Jump to content

gyenesvi

Eurobricks Dukes
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,396

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by gyenesvi

  1. gyenesvi
    Oh, I love that suspension / steering build, indeed really impressive :) Nice body as well!
  2. gyenesvi
    That sounds pretty ambitious, especially if you don't have experience with gearboxes. Even if it's doable, it's going to be pretty huge I guess, with a ton of friction, so motorization is pretty much out of the question. I'd say anything beyond 4 speeds does not lend itself well to motorization in an actual RC vehicle (maybe only for showcasing a gearbox itself). I'd suggest starting with something simpler, like a high / low gearbox :) Anything more is not even practical for an RC model, as you'll see even that will not be easy if you want a meaningful speed difference and practical performance in both speeds..
  3. gyenesvi
    This one is actually used in the Bugatti Bolide for half stud offsetting :)
  4. gyenesvi
    Surprised that a bit smaller tires solved it, but let's hope it stays like that :) It sounds like the steering is not calibrated. First, the physical build might not be centered properly, you might have to adjust some gears. When the wheels are centered, the motor's axle shaft should be adjusted to a 90 degree angle (the cross pointing up-down-left-right, not at an angle). Even more, there is an actual zero position in the whole 360 degree circle, which is not marked explicitly, but the app might actually try to move there when centering, but the physical limits might not let it. You may find the zero position by disconnecting the steering motor and let the app move the motor where it wants to when centering, and then connect the motor back. Alternatively, you need to run the calibration in the app to automatically search for the limits and find the center (I think it should already work in the latest version of the app). If that works you don't need to adjust the physical build as above (but it's a good practise just to make sure).
  5. gyenesvi
    Well, that's exactly the problem that @aFrInaTi0n mentions :) That is 'too high gearing', because there is no down-gearing in the drivetrain, and large wheels only make things worse. That's already too much resistance, so probably the motors draw too much current. It is a known problem with Buwizz 3.0s, lack of shut-down protection in the FW, so there's no point in trying to change it to a new one, many people experience the same problem, and some workarounds have already been discussed in this thread a few pages before (ramp-up curves, use of physical controller to better control acceleration, add down-gearing). And wait for updates and hope this gets fixed at some point in the future..
  6. gyenesvi
    That would not be too bad :) Why would you say it’s inferior? It’s actually hard to compare as they are different worlds and scales, but to start with, it’s the classic version (with a more interesting kind of suspension) that everybody wanted, not the modern one (with the boring old suspension setup). That already jacks up the price. Then, it looks much smoother as it’s brick built, with a ton of extras, though 42110 also had quite a few. And at least it does not have an overcomplicated unrealistically arranged gearbox :) And you need to take inflation into account unfortunately. (By the way I really liked 42110 as well.)
  7. gyenesvi
    Indeed this model is going to be really interestig, wondered why noone brought this up here yet (but there’s a dedicated topic for the model in a special theme somewhere). Anyway, really cool that they actually made 4 link suspensions for both axles, I was pleasantly surprised. As others say the only weirdness is the front triangulation, which is completely unrealistic. But I am guessing it has to do with space issues. The steering is done through double CV joints in the middle, probably that was in the way. Wonder if it could be done with linkage instead, but that might need even more space to go around the chassis. Another thing I miss a bit and could have been added maybe is a panhard rod. In that case there would be no need for such strong triangulation, and the upper links could maybe have more space in a proper position. But as I said I am already pretty happy this comes out as it is. There is no drivetrain. But the size of the whole model seems big enough to redo the chassis in technic form with more mechanical goodies, though probably at the expense of cluttering up the interior. The seats are really low for example, there is virtually no space under them. By the way there is already a speedbuild up on YT you can check that out for more details.
  8. gyenesvi
    The spring is already a bit compressed in the original build on the front, but not totally even after the mod. It's not spring compression that limits the movement on the top, but the wheels hitting the fenders.
  9. gyenesvi
    Nice and simple mods, I have just tested them. The rear one makes a much better looking heigh, while also retaining a bit of suspension travel, but the front one is too much, making the suspension totally dysfunctional. I suggest using this part in the front instead, with the round edge towards the spring That makes it similar to the (lowered) rear height, and leaves a bit of functional suspension travel as well.
  10. gyenesvi
    Yes, something like that :) The question is what's the speed / torque of that motor. I was wondering if there's something that's not too fast, but powerful enough, because, as we know too much speed is problematic for all lego components along the drivetrain. If only fast motors exist, maybe a lot of planetary reduction could be used to make the output slow and torquey on a small motor? I'm thinking about an RMP around 400-500 with a torque of 40-50 Ncm. That's in the range of 4x M motors or 2x L motors. Another setup that could be interesting is double the speed but half the torque, so around 800-1000 RPM and 20-25 Ncm torque. All of these in the size of a single M or L motor.
  11. gyenesvi
    Interesting topic, thanks guys. What I have been wondering about motors is not only having much faster or more powerful ones, but rather having the same power/speed as we have for example for 2 coupled PF L motors, but at a much smaller form factor. Something like a single M motor. Do you guys think there exists such a motor? That would be really interesting for smaller scale RC cars, coupled with a geekservo for steering. By the way, +1 for having a lego compatible RC system or even just casing for such components available from any producer :)
  12. gyenesvi
    Hello! Thanks for the detailed explanation. Indeed I did have a feeling that I saw a CV joint sticking out at some point, but at first I thought it would become part of a drivetrain, and later thought I was simply wrong. So they did the steering that way, wonder if there was no space for a linkage because of the engine; would have been simpler and more realistic I think. Anyway, still curious about the actual build of it :)
  13. gyenesvi
    Sure there are some gears in it, but the movement needs to be transferred to the floating axle somehow.. the question was how. It cannot be done just with gears because the axle is not stationary. Either double universal joints or a linkage must be involved; most probably a linkage due to the available space and that's how the steering is in reality. Still in lego there can be some simplified tricky options to do the linkage. I love that too, nice color!
  14. gyenesvi
    This is looking awesome, really excited about this! I am pretty much blown that they put proper 4-link suspensions in there, really sweet. The front suspension geometry looks kind of odd though, as the upper links also attach low to the axle almost where the lower links, but that may be due to space constraints or the construction of the axle itself out of A-arms not allowing much attachment points. I wonder how the steering is done, probably though a linkage? I can't really see anything about that on the video.
  15. gyenesvi
    I suppose Independent Front Suspension / Independent Rear Suspension
  16. gyenesvi
    Hmm, not sure I understand what kind of binding you are talking about. Does the steering get blocked somehow? Does the camber change on your IFS? Is it more complex geometry than simple parallel A-arms? I haven't noticed any problems with the steering on live axles when implemented with proper geometry (minimized bump steering). What problem can a lot of torque coupled with low gearing cause for acceleration? Do you mean some sort of binding in the drivetrain? Especially if the model is slow, there's not that much acceleration anyway, so it's harder to notice if the ramp-up is not smooth. Also, it may depend a lot on the battery / software you use for control. I use a physical controller with BrickController 2, and a physical joystick makes acceleration smoother in my experience. So to answer the question, I did not notice anything that I found to be an issue.
  17. gyenesvi
    That's cool! Are you planning to cover up the body and hide all the electronics? It looks pretty naked this way.
  18. gyenesvi
    Thanks for the comment and the questions. Glad you like it. I don't have a top speed but I'd say it's still pretty slow :) Take the Zetros speed (super slow), and triple that. Still not much. The thing is that these differentials and planetary wheel hubs do a lot of down-gearing. So this gearbox does a 3x up-gearing, but that looses efficiency. To build a faster MOC, even an off-roader, regular wheel hubs should be used, and no up-down gearing to minimize efficiency loss. Check out my motorized Willys Jeep that uses the same motor setup. I built that both with and without planetary hubs. The one with regular hubs is much faster and feels like it moves easier in high speed (on flat surface). What issues do you mean exactly here, and why is an incline special about it? Sideways movement of the axle? Both axles have a Panhard rod, that holds the axles very well centered, so there is virtually no sideways movement at all. Furthermore the front axle has 4 links, so longitudinal / rotational movement is also minimized.
  19. gyenesvi
    This keeps getting better and better! This set does justice to the defender! It's a classic version, it looks beautiful and detailed, customizable, mix of technic and system, it's great scale (the wheelbase seems 13 wide and 25 long, including the axles) and it has suspension. Loving it already, adding in a drivetrain seems feasible :)
  20. gyenesvi
    You are using Powered Up, right? Not sure what settings you are trying to set for the steering (servo calibration?) but the M motor cannot act as a servo, it has no position encoder. So you'd definitely be better off with a third L motor in case you want proportional servo steering.
  21. gyenesvi
    Now that looks awesome, great news! Not only that the wheels are back, the color is interesting (I also think its green), and the set contains 6 of them! Furthermore, this makes the model have a pretty good scale, large enough to be able to mod a proper technic chassis with suspension into it and even for motorization. This will be an interesting one, must buy for me! Curious though whether it has some suspension out of the box. The fenders are done really nicely, are those made of a single piece? Did that part exist before?
  22. gyenesvi
    Thanks @keymaker and @howitzer, indeed that sounds plausible, that terms might come after being contacted!
  23. gyenesvi
    Thanks, indeed that's what all my dual alternate builds do :) Thanks, glad you like it! Yes I am aware of that solution (from both designers), that's what I was referring to earlier. It could work, also with planetary hubs, its weak point for me is the structure of the chassis around the front suspension as far as I remember, because it needs space for the diff to float. Also because of that, the ground clearance will be less tht with the floating axle. But I might give it a try one day. Also, as I noted, another problem will be the placement of the gearbox motor, because the steering motor would need to be in the center then, which leaves no room for the other motor as it is now.
  24. gyenesvi
    @Jim, do you know what are the (legal) consequences of signing up / being selected? The sign-up link does not explain too much. Is that an official Lego link, or is it just something you guys created to gather interest? For example, if one submits an idea to Lego Ideas, they loose the right to sell the MOC on Rebrickable for a period of time even if the idea is rejected. It would be great to know if something like that applies here. Though I guess it's not like that as Lego are not potentially making their own version of it, still there might be some 'terms'. Thanks! Didn't think it would be that simple :)
  25. gyenesvi
    If I understand correctly, they are expecting non-typical ideas here, something out of the box (things like clock mechanics and GBCs are examples I'd think about). So I guess cars are not really the things they are after :)
×
×
  • Create New...