HectorMB

It was a kind of late evening, but I saw the offer and I had no issues in driving 30 mins to get the pack! :)

Yesterday evening just got: Mindstorms Ev3 31313 (complete) Off-Roader 8297 (complete) Supercar 8070 (few pieces missing) Motorized Excavator 8043 (complete) For 35 CHF/USD. I still cannot believe it :).

I think it deserves a particular topic. Let's keep this one for the lights and shadows of the new (and old) diffs, isn't it?

Indeed, pretty functional and relatively easy to place in models.

@pleegwat, as you said, "commonly". Central axle differential, motor coupling, or differential-based gearboxes are few examples on which you may not use a 5x7 frame to house a such piece. For me, the point is what the central Y axis makes for the differential performance. And then, if it's absence makes possible additional uses of the piece. Moreover, bigger room inside of the differential will allow better attaching with regular (non-stopped) axles, reducing the chances of slipping away.

That was exactly my thought

This partially solved the issue and the pieces are holding together under high torque. As the gearing inside is made by 1 to 3 to 1 bevel gears, they can take such torque. It is a pitty that given the gearing inside, the diff fails at holding together while it can take higher loads. Also, removing part of the Y axis insitde of the diff will make place for a better axle insertion, reducing the chances of the axles sliding out.

Couldn't be a better summary!

Well, is true that you see "less movement", but if at least it would have come with increased robustness... Ps: I edited my previous post since I misunderstood the last comment! ;)

It might be, but they are brand new...

Yes, that's a fair point. Nevertheless, these differentials have two weak points that make them not that suitable for high torque applications; they may be dissasembled in two pieces and the axles still depend on the attachment to the 12-tooth bevel gears. At the end, they are what they are. After this experience, for me, they are just other differential, with some small improvements respecting the previous diffs, but lacking a true significant improvement (such, for example, what the planetary hubs have done). Regarding the use of other diffs. This is indeed one of my possible future approaches, but I wanted to exploit the 24 bevel gear...

They are housed in a built frame ( a 11x5 with a 9L liftarm to make the sandwich. I put a lot of effort in making it studry, but with no real improvement. Not really. There are few solutions, from the tip top one, which would be a closed differential with not detachable parts, analogous to the planetary hubs, to just making the 24 bevel gear to fit way tighter than they currently do. Also, I found a custom solution which is to introduce three small plastic pieces to secure both pieces together. Nevertheless, the vibration and high torque makes them to fall out. In my opinion, if the differential need to be in a 5x7 frame to be functional is not a nice alternative. There are many applications to the differential that are just incompatible with such set up. Besides all that, I have to say that I am also disappointed with these ones. I thought that they were made precisely to be able to take a considerable torque, but I am not sure if the fact that they are made of two pieces (plus the bevel gears) adds or takes robustness.

Everyone liked the new differentials (65413 & 65414). The 28 tooth is great and the 5 bevel gears inside promise a lot of possibilities. They can be also locked, which is great. Nevertheless, I'm having some issues (and thoughts after them) when using them under high torque (which is the main use for these ones, I think). The thing is that when subjected to high torque, both parts partially disassemble, probably not even 1 mm, but enough for give room for the 12 tooth bevel gears inside to slip and crack. I tested several of these ones, and the issue seems consistent... Has someone else experienced something similar?

Those are indeed great news! Thanks!!!

Regarding the motor, that was there first thing that I checked. The motor works perfectly fine in standard Lego hubs and other motors have the same issue in that BW brick. Do you know if the repair/substitution of the BW will be with new ports to prevent this issue reoccurrence?

Good to know, thanks! I was aware that you belonged to the team, but did not know where exactly. I will do the do tests on the other BuWizz (hope that it doesn't need replacement), and I will let you know. Also, @Zerobricks, you are putting a lot of effort here in the forum to cope with all the comments that arise, and I truly appreciate it. Really. Puting aside the price thing, the BW are nice products, above the performance delivered by TLG, and I am happy with them. Nevertheless, until we can see, test and enjoy the updated app is difficult to say if the BW 3.0 worth the money. I am truly looking forward the capabilities of the BW 3.0 with the appropriate app. And now that you mentioned about the replacement: I am wondering that, as you said that this issue will be fixed in the new batch of ports, will have the replacement BWs the "fixed" ports, or they will be repaired with the same type/batch of port?

After contacting the customer service about the 2 issues i have (the for-backwards move and the temporary deconexion of one port), i was told that: -the updated app will take (or try to) care of the control of the larga angular motor -And that the deconexion in the ports might be due to defectuous contact in the BuWizz brick. Now, de "temporal" deconexion is not anymore temporal but permanent. Tried to pull a bit the contacts but with no improvement. I contacted fr customer service again to see what to do now. Regarding the increase of price; well I have no objection if the current situation made the old prices unsustanable. Nevertheless, given the issues coming from the BuWizz 3.0 and the still-to-come app, I think such increase comes in not the best moment. Honestly, when I saw the increase of prices I considered (almost 100%) to get 1 or 2 BuWizzes more, but as the ones that I already have are not working properly, I decide not do order anything else. I am afraid that my action-reaction is similar to many of those that were thinking to get some bricks before the increase of price. But also, regarding the impossibility of using the discount given for our patience for the first delivery of the BuWizzes 3.0 for getting BW 2.0 or BW 3.0... I just don't get it.

For me, the reason of using digital tools is not the parts availability, but the possibility to place pieces in positions and sites that would be impossible without dismantling the physical model. But also, the use of parts that I do not have is a plus ;)

Indeed, I proceed very similar to you. I initially make a scratch in digital, a scafold. Then, i build it phiscally and solve the issues that I see. Then, I digitalize everything (often from scratch). At this point, I often have just a "refined" scratch which basically have all the functiontions and only the appearance is missing. From there, I normally finish the model only digitally and once I have something that I am happy with, I make the instructions and the final physical model.

Many thanks (again!)! indeed, i should get used to all use of the custom parts and so on. For me, each time that I try to use a non-official part is just an adventure ;)

Hi everyone, does someone has the 11L liftarm with alternating pin holes for Stud.io? I am making the instructions for a MOC and i do not find neither the way to do it myself or to find it somewhere else. Many thanks in advance! H.

After some tests, i found that: -One of my bricks have issues with one port, and sometimes it doesn't work at all. The motor is fine (I tried with few different models with the very same result and tested that the motors works fine with the Lego technic hub). -After connection, but not moving anything the motors are still moving slightly. It is particularllly visible with the large angular motor. The moves are for and backwards and very small, but clear. Has someone else experienced something similar?

I would be inclined for the Volvo hauler. Why? -Is not very expensive -has 3 different motors -Has 2 long actuators, which are always welcome. -The gearbox places this set not among those that are just a scafold with the motors in the closest location to the action Next, the Liebherr is a good option because the always mentioned good price for the number of PU elements. And, besides, is massive!

I think in the short term, they may dont care much about the comments (even good or bad): the set is already released and it won't change a tiny thing. So, I think they may look only for publicity. On the other side, in the long run, they may gather the general most frequent comments in order to design new models... or at least this is what i would like to think! ;)

In the last months my collection reached a point of which I think as the comments above: with a little "help" from bricklink, I can make a lot of models that I love without expending a huge amount of money. Unfortunately, I do not have a lot of space for model display, so I usually have just 3 or 4 assembled... and the turnover time varies from 3-4 months to 3-4 days. So, for me, the 42131 is like other MOC: get the instructions, get some pieces, and have fun. In this regard, is just very good news. I think that for those looking for a great model to assemble and play (or leave in the shelf) and leave it assembled for a long time, the model has a high price (justified or not)... but it all depends on everyone's perspective! ;)