CrankyCraig

@Agrof - that video was brilliant! ? It seems there are more, too. We need a thread called "Lego around the home", showcasing peoples unusual applications for Lego.

I love it! I've been there too. Scouring Amazon/Ebay for a highly specialised tool that you've convinced yourself will change your life, and then you remember... Lego! And the 5 min job you had is made marginally easier 5 weeks later once you've built it.

Beat me to it. Many of the issues with the Porsche (including a body that couldn't be removed) were addressed by this community, and as a result it became quite an impressive set. I'd hoped to have a go at some of the issues with the Chiron, but after building it it became apparent that a removable body wouldn't be achievable, and to make any modifications was a nightmare because it was so difficult to access the internals. I was so dissatisfied with it's saggy suspension that after one failed attempt to address it I gave up, and dismantled it. A removable body is the most important feature for me. Everything else would be a bonus.

Thanks MajklSpajkl, you must have read my mind. June 1st can't get here quickly enough.

Great functionality. If only Lego gave us motors that could survive a dunk.

Sorry, what I'd meant was outdoors on rougher surfaces (and so with rubber tyres), but on re-reading my post I can see that may not have been clear. It's not that it's impossible outdoors, it's just that it's impractical with Lego. What the OP has built will be just as fun indoors, but won't be as demanding on the materials. In reality, on an AWD RC car, once the drift is initiated, there's no need to balance the car with counter-steering. That's why AWD is so much fun. RWD is much more difficult and does require counter-steering, where a greater steering angle matters and finding that delicate balance between throttle and steering angle is hard to the point of being frustrating, especially without proportional controls. I'd recommend anyone with a suitable surface in your home to give one a try. Even without buggy motors, they're still a blast!

Fake or not, great find LvdH!

Looking good, great job. AWD is the way to go as RWD is too difficult to control, you just need less traction and a bit more space to get a really spectacular drift going. Oh, and a couple of items to drift around in a figure 8. You can use tape, but in my experience plastic wheels are much better, as it's it doesn't take tape long to separate from the tyre. The other thing you can experiment with to fine tune it is changing the weight distribution by moving the battery box between the front and the back. Have fun!

Looking back at past competitions I've found it fairly easy to determine my favourites amongst the designs. My intention had been to vote this time if possible, but I'm almost relieved I'm not able to; I'd have no hope of being able to fairly decide between them. The competition is so deep, with so many highly praise worthy entries, the difference between many of them is less than the width of a piece of paper. Well done to all who took part. It's incredible to see what great minds can create at this scale.

Rudivdk suggested a good starting point. It will mostly depend on which flavour you find tastiest. Are you intending to display them, or will you use them for parts to create your own MOCs? Do you prefer looks, functions, pneumatics, RC, small, large, certain colours, etc. The cumulative effect of all of the releases over the years means that there's now a lot of variety, if you can get them at a reasonable price. 42043 is the one set that stands out above all others for me as a technical marvel, but there are lots of really great sets throughout those years.

I favour functionality above all else, but spider cranes are the only vehicle I can ever think of that seems wildly beyond the scope of being able to accurately replicate with Technic, at least in my mind and with current parts. There's a mind boggling amount of functions packed into a relatively minimalist structure, which would require an incredible amount of motors, creating more volume, weight and in turn requiring even more motors! Of course, they could build a much simplified version as they often (unfortunately) do, but I think it would likely end up loosing too much of the character that distinguishes it. I'd love to be proved wrong though, if Lego or anyone else fancies taking on the challenge. It would be quite a thing indeed.

They had a great opportunity to do four-wheel steering with the Porsche. I'd love Lego to replicate a beautiful classic car, complete with working manual gearbox, clutch and brakes. A Shelby/AC Cobra could be the pinnacle of display pieces, or perhaps an original GT40. An RC Tatra crawler, a large pneumatic back-hoe, a small floating RC Sherp ATV, and a self levelling walking excavator, to showcase the true capabilities of Technic and powered-up.

A pipe dream I'm afraid. It will work for as long as it takes for the air pressure in the system to equalise after opening the valves on the tanks. Props for the cheeky shot at physics though. It's always worth it on the off chance you catch it sleeping.

While it is possible to make a Lego car that car briefly loose traction outdoors, I've never seen a Lego vehicle that could sustain a drift, so my current thinking is that level of performance is reserved to hobby grace RC or those that are able to do so on frozen lakes. The more buggy motors, the better the chance, but lego gears aren't deigned to transmit those sort of forces and will most likely give up. However, whip the tyres off what you've already got and I'm prepared to bet it would make for a pretty spectacular indoor drift car on a hard surface, and would be a lot of fun.

I'm also opting to reject empirical evidence, instead favouring to adopt blind faith and the convertible Aventador SV it brings.

I want this, and every model TLG produces to have every feature and function that's ever been conceived on any car, be it actual, fictional or MOC, up to and including a flux capacitor. Is that really so much to ask?

Thanks for the fun distraction. The colour, combined with a distinct part makes this surprisingly easy. I still got the transporter wrong initially, and the wheels on 42070 had me excited that I may have missed a set. Smaller/older sets and I probably wouldn't have done so well.

That never occurred to me. Is the perception by Lego that adult's aren't interested in playing with the models they build? Because lego RC seems to generate more than it's fair share of interest from adults. I like the use of electronics/RC, but I also like that Lego seem to have created a distinctly different section that's safe from it, and with it, the opportunity to create those things we otherwise might not see. I just hope they use it, and show some variety in the features each time.

Is the 18+ rating a first? 42100: 12+ 42056 & 42083: 16+ 42043: 11-16 In any case, it's given me a great deal of hope that what lies beneath the shell will be something designed with a higher degree of authenticity for a more discerning customer. Regardless, I'm wasting no energy on trying to convince myself I'll be able to skip this one.

This follows from a discussion in the Technic and Model Team section of Eurobricks, where up to this point we've been unable to find a simple solution to this conundrum, if one even exists. For those of you well versed in Stud.io (or possibly other digital design programs), I'm looking for the easiest solution possible. As a newcommer to Stud.io/all-things-digital-design I'm trying to recreate the Class 1 Unlimited Buggy by Agrof - a great MOC for anyone interested. Firstly, for reference, here's the MOC: What you're looking at below is the rear of the buggy, with the 2 independent rear swing arms. Circled in green are a couple of mods not in the instructions; 2 further supporting arms which attach to the swingarms and reduce lateral movement. Then, later in the build, 9.5L Hard Shocks connect these swingarms to the body (using part 32069). Here's roughly how the supporting arms attach to the swingarm. Obviously, there are a lot of parts here that need to intersect at the correct angles, and to solve this myriad of variation by trial/error is a time consuming exercise when compared to the few seconds it takes to achieve this with actual bricks. Simply put, is there an easier way to achieve this digitally?

Having never used LDD and with no sound, it's tricky to follow the process in those videos, but I'll give them a watch and try to gauge a feel for what's going on. Once the video you suggested finished, I noticed this in the thumbnails, which is something similar we'd discussed earlier: I don't know what magic was performed at 18 seconds, but if it's that easy I need to explore LDD! I suspect it was just a Macro though. In all honesty, I've no right to think it should be easy to manipulate an object freely - I know so little about programming, I can't even program my homes thermostat - but it just seemed to me like the kinda thing you'd be able to do in a digital program I did try posting a different question in that section, but it doesn't seem to be one of the more active area's of Eurobricks. You're right though, that question may be better placed there.

I did know how to set the angle manually, but thanks all the same. It's what made stop, thinking about how small the tollerances are in Stud.io, and how many different permutations each of those finely editable orientations creates. Just knowing it's a program limitation is really useful though, and not just something I'm not doing. It's a shame, because I could see some enormous benefits in designing digitally, but having dabbled with it a bit, it seems there are some big negatives too. As difficult as it'll be for my OCD then, I'll leave it like that and carry on. I can already pre-empt what would happen next; I'd find a set of angles Stud.io was happy with, only to have to go through it all again when I added in the 9.5L shock absorber. I'd then turn green and muscular, and start breaking things. It's hard to believe the only way to do it is trial and error, and there's no way to relax hinges and manipulate the ends of pieces in a drag/drop way or to force a connection within a tolerance, but perhaps we'll see those things in a future update. Thanks for all your help, it's very much appreciated. I'll get a post on your Class 1 thread as soon as I have something meaningful to contribute.

Ah, Agrof, just the fellow. I'll attempt to stay on topic and save the gushing over this model for your thread - mostly at least, obviously I'm a big fan. Copying a pre-built engine from somewhere else is a great idea. It's these tricks of the trade I need to learn. Here's perhaps a better attempt to show what I was hoping to achieve: There's a correct set of angles there somewhere, but obviously, I haven't quite found them yet. I don't know what you mean by 'overconstraining', but everything is sub-modelled, so manipulation is easy enough, it's just that it's still much faffier than building with bricks. Perhaps I've just reached it's limitation, but I'm still hoping I'm making a meal of this just because I don't truly know what I'm doing yet, and appreciate I haven't picked the most straightforward model to begin my endeavour. I was enjoying learning until I reached this point. As previously stated, this is my first foray into the world of digital design. Is there perhaps another program better suited to this?

Thanks very much, that's certainly good to know, but how about the crankshaft, piston rods and heads? Is there not some even trickier angling required there? I've no doubt you'll recognise the model I picked as a first venture into the world of digital replication. Agrof's class 1 unlimited buggy - my favourite MOC to date, one which I've created a few mods for (and intend to post) and hoped to develop further digitally. The specific difficulty I had in doing this I've circled below: These pieces connect to each of the rear arms and remove some of the lateral movement. Connecting them on the actual model obviously takes less than a second, but is there a way of doing that here just as easily? Is there a way of saying to Stud.io 'look, forget about x/y/z angles for a moment... just do whatever it takes to connect these pieces'?

This is the exact point where I gave up with Stud.io, at least until I find an easier way of doing it. I figured there must be a less painful way other than trial/error to get multiple pieces to converge at a point and avoid interaction. Trying to connect suspension pieces cooked my brain. Is there no way to manipulate or drag an item item through it's possible x/y/z possitions while keeping it fixed to a point? Or even to be able to view possible connection points? Maybe the key to this revolves in the connection tool. I'd love to see a tutorial/guide or similar on how to connect pieces at more unusual angles, to see how you guys do it.