Lego Tom

Totally agree. I've moderated on several sites and hackers have always been a concern which has intensified over time. Those people are as low level scum as the ones who bilk old people via the phone or internet out of their life savings with various scams. I don't lean towards violence but take no prisoner swat raids of these low lives would not cause me to lose any sleep at night. Bricklink handled this very well and I am not only glad they are back up and running, but placed an order there this morning.

Cases are expensive because they are limited items, usually built by hand and thus labor intensive. It's not like they are mass produced and can thus take advantage of the economy of mass production. However, you can build your own, using wood and plexiglass. Another alternative is to look for used store displays.

Shades of Meyers-Manx! Nice build!

Looks great. Use a photo host, then embed links using this line:

It appears how the bucket is lowered depends on the conditions and the operator: https://duckduckgo.com/?hps=1&q=dragline+excavator+video&atb=v341-1&iax=videos&ia=videos&iai=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D8UCOv2v4hv4

Here is step 151: And step 152:

Depends on how you look at it. Just to give a reviewer a set that retails for say $200 probably costs LEGO $30. When looking at product costs, you have to include more than what the cost of making a part. You must include support group costs (maintenance people, janitors, supervisors, managers, engineers and the like). You must also include the cost of the manufacturing facility, such as utilities (water, gas, electricity), property maintenance and property taxes. On top of all this, there are the costs of packaging, tooling of new parts, advertising and upper management. All these costs are termed burden and must be added to every part made. The more parts you make, the less per part these costs are, but as sales drop, the post per part increases so this cost is a moving target. So before you say it only costs LEGO a few pennies to give away a $200 product, you need to consider all the extra costs I listed above, which I suspect will result in the real cost of $30 over that of pennies. Now consider that if they give the reviewer the kit, he/she obviously isn't going to buy one, whereas they may very well have bought it had TLG not provided one. In that situation, they have actually lost a complete sale, so if the kit's actual cost is $30, LEGO loses $170 profit by giving away the kit, plus the cost of the kit.

Very cool build!

I couldn't remember who he was until I looked at one of his reviews and remembered the black gloved hands. That's really a shame as his reviews were in depth, honest and fair (IMHO). As suggested, probably a cost cutting move but perhaps someone in TLG wanted all reviews to be sunshine and roses with all warts removed before hand. If cost cutting was the chief concern, they could have handled it better such as offering kits at a substantially reduced price. Their ball and court, but the public will remember, plus his reviews surly accounted for some sales that will be missed.

Any time! Criticism and sarcasm are just two of my many talents!

Forget the car crap - where's the JCB 220X LC?

Mine is already extended - see my avatar or my posts here: https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/topic/189139-42146-liebherr-lr13000/&page=48

You have done an amazing amount of work on this and it shows in the final product! Although I'm not ready to tear my 13000 apart to build, I might consider picking up a second unit if the prices come down here in the US.

Interesting build! Looking forward to updates.

Actually looks like a pretty viable solution.

I get a "Dangerous Website Blocked - This is a known dangerous site." from Norton when I click on your link.

I already have digging covered:

Apparently not untrue....

At a price of $10.99 I'm not too excited. EDIT: Speaking of dozers, it appears 42131 is being retired this year. Kind of sad to see it go...

I'm not sure if the builder has been back here since 2020. Might want to try contacting via YouTube?

I wish I understood exactly how the program calculation works. I'm guessing it's a combination of weight/load and number of motor revolutions. I came up with this theory based on the fact that when using the stock cord and a stock build, the hook rises to the top of the boom until it encounters the boom, encounters resistance and calculates the top movement based upon that travel - meaning it is using resistance in setting the upper limit. When adding extra boom pieces and longer cord, the process no longer raises the hook until it encounters resistance, indicating there is also a revolution counter being employed. Larger drums overcome the revolution counter because the greater circumference results in more cord wound on the drum per revolution. Here's some rough calculations I did: Stock Drum = 8mm dia / 24.9mm Cir Mod Drum 1 = 9.5mm dia / 29.9mm Cir Mod Drum 2 = 11.125mm dia / 34.95mm Cir Mod Drum 3 = 12.7mm dia / 39.9mm Cir Here's what those increased circumferences equate to line spooled onto the drum after 10 turns Standard Drum = 249.9mm Mod Drum 1 = 290.9mm Mod Drum 2 = 349.5mm Mod Drum 3 = 399mm So modified drum 3 will spool approximately 50mm more cord after 10 turns. Note the word approximately as the spooling isn't consistent enough to be accurate. Each time the cord laps over itself, it adds circumference to the drum, thus adding to the amount of string wound on the drum. My goal is to get about 900mm more cord on the drum to compensate for the cord I added. I am hoping making the drum circumference 12.7mm, and taking into account the growing circumference effect as the cord is wound on to the spool, the LEGO program will be fooled into believing nothing has changed and will spool all or most of the extra cord. Hope this makes sense to all...

@nico71 You are a very talented, prolific and creative builder! While the Liebherr Container Carrier is my favorite of your builds, I also have a soft spot for the various crawlers and weaving/braiding machines you have constructed. Well done!!

LOL - Hey, I'm not a Hobbit! WARNING: This post is going to delve into a non-LEGO solution! If that offends you, please do not proceed! In essence, when adding four extra sections to the boom, 36 inches (914mm) of cord had to be added to the cable to enable the hook to lower all the way to the ground. As mentioned, this left the hook a considerable distance from the top, even when recalibrating with the LEGO Control+ app. There are a couple of ways to cheat the system. The proper LEGO approved method would be to use gears to drive the drums which are currently direct drive off the motor. Using 2:1 gearing where the motor turned one revolution for 2 revolutions of each cable drum would more than cure the issue. Unfortunately, room does not appear to be available for this solution, plus said gearing would make the crane unnaturally fast (IMHO). Option 2 leads one off of the approved, no modifications path. Increasing the diameter of the drum serves the same purpose but there is nothing (that I am aware of) in the LEGO parts bin to do this. The factory piece measures .3125" / 8mm. Because the cord does not wrap around the drum in successive layers as most real winches do, it's hard to calculate a specific drum diameter that would take up the cable at a rate where the added 36" would spool using the same number of turns supplied by the LEGO motor, but something between .438" / 11.125mm and .5" / 12.7mm should work. **SECOND WARNING** Non LEGO approved discussion is about to get serious! After giving thought to this for a couple of days, there appears to be on relatively simple solution. A .5" wooden dowel, drilled down the center then split in half could be placed over the original spool. Fastening it in place could be as fancy as using tiny screws or as simple as using piece of tape. This solution is not without possible problems however. As mentioned, there is no system for cable guidance and the spools often wrap wildly uneven. Without the additional diameter, this isn't a problem because the spool sides are high enough to always contain the mound of cable that frequently develops but with the extra diameter, this might be come a problem. If someone can suggest an alternative solution to this, I wold love to hear what you have! Things to remember: the 36" added cable were based on the distance the hook was shy of reaching the top of the boom. The actual distance was 9" but there are four lengths of cable running from the boom to the hook, therefore 36" total. Since there are two spools used to operate the raising and lowering of the hook, the 36" is divided into 18" extra inches per drum. Because I'm an old American who is set in his ways, I cling to the English measurement system, mostly unapologetically. However if you are as set in using metric, as I am inches, I will readily do the needed conversions for any solution you propose!

Thanks!!! It looks better but barely fits without hitting the ceiling!

I too was looking forward to the video and it did not disappoint! Watching it blaze through the weeds brought the term "Bungle in the Jungle" to mind! Don't worry about small parts falling off, they fall off the 1:1 vehicles as well.