Blakbird

If you don't like someone's model, you are welcome to say so. However, saying it once is probably sufficient but saying it over and over again starts to look mean. From my own perspective, I would say that these two models are quite different. They are scale models of the same subject matter built at a similar scale, so they are bound to look similar superficially. However, at a detail level it would appear that they are built completely differently. Looks like a case of "inspired by" rather than "copied". In any case, this is a very unusual kind of machine and I am happy to see another interpretation. Looks like you have done a great job with it!

I remember this one made to carry all the supercars. I would think the reason we don't see more of them is that car transporters are only fun in you have cars to put in them. Since Technic cars tend to be so big, making a car transporter at the same scale is very difficult.

Gears, axles, and pins have been generally available in only a single color from the very beginning. Friction pins have always been black, axles were always black, etc. There were a few rare exceptions for things like Star Wars or Bionicle. The "color coding" whereby 3L pins became blue or odd length axles became light gray, for example, started later to make it easier to distinguish parts. In most cases, these types of parts are not particularly visible anyway so the change is welcome, but there are exceptions. So I wouldn't say this is really new. However, other parts seem to have limited color selection recently. For example, when the numbered angle connectors first came out, they were available in a wide range of colors. However, recently the #3 red connector has become rare even though it is still a common part in other colors. Most of the wide color selection was circa 2004 when LEGO almost went out of business. One of the core concepts of their return to profitability was reducing the number of available "elements" by more than half. Given the business history and the fact that the company is more interested in making models easy to build for kids than looking good, I don't think we are going to see any return to the old strategy. Although I don't see any chance of a wholesale change in strategy, there is ample anecdotal evidence that TLG is aware of the parts needs of AFOLs and of part rarity on the secondary market. It would appear that certain parts have been included in recent sets with us in mind. While the number of such parts has been and will be small, I think they are listening and are accommodating to the extent possible. Note to TLG: We want 19L black flex axles and red #3 connectors!

This is already answered right in the original rule post. A motorized shifting gearbox is fine.

Yes. Additional manual functions are allowed, so this pounds fine. Again, the intent is to use all 4 outputs of the SBrick. Not exactly sure what you mean by this, but it sounds ok.

There should only be one axle. Take the 1x1 round plate off the bottom of the base, then you should be able to put the top onto the base by pushing the bottom axle out.

If you just pull on the hoses, they act like a Chinese finger puzzle and actually become tighter. To remove them without risk of damage, you actually have to push them rather than pull them by getting into the gap behind the flare and pushing them off. This usually required working your way around the connection at multiple points rather than just trying to lever at one spot. I usually do 4 spots 90 degrees apart in phase.

I think a WIP review would be cool, especially if you build it first with PF receivers and then show the process of converting it to SBrick.

It seems like the intent is not so much about the number of motors but rather the number of outputs. A model which uses all 4 outputs of the SBrick would have at least 4 motors, but could potentially have many more if multiple motors are used on the same output. In fact, the extra current capacity of the SBrick is an important feature that makes this possible. Likewise, such a model would have at least 4 motorized functions, but could have many more if gearboxes are used. Therefore I would say: The model must be provisioned to use all 4 SBrick outputs, and must therefore have at least 4 motors and 4 independent motorized functions. Regarding LEDs, I would say that if a motor is used to actuate the LEDs (like the motorized switch on Madoca's wing body truck or the flashing indicators on Sariel's models), it still counts as a motorized function. Regarding pneumatics, I would say that a regulated compressor does not count as a function because it is not controlled by the SBrick. On the other hand, 4 autovalves using the compressed air would count. Allowing additional motorized functions that are not controlled by the SBrick gives an unfair advantage to those who want to spend a lot of money on motors for their model, but I feel like an exception for a compressor would be reasonable.

I use a little bit of liquid soap on the nozzles. The hoses slide right on then. I was surprised about the new types of hoses used in the recent pneumatic sets which are much more rigid than the old hoses. I cannot imaging that most children would be capable of attaching these.

I have the CD and an old Win98 laptop, and I confirm that you are not missing anything. The software is more annoying than it is helpful. The problem is that you need it for instructions since there no printed instructions. I recall the randomly named MOV files. You have little to no chance of deciphering them on your own. That's why the video is so useful. I'm glad you were able to find it. Wow, thanks! That must have been a tremendous amount of work. This is actually even better than the video because: It takes up much less space It does not require you to sit through an animation to get to each step.

Sorry, but I'm going to tell you what you told me not to tell you. Unless someone from TLB chooses to post, we will not get a definitive answer. However, I am 95% sure that cost is the primary reason you don't see 4WD in sets. We've seen enough designer interviews to know that they fight with the cost department over even a single part, so of course complex parts like differentials and CV joints in quantity are going to put a model over the limit. We fans don't often realize what strict constraints the designers are under. They need to hit very conservative cost targets, and they cannot go over no matter what. Of course you could include 4WD by trading it against other features instead, but I'm sure this is where 4WD loses the trade. For a non-motorized model, 4WD doesn't really add any practical value to the model. In general the only things the drive system is doing is making a fake motor turn, and since a non-motorized model is just being pushed around by kids with all 4 wheels on the ground, it makes no difference if it is 4WD or not. In fact, it doesn't need any differentials at all, and some models are built this way. The only reason for 4WD is accuracy, but kids care more about play features than accuracy. I would be willing to bet that adding 4WD to a RWD model, in the absence of any other changes, adds a couple of dollars to the part cost. As a portion of the overall recurring product cost, this is actually a really big number

If you are just looking for the instructions, they individual QuickTime videos can be found on the CD but you won't know in which order to view the files. I seem to remember that someone put them all in order and posted it on YouTube.

Good idea!

I would say that Mark I is the version that Gerger and I built for which I used my draft instructions. Mk II is afol1969's instructions with the modified counterweight. Mk III may be the unsuspended version with Efferman's superstructure and actuator. After all this redesign, we could use his big turntable as well. Then of course it could use an sBrick or even a Firgelli actuator, but I like the 3D printed one better for scale.

I don't know what you mean by this. I don't think you can order this part directly from LEGO since it is not included in any current sets. You can get it at Bricklink or from LEGO Education. The servo does have internal gearing between the motor and the output, so it does have decent power. However, you are still limited by the small output rotation range which you cannot modify and still maintain a good steering lock. It may or may not work depending on your application.

That is impressively fast, but it is also a bare chassis. Once you put on a body which is in scale with that huge chassis, the model will be very heavy and the performance will suffer accordingly. With only 1 amp of current to play with, there is just not that much that can be done. The only legal way around the 1 amp limit is to add more battery boxes, but battery boxes are also really heavy so this becomes diminishing returns very quickly. Even with a real R/C battery pack that can supply 100 amps, the wires can't handle it and neither can the motors, not to mention the axles and gears. Those current limits are there for a reason. They match pretty well with the strength of the parts. If you bypass the current or voltage levels built into the PF system, part destruction is likely to follow.

You are not going to get speed from a heavy Technic model, it is as simple as that. There have been a couple of builders who have optimized a model to get speed, but if you look at those models they have NO structure; they are just motors and wheels. Every heavy model tends to be pretty slow, at least compared to anything R/C. You can't have everything at once. Dan Goldin's "Faster, Better, Cheaper" didn't work either.

An air tank is not necessary, it can just add more immediate response. The basic issue is that the volume of the compressor pump is small compared to the volume of the actuating cylinders. Because of this, the pump needs to cycle a large number of times in order to fill an actuator, especially one under load. Since the pump doesn't move all that quickly, this can result in slow response. The advantage of an air tank is that it stores up pressure allowing the pump to store power over a longer period of time when there is no demand, and then release that power in a shorter period of time when needed. The more air tanks you have, the longer they take to fill but also the longer they will provide uninterrupted power. Note that the air tank does NOT add more capability. The force limit of an actuator is typically based on the pressure at which the seals leak or the hoses pop off. In either case, and air tank doesn't change the result. A servo has a fixed output range of +/- 90 degrees. This means that, for a given steering lock, you really only have one gear ratio option. Depending on the size of your vehicle (and 8100 is very large), you may not have enough power to drive the steering, especially when the vehicle is stopped. The advantage is that it automatically returns to center and, with a proportional controller, can be commanded to intermediate positions. An M-motor can be geared to whatever ratio you like. This means you can get more effective power to your steering system for big models, albeit at the cost of a slower rate. The disadvantage is that it does not return to center. A high speed steering system can be very difficult to center properly to get the vehicle to drive straight, but if it is slow enough this is no problem.

Excellent! Now if you could put those back in the box and send them to me, that would be great.

This is true of any electric or mechanical motor of any size at any price. Speed and torque are inversely proportional. The only way to get more of both is to consume more current. It sounds like you are trying to achieve results that are not practical with LEGO. The XL motor already exceeds the power that can reasonably be reacted by LEGO components. A more powerful motor will not result in a faster heavy model, it will result in more broken LEGO parts.

The 9.5L shock is not really stiffer (as you noticed), it just has more travel.

Is this thread a trick to get new members to post their personal email addresses in a public forum? Note to new members: posting your email address in a public thread is a good way to get your mailbox filled with spam. I recommend that the OP put the file somewhere (like Bricksafe) where people can download it, or at least that interested parties contact him via Private Message.

Yes. The counterweight is not carried by the crane when moving to another site over a roadway.

Then I am the lamest man of all!!