howitzer

Yeah, they are 7L as opposed to 5L in the Liebherr. But they are also made of softer material which would bend under load and thus not provide the sideways stability desired from wider tracks.

If you include handlebars in the limit, they won't. On the other hand, for aircraft the limit is really, really tight and anything above polybag size that would probably be too limiting. I'd stick to cars and trucks too. Perhaps there's even possibility for me to enter in such a small contest.

Mindstorms and Control+ has been allowed in many contests though and I'm sure will be in the future too, so nothing's preventing you from including them in your build. It's true that there has been no Mindstorms-focused contest, but I'm not sure if that's a great contest idea anyway, considering the lack of participation in some of the contests where programmable electronics would've fitted perfectly, like the transformation vehicle contest. There just doesn't seem to be too many builders here who are interested in those and also interested in contests. It's also noteworthy that Mindstorms was only recently merged to this forum, while it is my understanding that Model Team has been there since the beginning.

Could be a fun contest, at least in the sense of being something novel and something to challenge Technic builders who don't normally build in System and also a good reminder that this forum has also "Model Team and Scale Modeling" in its title. There's a downside though: many Technic builders might not have a good enough collection of suitable parts to make a good entry for this kind of contest. I personally have some parts but as I don't really build in System, I don't have a good sense of the parts I possess, so entering would be difficult.

The non-recolour of the axle with pinhole part for Wrangler is indeed inexcusable. I don't really disagree with you on any of your points, it's just that this is the world we live in and TLG does what it does. I believe the set of flipflop beams will eventually be completed (same as normal liftarms) but other missing parts you mention seem to be more elusive. My pet peeve is the lack of pin-axle connector, the same as pin with pinhole but axlehole in place of pinhole.

That's not an exotic colour for a dragon. It's only exotic if you only think it as a pneumatic part, but obviously it has also many other uses which sometimes require recolouring, that's a perfectly normal thing to do. It's true that Technic is somewhat display-oriented nowdays, considering the endlessly repeated car sets with minimal functionality and almost no innovation. I also agree with you on the issue of new exotic colours which makes the recoloured parts almost useless, which is why I avoid buying those sets - I long considered buying the Land Rover but in the end decided against it due to the stupid colours. The flipflop beams don't really compare here because each requires new mould and reconfiguration of the whole production line (part counters, bagging etc.) so they are requested by designers only when truly needed. This does leave moc makers at frustrating position as there's a sort of a promise of this new very useful part but it's unknown when we'll get a delivery on that promise. I'm sure more lengths will be released eventually, but only as the designers need those badly enough. One problem with Technic parts is that they are generally not that useful in other themes (many are but mostly those which have been in production for a long, long time) so the Technic designers probably have to justify the need for new part more strongly than designers for other themes. Getting a recolour of a Technic (or whatever) part is much easier if it happens to fit in a System build than getting an entirely new part. Also, despite this we've been getting quite a bit of new Technic parts lately with tons of new panels and also new gears and gearbox parts and the small fake engine parts in the latest. What other theme gets as many new moulds designed every year for their specific needs?

This maybe? I think the CV joints are actually constant velocity, it's the third part in the middle which makes an U-joint not constant velocity.

Can we have a new, separate topic for the actual challenge where its idea and guidelines are posted, in addition to posting the results?

Great review as always, and how nice of him to compliment our reverse engineers here in the forum for their work! The set is as expected from the photos and analysis provided here, so I didn't learn much, but it's nice to have our thoughts confirmed. I'm sort of bummed about the complete lack of aesthetic touches but as @kbalage points out, it's great to see all the gears at work. I wonder if it would be possible to achieve some sort of finished look while not hiding the gears too much...

This is awful. For such a parts they really ought to do better quality control.

Funny that some people and even some reviewers criticized the set for its "unrealistic" colours and configuration, but what do you know, those are entirely realistic and the critics were just unaware of how things are in real life. Anyway, I share a lot of your sentiments about this set, and I'm similarly happy about it even if it was really expensive purchase. Obviously it's a compromise of many factors but overall I feel it turned out in the end much better than I initially thought.

My comment was a bit of sarcastic one, I have tons of those old light gray ones, far more than I can ever see myself using... so having it in lbg is completely pointless for me.

So.. now frictionless axle-pin exists in light gray and light bluish gray, yay!

Or towball sockets with pin or axle...

Very nice! Maybe this will give some inspiration to others in attempts to build something less usual in Technic. I've also contemplated on building a lathe, albeit with a bit more ambition. In my idea there would be multiple speed gearbox and a bore through the machine (so you could turn long stock) and main bearing made with Technic metal balls. Perhaps even automatic feed through lead screw. But as with many other ideas, that has to wait until such a time where my schedule is not so cramped...

In principle, yes, but considering how it's marketed, that's less of a concern. Considering it's intended for robotic and programmable applications, most of the time it's not connected to several powerful motors being used simultaneously, but rather it's going to have many low-power sensors connected which leaves plenty of power to motors. I guess it's possible that it also has more robust electronics as it's much more expensive than a C+ hub, though I have no testing data of this.

Spike hub isn't that much bigger than C+ hub or PF battery box and it has 6 ports so size-wise I don't see a reason not to do 6 port hub. I'd be more concerned about people connecting 6 XL motors to it and then attempting to run them with maximum load - either it would cut power instantly or it would require pretty robust electronics and I don't think TLG is willing to have either.

I believe this is the reason TLG hasn't officially used axles as torsion springs, people would inevitably display the models in articulated poses and then complain about permanently twisted axles...

Very impressive! Most of the time large Lego builds tend to be just basic bricks stacked on top of each other in a way that creates sculpted looks, but yours is something different as it actually takes advantage of the possibilities of Lego as it is today instead of being something that could have been built in the 60's. I can only imagine the hours and effort spent on designing and building this model, especially the tyres are really cool.

That's why it's a challenge and not a contest. No prizes, just show-off of creativity. Most people don't work on weekends so I guess that would be the best time for it. And of course you don't need to spend the whole 24h on it, you can build only 8 hours or whatever if you feel like it or can't spare the whole 24h but could spare less.

I believe the idea is to take 24 hours of time to design and build something from start to finish. The different timezones etc. of course pose a challenge but it's an interesting idea, and I'd like to participate if possible. But taking 24 hours off from normal life is a tough deal...

Yep, there's definitely a change in the part, the finish is glossier in the old ones, and they are slightly stiffer too.

8421 had three-stage telescoping boom and its lifting was even pneumatic so scale poses no issues for such a set.

Do you have some sort of official source for this pattern? Because just having three crane sets with 5 year intervals makes for a pretty poor pattern, and TLG isn't under any obligation to follow such patterns anyway. Flagship scale mobile crane would be nice though. Hopefully with three-section boom with synchronized hook travel and at least 6 axles.

I don't think it's possible to break a truss made of new parts without breaking the parts themselves, and at that point we're talking about forces far exceeding those that any Lego is expected to withstand. When used as intended they connect really securely and are indeed strong in both directions. It's true that other cross sections than 7x7 pose challenges, though I think strong 7x9 would also be easy using flipflop beams along with the truss parts. I think variable cross section boom is going to be difficult no matter what your technique, as are triangular cross sections and so on, but those are concessions that we're going to have to make with Lego and not diecast scale models.