a big step for a Lego purist like me :), but I guess if Lego makes cosmetic wheel covers (for it's Ferrari's for example), why couldn't we?

Thanks for the tip. Is there something like a conversion table for Lego colors to RAL or Pantone numbers? I think I saw something ages ago, but can't trace it back.

I understand, I'm happy with that. I think I'll order a set of covers for my Unimog and a set for my future 42030. They come as white parts, right? I need to figure out the correct paint colors to approach the Lego colors. Thank you!

Very nice, is it possible to increase the offset of the ring which protects the bolts and maybe reduce the 'depth' of the rim? In case of the standard rims of the U500, the ring sticks a bit out of the tyres. I gues this could be achieved by adding a bushing as a spacer behind the cover, but will this result in a gap between the cover and the rims? Keep up the good work!

Nice, I would love something similar for the Unimog U500.

In 2014 I'll focus on MOC's, I'm currently working on plans for : - A 41006 scale crawler crane, similar to 8288 - A 42000 scale BAC Mono - A large scale single prop commuter airplane (Piper Cherokee or similar) - Two 8053 scale motorbikes, model choice not definitive yet - A 8258 scale truck, with curtain sider upper structure and "kooiaap" I'm probably too ambitious to finish them all this year, but that doesn't matter.

Injection moulding is indeed an expensive process. My job is currently designing injection moulded components. Mould prices for even simple parts can cost between €10.000 and €30.000. This is the reason why this process is only applied for mass-produced (at least 50.000 units) to make it economically viable. A more interesting process might be vacuum-casting. in this process, a component is 3D printed, then a flexible mould is made from this model. In this mould a casting is made with a 2K material (for example Poly Urethane). The mould is good for about 30 runs and a new mould can easily be made with the printed model. Additionally, tricky engineering such as tolerances, draft angles and thermal management related to injection moulding can be avoided. I've used this method to produce prototypes, and the level of detail, rigidity, and accuracy are very good. However, because this mainly a manual process, it's not exactly cheap.

I think it is a question of values. Is the value of opening a new set, discovering new parts/colors, building, playing and/or MOC-ing over the years worth more to you than the profit after reselling? For me personally, it isn't. The whole point (for me) of the Lego hobby is to build. I had the opportunity to buy a 41999, but was uncertain what to do with it as I wasn't won over with the 9398 chassis and functionality. I bought the set, giving me time to think about my options and in the "worst case" I could sell the set. Eventually I opened the set, MOC-ed a new chassis and interior and rebuild the body. The satisfaction of finishing this unique creation is priceless.

Nice, I thought the movement of the hub would be restricted when an axle passed through it, but nice to hear that this is not the case. The brake disk would be a good mounting point indeed, but how is it fixed? Based of your images, I get the feeling they are only fixed when a rim is connected and even then there might be some play between the disk and the hub? Anyway, seem you know what you are doing, so I'll follow the progress. Keep up the good work.

I like your design so far, but if you want to use this hub as a helicopter swash plate, I think there are some extra aspect to take into account to maximize the versatility. Firstly I think the central axle should be able to pass through the hub, even if if the hub is tilted in relation to this axle. Secondly, when using this assembly as a swash plate, Iccan't think of a way to connect the upper part of the rotor to the three pins without the use of an extra custom part. For use in helicopters, ideally, the upper part should be very similar to the lower part (the light grey part you designed). Take a look at this , which shows the connections needed in the top part of a rotor with cyclic and collective pitch control.If you can solve these challenges, you can sign me up for an order.

Hi, I have never properly introduced myself here, so it's about time it did. I’m a 30 year old industrial designer and currently live in the Netherlands. I followed this and other fora for many years, but finally decided to participate more actively. As a child my main toy was always Lego : I built many cities with harbours, aeroports, trains, etc. Through Model Team sets (the 5580 truck was my favorite) I evolved into technic sets. The red line through all my creations was to mimic stuff I saw in the world around me (trucks, cars, tractors, …). My goal was (and still is) to reach a satisfying balance between realism (proportions, functions, aesthetics) and the mechanism I could build. It was always a tool for me to learn and understand how these machine work. This curiosity is the basis for my professional career as well. As so many of you somewhere in the 90’s I lost interest in the models Lego launched and eventually stopped playing completely. The set which brought me back from my dark ages is the 8288 crawler crane. I was fascinated by the compact studless design, the manual actuation via cables, the colour combination and size of the model in relation to its scale. Since then, I found new inspiration and bought many sets including most flagship models. As I mentioned before in another post, I prefer manual control of a model, because I like to figure out the necessary mechanisms, can build models more compact (no battery box space claim) and I like the feedback a model gives me through the mechanism. This is the reason I converted many of my sets with PF or RC to be manually operated. Each year I get inspired by the official sets, but over the year with growing skills and parts, I find the official sets not quite to my taste. This leads me to modify the sets more and more extensively to the point that they are more MOCs than MODs. Almost all purchases are modified to better mimic the real machine: I put a wheeled chassis under the 42006 crane, gave the dirt-bike a one cylinder DOHC motor, designed a new chassis and interior for the 41999 so it becomes a musclecar (no RC), modified the width and proportions of the 8110 Unimog, etc. In 2014 I will take it a step further and focus on MOCs. Several sets have inspired me and although I reused many parts, they will be completely redesigned, build in LDD and eventually built in real life. I have got plans for my 42025, 42000 and two 8053 sets. I can'wait!