KrasiniArithmetic

I do get tired of the sameness in Technic. Not because I feel like there's anything lacking in my modern Technic, necessarily, because for me, evolution in the purpose of the line is no less valid than evolution of the parts used. No, I think there is a world of cool engineering out there that could be replicated but is ignored. Like - and this will sound really weird - but, let's see Technic do a building with an escalator, or an ornamental tree with no functions, just an exploration of the versatility of the medium. Maybe a mechanical coin sorter or a production line - that might turn out like a GBC moc, but with a theme. How about a drill rig with all the functions? Elevation, stem rotation and advance, outriggers, caterpillar tracks or wheels, maybe including steering, and maybe even stem clamps... I think every true Technic fan should build their way through the history of the line, starting with the first glimmer of the ideas at the introduction of gears by Samsonite. But narrowing it down a bit, I think the following should be bucket list builds for all: 853 Auto Chassis. The first flagship set and really rather ambitious given the limited variety of new parts. Built modularly like a real chassis would be, with frame, steering, engine+transmission, and seats all built separately and assembled at the end. I really really like 851, too, but not enough to list it as a bucket list build. 8865 Test Car. This is a refinement and development of 8860, which in turn is a refinement and development on 853. This displays how the system and design has developed in its first 10 years. 8862 Backhoe. Introducing pneumatics! There's been cosmetic piping before, but now it's functional! It is, however, an early implementation, and most functions remain unpowered. 8880 Super Car. I mean, of course. It's excellent. A classic for a reason. I don't think I need to say more. However, many of the innovations of this set are unique and never repeated. Many of the things it innovates use highly specialized parts that will never be used again. These things will be executed very differently in the future. Therefore, this is bucket list because it's great, not because it really has much bearing on the development of the Technic system. 8480 Space Shuttle. One of the most complex and challenging builds in a Technic set EVER. Also the introduction of the first studless parts, an era-defining extravagance in the excess that is fiber optics, and an iconic model. 8448 Super Street Sensation OR 8466 4X4 Off-Roader. This might be a little controversial, as 8448 is better loved by most. I prefer 8466, though, as it's a refined version of the 8448 mechanisms with an improved and extended door function. However, 8448 does have much more flexibility and builds in modules like 853... Choose one. You don't need both. 8461 Williams F1 Team Racer. Kinda the last hurrah of studded Technic. Not the best designed as a set, perhaps, but cleverly engineered as a model nonetheless. Useful as a direct comparison with 8674 Ferrari F1 Racer 1:8, which is pretty much exactly the same model, but built studless. Very interesting to see how the change in system forced a completely different build method to achieve similar results. 42043 Mercedes-Benz Arocs 3245. Still considered by many to be the best Technic set ever released. It's got it all - a technical build, power functions, pneumatics, and a great looking model. 42083 Bugatti Chiron. A truly revolutionary set, introducing modern gearbox parts and techniques. However, it is flawed, which also seems to be pretty representative of modern Technic sets. I prefer either the Porsche before it or the Lamborghini after it, but this is a good set for understanding the state of Technic as it now is. This is a highly unique list, I think. But again, my interest is in the evolution of the system. I think this list would be interesting and instructive for anyone who has an interest in such things.

So he starts a topic with a specific question (how to build a strut 9.5L) and your response is to tell him that his question is not valid and that you're annoyed at him for asking? That's really not very helpful of you. I can't speak for everyone, but I do find myself wondering if you might indeed be the only one thinking that way.

Thank you. I'm sorry that my thread photography is so bad - I find building on the computer distasteful and I haven't any good equipment for photography. That thread also could use an update. The model itself has been comprehensively overhauled since then and is more attractive and significantly stronger internally. The photos in that thread are of the very first 1.0 version and of the quickly discarded 2.0. I'm now at about version 1.9 - incremental improvements to just about all of the internal structure will do that. Your model is certainly one of the best models of the last few years! You've got a way of persuading the pieces that I envy

I did see your original V1 Flickr model - it and the version you posted in this thread were referenced quite a bit building my own! My cannons are based on the mod of your model that NeoSephiroth posted above. Maybe based is too strong a word - heavily inspired by, maybe. They use the same wheels for the wing connection, but are significantly different in overall execution - and my flashback suppressors are entirely unique. It's those particularly that I think you may like. My forward landing gear isn't particularly clever, but my rear gear is almost too clever for its own good - folding tightly into a small space while being relatively attractive and really quite solid. All of which is a not-very-effective way of talking about how much I love your work here. It's a gorgeous craft you've built!

Your V.2 model is looking very good and I'm interested to see what you'll come up with when you actualize it in physical parts. Your V.1 model was a major source of inspiration for my own MOC - and while we have different priorities in our MOCcing, I do think that you may find some of the solutions I used there useful. I'm particularly fond of my designs for the cannons and landing gear.

Thank you. That helps! Here's the listing for the Esso Tanker I asked about: https://www.ebay.com/itm/LEGO-Denmark-1950s-Bedford-Esso-Tanker-Truck-1-87-Scale-B/323841037319 In those photos, I don't see any obvious signs of paint removal on the side stripes - aside from the fact that the stripes are truncated. I'm not going to purchase unless I have some confidence, though.

I just purchased the Collector's Guide to help answer some of my questions about the 1:87 vehicles. It's going to be a great reference as my collection grows! However, there are at least two points upon which I'm still confused regarding some of those models. First: How many colors was the Vauxhall Victor Estate produced in? Your guide lists three - Blue, Red, and White. Miniland.nl, which has been my resource up to this point, lists three - Red, White, and Black. This last one is not listed in your guide while the owner of Miniland.nl is unsure that blue was ever a color they were produced in. Since there is a good chance that I could be buying what appears to be a blue Vauxhall in the coming days, I'd like to know what you guys think about this discrepency. Second: I may also be soon to buy a version of the Bedford Esso Tanker with a different painting pattern than is listed in your guide. It's most similar to the Norwegian version, with the stripe simply bearing the word 'ESSO'. However, it differs in that the stripe appears to have been only painted as a backdrop to the word and does not extend the full length of the tank. I suppose I can send you an eBay link to the listing, but I call dibs on it if genuine, so please don't outbid me! Third: Where do you go looking to expand your collection? eBay is where I've been going because I don't know anywhere better to haunt.

I've been getting deeply into collecting vintage Lego - particularly anything produced BEFORE 1970, with an emphasis on the period between 1955 and 1965. Unfortunately, I can't find a lot of quality information on this period. Miniland.nl is the best resource I know of, but it's somewhat lacking in some areas. If there is another resource I could go to for information on vintage Lego, I'd love to learn of it.

It's a wonderful model! I'm curious how it's braced internally. It looks like it's quite heavy, so the structure must be quite robust

Very nice! The armor looks quite substantial, which I quite like to see on a tank.

Nope. That's my own X-Wing. See my topic on that MOC separately.

Hi! The wings are a sandwich of two different plate layers laid back-to-back with SNOT brackets lined up like zipper teeth on the tops and bottoms of the wings. In this construction, the two halves of the wings are held together by the gray plates that make up the outlining ring, which are mounted to those brackets. I could post some photos of that later, but right now the model is at Brick Slopes 2019 in Utah, so I can't get to it to take those photos for you until the convention is over.

Thanks for the praise! Sorry for the low quality of the photos - I've not got the best rig for that right now. I'd like to be able to post photos of the internals right now, but the model is currently being exhibited at the Brick Slopes 2019 convention in Utah, so I don't have access to it right at the moment to get those for you. I'll get back to you with them in a couple of days.

I deliberately made some tweaks to the model. Notably, I narrowed the rear fuselage width to 6 studs maximum when the correct value is a little over 7. This was for ease of building - and because I didn't like how the more common shortcut (rounding to up to 8 studs instead) looked. You'll also note that I worked hard to get the correct nonagonal shape for the rear. Between these two factors, the rear fuselage looks a little squished vertically. I'm ok with that - in fact, I like it better that way. I've noticed most builders would rather produce a pentagon or hexagon rather than figure out the whole nonagonal form. Further, in order to get the notch in the nose tip, I widened the tip of the nose to 3 studs. The correct value for the width of the back of the nose cone is slightly less than 3 studs and the correct value for the very tip of the nose is about 2.25 studs. Most MOCs that I've seen have maintained the 3 stud width for the back of the nose cone and have sacrificed the notch for the narrowing of the nose - often overshooting to 2 studs rather than 2.25. Recently, Markhchan posted his model that attempts to do both. His nose uses a design that I experimented with and discarded - I felt the narrowing was excessive at the tip and the resulting side profile was rather hawkish rather than smooth as it ought to be. In the interest of addressing some of these concerns, I've produced a V2 model with an 8 stud wide rear fuselage and a narrowing nose. I couldn't abide the hawk-nose approach, so V2 sadly makes the sacrifice of the notch. Photos of the V2 model are below. I DEFINITELY prefer the V1 model to the V2 model...

Way back in 1999, I was 9. Which is a great age, and a very impressionable one, too. That summer, the very first wave of Lego Star Wars sets came out. I was given 7140 - the X-Wing fighter - as a gift, and I loved it to death. I still have that set today, complete and in great condition. I loved it so much that I played with it almost every day - but was careful not to damage it, even as I played. It was a great ship, a nearly perfect translation of the iconic form of the ship to the common Lego design language of the era. Sure, it wasn't Accurate, per se, but it had that grace and simplicity that even now makes the '90s one of the greatest eras of Lego design (issues with expensive parts and poor accounting aside). Then, in 2003, 4502 - the Dagobah X-Wing - was released. It marked a second generation of X-Wing design and a radical change in the apparent design goals of the Star Wars line as a whole. Now, instead of translating things into the Lego language, the goal seemed to be accuracy in modelling the shapes and functions of the filming models. It blew my mind, quite frankly. Until that point, it had not crossed my mind to complain about the Generation 1 model (7140 and 7142). I HAD to have it! At the time, I thought it was about as good as it could get. Over time, though, the clear shift in design goals eroded my confidence in it. Generation 2 consisted of 4502 and 6212. Generation 3 (9493) improved on many of the aspects of Generation 2 that were problematic. However, it took several steps backward as it did so - most noteably in the orientation of the droid bay, which had been rotated 90 degrees so as to fit into a narrower fuselage. I gave this one a pass, though I did not skip out on the T-70 Gen 1 (75102 and 75149), which consists of a modified T-65 Gen 3 structure with new wings, engines, and canopy. Finally, in 2018, Generation 4 came out. 75218 represents a huge step forward from previous designs in a lot of ways. Making use of the new, more accurate (though still correct) canopy introduced for the T-70 and with more accurately proportioned engines and wings, there were a lot of reasons to look forward to this new model. A more colorful, battered aesthetic and corrections of some of the biggest issues with Gen 3 were well welcome, too. I received this one for my birthday in July when my brother found it on shelves before it was officially released. Initially, my attempts to make my dream of a correctly shaped detailed minifig-scale X-Wing were based hopefully on the Gen 4 model. I made a number of mods to it - first replacing the lever with internal gearing based off of the Gen 3 model, then rebuilding the engines and wings to fix the odd hump on the forward slope of the engines and the poor cannon design. Then I narrowed the rear fuselage, which felt too wide relative to the nose. I added fully retractable landing gear for the rear. Then I went to redo the nose, which featured an unfortunately flat top and sloping bottom - contrary to the proper shape of the fighter. This was where I found myself starting to need to seriously MOC. The nose from the set wasn't right and making it right seemed to require starting from scratch, then grafting the new nose on. I made a number of attempts at nailing the shape and before long, I became frustrated. I'll edit this topic later with photos of my attempts. Finally, as I would complete a new draft and try to graft it on to the hull, I began to realize that with all my mods, the ship I was building had little in common with the original set I'd started with! When I realized that my modded ship probably no more than ten pieces in their original position left, I started considering simply MOCing my own model from scratch. Which I did. My first models, in late August 2018, were inspired by the fruits of my lengthy modding campaign and by the efforts of Inthert, Psiaki, Atlas, and WookieJedi. I'll post photos of these later, too. Then Jerac released his model - a beautiful and ingenious creation. I owe a debt to Jerac. His brilliance gave me a swift kick in the pants when I needed it, for my model, looking back on it now, was a rather sad derivative of Inthert, lacking the genius and lacking the grace. Jerac helped me see how badly mine sucked. Cehnot, too, was a great help. His build photos and his dimensional diagrams helped me bring my failure into the light, even when I was nearing completion! This draft version, so close to finished (I really only had the greebling on the rear fuselage left to do), was discarded entirely and I went back to square one. As I built, I had several goals. I wanted to produce a model that was correctly sized and shaped, with as much detail as possible. I needed to include moveable wings, a notch in the nose, fully retractable landing gear, and storage space as depicted in ESB. Further, I needed to do it without expensive, rare, or discontinued parts, as well as without using illegal build techniques or weak connections. Finally, the result needed to be as strong as the set and swooshable. When doing this, I felt free to look at photos of other peoples MOCs, but I would NOT look at instructions. Near the middle of October 2018, I felt like I achieved these goals. The following photos show the model as it existed at that time. Note that there are some things that are included because I had the pieces - and are designed to be easily swapped for common pieces for those that don't want to spend the money for the discontinued parts. Further, note that the following photos show a model that is unrefined. Since these photos were taken, there have been a number of internal improvements that have improved strength and durability. The exterior appearance hasn't changed, but that rumpled weak spot you can see on top of the nose has been fixed - now the nose top is smooth and strong.