Jump to content

anyUser

Eurobricks Citizen
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    243

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by anyUser

  1. anyUser
    Didn't want to use lime rotor blades respectively those from set 8046/42092 so I made a subsitute:
  2. anyUser
    Wow, the building process is really one of the better recent models. It has come together nicely so far: Included MODs: - Huw's fix on the 8:8:8 transmission - single clutch to prevent stress by rubber band, cf. (I have used a #3482 wheel hub) - single front wheel on a rotable mount for better steering on ground
  3. anyUser
    I like that one - should have been like that from the beginning...
  4. anyUser
    I would do mine like this: - in orange - not (US) coast guard (exept for the coloured 'stripes' on the wing(s)
  5. anyUser
    Has anyone considered using pulley + 'rubber' instead of the 12/20 reduction next to the motor? From Instruction scan this should fit. Reduction would be 3.6. By variing ruber and perhaps using a full bushing on the small "gear" the amount of friction could be adjusted.
  6. anyUser
    Is the 20tooth gear rotating on an axle or a axle pin? Have you tried using a blue 20tooth gear on a frictionless pin?
  7. anyUser
    You could get slightly better clearance if you replace the red connector by a 3L friction pin that has this instead of the black 2L friction pin.
  8. anyUser
    But wouldn't these be properly aligned when the wings are attached to them, cf. picture from your previous post?
  9. anyUser
    By postponing the cancellation - which should have been obvious from given arguments - the collectors market now has been well served. I wonder if that is proper aim of a toys company that once had the slogan: "What will you build today?". I am missing the 42113 technic set because of exclusive parts. I was planning the build the aircraft in white and orange colour scheme similar to these: That would be difficult now. I wonder if I would assemble as a statement:
  10. anyUser
    No - all four .io files are available to me.
  11. anyUser
    Talked to the owner of a small toys shop on wednesday: New (technic) sets should arrive today (friday) at his store. Maybe 42113 won't be shipped at all.
  12. anyUser
    If you need more details let me know.
  13. anyUser
    I may consider it after test with drum installed. I don't think that suspension on a model of this scale is 'necessary'. I prefer having a fake engine. I am not an expert on suspension. I have currently assembled two set with pendular suspension: 8284 and 42030 (8265 hasn't?). There is more space for realisation. As you can see the two rear axles are next to each other. Thus there is little option - without bigger changes to the drive train - to have anchor points. The last axle alone could easily be done. For the other one: Range would be severely limited as the drive for the drum is passing just over the differential. I have mounted gear support to the 5x7 frame - these could be attached to the upper framework instead. It could be feasible if you omit the differential for these wheel to put the support to the middle of the frame. Engine and drum would be driven by last axle only. If you would like to have suspension on a concrete mixer, check out the MOC by desert752
  14. anyUser
    I am done for the moment. Now I would need the drum pieces to test-drive my version. I would like to have those in either white, yellow, or even grey colour without printing: - drum rotating only one direction (mixing) when driving a) wormgear version: drum also rotating when driving backwards setup is inspired by https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-44634/2in1/simplebutclever-2-only-one-direction b) "Ratched" version: drum not rotating when driving backwards - smaller turning cycle by improved steering angle - axle width is smaller by (ca.) 2 studs, e.g. wheels are not protunding from chassis - cabin can be tilted forward - funnel to fill the drum Images: I can't decide on the colour for second truck: I am missing the proper colour of 3x3 half beams with curve for those schemes that I would like to build...
  15. anyUser
    There is an example in the first technic ideas book. (I never build this.)
  16. anyUser
    red: 1999 yellow: 2015 They became more common 2016
  17. anyUser
    The milky white axles are from old, pre-technic "gears" sets.
  18. anyUser
    I used 3L axles for motor "cylinders" in my attempt to 42112. Even with these I occasionally got that lock when the crankshaft catches the lower end instead of pushing it upwards. Did you notice that in the 42114 Volvo there are 3L beams at the bottom which will effectively prevent this behaviour?
  19. anyUser
    This represents the gear box from 42112 truck as far as I recognized from early review videos: This is my current solution to the ratched (the yellow bit inside) mechanism: (top view) (bottom view) Implementation to my chassis mod: There is no lag for the drum rotation is direction is switched from backward to forward. My setup now has 1 full rotation for each 50 cm of travel which I consider (too) 'fast'.
  20. anyUser
    Translation of Gimmick above is a summary of several sentences at the where the reviewer shows the propeller and the underside of the wing with the axle for tilt mechanism: "it's not a building error" - the propulsion is transferred only up to the tube piece () implying that this would be a flaw in design rather than assembly. It has worked as intended before the propellor blades were attached. The problem is similar on both wings so he excludes a fault from build. "but I definitely made a mistake" - something in the gearbox is not OK from the building process but no further details are give. He plans to look into it.
  21. anyUser
    Anything driven by crank or knob or lever, e.g. not motorized.
  22. anyUser
    From those two video reports it seems, that the model is over-engineered: You can hear grinding noise of the clutches from small linear actuators used for loading bay mechanism and landing gear deployment if the end stop is reached. On the other hand, the designers had to implement a construct based on pin friction to dampen force on the rotor (didn't notice if it is the tilt or the rotation). I think theres is also a linear clutch (as in 42100 and 42112). Despite the possibility of building errors the motor cabins don't seem to be properly balanced to work without flaws. To me these are too many adaptation just to maximise the motorized functions. I would - put a motor with proper clutch to avoid injuries on the rotation because this is the most tedious operation - use purely mechanical setup to tilt rotor, deploy landing gear and open the loading bay. There is even a nice sliding solution driven from the linear actuator that could be kept as start.
  23. anyUser
    This should be small enough to fit into the gear box area of the original set: (Top view, first rear axle on the left, front of chassis to the right, all red (axle)pins indicate temporary connections that may be used further) (Bottom view, first rear axle on the left, front of chassis to the right)
  24. anyUser
    Something based on this draft might figure out:
  25. anyUser
    I am quite happy with the compact setup: Gear 'box': I think that the gear ratio towards the drum is OK: I get 1 revolution per 1.2 m (4') travel. This should be sufficient to demonstrate the principle *). From the video review just posted to the main topic it seems to be 'faster' there. However, using of the worm gear comes at a cost: When direction is changed between forward and backwards travel it takes ca. 75 cm (2.5') distance before rotation starts. I calculated that this could be reduced to 45 cm if the new differential (from 42109) would be used instead (because of 28:12 gear ratio) *) I don't think that the 1M beams will be stting in a while ;-)
×
×
  • Create New...