D3K

I really like the subtle - and the not so subtle - visual improvements compared to the first version! Truly a great looking truck!

Wow indeed! Again, I'm not a fan of huge models, but again you manage to make one that truly amazes me! Hall of Fame!

Pretty cool model! I too haven't seen one of these before! Regarding the gear slippage, you need to brace the 12 tooth bevel gear on the arm better. As it is now, it is quite frankly terrible.. I'll try to put something together in LDD to show you what I mean EDIT: Try something like this: You might need some additional bracing in the transverse ditection as well, alternately use 5L thin liftarms with axle hole ends instead of the 7L liftarms. That should probably give you enough strength for most pratical purposes

Good point! An easy fix could be to use either a #1 or #2 connector and affix it to the surrounding structure as so: EDIT: Or it could be made more "self contained", like this:

Hi! I'm afraid not, I never got around to making them. Concider it a challenge! Have you started/tried? If you'd rather build by instructions, I can maybe recommend my 6x6 truck instead? That comes with full instructions, and you could probably combine those with the LDD of this truck to make it look more like the latter. The cabin, equipment tower and dumping bed should be easy enough to reproduce from the LDD file

Great work! That can't have been an easy assembly!

It is compact, at least! One could easily expand on it in one of the following ways: (All pics clickable for higher resolution)

How about this?

Looking very much forward to seeing more of this! When do you reckon you will post an update/more pics?

X-wing?

AND YOU CALL YOURSELFA STUD LOVER=!??!

Like I said, it's kind of tricky, but absolutely doable. Here is how I did it on my 6x4 Dump Truck (which had live axle suspension and dual wheels): As you can see there are 4 (or 3, depending on how you look at it) studs between the attachment of the actuators to the chassis and the pivot for the dump bed (vertically). When the bed is lowered, the point where the LAs are attached to it is in line with the pivot. That doesn't matter, in effect you want the lower part of the LA as low in the chassis as possible, and the attachment of the LA to the bed as high as possible, to create an as sharp angle as possible. This is where one can "cheat" , and manipulate the angle between the lower end of the LA, its attachment point on the bed, and to the pivot of the bed, by moving the pivot further down, thereby decreasing the angle. If that makes any sense.. At a glance I would say the angle I'm talking about is roughly 170 degrees on my model, and maybe closer to 175 on yours. Further, to get the above pictured setup to work, I had to make certain compromises in the structural rigidity of the chassis. As you can see the rear of the chassis is 4L in height. To have enough room for the dual LA setup, I could only have one liftarm going front to rear in parts of the lower part of the chassis. Some parts removed, but the one LBG long liftarm between the LAs is the only structure going from the front toward the rear there

I find it very interesting to go year-to-year on Technicopedia to see the evolution of new parts. I would argue that the very first wholly "studless" part might be the "control arm" introduced in 1981. I view this as the first part (not concidering axles and gears) not designed to directly interface with studded bricks/parts. Of course, you could stuff a stud into the axle hole, but still. Then in 1988 there are the specific steering parts introduced in set 8865 (middle column). In the previous two "supercars" the steering was made using 2x2 small turntables . I am certain the decision to go from studded to mainly studless models was a very concious decision, not something that just "happened". There is a small transition period stretching a couple of years around the beginning of the 21st century. This parts evolution is one of the most interesting parts of Technicopedia, and one of the reasons I am eagerly avaiting the site to be completed

It's all a matter of leverage. It can be tricky to get an effective mechanism when the available space is limited, as in your model here. If you add suspension, there is even less room. In effect, what you want is to mount the LA/pneumatic cylinder as low in the chassis as possible, to get good vertical force. When it is too high, it more or less pushes in a horizontal line towards the pivot of the dumping bed, which is far from ideal. A trick I have used on a couple of occations is to mount the pivot for the tip low and on the very rear of the chassis, typically using 3x5 L-shaped in liftarms in the rear of the bed to get it three studs lower than the dump bed floor.

I think no, they shouldn't "go back". Lucky for you, we live in a time where this isn't even a problem; you can buy pretty much all the studded bricks and 9V motors off of the internet. EDIT: These pictures show part of the reason I think the steady evolution towards studless have helped make a far better product when thinking of the Technical aspect of things. -> -> Those are the rear axles from 8860, 8865 and 8880 respectively. (All pictures from Technicopedia)

There are 60 for sale on Bricklink now

Wow, seems like a great product! And not too pricey either!

Good news, I just got my SBrick two days ago, downloaded the app, and it crashes every time I try to discover SBrick (Sony Z1 Compact). In other words; utterly useless in its current state. Hope this fixes things, can't wait to try it out

Nice use of the parts from 42000!

Pretty impressive MOC indeed! Not so sure about the suspension setup, but the drive and transmission seem solid! But it looks like the battery placement might interfere with the drive motor. Overall, I give it a

Kudos for the effort and write-up!

Hi! Are these the parts you are referring to: and ? If so, I'm pretty sure you could work around them by slightly redesigning the two axles in question, as well as the areas where they are attached, and then just use 3L U-joints to transmit the drive

Did you have to "register" to download it? I'd like to see the files in there, as he has several of my MOC building instructions, as well as digital files. They are all freely available from me, but of course I can't say for sure about all the others, as the list seems to show the actual file names (for example "6x4 dump truck instruction model.lxf", which I can only assume is my own digital model found on my Bricksafe page)

Holy laziest most unnecessary topic ever

I use both LDD and MLCad, and they both have their pros and cons. In my experience, LDD is far far FAR easier to learn, more intuitive, and way faster. On the downside, it sucks for making instructions, and the snap feature and constraints can be a nuisance at certain times, but more often than not I find it very helpful. MLCad allows for a lot more options, as well as a more comprehensive parts library. You can also synthesize hoses etc in it, although I never got the hang of it. Negative aspect is a dated UI, and you need to read up on it to understand how it works.(there are a lot of really helpful tutorials, but it is still time consuming. For me the two serve two different purposes. I use LDD a lot when developing a MOC, and I use MLCad/LPub to make instructions after the model is complete. For Technic builders, LDD can be a very useful tool to make gear trains and transmissions, as well as planning the size of things