Jump to content

agrof

Eurobricks Counts
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,941

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by agrof

  1. agrof
    I was wondering about this as well, I settled by the next: - those are needed for the B-model, - they help for easier assembly with several pins, - or both. I tend to first option, as some simmetrycal sub-assemblies are built differently, and must say, it is pretty clever where and how they hid these axle pins.
  2. agrof
    It is actually very stable connection, I can not make the rope plug move at all, the whole fork+mast assembly bends. Tested. EDIT: at the top position it does indeed disconnect, the reason is, that the 3x5 liftarms slide apart above a certain (unreasonable) force. What I only can think of as "not-so-ideal" situation: the rope is actually sliding on the top of the mast - instead of having a rolling support. This might cause earlier wear of the rope=reduced lifespan. If it really matters, I don't know, for me it still seems an acceptable trade-off.
  3. agrof
    Beautifll review Jim! I couldn't miss to grab this set for 35 EUR during my holiday, and must say, I am in love - the perfect Technic set at this size range! Surprisingly the reversed steering doesn't bother me much - it works for me some reason, but the lifting height is just terrible. Here You can find instructions for my EASY! modification: https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/topic/163477-42079-heavy-duty-forklift-mods-and-improvements/&do=findComment&comment=3004309
  4. agrof
    Here is my 5 minutes MOD. This was so obvious, I am wondering why is it not applied on the set as default. Forks all the way up to the top of the mast, making 21 studs clearance beneath. I love this little set, and now it is PERFECT! HERE you can download in PDF format, 7 extra pcs needed: 4x https://brickset.com/parts/4121715/connector-peg-w-friction 2x https://brickset.com/parts/4142135/technic-5m-beam 1x https://brickset.com/parts/614126/round-plate-1x1
  5. agrof
    Hi, 1. I built this once, but I changed couple of things for my liking during the build. 2. My main complaint were the wider rear axles, and that the XL motor (vertically placed) was not braced properly enough. 3. I have also only the jpgs, one can connect them into a pdf with minor effort if needed. 4-5. No idea, sorry. I go for holiday now!
  6. agrof
    I edited the picture comparison, so the problem is visible: while the lifting height might be realistic for special purposes, at the maximum the fork unit reaches always the top of the mast. In case of 42079, we have a noticable pole above. Limited lifting height has it's reasons, like low ceiling, low gate entering, etc... so having unused mast above is just a barrier for this purpose. Nonetheless, still my favorite set from this batch, deserves the modification.
  7. agrof
    I am absolutely pumped to get this now! I do believe it is a very-very playful set. Thanks @M_longer for the LDD model!
  8. agrof
    Absolutely stunning in this scale , congratulations for the collaboration!
  9. agrof
    Like it, especially the hands-on manipulation - so much, that I wouldn't even miss the motorization of the undercarriage. Nice MOC!
  10. agrof
    Great reading for the morning coffee, thank You Jim! I was coming for nice pictures and to read a nice story with some objectivity, I am not disappointed.
  11. agrof
    @AVCampos is right, the Mack is great in every aspect, the garbage truck is on pair with any A model, and 42079 seems to be my most anticipated set for 2H for me. Though, I would warmly welcome Creator like 5-in-1 sets (500-800 pcs), of course with printed instructions. That could be also show the versatility of Technic system, and also great learning material.
  12. agrof
    @Jim It is your opinion, You like it. I don't. I guess, we could still sit to the same table and have a good beer with a nice chat, could we?
  13. agrof
    Back in beginning of 2016 I started a similar concept (shame on me not to finished it yet), 1 direction ON/OFF battery box, 5x bi-directional clutches (same as 42082), + some manual functions, as it is, still below 1000 pcs... I admit, my MOC doesn't have fake engine, nor 4 wheel steering, but I can see it possible easily with 2000 pcs.
  14. agrof
    Great pick-up/truggy truck! Congrats for the 2nd place!
  15. agrof
    I am one, who is complaining about the size. It is not a price issue for me, but a design issue. As mentioned before, adding parts for example on the wheel hubs just for sake of adding parts and be able to present the set as "The next biggest" is far away from Technic. They not even add a valuable aesthetic improvement in my opinion... just parts to be in the list. Similar effect to make a larger scale to reach the same target (The next biggest). There is nothing more in function and technical solutions, than in a 3000 pcs set. As an engineer, I find this just against my instincts, it is just marketing over engineering - and literally: overengineering. I like compact, efficient, smart solutions - size alone doesn't impress me. A design is successful to me, if it has the technology, functionality, usability, and elegance in one package. This is one example for those profanes, who are not WOW-ing the 4000 pcs count immadiately. BTW: functions are fine for me, even the outriggers speed. May I note, that the speed of those are not linearly connected to race extinction? Except, if the last member of the certain race is beneath the outrigger's feet...
  16. agrof
    I am afrad it is the Li-Ion battery inside. I strongly recommend not to use it, and keep it away from every flammable material (don't store in a cardboard box f.e.). Do not charge it! It can start fire, and it's smoke is toxic. I would wait for answer from Buwizz @Ron1 can help for sure. Also do not send by post back to BuWizz, even if they ask for it! It must need a special inflammable transport case for it, otherwise it can burn down anything around, yes even a complete warehouse, or airplane (happened with UPS). I am working with such batteries, exactly the transportation of them in my profession, injured batteries have very strict transportation regulation with a good reason! After answer from BuWizz I would bring the injured unit to a shop, where they sell Li-Ion batteries, and ask them if they have waste handling and leave it there.
  17. agrof
    As outsider - indeed the new door shape is more fitting to the overall design. I like this angle: https://s22.postimg.cc/l71fu8ltd/LB-_X18_-_dev.lxf.png
  18. agrof
    Looks nice, I have 2 remarks only: the panel behind the rear wheel (rear bumper side) is too long / or should be lifted by 1 stud at least, and the wheels appear slightly small to me.
  19. agrof
    Yesss. We definitely need more MOCs like this! HOF material.
  20. agrof
    I don't think its that common for the forks of a forklift not to reach as high as the roof of the cab.
  21. agrof
    This is the only thing that bugs me, very displeasing attitude to hide facts (message to marketing team: ). We need to find a solution to make the fork movement range properly up to the top. Other than that, this is the most convincing set to me for this batch, perfect size, functions, great B model. Like!
  22. agrof
    Actually, I like the playability of the A model a lot, but the B model is still plain ugly to me.
  23. agrof
    On big sets like this are usual above 11, for UCS it is 16+ (which basically means adults, especially considering the price). So your nephews are not licensed to understand and to play with those! Seriously, it is cute and many times admirable if a small child can operate, build and enjoy a set like these, but to be fair the expectations of a 4 year old and a 16 year old are pretty different. And as the target group is 11-16 (set by LEGO itself), than steering radius can be an issue. Just to compare apple to apple.
  24. agrof
    Absolutely love it! The proportions, the build, and seemingly the functions too (I trust You, based on previous MOCs).
  25. agrof
    What You are describing is, let's say external motivation. But does the crowd's low demand meet the original LEGO legacy: "Only the best is good enough"? I think, no. This motto should be the internal motivation for TLG - sometimes they seemingly gave up on this with compromises You describe above. Or just transformed the meaning of best... best what? Best toy, best functions, best within the limitations, best official LEGO Chiron set (which has rather low competition to date ) or... best... profit? I believe, if You show the best product to the market, than even the reactions from the mass will be: OH, damn is this really LEGO? - instead of: Oh, it doesn't work so well, You know it's LEGO . I think we AFOL's understand this slogen as it is valid in every (or at least most) aspects, and that's why we are picky. I agree with @Erik Leppen - if there is a function, it should reasonably work. Speaking of 42083 for easier example: a spring, which works only in one direction, can not be considered as correct function, also not as the best. Feels more like the slogan is twisted: "Good enough is the best." Meanwhile, understanding the limitations, I find the rear spoiler adjusting method reasonable, furthermore a nice gimmick with the "speed key". I can count more positive, than negative things about this certain set, but as metaphor: if there is only one nail is sticking out in your mattress - the whole night is ruined, it is just not the BEST mattress any more. All in all, I miss sometimes this internal motivation from TLG's products (not each!). Especially noted at flagship models recently (those, we expect to be the best of the bests) , that's why they are much more under the loop, and hurts even more if there is a single annoying little fault found.
×
×
  • Create New...