2GodBDGlory

That camber looks really extreme! I can't figure out how you're getting that! Can you add a picture from more of a straight-on perspective?

Maybe we'll have to try an event like that here in Canada sometime!

And to add images, you'll have to use an external hosting site, like Bricksafe or Flickr, just so you know Welcome to Eurobricks!

As did the Hyundai Veloster!

Yeah, that's why I probably wouldn't bother with that kind of comparison. A Mindstorms hub would make a pretty good counterweight, I guess! :)

Possibly, though it would get pretty subjective on what to count at some point, I think! It looks like both this year and last year introduced three sets of two mirrored panels, so that wouldn't make a difference, but grouping tire/rim sets, combining swashplate parts into one module, and ignoring single-use parts could get a different outcome, perhaps

Looks like a super fun event!

I don't think anyone's arguing that it's the best year ever-just that it's not quite as bad as the last few years!

Woah, CADA has a reverse thread worm gear! That would have been really handy to have in some situations

I think I'd agree with your assessment that this year is a step up from previous ones. I think the only major complaints we can make about this year are: 1. Poor choices of sets and 2. High prices These are valid enough criticisms, but they're nothing new. What is new, I think, is that given the lineup of set topics, pretty much everything is well-executed. If they're just going to do cars, at least they're doing decent cars! Also, we complain a lot about the number of car sets being released, but it might be helpful to note just how many sets are being released! We've had 18 sets released this year (counting both colors of Bugatti), which is an all-time record for Technic, as far as I can tell! (1998 seems to be the previous leader with 17 sets, and 2854 and 8202 were recolors of the same model, just like the Bugatti, so either way of counting such sets, 2023 beats it). If the long-term standard was to have 10 sets, with 5 cars and 5 machines, and then they suddenly bumped it up to 18 sets, with 13 cars and still 5 machines, I don't think we have any reason to complain. Of course, that's not exactly what happened, but it's really just a fairly small decrease in number of machines coupled with a large increase in number of cars, making for a very disproportional lineup, but one that nonetheless contains only a bit less machines than usual, I would guess. Also, the vast number of new parts is quite nice! Especially since they're not only panels this time around, with solid mechanical stuff too!

Wow, impressive! It's interesting how you made the loop out of sideways track. Is that a standard roller coaster technique, or something clever you had to do to make it work?

Thanks for posting! I've seen similar stuff from Aerolight on here, and always like seeing this kind of thing. Buying an ESC and controller seems like a kind of steep price of entry to this world, but maybe one day I'll go for it!

I think that's a fair question to ask! I haven't gotten any CADA sets, but my brother bought the Ferrari 488 from this website, and it all showed up fine to Canada: https://www.yourwobb.com/ They don't sell it with the original box (you could go to the official CADA site for that), but it was all there. I vaguely remember it showing up in multiple shipments, though. Maybe it was all the normal parts first, and then the electronics in a separate box? I've also had good experience with this site for buying other, non-CADA things, so it'd be at least one option

This was my count:

No, it's not required, but sometimes the shape of a build will require them I count 36 from last year, so 33 this year isn't quite record-breaking. By my count: 2023: 33 2022: 36 2021: 19 2020: 10 2019: 22

Well, sometimes there's other stuff going on between the gears that prevents them from being closer together. Alternately, sometimes you'd have two driving rings right next to each other and not want their gears to mesh (as in a reverse gear on a 3+R transmission), so you'd use an extension to move the one gear away. There is a similar extension part for the newer driving ring system as well, with an improved design to cut backlash.

Nice pictures! Did you change anything since our race?

Yeah, I think you're right about the bands being the typical way to do it. I'd agree that doing it with Lego would be pretty tough! I wonder if this track could be used for it: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=x939#T=S&O={"iconly":0}, but then you'd probably need some kind of rim that would have fairly large diameter for good grip, and a pinhole in the middle to allow drive through, and a way to attach it to the hub other than that center pinhole, which sounds pretty challenging. The splat gear is an interesting idea, and one I hadn't thought of, but I think the working principle would be similar to the ones I've used in previous designs, like the automatic ones I put in this thread: (I've also tried making manual versions on this working principle, but they didn't work very well) If I'm not mistaken, though, you'd still need some kind of clutch to lock the drive axle to the body of the hub, since the belt/splat gear would only replace the locking side of the driving ring, and not the engaging side, and I haven't had any success at coming up with a reliable clutch going into the hub body. Good thoughts!

Cool, thanks! I'll have to give it another go soon

Thanks! That's actually a good thought--it hadn't crossed my mind! At first thought I wasn't sure the logic would work out for the different modes, but this mock-up here should have the correct logic to work: As for whether it's advantageous or not, I'd probably have to build and test a full gearbox. It would definitely be easier to shift, which would be a massive plus. I think the gearbox itself would get larger--I'm thinking three studs longer with this driving ring, or maybe just two with the Yamaha one (This is including one stud that I think I'd be able to save between the turntable and hub) Having the shifting mechanism more compact would probably make it worth it, though. The main question is whether or not the driving rings can actually cope with the levels of torque that a model would require. One helpful thing is that the driving rings are being driven at a 28:20 upgearing, so they have a bit less torque acting on them than the normal system torque. I generally don't trust them in truly heavy-duty situations, though, so it's hard to say. Good suggestion!

Thanks! In this configuration it can take at least full XL motor torque, which I think is honestly more than you need, because given how low low gear is, the level of output torque is already dangerous to axles! There probably would be more resistance to shifting under load, but I'm really only recommending to shift while the motors are off, anyways.

Wow, that is some high-level photography! It looks like a nice C-model too--definitely better than the original set, I'd say. Have you tried adding a bucket to the rear arm, even if it requires parts from outside the set?

Here's an interesting gearbox concept I've been working on lately: I've been intrigued by gearboxes based on the planetary hub for a while, based on the potential to replicate real-life automatic-style gearboxes, and based on the potential for heavy-duty applications. I'm not sure this is the ideal layout, and it's likely not the ideal build for this given layout, but it's an interesting idea, I think. So, the shifting in this gearbox is handled by a sliding row of 20T gears, but it's not a traditional sliding-gear transmission. In one gear position, the gears are meshed with both a 28T turntable connected to the body of the planetary hub, and a 28T gear attached to the driveshaft coming from the motor to the CV shaft of the planetary hub. This locks the hub and the driveshaft to rotate together, making for an overall 1:1 rotation. In the other position, the 20T gears are still meshed with the 28T turntable connected to the hub body, but they are also meshed with a fixed, non-rotatable 12T gear. In this position, the 28T turntable, and by extension the body of the hub, are locked in position, forcing the internal gears on the hub to come into play for a 1:5.5 reduction. The design I currently have will stall a single XL motor in high gear, and will dramatically twist the output axle in low gear rather than skip any gears, so it's a reasonably robust design. I would recommend using it with less input torque, though, simply because the level of output torque in low gear is pretty unmanageable for any downstream drivetrain components when using an XL motor! Probably the main downside is the difficulty of sliding the gears for shifting, which looked annoying enough that I didn't bother trying for this proof-of-concept model. It's also worth mentioning that shifting while the motor is running isn't recommended, because the halfway position locks up everything and stalls the motor unless you shift fast enough. Here's a video: More images at: https://bricksafe.com/pages/2GodBDGlory/miscellaneous

Hmm, maybe! I can't say I would mind, because white is definitely a more neutral color than blue (Though not as good as the also-common LBG ones)

That's a good point--big, powerful, MOCs can probably fit the big ring, and I don't expect you'd have trouble with using it in a diff lock mechanism