Lipko

According to my experience, even hard springs work okay if the piston end is attached with a pin (frictionless pin, so quite flimsy) and the housing part is properly braced. By far my smoothest suspension design had this mounting (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oZYLFo1tbU). Not sure about ball joints though, and yes, @gyenesvi is not quite right about opposite mounting cancelling effect. But my feeling (I haven't thought it through) is that opposite mounting is stronger than same-side mounting, as in the former case the soft part would bend like an "S", while in the latter it would bend like a "C". It's takes a bigger load to bend something to an S than a C because the bending radius is smaller (bigger deformation). Or whatever, my diploma is only for decoration.

It's interesting and valid, but then why are they asking for a portfolio? It implies they prefer candidates with LEGO experience, but if you are right, they basically make AFOLs chase a rainbow. EDIT: maybe I misunderstood and they didn't ask for LEGO but a generic portfolio... Also, do you think that the hiring process is not so good if AFOLs make it to de final stage only to fail there easily? I mean at least being talented in industrial design and the ability to work with limitation and in a team should be apparent during many hiring stages.

I'm still lightyears away from 5000€/month salary even though I'm a senior(ish) test engineer at a multinational company. In Hungary... so I'd be okay with that small 5000€/month. As for turning hobby into a career: I just don't find any significant time for Lego hobby. The only way for me to do Lego is to do it professionally. Not that I would move to another country for any career, maybe this was a bit obvious in my application, I didn't want to lie about that tiny dilemma.... But my CV come together pretty well, maybe I'll upload it to my website.

I applied and got rejected. At least not the usual "Thank's for your interesting our company" message.

I prefer getting parts from only a few places at a time, mainly because of minimum order limits and shipping. If I was selling, I'd look at some of the most popular Technic MOCs with instructions and build up stock mainly from their inventory.

Now THAT is a good example of what this contest is about for me.

I didn't say not allowed, I say that this contest will get out of hand very quickly without clearly communicated jury preferences. If 1:1 copy of the original but with studded parts are not discouraged (I didn't say disqualified) in a way, than builders who would chose non-Technic topics will be discouraged to take the bigger risk. All I am trying to say that it's voting will be totally unpredictable, I think separating Technic from non-Technic (2 categories, I recall we had some contest with such a thing) would have been a better choice.

I might be totally wrong here, but a simple rebuilding is not a very hard task, as it can be seen from the WIP pics so far. It's much harder to design a model from zero based on a non-Technic model. I wouldn't call it a fair competition. So I would encourage a proper paraphrasing, at least it should be preferred by the jury. It this particular case I would (if it is was my entry) keep all the functions and solutions of the original, but build it in a smaller scale with some cleverly used panels, since studless is capable of that. I will be harsh, but the model as it can be projected at this state will be a boring, emply pile of beams, more like a K'nex set, obsolete looking even 20 years ago.

For a promo image I'd suggest the 40th anniversary set. It shows perfectly that with tuday's studdless it's possible to remake old sets in a much smaller scale. To be honest, the entries I see so far are mere beam-by-beam-replacement models. This challenge might be much tougher than any other contest before... Please guys, don't make my eyes bleed because of beam stacking! EDIT: sorry, it's just my personal preference, I understand that a 1:1 studdless version is also interesting and looks cool, so I'll stop here.

Another contest I will miss. I hope someone will do the model below. I would if I joined.

That's a valid concern for studded Technic. If I'd enter, I wouldn't just copy the set with studded parts replaced by studless parts (obviously 100% replacement is not possible, but you get the idea), that's sure. Because of this simple replacement thing I don't like these remakes much. In my opinion the contest should be about a complete paraphrase of the original models (within the original shape and color similarity constrain). So that means gaps-filled body design for example, as that is clearly the current trend. I wonder what the contestants can come up with.

Maybe excluding lincenced stuff (lincenced cars so all Speed Champions, star wars and crap) would also suffice, it would be harder to exploit the contest theme, and would make it harder to tailor already-built models to fit the theme. I know I don't speak Engléish, I hope you get what I mean by "licenced". The 50% jury + 50% community vote thing is also a good idea, this way the jurys can make sure the most fitting entries have bigger chance of winning.

I think it would suffice to say that the overall shape has to match. If it's a Town small car, than the counterpart can be a big, but oddly shaped Technic car. It would be quite funny, but it requires prejudging entries.

Um.... If ANY set is allowed that means pretty much any model if there is no strict (but very hard to define) rules. I can't think of too many topics (apart from military) that was not covered at some point in Lego history. "I have an idea/model lying around already, now all I have to do is find a matching Lego set and change some colors" kind of thing. I have some ideas: size limit or same scale as the original or overall shape has to match the original set (but this would require judging by the moderators)

with no electronics allowed.

It has at least four round 1x1 bricks

Well, this hood is definitely a one-purpose part. Even the rims of the UCS cars can be used as rims in other similar cars. The mudguard pieces can be used as mudguars in any other car in the same scale range. You can argue that the drum in the cement mixer is a one-purpose piece, but it was a generic mixer, so at least you can build another mixer with it (4 axle, 3 axle whatever). So dunno, maybe, yeah, whatever

Why did you stop at the hood? All parts could be custom.

Brings back some old Meccano catalog memories

Any candidate squirming because of a question like that is a failure for any company and situation. They are searching for experienced people, not someone just out of college.

I heard they are allowed in some percentage in their work to work on personal projects. I, for one, would be okay with constrains since that's pretty much any professional work is about. I love contests and the only reason I don't enter all of them is simply time. And there are constrains in a contest too, some are overlapping with professional ones (for example deadlines). Actually, time would be a reason to apply for me, because I just don't have to time for Lego as a hobby any more (or any time soon). As many already also said, I would apply in a heartbeat if I didn't have a family. I think I will anyway, maybe I'll get some feedback from the pro guys/gals (or HR...)

That's me. The airport is 10 minutes from our home with bike and there's a direct flight to Billund from here. Maybe we can arrange a home-office like employment. Half-serious Lipko.

I cannot add anyting to the techical part, but that contruction with the net is awesome! It's 100% legal and I can imagine some neat surfacing possibilities with such a surfaces.

I think that's doable with the studded Technic, but it would not be with studless. That's a reason why old sets could be build with much less steps. Most probalbly becaused the layered build of those old sets. That's why I think it's a bit stupid to compare those two instruction styles and to whine about the simpleness of today's instructions all the time