2GodBDGlory

Now if they could get the axlehole off by, say, 45 degrees instead of a mere one or two, it could be a useful part!

That's a neat part! I've been lubricating parts for my high-powered models, but that would be a better solution!

That's pretty cool! Thanks for sharing it!

It sure seems that it would be possible if one were willing to give up the stacking!

It is quite an interesting idea! I would say, though, that in a truly fast, buggy motor-powered vehicle, one might prefer an "engine brake" to the coasting ability, but the mechanism is still innovative and worth seeing!

I like the use of 9L links for the windshield pillars. It seems like this is likely the best way to make a good-looking, but still structural, pillar.

I like the idea! Transverse drivetrains are an interesting challenge compared to the more common (in Technic) longitudinal ones, and the unusual suspension designs are also interesting! I've been doing a co-op in an auto shop these days, so I get to see a lot of suspensions from below, which has caused an "itch" in me to try some types I haven't done yet, such as the torsion-beam one you have here. I'm just not sure that I'm willing to build a whole model just to try out a suspension concept, but it'll be interesting to see yours!

I like the originality! Good work!

I agree that cars are often repetitive, but I feel like construction equipment can be too. I've built so many cars in my career that anything along the normal lines is starting to get boring, so I am trying to come up with more challenges for myself, like more complex, realistic suspensions, torque-vectoring differentials, automatic transmissions, twin-clutch (differentialless) rear axles, etc. I suppose I feel like the average Technic supercar is less interesting than the average Technic construction equipment model, but I think if top-level (in complexity) supercars and construction equipment are compared, the construction equipment ends up like a more compact, better-looking Liebherr set, with one motor per point of articulation (or a pneumatic valve), while the supercar is more likely to have unique mechanical solutions. I guess I just disagree with the idea (which I don't think anyone on here consciously holds) that construction equipment is necessarily more complex than supercars.

I don't believe so. There has been some discussion earlier in this thread about it, if you want to take a look.

Looks nice! Ever since I heard about the real car's gearbox, I sort of wanted to try to model it in all its seven (or is it eight) clutch complexity, but I'm not sure I'd have the interest in finishing the bodywork, and I'm certain it would look far inferior to yours!

I wouldn't join. I don't have any balls, and the build of most GBC modules is too System-heavy for my Technic-heavy collection.

Thanks for sharing this! I would say that the virtual images of the car make it look somewhat too tall and chunky, but the physical image makes it look far better!

We're sure seeing a lot of updated Technic parts these days!

I play with it (as long as it is tolerably reliable), and then take it apart within a day or two, but I'm sure I would lose interest in playing with my models if I kept them all built for long periods of time.

I like seeing the half hub parts being used alone!

The gear ratios would be (provided that the inputs and outputs are set up to provide no overdrive) 1:1, 1:1.67, 1:2, and 1:3.33

Thanks! It saved adding three gears, which is definitely a win.

This model was built for essentially one purpose: To build a model with a functioning four-speed automatic gearbox, using PU programming. Functions: 4-Speed gearbox with PU L-motor Steering with PU L-motor 4WD with 2x PU XL-motor Dual live-axle suspension Opening hood More details: Aesthetics: The real vehicle is quite boxy, making it easy prey for reluctant bodywork-builders such as myself. I think my version was easily recognizable, which was good enough for me, but not exactly excellent. Steering: Steering is a basic rack-and pinion setup with a PU L-motor. The app provides return-to-center steering. Drive: Two PU XL-motors drive all four wheels. The front axle uses a new style differential, while the rear one uses a perpendicular 12T to 28T gear meshing, which is a good compromise between off-road capabilities and handling. Suspension: There is full live-axle suspension, using ball joints and shock absorbers. The system worked fairly well. Opening hood: Gearbox: The gearbox was a fairly basic four-speed design using a rotary catch. The only interesting thing about the gearbox itself is that I designed it such that the four speeds were not actually in sequential order, which made for a significantly smaller, more efficient gearbox. This lack of sequentiality was not an issue for me, because I knew it would be electronically controlled, which could mask this mechanical shortcoming. The programming was definitely the most complicated part of the gearbox, and allowed for both manual and automatic modes. In manual mode, one could toggle up and down gears with a pair of virtual buttons, which worked quite seamlessly! The automatic mode would essentially keep tabs on the speed of the drive motors (actually an average over time), and if their speed went above or below specific limits (relative to the commanded speed of the motor), the gearbox would then shift to offset this. In practice, the shifting was rather sluggish, and is certainly not a good choice from a performance point of view, but it would eventually get around to the right gear for crawling or cruising, if one were patient. Shifting was mechanically controlled with a PU L-motor, which drove the wave selector through a 20:12 gear ratio (chosen because of space considerations, rather than torque/speed ones). The wave selector also had a stepper (?) mechanism attached to help it snap into position. Programming: The program was quite complicated, so I won't go into it here, but there is some explanation in my video, and I would be glad to answer questions or provide screenshots of the code if requested. Overall, I consider this model a success. It combined decent looks with considerable speed, tolerable off-road abilities (Ground clearance seriously hurt this), and a reasonably well-sorted automatic gearbox! Images at: https://bricksafe.com/pages/2GodBDGlory/jeep-cherokee-xj

It's been a lot of fun for me! I got my whole setup for only about $50 CAD, and since I figured out how to prevent it from melting Lego parts (Immediate planetary reduction, "boxed" gearing at the axle, and some lubricant), I'm coming up with more and more fun ways to use it!

Similar to a recent mod I did on the Porsche 911 GT3 RS, I have now reconstructed this set from my collection with a number of RC mods. The trailer has two PF L-motors, my camera battery, and a receiver added to motorize the container-depositing arms, but the cab has received the same near-hobby electronics I have used many times in the past, making for one fast drifting truck! It could be driven in three main ways: Truck alone, which was all about drifting, Truck and Trailer, which was mostly about driving sensibly, with the added challenge of the trailer, and Truck and tireless Trailer, which was all about drifting and fishtailing the trailer around! The truck had my servo tucked under the hood for steering, the battery and circuit board in the cab, and the drive motor built into the frame, driving the rearmost two wheels. It would have been nice to drive all four rear wheels, but that would have taken a much more extensive reconstruction than I wanted to do for this leisure model, and may have (gasp!) decreased its prodigious burnout capabilities! The middle two wheels were mounted on 2L beams, which connected to the wheel on the bottom stud, and to the frame on the top one. This setup prevented these wheels from taking any load, and thus reducing the traction of the drive or steering ones. You can see more images at: https://bricksafe.com/pages/2GodBDGlory/modded-mack and a video at:

The look at the front is quite recognizable as a Chevelle! Good work!

I guess my only hope for a longer run time is pumping the air up to higher pressures, taking advantage of the can's metal construction

I've got myself an old aerosol can (air intake cleaner) and an automotive valve stem, and I'm thinking I might punch a hold in the bottom of the can, drill it out larger, drain out any fluids, and then insert the valve stem to (hopefully) make a refillable can of compressed air. Apparently puncturing these cans can be dangerous, though, so try it at your own risk while I try to come up with the safest way possible! (And after that, too) It'll be interesting to see how it works, and especially how long it will last for.

Yeah, I'd like to pick some up just for that