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
    Hmm, that's a neat way of manufacturing such a 4L link :) and a 5L can also be made with a 3L connector. And it can even be glued together in a perpendicular way! Lots of combination possibilities, even longer ones can be created by glueing more connectors together with 2L axles... I always wanted 11-13L versions for larger scale suspension links.
  2. gyenesvi
    That's exactly the problem I have too. For slow crawler models using the touch screen on a tablet and filming with the phone with a gimbal that even tracts the motion of the model works okay-ish. But for faster models, tracking breaks down, and control from the touch screen is also a huge pain. That is why (proportional) physical control would be a double advantage: no need for two devices and no problems with the touchscreen. @Pybricks, one more question. While browsing your GitHub repo pages, I have read somewhere that you guys could not resist experimenting with Pybricks on other devices as well. Did you by any chance try to port it to Buwizz 3 as well? It seems to have issues with the firmware, and it would be awesome to be able to replace it. BTW, I find the Pybricks code pretty clean and well organized, great job!
  3. gyenesvi
    Yes, I like that one more! Although that has some support in the back as well, I think it should look better from also from the side, as the support can be made thinner and less pronounced and kind of more optically separated from the headrest itself :) Sometimes that makes a big difference in the perception at least for me.
  4. gyenesvi
    Oh, that's a nice trick to control two modules with the same slider! That's a great solution to that half stud problem, I guess the axles could otherwise slide out from the diff and into the CV joint.
  5. gyenesvi
    That already has insane speed with one motor, what could it do with two? I'm tempted to build this, are the instructions out for the 1-motor version? I love the way the possibility of torque vectoring is implemented, especially that it has AWD through the differential at the same time. Are you planning to actually implement it in software? In the Buwizz app?
  6. gyenesvi
    It's coming together nicely, looks pretty cool! Only thing that looks weird for me are those headrests for the seats. It looks too bulky with those backwards protruding mounts. Maybe something like the Zetros has could work here as well?
  7. gyenesvi
    Yes, I meant to ask that in essence, whether the gearbox is different. But I did not even think of the calibration possibly screwing it up..
  8. gyenesvi
    Indeed, the old ones don't work on pins. I did not think about that, thanks!
  9. gyenesvi
    That's a neat looking alternate, and has great functionality, uses the available parts really well! Did you try to make it work with the official control profile?
  10. gyenesvi
    I think this looks really cool, especially considering it's an alt build. First I thought it's a black version of the official mustang set. The black color is really good for this, and the dark red stripe makes it even better. If I ever get the Camaro, I'll surely build this.
  11. gyenesvi
    I also saw that, but I thought it's so obvious that he probably meant it as a mock for positioning things, and the driveshaft will be suspended from the top for example.. Curious if that was the real plan or not :) But actually this part may help in such cases. But even with that part, in that setting, it will be hard to properly fix that driveshaft going to the second axle; it will put friction on the cross axle of the first axle. So suspending the driveshaft from the top seems like a better idea for me. Also, the 2L axles going into the 'differential', only supported by half a stud would worry me. Especially if the model is getting heavier..
  12. gyenesvi
    Well if one works does not suggest that the other would not. They are supposed to be combinable lego pieces after all. My reasoning was this: both the 2L and the 3L rings fit the 16T clutch gear, and also both ends of a straight 4L differential. So why would only the 3L ring fit the latest differential? But now that you made me think about it in more detail, here is the catch: there are two types of 16T clutch gears (old and new, they also differ in being one sided or double sided) for the two types of driving rings (probably the new driving ring fits the old gear as well, but in a less stable way). The difference is the size of the inner ring on the clutch gears: the older one has a narrower ring, the new one is wider, that is why the old narrow driving ring collides with the wider inner ring of the newer gears, including the new difffs. The 20T clutch gear is also newer type, so I am guessing that the older driving ring does not fit that one either. Or any other ones produced from now on.. That is a real pity.
  13. gyenesvi
    I didn't mean it that way :) But since the Zetros uses that setup with the 3L driving ring, I consider that common knowledge :) Yes the new 3L one fits (see the Zetros), and an old extension ring can also fit. The old 2L driving ring only works with the old extension ring, not with the new one that you show above (same reason as for the new diff, cannot slide in because of the inner ridges). But as I wrote, both solutions will result in an even width, which means in practise that the axle setup becomes 2 studs wider.. That's what I thought could be spared by using the 2L ring. Anyway, I'll just go with the 3L now. Nevertheless, the old 2L ring + old extension ring combo can be useful in some cases vs the new 3L ring, nice idea, because it has the outer cut for the selector in a different position which may matter in some cases (how the control linkage can be mounted).
  14. gyenesvi
    It is looking quite good, I like it! I'd test this out IRL as soon as possible because I'd be surprised if that motor just worked well ungeared. May happen, but it just sounds too good to be true :) It could be too weak, it could be too fast, etc (or both). I just designed on paper a steering system based on an M motor and a 24T clutch gear, which I have seen in other builds a few times, and it just did not work for my purposes IRL (too fast, too much slack). Yeah, you are right about the style, and it may be an overkill indeed. An XL should be enough for this.
  15. gyenesvi
    Of course, I know, but that makes it even width, and so does not fit into a regular odd width. So the whole axle actually has to become 2 studs wider in the end.. Well it is more wobbly, because the other side is immediately supported by a frame, but the connector side with the driving ring can only reach any support frame in a 3 stud distance. With the old driving ring that would also have reduced to a 2 stud distance. So the whole thing is weaker. Nevertheless, I'll have to go with that as there's no other option.
  16. gyenesvi
    Maybe some of you realized this before, but for me it was a bad surprise; these two are incompatible. TLG just shattered my dreams of building a compact diff-lockable axle.. I wasn't even thinking to test this, I was so sure it would work, but had to realize it wouldn't after building a prototype axle. The inner ridges of the driving ring that go around the connector piece block it from sliding into the diff housing.
  17. gyenesvi
    I'd prefer this one without the ball joint on the end :) I think it's more useful as it is now for many things, the alternating holes can have more interesting connections (form locking).
  18. gyenesvi
    That's a nice one, those small panels could be useful! Do you mean in Bright Light Orange?
  19. gyenesvi
    Oh, I didn't follow that one, thanks. Is there anything else technic available besides the parts in 42099?
  20. gyenesvi
    I like this a lot! Looks good, works good. Nice tensioning system. There's so much that can be done on a small scale with proper electronics. Also, sometimes I feel that shaping these models can be easier on the small scale because a few parts with the right slope/curvature make the body look simple and clean (big models can often look patchy). Great work!
  21. gyenesvi
    Indeed, I already realized it in the general parts thread. Hmm, that would be nice if something bigger came later in bright light orange, it’s a nice color but currently not too useful. If this set had that color, only the 7L beam would be new I think.
  22. gyenesvi
    Yeah, that’s what I predicted too. And based in this, I am not holding my breath for 9L or 13L to appear. At least I hope they realize how useful the shorter ones would be, so a 5 or 4L would come eventually. Or even 3..
  23. gyenesvi
    Oh, maybe you are indeed right, I forgot that the middle pin need not be part of the part , but it can be inserted if the holes are perpendicular. Yeah, that second part makes more sense, than the first one predicted by @Zerobricks (that was my first guess too). And it should be quite useful! I have been soo waitig for the 7L flip-flops, already buidling with them in Studio :)
  24. gyenesvi
    We will, see, but I don’t think so, because its corner on the image does not look like that, furthermore if there is a pin in the middle as well then it does not make sense not to have a perpendicular pinhole in the middle I think.
  25. gyenesvi
    Nothing would hold it, it would literally fall out to the bottom, no? It can only be connected from the top, there's no space below. Yes, right, I see, so then it's like a 3L beam with 3 perpendicular pins. Interesting..
×
×
  • Create New...