gyenesvi

Interesting what he says about them not being able to design hollow wheel arches that would allow the wheel to go underneath as the suspension works; since the Defender's wheel arch is just like that :D I think the problem is not the wheel arch, but most Lego wheels being too wide in proportions and resulting in overly wide axles sticking out from underneath the body. In my Volvo alternate that uses the same wheel arches as the Defender, I was surprised how well the (steered/suspended) wheel can pass under the wheel arch even with much bigger wheels. Although that uses pendular axle, which pulls the wheel inwards as it articulates, while the independent suspension with its basic geometry pushes it outwards.. Furthermore, brick built wheel arches are not buildable for circular shapes, and even when buildable, look very much out of style due to all the pinholes. So I'm still waiting for nice wheel arches for off-roaders :) I don't exactly get why the rear diff had to be offset by half a stud. Both axles could just use red differentials with 12T pinion gears (or the yellow diffs if the red results in too much speed and friction), if the rear diff was also centered; the space for the locking ring would just be enough on one side of the frame. Another thing that's not clear to me is why the model does not use Audi hubs in the front to increase the steering angle and to get more of those parts out? I guess cost, but we are talking about a $250 model.. Nice that he discusses some issues that people have been commenting on, like the fragmented doors. I don't know if anybody said specialized parts should be made for doors, what I proposed is smaller panels like 5x7 or even 5x5 (and 4L / 6L liftarms). Those would be very useful elsewhere as well, so definitely not specialized. Pity that Lego never made the flat panel system more systematic, it could be very well used to build good looking continuous surfaces of any size; one could even build larger surfaces from smaller flat panels, but the large panels are not useful for smaller surfaces.. I like the amount of articulation, very nice! Yeah, let's all design Unimog alternate models out of this set; seems like everybody had the same obvious idea :D

Thanks!

Just to use the new suspension arms? I think it's large enough..

I wonder how those headlights are constructed. I guess that the inner piece is this 2x2 plate with round bottom but is the outer circle this 3x3 dish? And then how are the two joined together? With a 1x1 round plate in between? In that case, the inner one seems to stick out more than on the pictures. Or is it something else?

Oh, that's interesting to know! I don't have the old part so I was just guessing. So, looking at the pictures, I guess it was made of a longer and a shorter ring that were slid (and glued) together? Anyways, I guess similar new parts would follow the slotted principle, to allow for cheaper production.

How could they have used it? The new one is 7L and already the current 6L is too long here as it does not allow the diff lock to be fitted. Instead they should have used 5L ones and made a 5L steering link to accompany it.

Maybe that's why they changed the mold? :) I guess it is stressing the pin a bit as it is keeping the end contracted all the time, and it would loose its clickiness over time. And also, as it does not click in and grab that little edge, it can also slide apart easier. I'd like that too, but that's just the way the system works for now.

Well true that those parts have that shape in them, but if you look closely, all of them have a cutout from one side, or even all the way through, that is to make the wider hole where the end of the pin clicks in. And I was thinking that if only two perpendicular pinholes would be connected like that, it would be structurally weak, but in the bigger shapes it is okay because of the surrounding material. However, I realized that this piece is made exactly in that manner with the cutout, and has proven strong enough: So you convinced me, and here's how I think this part could look: And for sure it would be a useful one!

I think that is impossible to mold. In general, pinholes must have both ends free, otherwise the slightly wider section in the end where the pin clicks into could be molded, as the mold could not be pulled out from the pinhole.

Interesting, though for non-racecar models only in fairly unconventional ways.. I think the most realistic off-roader one could achieve without such awkward / funky building tricks is an RWD buggy with independent suspension.. which is almost like a racecar.. So far this hub has not convinced me to buy it..

Yes, but this one has 3L axle instead of 2L, I suspect that for its 'regular' use as a connector, the 2L would be needed more often..

Great that we are getting a fairly good amount of parts in this new color. Agree that the Defender's olive green parts are pretty hard to use for any MOC-ing, haven't seen many in that color except for the alternate models. About the wheel arches, I always wondered if the Defender's fender parts were designed for the Defender itself, or rather for the Volvo, or actually both in mind, as the release time difference is not that much. But I always felt that it is a better fit for the Volvo, than the Defender; it is just too large for the Defender in every direction. Those wheel arches actually work quite well with 95mm tires, with good steering geometry the wheel can turn under the arch and does not get caught up in it because it has no edges on the inside. It could also look better with the new 87mm tires, the Defender's 81mm tires are just too small for them and look ridiculous. This; it's true that the shape in general can be built, but the style of these fenders built from liftarms is so unrealistic (and old-shool). It just does not match the modern paneling system. I am still waiting for lego to come out with some better fender parts for off-roaders. Something that is just 1 stud wide and can be mounted in two points at the top, so that the bottom can end smoothly so the wheels don't get caught in it. Circular and angled variant.. in different sizes of course :) And let's just start with black.. that can be matched to many body colors.

That's interesting to know, thanks! I guess for a small model like this, such a technique could work fairly stable, but in case of larger forces I'd be more worried about the parts wearing out unevenly due to the slack (uneven spacing) in the support of the CV joints. That's a nice trick, though I suspect you won't be able to take the tube out of it. Have you tried already?

I don't see where else you could reinforce these in the door frame, where that's the only structure, since it opens. Or you will just have to be okay with it being flimsy. I guess if it was that simple there would not have been a need to introduce a new one :)

I agree that new parts are useful to keep things evolving, and you don't need to spend on new sets if you don't want to, just buy the few new parts. They are not that numerous that it would be hard to keep inventory up to date, especially if you are not interested in new panels in all available colors. I wonder how you are going to replace the new angled connector?

This is a seriously cool looking truck and also mechanically really interesting! Suspension on all wheels and all wheel drive in such a scale in a great feat, I especially admire the front axle. I wonder though what keeps the front diff in place, if I'm right there is no axle-hole supporting the axles out from the diff, but the CV joints are themselves constrained between liftarms? The arm is also a really ingenious construction, I love that folding mechanism! My only complaint would be that the 49.5 mm tires seem a bit too small for the overall proportions of the truck, as if it was originally designed for 56 mm tires?

Good to see you going to the dark side :D DBG is a very nice color for trucks I think. The linkage based suspension is really interesting for an 8x8 due to its superior flex capabilities. I have also wondered myself how it would be possible to implement such a one for wheels more than 4 without restricting the freedom of their flex movement too much. I think even for a 6x6 it is not trivial, and I like your approach of splitting it to front and rear sections and then typing the wheels in the individual sections further (even though I don't completely comprehend the linkage and what degrees of freedom it allows). I like the individual axle constructions as well, seem simple but robust :) I wonder what you are missing because I think DBG is a color with one of the highest part availability due to some recent sets like Zetros, Peugeot 9x8 and Jesko, even the Liebherr crane helped a bit.

Wow, that's a nice surprise! Hopefully! The functions look interesting too!

That looks like a 3rd recolor in a single set, right?

Interesting.. I don't think they would do a recolor just for color coding of identical parts. More probable that they would be required elsewhere, but in two such vibrant colors right off the bat? Strange..

I kike the effort for such realistic transfer case, but I don't get why a 2wd/4wd switch along with a central diff makes sense, maybe only marginally. The diff itself is supposed to ease the drivetrain when driving onroad, when it is not locked, but you can have a similar effect by using 2wd mode. I guess that is why real cars would typically use either of the two but not both mechanisms, as that may not worth the added complexity. For actual RC MOCs, I'd say the simpler the better :) So if you want some performance, then maximum 2 speed gearbox, and one of the two mechanisms is enough. For the building challenge sure I undertand it, but would rather reserve that for manual models. Curious how the final model will turn out though, I like FJs too and plan to build more in the future :)

As far as I can tell, the conclusion here so far is that there are probably software (firmware) problems with Buwizz, which is also the conclusion I came to. In my experience as well, PU servos work more precisely/smoothly with both Lego PU software and also with Pybricks firmware. I think the PID controller in the Buwizz firmware might have some bugs. For example, I have discovered and written about another one, which may or may not be related: when processing signals coming in from the phone (the BT peripheral), the Buwizz unit is handling them too slowly (I hypothesize that it does not drop old unprocessed commands that will be overwritten anyway by newer ones that arrived in the meantime), and can get flooded and the response can get significantly delayed (few seconds). I observed this during drive motor operation, but I think this may also effect servo operation. I know that some software like BC2 try to fix this by sending joystick positions less frequently, for example by only once in 10-20ms intervals. But that's not the ideal solution as it is hard to find the good interval that does not overload the Buwizz unit but also does not cause too much delay in itself. In contrast I know from personal programming experience that the software on the PU hub does handle this automatically, even if joystick positions are sent very fast, it drops the old ones in favor of new ones and reacts faster. Also, even after tuning PID parameters, which should not be necessary, as both PU hub firmware and Pybricks can do much better out of the box, I could never get the servo control as smooth with Buwizz as with other hubs/firmware. Hence I suspect software problems. These are definitely issues that should be fixed in Buwizz firmware. This is interesting idea, do you mean that the pin contacts need to be fixed by bending the pins inside the plugs a bit inside to ensure better contact?

Of course much of the above would not fit (in my experince) even into a manual model not to mention a motorized one, but he always lists everything but I have never seen what he actually manage to fit of those wishes. The space requirements of things often compound because the routing of mechanics often get in the way of each other. I think if you go for an RC model, then even a 2-speed gearbox along all the diff locks will be a real challenge, assuming that you want to keep the interior and not put electronics instead of most of the seats (or put seats unrealistically high in the cabin). For me a more realistic (albeit modest sounding) challenge would be to implement the manual model with 3 diff locks, along with the hi/lo selector, and a proper 4-link live axle in the rear.

This looks pretty nice, recognizable on the outside, I like the mix of technic and system parts, and realistic chassis structure on the inside. I like the rear axle, this is what the G wagon should/could have had. Wish TLG would provide a solution for fenders on these types of cars. If only the fender flares of the raptor would be possible to mount without the fender piece itself, that would be a step forward..

Yeah, but it's not about 2025 sets. I know people wish some sets would come in 2025, but that does not make it a discussion about 2025 sets. This could mostly go into future wishes and speculation thread.