Blakbird

I'm not sure what you mean by that. If you want to know if I've done a particular set, just go take a look! If you are talking about the Universal sets, yes they have all been done.

I'm not sure how you would compare them. They are completely different.

This topic is another "why" question that we can't possibly answer, but the speculated answer seems to have a high probability. They want to sell the sets to a younger audience, so they have to make them easier to build. Color coding parts makes it easier to find them and harder to screw up. This theory has additional evidence based on the super simple instructions which add only a few parts per step in recent years.

Nobody can answer this "why" question. Every response is therefore just pure speculation. I'd also be very interested in the answer, but we're not going to find it on Eurobricks. The answer has to be buried in the marketing department, and no one can understand those guys. Decades ago, not only was the release schedule different but even the sets available and the set numbers varied by country. At least at this point we all get them eventually.

Update: Major update to Technicopedia. One of my lame excuses for taking so long to write about the years in the mid to late '90s is the insane number of models released each year. I'm proud to announce that 1998, one of the biggest years of all, is now uploaded with sets 2544, 2854, 3054, 8202, 8203, 8204, 8208, 8209, 8213, 8217, 8218, 8219, 8226, 8233, 8245, 8248, 8257, 8266, 8417, 8428, and 8462. That's right, there were 21 sets that year. I'd like to say I am over the hump, but 1999 has 25 sets. I'm actually looking forward to getting to the modern years when there are only about 10 sets! As always, let me know what you think.

This is not a Technic question. Moving it to the General forum.

Those narrow suspension arms are really weak laterally. I expect this setup will be really wobbly on a heavy model. Try adding an extra link either ahead or behind the arms.

You are asking about a topic that is 4 years old. The person who posted it is not even a member here any more.

It should not be a .txt. It should be a .ldr file.

Keep in mind that when you ask for instructions you are asking someone to spends dozens or even hundreds of hours of their time just for you for basically nothing. In most cases, people will not make instructions and it is not really reasonable to ask for them. When someone actually does take the time, be very grateful! LDraw is not easy to learn, but the only way to get good at it is practice. Start with an easy model and learn the tools. You will be happy you did because then you won't have to ask for help. I'm sure people will be happy to help with specifi questions about the tools. There are also some good tutorials out there.

You've done zero work on the box, but your body has converted plenty of chemical energy to heat!

Beautiful instructions. Can you tell us how you managed to get the stickers into your LDraw instructions? It looks great but I have never been able to do that.

Buying a set is not only better value for money, but will also give you some valuable experience in using PF. If you have not bought Technic for a long time, you are in need of a refresher on the other parts and building styles as well. Get the Volvo and build it per instructions, then part is out. You'll have a great starting point and lots of parts to work with.

The flexible shaft is useful in low torque applications, but it will be quickly destroyed by anything else. It is a ZNAP part.

Pneumatic switches when arrayed in a big pile are not very intuitive. A dual stick controller like on Jennifer Clark's JS220 excavator can suddenly make controlling 4 functions very easy indeed. The locations of controls on the 42043 are obviously chosen for easy of build, not for ease of use. The gearbox controls are right by the driving rings, and the pneumatic controls are all at the base on the crane to avoid hoses through the turntable or long supply lines. It would be a good technical challenge to try to optimize for ease of use instead without altering any of the actual functionality. Nathanael Kuipers' latest supercar is a good example of logical control of a gearbox from a remote location mechanically. Jurgen Krooshoop also has some excellent controllers for his models. The controller for his ultimate Backhoe is a good example.

Much of that apparent additional "power" in PF motors is due only to reduced gearing. You can always get more torque by gearing down, and torque is what most people really mean when they say power. Even the original 4.5V motor in the Expert Builder line had plenty of power to move a giant tracked crane (8888) when properly geared. The old 9V motors could perform amazing feats under the right circumstances as well. Use whatever motor you have and fits your model geometry. Use gears to do the rest. That's what makes Technic fun!

Keep in mind that set was released in 2004. In 2004 LEGO was releasing every part in whatever color they felt like with little thought given to whether or not it would ever be used again. Their out-of-control element library is a big part of why they almost went out of business. They are very careful about color choices now, and only offer a part in a new color when there is going to be significant usage. ??? That part doesn't come in Nitro Muscle. You must be thinking of something else.

Now that is one cool machine. I remember seeing your original version at BrickCon a couple of years ago, and this one looks even better. How many individual Geneva mechanisms are there? How sensitive is it to initial conditions? Can you start it at any point in the plot? I imagine that the relative position (clock angle) of the various Geneva mechanisms has to be just right when the model is assembled in order for the sequencing to work. I look forward to studying this in much more detail.

This is just an incredible model all around. I have never seen anything like it and that's a great thing! I must have it. This would be a crown jewel in my collection. Yes, building instructions would take forever, but I'd be happy to work from the digital file once you have it available. I'd also be happy to make some renders for you and some schematic images to show how it works. That is a tough one. I have recently built Han's dragline excavator, and it is also quite difficult to control and would be much easier with SBrick. On the one hand, it would be great to make a custom SBrick profile that allows all of those functions to be controlled easily. The leveling system in particular could be set up in such a way that the control is very intuitive. On the other hand, your system of multiple channels, batteries, and receiver switching is ingenious and part of what makes this model so charming. The whole thing would cost a fortune though.... If I am reading right, here is what is needed in Power Functions alone: M-motor: 5 ea @ $7.49 = $37.45 L- motor: 10 ea @ $13.99 = $139.90 Battery Box: 4 ea @ $6.99 = $27.96 IR Receiver: 7 ea @ $14.99 = $104.93 LiPo Battery: 2 ea @ $49.95 = $99.90 LED: 11 ea @ $6.49 = $71.39 PF Switch: 6 ea @ $5.79 = $34.74 Micro motor: 3 ea @ ~$25 = $75 TOTAL PF = $591.27 Note that this doesn't include any extension wires or the transmitters. I am assuming that when you say "accumulator" you are referring to the rechargeable battery box. If you were to switch to SBrick, you could eliminate 7 IR Receivers, 2 battery boxes, 4 switches, and 2 motors. That's a reduction of $157. This approximately pays for 4 SBricks. Since each SBrick has 4 channels, it is possible you could use even fewer. For the battery boxes, you may need to keep all of them just for counterweight. No matter how you decide to proceed, know that this is one of the best Technic creations ever. With so many motors, I think each function is quite simple mechanically, but the electrical system and the arrangement to produce the final result is genius.

This post doesn't have any content. You might want to edit it and fix it. If it stays empty the topic will get deleted.

Doesn't really matter. Performance is about the same. Get whichever you can find. No he, is talking about the two different versions of the right hand motor. There is a lighter and heavier version that look the same.

I have about a dozen different Technic shirts, most made by Bob at Brickshirts. I don't see most of them listed at his website. You might try emailing him and asking him about them. Crowkillers made some cool shirts of his Vampire once and it was one of my favorites until I spilled battery acid on it and now it is full of holes.

I think back to 8862 which had 4 cranks and 3 pneumatic valves, and I find that the difficulties are quite similar to this. Those cranks and levers are all unlabeled and figuring out which ones to use is not obvious. That does not stop if from being one of my favorite 88xx series sets. In fact, it is because of that complexity that I like it so much. I don't have 42043 so I reserve judgement until it is available, but I predict that I will be happy about the complexity. I actually found 8110 to be quite difficult to use, especially the PPTO. Note that performing motions without "errors" would be a lot easier with the stickers applied to show you what the controls do. This is true for most modern multi-function models. It took me forever to make this animation right (watch the pneumatic switches)!

So you just want wheels installed backwards?

Thanks for the excellent review. I have been on the fence about this model for a long time for exactly the reasons you mentioned. It is a beautifully sculpted model, but I can tell just from looking at the grille that it is held together by wisps of air. I've been frustrated by fragile models in the past, so thus far I have no built this one. With that being said, my mind keeps coming back to it. It is just so pretty ..... Sometimes it makes sense to date the pretty but crazy girl for just a little while.