Lipko

Building on someone else's experience? Sounds like development of a society istead of greed. You have built your experience on the real pioneers of MOc-ing, like Crowkillers, Sheepo, Grazi, just to name a few. It's all normal. Don't be afraid, I won't take your customers, I'm not interested in agricultural machinery. And at the end, model quality should be the evolutionary push in the MOC race, not having enough money to risk.

I think if it's interesting to see how well instructions sell in general. Just my example: I don't have as many free time as I used to, so making instructions significantly reduces my productivity. Therefore I have three choices: making a business out of it, so that I can take unpaid days off my daily work asking others to make instructions which is not fair if at all possible to do for free not making instructions at all (this appplies at the moment) To make such decisions, it would be nice to see some numbers. I talked with Loxlego once as he is one of the most popular car MOC designers, and he said a well made and advertised instruction means about 100-200 sells at most. Now 100-200 sold instructions is enough to cover the workhours needed. And we're probably talking about a top notch model. That's the only data point I have, as for some reason (maybe I'm just lame) I can't even check the downloads of my own free instructions on Rebrickable. Hardly enough for planning. So I just have no idea if I could have a chance to make some living off my Lego hobby, because everybody keeps silent. And I'm sure that with enough time I could be as good as anyone here. So yup, "Well, big money likes silence :)" sounds a lot like greed :)

Man, I don't remember. Pretty common thing. I had this situation countless times.

It is used in official sets, I thought it's an obvious possibility, but maybe I misunderstand something.

I don't like the wall solution at all, it's so unnatural for a car to stick on the wall like that. The other I don't like is when there's no space above the models. For decoration purposes, nothing can beat open shelves with some space between the models. Though it's going to collect dust.

I think the cabin's proportions are beliveable. Americal looking long-nose, with no sleeping cabinet.

It's nice to see another nice model from my favourite builder!

One small thing I am missing (sorry if it's there, only run through the document): spring as power source. So a simple question: are Lego windup motors any good for a power source? I'm only looking fur stuff that can run for about half an hour.

I will definitely look into this. I want tó build a clocks for some time but it's over my head, so I will probably steal many ideas. Thank you! Edit: at first glance I thought it's a master's thesis, but at a second glance I thought it's much bigger work, at third glance it looks like a hobby book after all, not far from being print ready. Maybe you should contact No Starch Press. So I am totally amazed.

Aesthetics

I'm waiting for the macaroni version of all those angle connectors.

Nice project. I wonder how it Will come along as the source material doesn't really fit modern Technic. To the "what if parts" part: for prototyping, I often cut and craft parts I don't own yet. Even Paint, if my imagination is nőt sufficient.

I think that is also a matter of preference. I am a mechanical engineer by profession, I knew even as a kid that the Lego transmissions are not realistic. Yet, I found it more exciting how a problem can be solved inside the constrains of a system. It's a bit like art, and I certainly look for the artistic aspect of Lego, not the modelling aspect. I did paper scale modelling for years when I was young (they were also MOCs, I didn1t even know you can buy paper models then), also had some die-cast models. Lego cannot compete with those. With that said, I agree that the functions should work properly, and in that regard, this car seems to be good, not like the previous stuff. The only reason I'm still hesitating to buy it is that it's huge, it doesn't fit into my small collection for many reasons. As a parts pack: I think it's still cheaper to buy only the interesting parts. I would by it for the building experience, then maybe I could sell it built. Dunno yet.

I agree with that, but in my oppinion it is an ureachable goal in case of the 1:8 cars, because (again, it's just an opinion, not backed up by actual data or tests) the sheer size of the model makes them unplayable. It's heavy even for adults to lift and "admire" the functions at the same time, it's not convenient to push around because it needs so much space you end up crawling and hopping around the model to keep up with it which is not convenient at all. With this size, it's effectively a dollhouse from playability point of view, but a car as a dollhouse is not really working. The BWE is a huge but good model, because it's practically a building that can change position every now and then, moving is NOT its main function. For a car, moving is absolutely the main function: That's my problem with this very concept. But this is our fault, to be honest. Most people, including hardcore AFOLs and MOCers have the aesthetical taste level of "bigger is better". In the good ol'days 1:10 movels were the standard. Now, it's just the lame little brother of the "real deal". And this is a shame.

To be honest, I'm surprised that thing interests anyone...

Yes, that's why it's a rubber bushing. But it cannot be a ball joint on both ends, because the longitudinal rotation would not be restricted and would cause extra wear when the socket is in its extremes position in relation to the ball. Sometimes it cannot be avoided to have ball joints on both ends, steering link for example, but that is usually one of the first things that fails in the suspension due to wear.

Guys, those are not ball joints on the pictures.

I may be wrong, but real cars also don't use ball joints usually, just hinges, though the bushing is partly made from rubber to account for the sligth lateral motions. So I would argue which Lego solution is more realistic.

I think the truth is between the two models. Bruno's model is overall more accurate, but Lego's version flows better so looks better as a toy car. Bruno's version has a smaller headlight than the original, the Lego has bigger. Actually, either version are accurate at the front, but Lego's is more characteristic, though almost cartoonish.

Is bump steer a real problem with a small travel suspension, or is it just a matter of principle? By the way, the model looks decent so far.

Teh horror

Looks good so far. Finally they found a car that fits the system nicely?

Working vipers and folding mirrors: unrealistic and big mechanisms for such underwhelming features. I can already hear people whnining about such lame features. Face it: cars are boring. Just as in real life. And so as pretty much any other machine if you see some of them, it's life. The only solution to this is to simply end Technic. Do you like the idea? Or maybe TLG should do as the real industry does: make yet another car/supercar/exotic car/machine that has very little evolution since the last 500 iterations. Okay, it would be nice to see some clocks and GBCs, but honestly, we would get bored with them quickly except for a few clock enthusiacs, who would probably whine all the time how unrealistic TLG clocks are.

No pics yet, but most of the thread is about how much of a sh.t the modell will be. And yup, the Cada Renault is so fine it clicks when you push it and the suspension doesn't do anything apart from stressing and bending parts.

Airplanes and ships are a bit of a stretch I think. The rules say the wheels need to drive the vehicle. I assumed this means the real life vehicle is driven by wheels. So an animal/statue/house on wheels just for the hack of it is not allowed. Either ships or airplanes (even though some airplanes have driven wheels I guess). But I guess I was wrong?