SaperPL

Finally got time to make some outside photos for the contest entry: I'm also going to rename the topic to Mini RC Tracked Loader since I've ended up slightly off from the original concept of bobcat's straight lift arms geometry.

Lol, I hope they will finally hire some experienced mobile games developer to do the front-end for the controls...

This doesn't change the fact that this contest has a "no model team rule" as in limitation of "studded parts" to "some": And it's a Technic Contest. You are achieving the looks in a way that everyone else assumes is not permitted. The roller itself along some required system parts for lights and mirrors could be accepted as "some studded parts and panels", but wheel arcs, side skirts, windows, ladders, roof accents etc, gets to a point where the model is around 50% model team approach when it comes to the looks/externals, which I believe we have consensus around here with others that noted this and are taking part in the contests, is not acceptable in context of this rule. If you want to count % of the whole build, it's obvious that pins and axles etc will inflate number of Technic parts as well as the beams which are still Technic parts, but you're using them as structure for system parts that allow you to perfect the looks in model team manner. You need to decide whether 1) you're not okay with such restriction and not put this as a contest entry, 2) rework the model to the contest requirements OR 3) challenge our interpretation of that rule and ask @Jim about specific interpretation. I actually believe that rule should be more precise as we can clearly see your example and some other WIP models had gone with some look defining system elements, but you could have asked about this in the discussion thread for the contest.

Looks awesome, but I think that using the system windows is too much in context of "no model team" rule.

Thanks! And yes, this is something that we've seen with Sariel's MOCs based on circuit cubes as well. We need small motors and small servos, we have small motors with CADA and circuit cubes and I believe circuit cubes is investigating possibility of making servo (I asked them about it like half a year ago), but I don't know if that's going to be small or a big cube part. I also prefer use of Lego original parts in context of purity, but at the same time the plug and play aspect of this CADA hub is amazing. I've got two powered up hubs that I don't really use anymore because setting up profiles is annoying. I wish that someone made a physical controller for those already because I really prefer the liftarm based building over system.

The model is in progress - still need to split it into steps before I can make instruction: I've also made the bounding box: Counting on the outside its 15 x 25 x 15 which is 5625 cubic studs. If I didn't had the lights on the edges of the arms, counting on the inside/close to the surfaces it would be 13 x 23 x 15 which is 4485 cubic studs. Right now, if I posed it precisely for measurements, it can fit within 14 x 23 x 14,5 which is 4669 cubic studs

Well, my point was that this is genuinely one of the most creative approaches to the limitations, and at the same time I believe one of the reasons for a build thread was to not allow people to just lurk until last moment and drop huge expensive MOCs right before the deadline, and also there is a potential in some of the contests for people to just by sheer luck roughly meet the theme with what they've been preparing for a lot longer than just the contest period. For some of previous contests, if I remember correctly, you had to have a thread added at least halfway before the deadline, but my memory may be wrong here. Anyway, since I'm pestering moderators a lot about keeping up the game fair and vetting the entries against the rules before voting, I was just making sure there's no room for accusing this entry for foul play here :)

Do you have some WIP photos of the process maybe?

I can now see why you didn't want to transfer the second knob to the back - the engine bay is really amazing. I can understand the compromising "perfect" playability in favor of such wonderful detailing :)

Thanks! As for the scale - I was too lazy so far to even check the scale xD Yeah, that's exactly the issue - what annoys me with Lego is that they should have already done a proper physical controller that doesn't require using a phone. CADA's hub is plug and play and it blows my mind how long the battery lasts. It beats all the shenanigans with control+ hub, but enforces different build style where I cannot set a specific servo angles etc.

Amazing, especially the idea to collapse it all like this thanks to it being rope-based. I really like the idea of using the tracks on the sides, great job on this trick.

Made a video on the final version: Will have to make some cool photos for the entry, and maybe update the title :D

The photos are amazing. The "logs" are awesome trick. Video is really cool as well, although it shows limitations of what you can and cannot do at this scale (speedy movement of pistons, holding the vehicle to not tip over, manual operating end of the arm). I'm also having issues with movement because there's no proportional control in my CADA hub. I wonder if we'll have someone who has a machine that has additional functionality over just movement and tipper, that will be perfectly executed in context of those movements.

Awesome, can't wait to see the final version of this :)

I would definitely go with the loader if you managed to put all knobs at the back. I don't like the situation where you're using knobs in front of it/at the side. The excavator looks awesome, but I don't like the approach with knobs everywhere - it's more like pose-able than playable and thus I'd chose something that is possible to control from the back.

Not really, the issue is that hub from CADA doesn't have proportional control and if I geared down the movement speed, it'd mean the loader is moving really slow. What I would need to do is to buy buwizz 2.0 or mould king hub and controller, and I don't think I'm going to do that just for this model. I already have a lot of RC hubs :P

I've redesigned the internal structure and it is rigid now. I've also replaced black liftarm with alternating pin holes with standard one to move the attachment point of the linear actuator by one stud for increased lift. I'm waiting for white liftarms and white 3x7 panels to replace those two elements. The black connector on the liftarm is moved forward from the middle of the arm to lock against the wheel arch panel sockets on the side and prevent pushing arms into the tracks. I worked a bit on the look of the running gear. I'm in a weird situation where tracks are a bit too tight but if I add another link or replace one of the gears with 8 tooth gear, I end up with loose tracks again. I'm considering a rear like this as those loaders usually have the back slightly wider than the main body. I had to move the tilt levers to the outside and it's not perfect, but the added value of this move is that they won't interfere with linear actuators this way. The hub is placed asymmetrically to fix the issues with everything being attached with half stud step. It also allowed me to make a 1 stud wide gap for cables next to it which works really well.

Ill just attach 92907 connectors around the liftarm to guide the links. I need to build some shelves and pallets for this. Those containers are bad because I don't have precise control over them, but it was an interesting experiment. I think I need to rework the internals though - right now the hub and drive motors are in the middle so they are shifted half stud vs everything else, but it causes multiple issues with building some reasonable structure. I'll try to go asymmetric with the hub for it to be aligned with liftarm grid. It would be good if I managed to squeeze in the boat counterweight as well, but it's already hard to squeeze in the lift drive there.

Video on the update:

This looks really good. Can't wait to see it completed. I'd like to see the pneumatic outriggers, but I guess it's tough enough to handle the arm with them.

Really cool - awesome presentation on damping and tailgate. I feel like the proportions between the tracks and what is on them feels off, like it's a sci-fi space vehicle rather than something made here on earth, but it feels like an old-school Technic set that way - I would suggest stealing some ideas for the cab from 8462 or Samolot's recreation of it for TC20. Just out of curiosity - did you try making the bed lift with mechanical advantage in mind? I think it may not lift much weight (but I done the same a lot).

I've tinkered a bit with that idea, but I think that stacking two liftarms together and showing pins on the side will not look good in the end. I decided to go with simplistic approach of straight liftarm as an arm. Thanks! I simplified it though for the looks :) I've finally had time and will to work on it more and I simplified the arms but to do so I had to rework the rear a lot. I'll need to figure out a way to reinforce it. Whole thing now feels like building a ship in a bottle where it comes to the rear. I'm too tired/lazy today to make the video though, I'll try to make it tomorrow... I also finally made working doors/hatch at to front to access button and charging port: As for the arm and bucket range of movement: I added a big warning light on top which is spinning when the bucket is tilting. I'm not sure about those liftarms with perpendicular pin sockets though as they are black and we don't have a white variant yet. I might go for simple straight 15L white liftarm instead. I don't think that holding the "rigid bar" in the middle is required but it's a cool detail that the bar is moving in it.

Looks really good. I hope you'll start adding more photos with each update :P You should add 1x1 round plates with bar hole on the end of the boom to secure those lights. It's done this way in 60287 tractor for its roof light.

Looks awesome. I wish you could make it all pneumatic, but even if you squeezed the piston instead of linear actuator, the rotation would be kind of hard to handle apart from rotating by 90 degrees or something like that. Can't wait to see the video ;)

Interesting discussion. Like mentioned previously, this is both because of money and also AFOLs are more vocal part of the user base/community, but we don't have (I think we don't) the number of actual sales for each set and also sales don't necessarily represent what the kids would actual want to have in sets they could afford - they are getting what their parents can afford and what's there on the shelves. So it's more about the business decisions and marketing/what's available than actual general consumer base shaping how the product line evolves. First thing to note in this discussion is that it's a unique niche where we have a single manufacturer being reviewed constantly by more popular channels. Regardless of how objective the review is, we don't get to see competitor's products in videos from youtubers like Sariel or Racing Brick etc, which IMO in general is a weird situation on the market. We both don't get commentary/criticism/suggestions for CADA sets from those reviewers (In general, it does happen though from time to time), which could end up helping CADA to realise their shortcomings and improve to compete, as well as show stuff that CADA does better when they do, and more importantly show the choice to a viewer. Competition is a good thing for the market and the client. Second thing is that I agree that licensed cars seem to sell well, when Lego does licensed sport car pull-backs instead of making models at such scale, but I'd love this trend to take a turn such as Speed Champions did - streamline the scale and release multiple cars at specific scale each season, improve the inventory of the suspension/engine/body panel parts for a specific scale. Make each set cost the same as Speed Champions' double pack/twice as a single Speed Champions car. And maybe cut it off from the Technic brand or just make a Technic sub-brand for it. But separate it from Technic release schedule so it doesn't interfere with what we might expect from Technic (for example few licensed cars taking slots that could've been taken by medium-sized Technic forklifts/dozers etc). Third thing is that RC is something that is double-edged sword - it's cool to have a model that is motorised, but for AFOLs it will end up eventually on a shelf and it's suspended in a situation where you either have those expensive components gathering dust on a shelf or you need to tear down those models to re-use the motor functions. I feel like there's no rationale for some of the models having motorisation if you don't have place for example to race your RC cars. I feel like Technic didn't really change that much other than focusing on licensed sets, but it was like that for a long time where the bigger sets would have the functionality that MOCs tend to have in a lot smaller scale/package. It's just product line segmentation to make sure that more expensive products get more features/functions/interesting parts, so it's similar to how you buy a laptop/notebook where there's always this "add $100 more and you'll get the slightly better config) at each price point. Anyway, rather than arguing whether Technic gone bad, I'd focus on pointing out what's actually bad as is, regardless of whether it's changed from the past or not.