LiamM32

Hello, I have already gotten the Grand Emporium set because it was recommended on this topic. I have recently been thinking of putting 10214 Tower Bridge as a long-term goal. Earlier on, I didn't think I would get this one because of it's high total price and because I'm focusing on my minifigure-scale town. But I was recently thinking that Tower Bridge could be a good investment as a parts pack. Even though I have bought Lego sets for years, it still seems very difficult to build anything of significant size (probably because of too-many specialized parts). Brick Yellow is my favourite solid colour in Lego, so I thought that this set could be a good way to boost my collection of this colour for casual building. It has a great price per piece, but high total price, so I might try to get it on a USA trip to save money. I would probably build the model first, but it would be very difficult to dismantle it (I saw it displayed in Paris recently on my vacation). Does anyone here have anything to say on buying this set for the parts? My first modular building was the Pet Shop, and the Grand Emporium was the only one that I have gotten since then. I think that the Pet Shop is a good set for your first modular building, because the inclusion of two building lets you try the modular function of it. The Grand Emporium is a more tiring build better suited for collaborative building. I have built many different types of sets for years, and the modular buildings are the only ones that I have any slight amount of difficulty building. They are very good looking models when built.

I have not experienced an axle melt either, as I am not as experienced with Technic building as most of you probably are, and never used a high-RPM motor. They could just reduce the internal gearing from 2 lairs of planetary gears to one lair, but the problem with that is that there would be less precision with external worm-gearing. About the finger pinching; I actually think that it would be less painful if not geared down. I don't think that it would be strong enough to effectively hurt fingers, even though it would spin fast on its own. For extra safety, the motor could have a built-in clutch. @AllanP: If you could ever make nylon versions of Technic gears yourself, I would love to see a demonstration video. About the size of the gears; That is unfortunate but they should have done it from the beginning of Technic. I think that it is now too late to change it for compatibility purposes, but switching from ABS to nylon would be a big improvement in efficiency. The benefits would not be limited to ungeared motors.

The part that I am most interested in being more realistic is ackerman steering.They made a speial balljoint steering piece, so it wouldn't be any more difficlt if they made it for ackerman right from the beggining. They shlould use existing elements for ackerman steering on larger models. My old math teacher once gave a lecture to the class about this name specifically. Andrew was converted into a female name, but it uses the "andro" prefix which means masculine.

Dissapointed that I got no replies to my previous post. I though that it was quite relevent to what others were wondering. About the nylon; I was thinking that Technic pins might be made of this already. I found an old topic discussing the materials used for Technic, which I was curious about. They were unsure about the pins. But Technic pins are slightly flexible, low friction but sensitive to pressure. Seems like nylon. Again; What do you think of nylon gears after seeing the image? Should I post to the embassy?

There have been quite a few users that I wondered why got banned. Maybe you don't want an open forum about it, which is understandable. I still think that there should be an explanation on the profile page of the user of why they got banned. That way, only the people who already know and are curious of that particular user would see. They could ask the banned user for permission of what they can and cannot say. Yeah; That guy. Formerly active in the Techic forum. It seems really strange to me. A guy in his 50's with over 5000 posts; he got banned maybe a month ago. I am really curious about this one.

Present your friends with good display models. If they like it, then they could start to accept it as an artistic medium, not strictly a childrens toy. When I was ending my elementary school times, my dad told me that I would be too old for Lego soon, so he didn't want to buy sets for me then. Now I am older and still a dedicated fan. My family now accepts this, and they are aware of the artistic/display potential andpossibly AFOL community. Something that seems to be a good turning point for mainstream adults is their first visit to Legoland (often with children). @Gorelaxx: None are kids? Of course there are some. Telling them that there is a minimum age of 18 does not stop them from signing-up. There have been some really young guys who have admitted their age, and often got banned.

I would like to have a Power Functions S-motor. I have had visions of it since before the L-motor was unveiled, as well a my own vision of the L-motor. I have a feeling that there will sometime be one, due to the strange naming of PF motors since the first wave. While it would have fewer applications than it's 3 bigger siblings; I think that there could be enough to make it worth it, and many of the ideas that I could imagine would use multiple S-motors. I once had a concept of a Lego high-speed train with tilting cars and self-propelled multiple unit motorization. This was before they made the horizon express. I figured that there wouldn't be enough space for M-motors, so there should be a new PF motor suited for the application, that would be half to two-thirds of the M-motors power. The old micromotor wouldn't work either, because it would be too tall. I think that the S-motor should 2L wide and 2L (or 5 plates) tall, in the shape like a type of Technic brick. It should be 5L long, plus a part sticking-out at the rear with 2 thin cross-axle holes for Technic compatibility, making it 6L long in total like the other PF motors. There should also be inlets for studs at the side to attach the short pins with studs. There should be no internal gearing so that it would have significant power for it's small size, but that is something that I also advocate for in the other motors (http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=85907&hl=). I would probably use a worm gear for speed reduction. For other applications; This might be good for building clocks which require very little energy. Small decorative moving features in system models. That was about a small motor that would move continuously, but there could also be a small motor more dedicated to shifting switches. This should be a small stepper motor. Stepper motors could be used as lower-performance alternatives to servo motors, so it could be the little half-brother of the PF servo. I don't yet know much about how stepper motors work, but I know that they use electromagnets to give it one small shift of rotation whenever power is given. Unless if there would be a good way to let builders customize the stepper motor with multiple pieces, than it should be designed so that it could work for various common angles with a single gear connection. I am not as confident about this one as the above idea though, as I can't think of many applications other than Sheepo-sized cars with many motorized functions. Now what are some other applications for these small motors? Edit: It shouldn't be to hard to make a built-in clutch. Actually, they could just put the Technic axle hole overlapping the metal motor axle without glue, which could work as a clutch. Also, a problem with a small motor is that the Technic gears may have too much friction to let a weak motor work efficiently. In my topic that I linked to, I advocated for the replacement of ABS Technic gears with new nylon gears, to reduce friction. That could solve it. If the reason for the small motor is to power a small vehicle, than there should also be a small battery box. But I already want that part anyways.

This is valuable? I have three of them that I remember having in my house. Even though I don't have such a large collection, especially for Technic.

I got this set for Christmas in grade 3, as I was really impressed by what I saw of it on "Lego.com". I have not found reuse for any of the parts. The springs might work, but I have never tried them, and I don't yet have enough Technic to build large vehicles anyways. The part that might be reusable are those light grey parts that hold pin-holes together. It's a strange alternative to actual Technic pins. The electronics are just 2 large preassemblies, with duplofied versions of Technic axles to attach wheels (refered to as "superaxles" on Bricklink). It's a strange design decision of making it based on Technic, but mostly its own system for Racers RC with little intercompatibility. It could be disappointing if you expect what you normally do from a Lego product, so it is better to think of it as an upper-toy-grade RC buggy. I would personally prefer a true Technic automobile with decent performance, preferably with a dirt-blocking panel and semi-waterproof electronics for cleaning. The reason for the special parts may be to protect from water and dirt, and because you probably would be overprotective with standard Technic parts. I didn't realize this back in the day, but the decided to get fancy with the battery. Now I identify it as Lithium-ion Polymer, the best rechargeable battery available. These batteries are expensive, as Lego now sells them for Power Functions at $60 CAD. I would have to look-up some other RC in that price range, as there could be some high-performing hobby-grade for a similar price (but I don't know). Didn't someone make a post early on the thread saying that this thing is rare, but they have wanted to buy it for a long time? I can't seem to find the post, so it may have been deleted or edited. But I probably wouldn't mind selling it, finding-out that it could be valuable. I have the car assembled in my bedroom. But the buyer would also have to buy a few parts from other sellers. I have not used it for years because the antenna on the car is broken. I never got extra because my parents were generally downright terrible with online purchases. I could probably dig-out the controller somewhere. I recall seeing the fancy Li-po battery in recent times, and I think the charger too. But I might not be lucky to find both at once. But good to hear that it is a standard plug that other brands produce.

That is right. I think that I read it on the Lego Cuusoo blog. No alcohol in a modern setting. Also no warfare after WW2. I wouldn't call LotR "historic" though, but fantasy. But the collectible minifigure waiter included a wine bottle piece with grapes printed on, but that one is just implicit. Interesting about the Toy Story soldiers. So Lego sets can not include toy soldiers, but they can include toy toy soldiers. Probably just getting past their own rules to give just one set to the people who have wanted military Lego.

I was also initially wondering about how easy it would be to colour nylon gears, but I deleted it from my post. I assume that you are referring to unpainted nylon, which is most common as colour is not an issue for most non-Lego applications. I have found a few images of painted nylon gears on Google images, and I think I accidentally found a black one in my house just over a week ago. Lego pieces are already produced in various plastics for opaque colours, which reflect slightly differently but overall match-up in colours. This should also apply to painted nylon. There used to be a colour in the palette called "Nature" (on BL "milky white") which was unpainted ABS. It was a translucent-opaque white, similar to nylon, but I think that they should continuse to make this colour only in ABS because other plastics would look too different. Unpainted polycarbonate is given a different title; "Transparent" (still common today). To see for yourself; Here is a photograph from the internet of paint-molded nylon gears; The blue gears here appear mediocre quality. The black gear better represents the precise Lego molds, and has a fully opaque colour suitable for Lego. If you are still unhappy with the look, than TLG might be able to add gloss to look more like ABS. I personally wouldn't mind it without surface treatments though.

It is nice to see that we have generated a few ideas in my topic. As we don't suggest new product concepts on this site as often as I would like. It would be nice to test the hypothesis, but gearing-down an electric motor could be practical with the worm gear idea. The Emerald Night would work well with that. Maybe this topic should be moved to the embassy to suggest the ideas, or I could start a new topic. Now it's nice to see a bit of agreement to the theory that nylon could be a more suitable material for Technic gears. I still have some questions though; How much do gears currently cost? How much would they be if they were nylon? Should the molds be changed so that we can tell between the old (current) and new nylon gears, or should they look the same? Would they be broken by stress in cases when the current gears would not? I think that the Lego company should first change their spur gears (in the 4 smallest cross-axle sizes) to nylon. They could then replace other types later. The worm gear could be next in line, as it could reduce friction when pushing against the holder. I am unsure about the double-bevel gears though; It could solve friction problems with them, but it seems to be the gears that they use in system playsets. I want to see more gears in playsets, but they could become less common if nylon is more expensive. I'm not sure about the differential. I don't know how easy would be to give nylon such a complex mold. Maybe a different low-friction plastic. Unlike most gears, it doesn't need to grip the axles. The knob gears should be kept the way they are. Same goes for non-dedicated gears such as Power Miners drill. Like I said, I could post on the embassy to propose ungeared motors and nylon gears.

Some of the things being said here are interesting, but in recent posts it appears that it is starting to move towards casual chatter, which I specifically stated to avoid when I started the topic. I wanted you to just talk about the proposals in the first post, or specifically suggest your own. On this topic, you may suggest how you think that a section of the proposal should be changed, which some people here have already done. You may also copy-and-paste a section, and post an edited version of it as if you are editing a wiki. You could also post your own idea for a new section. Now like I said, I find some of these posts interesting, even though off-topic, but I suggest that you discuss these things in the other two topics about Lego Cuusoo if you are not expressing solutions to problems. The Rychira of time has already made a few posts here, which I find interesting as usual. But I wanted this topic to be about specifically stating how problems of the site should be solved. Thank you.

It is hard to say how the female minifig set will do in the review. To me the most important thing is the suggestion to include more women in other sets. For the sets themselves though, it is hard to say what the main appeal about them is. Is it about a Science lab, or about the characers gender? One thing that I am happy about that project is it's proposal for something other than a new model set to be released. Normally if you're proposing to fix some flaw seen in Lego products, than your project would fail to get enough supporters. I was happy to see that there was one issue tht was noticable to a wide enough range of fans.

I don't buy many licensed sets. But as other have said here, media licenses are much about visual appeal. Lego system is more fashion, while Technic is more function. I think that film licenses typically wouldn't work well for pure Technic models, but I think that licensed sets could work great with system exteriors and Technic functions built-in. In that case, Technic could add to the visual appeal by adding motion. Howabout a minifig-scale Leaky Cauldron pub set from Harry Potter, with a Technic function to move the magical bricks to open the hidden door. If Star Wars was going to have more large scale droid sets (like the UCS R2-D2), there should be many internal Technic funtions. Large vehicles (such as star wars ships) in general could really benefit from Technic funtions. Maybe Bionicle style Technic funtions in superhero action figures, such as Spidey's web launcher and many possibilities for Iron Man. A bit of embedded Technic might get me more into licensed sets. For one of the two ideas that you mentioned that you wanted, check out this Lego Cuusoo project; Batman Technic Tumbler. I actually think that it could be an interesting idea. I bookmarked the project myself, so that I might support it later.

I think it's probably nylon, but not sure. That is probably the right material. I just looked at the nylon Wikipedia page. It stated that nylon is used for gears in low or medium-stress applications. The article stated that nylon is durable, abrasion-resistant (scratch-proof), and has other desirable properties listed. It is a moldable thermoplastic, just like ABS. I didn't find this stated clearly on Wikipedia, but some Google search results appear to imply that it is low-friction, which is the main reason why I am suggesting it. I found an old preassembled bevel gearbox today in my house, which I believe is from an old Star Wars X-Wing set. The bevel gears inside appear to be nylon (judging by the nylon gears I looked at on Google images). I put an axle into the hole (which is part of the gear), and it is held nicely. It spins smoothly with low friction inside. Maybe they oil the internal gears in the factory. But if not that, then the combination of low-friction at the teeth and good grip at the axle makes it a suitable material for Technic gears. I also tried to test the friction of the worm gear. It appears to be better than the connection of 2 spur or bevel gears, and it could reduce friction even more overall because it can give a great reduction with just one connection. It was not such an accurate test, but it appears that this would be the best way with current gear parts to give a high reduction in a compact size, but I should find an ungeared motor to test this. Now about the nylon again; It appears that this is a very suitable material for Lego Technic gears. I think that they should replace the plastic used in their standard Technic gear pieces with nylon. Durable, moldable, low-friction at the teeth while having good grip in the axle-hole. They shouldn't worry much about the more special parts that have gear-teeth on them, such as the Power Miners drill or Technic turnables.

I can agree that most current Technic sets that would want to use motors suite the lower gear ratios, mostly being large land vehicles. There are still many land vehicles that would gear it back up slightly. But most of the official Technic sets that use motors are very large vehicles with full RC. I would like to see smaller vehicles with more minimalistic use of Power Functions, which would be able to use the motor at a faster speed. But then there is even more potential for fast but weak motorization if you look forward to expansion to things that use air turbines such as desk fans, rotary pneumatic compressors, and a slight chance of helicopters. But it is good that we can agree that it would be better to split the motor and the planetary gears into 2 separate preassemblies. There is hardly-any argument against that (apposed to what the motors already are). I am rarely an advocate for Lego preassemblies, but it would save space from standard-gears. But I could not find the old planetary gearbox on Bricklink, so could you please give a link? You also implied to like the cage that held a worm gear connection (with regular gear-pieces). That can easily be achieved without the cage piece. How is the worm with friction (at high speed)? I would expect it to be much better than the other options for down-gearing. As for the friction problem; Maybe The Lego Group should change the plastic material in Technic gears to a lower-friction plastic. It appears that the internal gears in the PF motors are made of a plastic, which I recall seeing in gears in other toys. Could that one work? The problem with that that I can see is that it would slide around the axle too much. But maybe they could try co-injecting with the current plastic in the center, and the low-friction plastic around the teeth. There could easily be problems with this idea that I am unaware of though.

All right then. The system that you described in the first paragraph is just what's ideal for me. I would like to join-in.

I am really considering this. I have a DSLR camera which should be good enough for these reviews. How long does it take to go through the tutorials? How frequently would I be required to post new reviews if I join? I have a very limited budget, so it would be difficult to post very frequently. Are we still allowed to post reviews on Eurobricks if we have not passed through the academy? If no one else has reviewed it by the time I save-up for the set and passed through, my first would probably be the Technic service truck.

I tried to use the search, but I didn't really find the results that I wanted. I sometimes just don't type the right words. Interesting. I haven't found people who have stated that they would really prefer no internal gears, but just a very small amount of opinion-neutral discussion (not reading very deeply into the topics). I was more expecting to get a response to try and justify it. But a separate planetary-gear preassembly would still be preferable so that it would be optional. But then, the least knowledgeable might not even understand the balance of "speed and strength", so might not even see the need for the gears when building MOCs, and get confused when they don't work. This could easily be solved by including a text-box in the instructions for non-Technic sets explaining it. Since posting this today, I have made an attempt to quickly slap together my own 2-lair planetary gear set-up after discovering online that there are gear-teeth in the Power Miners drill piece. It would be less specialized, but it is bigger than the set-ups built into the PF motors (about 9L diameter) and has noticably high friction. A worm gear could be another option that would take up less space, which I have not tried yet with Power Functions.

I thought that I recalled reading somewhere on the internet a long time ago that Power Functions motors have no internal gearing. What the? Well, it looks like that wasn't true. Now that I think of it, I think that I have heard the noise of the internal planetary gears when I run my Emerald Night. I'm just used to the sound, and I may have mistaken it for the buzz of the electric motor. But I question if it's really a good idea to include internal gearing. Couldn't they have a smaller assembly if there was no internal gearing? Or they could have a larger electric motor inside with more total power-output. I would also expect the motor to be cheaper because of the simpler preassembly. Yes, I am aware of the basic fact that the gears are used to trade speed for strength. Wouldn't it be better if they just let us build that with our Technic gear pieces? Because Technic gears would take more space, maybe a separate preassembled planetary gearbox? I think that there are more Technic models that use gears to increase the speed of the motor than decrease it. It would probably be better if they at-least reduced it to one lair of planetary gears. I only know the basics of how an electric motor works. But I don't know exactly what determines all the specifications. Is there a way to adjust the balance of speed and strength while the motor is being built? I would expect there to be some way.

I have for long been a supporter of the Vampire GT Project on Cuusoo. I first found out about the Daywalker Edition on that very website. I personally prefer the look of the black car, but white still looks good on it. I wish that he kept just one of the old images of the black one, as that should be the main focus of the project. The Daywalker probably helped gain some more supporters though. Does anyone know if he is doing another auction or sale for the Daywalker Edition? I don't have the car yet, so I would consider buying it if theres another sale.

Replacement? They denied the Legend of Zelda project because of new molds. They could have made the Link minifigure with the old bandana 2543 (which even Santa Clause used to have) in green and have printed hair. The hand utensils could have also been replaced with the existing molds with special paterns on them. But the Lego Group just decided to turn-down the project entirely instead.

In the section about the Rating System, it says that a user would require a Lego ID linked and would have to log in to Lego Cuusoo on 7 days before they are allowed to rate projects. The original reason for this was so that those cult-followers who sign-up to support a single project don't skew the ratings. The ratings should be controlled by people who typically discover projects through Lego Cuusoo, not other websites. But this will also prevent the possible confusion that you mentioned, of people thinking that the positive vote counts as support. By the time a user qualifies to use the rating system, then they would already be used to clicking the support button. Just in case, it should give users a message the first time that they try to use the rating system, to briefly explain what it is. To everyone reading this thread, please don't be shy to share your own suggestions. I could then add your ideas to the first post. If I send this directly to The Lego Group, a collaborative suggestion should be more affective then one written entirely by a single person. Although my own solutions are not as well-recepted as I hoped for, there are still some problems of Lego Cuusoo that bring it short of the Lego fans dream that it has the potential to be. Go ahead and present your own specific ideas to get around these barriers. You may also post an edit of a section of the essay if you have a way to improve it. We don't yet have a reply on this topic from a Lego group Embassador, but it would be appreciated to hear back about how well the proposals would work from a Lego employee perspective.