Kamil

This is the Lego 42129 unofficial C model (by Victor Gyenes) modified by 107x44R tractor tires. The tires are mounted in the reverse direction to provide shovel effect on dry and loose sand:

Hi, I disassembled the Zetros, found some wear and dirt on the parts due to these trials (everything was brand new before trials). Oiling is needed to prevent this wearing issue, maybe graphite grease...

Another issue on this leaked pic is written by another user in another platform (not sure to mention these names here). There says no suspension clearence exists between the front tire and the mentioned liftarm. So, the front axle must be a fixed one. I think, even it is fixed, there should be a visible clearence between them to appear normal to the eye.

@gyenesvi For sure, it's great that you have created at least three different vehicles while staying within the 42129 parts limit

@jundis thank you for info. @jundis Yes, I learned this by chance. I was building Zetros from computer screen, and realised my MB emblem holder pieces were different from the pdf instructions. That was weird being the same set having two different instruction files.

"The first leaked pics in 2021 were in 6x6 configuration, looked way better imho ;-)" @jundis I am not sure the leaked Zetros is fake or real (it also has some similarities with the red Zetros 6x6, released four yrs before 42129, which is posted above). I feel like I saw two XL engines in the leaked one. Okay, did the Lego CEO's told the builder "remove one axle, shorten the bed, change the two XL motors to L motors, then decrease speed of the truck?" I havent witnessed such a torture, from design to production, before. Something like designing a G63 6x6, and Multipla is coming out of the production line

@gyenesvi Absolutely, I leave it to the viewers to decide. Summary: To be honest, I never liked this set before buying. I would prefer to buy Lego technic G 500 set instead. There are issues that do not fit the overall scale of the truck. - The wheels are smaller than original, - The cabin roof is higher and wider than original, - The nose (engine cover) is shorter and wider than original, - The shape of the truck's nose doesn't seem very realistic either. I found this set for half a prize, it had unopened packaging, and I needed some parts of it for my new project. I built and played with this to satisfy my curiosity. My findings are: - This truck is too heavy (around 3.3 kg) and battery consumption is high. I have used three sets of 6x AA battery packs during my trials, - Some of its accesories come lose easily (like side mirror plates, fire extinguisher nozzles, snorkel and exhaust pipe) so precautions must be taken before using it outdoors or on sand, - Instead of using an app. controlled motorised diff. lock, two manual diff. lock controls (controlled by sticks from interior cabin if possible), and one app. controlled high-gear selector would be a better option, - It would be better to release this set as an expedition truck, instead of a trial truck, together with a rear cabin on the rear bed. Then its off-road capabilities would be reasonable on this basis. Here 94.3x38R Lego tires with black rims would be a better choice for this purpose, - As the truck is too heavy and slow, momentum can not be used as a driving force to overcome obstacles while climbing. Only full power and traction combination is helpful here, - Creating a flexible chassis, and gain more articulation via this chassis (cabin and rear bed can articulate in opposite directions as seen in off-road tests of these vehicles) would be fun to watch on Lego based Mercedes Zetros and Unimog vehicles, - This set is a good part source for app. controlled MOC's, - If I were the official Lego builder, I would create this truck chassis as a set (Mercedes-Benz Zetros 3643-S 6x4 Tractor Head). While having 6x4 drivetrain, I would build a front steering system with higher turning angle to match original Mercedes specs. I would leave the buyer free for what to build on the rear bed. Zetros 6x4 - Playing with the original set was challenging, it was barely playable. I think modifying this vehicle to the beast mode in video 4 was more fun to play with. Plus, the beast mode is 4-4.5 on the playability scale above. What do you think? Thank you Kamil

@gyenesvi Okay, thank you, good to talk about this. Mine is an observation, not based on technical knowledge (or maybe not knowing like a mechanical engineer/mechanic etc.). In my video, diff. lock = on means engaged, on the phone control app. the button is at up position. “Off” means diff. lock is disengaged, and the button is at 0 position. Let me explain the operation step by step, while giving the exact moments in one of the video scenes of the last video. - At 18:33, I started the truck while diff. lock = on mode (I do so in all of my trials). - At 18:42, wheels start slipping, truck stops while at maximum throttle (truck is stuck). I release throttle. - At 18:48, I disengage the diff. lock (deep click is heard), bring it to off (zero position). - At 18:50, at full throttle, the front wheel starts turning faster, and the truck has moved few cm. - At 18:59, front wheel spins fast, and truck stops again. I engage diff. lock, deep click is heard. - At 19:00 the truck starts moving again. I would be grateful for a technical explanation for this. Coming to tires, okay, I see now. Thanks in advance

My last video on being the angel of Lego 42129 Zetros. The beast mode (Thanks to Viktor Gyenes for his suggestion for adding more articulation): Video includes: LEGO 42129 MB Zetros, with bigger wheels, outdoor trials: 1. The beast did not like sand trials 2. Outdoor climbing = Good performance 3. Outdoor tree root trials : Good performance 4. Outdoor rooftop ceramic tiles trials = Good performance (forward only) 5. Outdoor dirt trials = Acceptable performance 6. Outdoor dirt downhill trials = Good performance 6. Night driving, diff. lock on/off traction transfer trials = Good performance Cheers

@gyenesvi Thank you for introducing me your cute little kitty. I really missed it within my searches. I wish I could build it for learning more. For sure, I will try to PS: The original tires matches the overall scale this time.

gyenesvi thank you for the suggestion. For sure the red springs are too stiff for the rear axle of the vehicle. I have replaced them with softer grey springs. Now suspension became softer and gives more articulation. However, the real Unimogs and Zetroses also have a flexible chassis. The front cabin and the rear bed articulates in opposite directions while off-roading. This vehicle is far from this ability. The articulation I have added may seem insufficient to you (it wont be like the one used in the x-treme off-roader), but I think it is better compared to the original (see video Part 3 below). I have also added 107x44R tractor tires to the back axle. I recorded more videos for making the Lego Zetros, the ultimate beast (:-D) outdoor trials. On that video, I have discovered a hidden function of the diff. lock while trying to climb. The diff. lock transfers more power to rear axle or front axle. If the rear is stuck, it is possible to transfer traction to front axle. I have planned to merge these videos as Part 4, I need days to edit all. LEGO 42129 MB Zetros, with bigger wheels, foundry sand trials (Part 3): Is this set playable or not? Cheers

Yes, I have seen this video previously, thank you for posting it here. I am not sure this comparison is right, Zetros and other vehicles may be different classes. Zetros is a safety concerned commercial set (no buwizz motors etc.) for 12+ customers. It has more finished exterior shell than others, so it is heavier and slower than others too. I wish it had two manual diff. locks, and a high gear, but not available here. Maybe they always leave incomplete functions in a commercial set, so we have to go and buy new ones to complete it. I would compare Zetros with some of these more finished MOC's below: Sariel's pug proof MAZ-535 8x8 truck (having more finished exterior): The "Zetros Killer": Or, maybe this Unimog: Or a similar Zetros: To me, Lego Zetros is more a Unimog than a Zetros. It is more a rock crawler than a trial truck. Here, I want to stay on the "playability" scale. To avoid misunderstanding, I give my Lego off-road playability scale here: 12 points: 10 Points: 7 Points: The three trucks on Sariel's comparison video above 3 Points: Lego Zetros original 3.2 Points: Lego Zetros with bigger tires My new aim here is to upgrade Lego Zetros into rank 4 by adding few modifications to increase playability of the vehicle. Thank you

@jundis That is a good question. When I first seen this set, I immidiately thought something is wrong with it. I realized that the wheels are out of scale. The proof is here: In addition to looking closer to scale, these bigger tires are handsome, increase speed of the truck, give better ground clearence, and their specs differ on different terrain types. For example, you are right for loose sand conditions. However, it does not matter on wetted stable sand. I have videos on preparation (part 2, part 3 etc.) so the answers may remain in them. I will try to add them here in my new posts. Thanks in advance. This is my second video on Lego Zetros foundry sand trials. Performances of three different Lego wheels were compared in it. Dry and wetted stable sand surfaces were obtained.

Some say Lego Zetros Trial Truck can only be played at home by using books as obstacles. To prove the opposite, a foundry sand track was built for Lego Zetros Trial Truck with bigger Lego wheels mounted on it. The truck completed the track. This set is playable on a sand track with variable road conditions. Plus Sides: Truck has enough power to be played with bigger wheels. The steerability of the truck is good on sand surfaces with bigger wheels. The speed of MB Zetros has increased by using bigger Lego tires. Rear differential-lock is useful for climbing slopes. Minus Sides: Turning radius of MB Zetros is insufficient for narrow tracks. Light rear end of MB Zetros causes problems whenever rear traction is needed. Front differential can not pull or push the vehicle under hard conditions. The trial video is here on Youtube: I think, this set is still playable. Thanks for watching.

LEGO Technic Complex Heavy Duty Multilink Suspension System Trial for LEGO remote control vehicles (MOC) Aims: This experimental suspension system here was intended to be used as a front axle of a tough 6x6 Lego remote controlled off-road vehicle. The reason of constructing this system is to decide whether it would be appropriate to use such a suspension system in a remote controlled 6x6 LEGO car that I want to build in future. In short, I wanted to verify the system I had in mind. The aimed specifications of the suspension system are: 1. Soft suspension for off-road use 2. Long suspension travel 3. High impact resiliance for off-road use 4. Being capable of maintaining its integrity for off-road use 5. Flexible enough for off-road use 6. High ground clearence for off-road use 7. Reasonable turning Radius 8. Reasonable powertrain to transfer 25-30% motor power to the front wheels (intended to be used with clutch gear(s), and remaining power is intended to come from the rear 4x4 wheels). 9. Correct geometry turning of front wheels 10. LPEpower*Youtube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBw44g2uEis) multilink suspension pivoting adaptation for turning the big wheels in tight fender spaces to prevent the wheels from hitting the fender while turning left and right 11. Having gear reduction units for better power transfer to the front wheels 12. Having neutral camber when touching the ground 13. Obtaining a positive caster angle by connecting the main chassis and this suspension system at an angle The Suspension System: The suspension system is approx. 280 mm wide and 140 mm high. The sytem is designed for 15038 rims / 23798 tires. Figure 1 Width of suspension system Figure 2 Height of suspension system Overall view: Here the suspension system is shown from different perspectives. Figure 3: Front view Figure 4: Front view with steering right Figure 5: Rear view Figure 6: Top view Figure 7: Side view Figure 8: Bottom view The Youtube video of this suspension is also included below. Many details were given in the video: ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suqPfu8HZDo&lc=UgzrsbQ_SmJRpOu-s-p4AaABAg ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- Results and Discussions: Each topic given in the “Aims” section will be discussed one by one in the same order. 1. The softness of the suspension system was found to be adequate (see video) 2. Suspension travel (22-30mm) is fairly well, however this does not fully meet my expectations 3. This topic may be tested once a complete remote controlled vehicle is available to perform an off-road test. The weaknesses then can be determined. No further information is currently available at this time. 4. The integrity was maintained during the tests in the video. No further information is currently available at this time. 5. The suspension and the steering system seems flexible enough to work in off-road conditions (see video) 6. This suspension system has approx. 48-50 mm of ground clearence (see Fig. 9). This is fairly well but remains below my expectations. The restriction here is the short length of the control arms (see Fig. 4). Some additional spacing was needed for the LPE type pivoting, and the gear reduction units. As a result, the control arms are shorter. Figure 9: Ground clearence 7. This topic is the highest shortcoming of this suspension system (see video). Turning Radius is fairly limited due to the structural nature of the multilink pivoting, see Fig. 10 and 11. Also the bottom steering link is using the maximum space (see blue circle, bottom in fig.10), so this is another limitation here. Figure 10: Turning radius limitations. Multiling pivoting limitation (blue circle, up), and bottom steering link space limitation (blue circle, below) Figure 11: Multiling pivoting limitation 8. The differentials and universal joints used here can be replaced with new generation stronger Lego ones. Then double differentials would be eliminated. The use of 46490 hub here may require some design changes. 9. Correct geometry turning slightly exists on the system, but it is barely visible by eye even when measured by rulers (see Fig. 12). Figure 12: Correct geometry measurement 10. LPE*Youtube multilink suspension pivoting is capable of keeping the wheels in place during manoeuvring 11. Structure of the gear reduction unit ease angular constructions, and this provides to move the upper pivots through the center of the vehicle. As a result, pivots are in the desired position. Figure 13: Angular construction of the gear reduction unit’s upper pivot Figure 14: Closer look on the gear reduction unit 12. Neutral camber gives a nicer and tidy look to the suspension system. However, when the entire suspension system rests in neutral position, it has neutral toe. When suspension is pressed downwards, a slight toe-in appears. I think, slight plays may be expected for such a complex suspension system. 13. Positive caster can be obtained by connecting the suspension system to the chassis at an angle. Figure 15: Positive caster construction Conclusions: It would be fun to watch this complex heavy duty multilink suspension system on a RC Lego vehicle while working. Besides, it has some limitations and plays due to its complexity. For a 6x6 vehicle, the rear two wheels must also be steerable to obtain a proper turning radius. This suspension system also consumes a lot of space. In my opinion, this system becomes an over engineered one when compared to Lego X-treme off roader or similar vehicles. Additional images: Figure 16: Multilink lower pivoting and universal joints Figure 17: Double differentials and steering lower arm Figure 18: Left steering setup from above Note: This suspension system was built by imagination only. No computer aided design or plan exists. Thanks for watching

An update to the topic: A video was uploaded to YouTube to demonstrate the capabilities of 8448 remote: Kamil

Hello again, This is the video presentation of my mini Lego exhibition in Rahmi Koc Industrial Museum in Ankara last year. Some complete sets, moc's and replicas covering the period of 1969 to today. Kamil

Very Nice ! When I see "Emo Girl" I remember Eurovision song contest winner Lena Meyer-Landrut: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/df/Lena_Meyer_Landrut_2010.jpg Both are so beautiful ! Kamil

Thank you. The solution in your message looks mechanically perfect, I will try that. By the way, I found an alternative solution, maybe not as perfect as the one above, but it works. Thanks for the Lego crankshaft part, it fits into the gap and no play exists: http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/technickamil/SSS/srcb1.jpg On the other hand, as the crank axle fits loosely into the remote control arm, it comes up after using a short period. This problem should be fixed, maybe by an additional upper lock: http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/technickamil/SSS/srcb2.jpg Kamil

An extended remote controller was designed to overcome the shorcomings of the 8879 speed remote: Additional pics: 1 http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/technickamil/SSS/src3.jpg 2 http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/technickamil/SSS/src4.jpg 3 Simple steering link: http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/technickamil/SSS/src4b.jpg 4 http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/technickamil/SSS/src5.jpg 5 http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/technickamil/SSS/src6.jpg 6 Slight modifications was made on the car. The gear ratio of the steering is adjusted for the new controller. The electric circuit is modified (front IR-receiver controls the steering and front lights and the rear IR-receiver controls the rear wheels and rear lights) http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/technickamil/SSS/src7.jpg 7 http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/technickamil/SSS/src8.jpg Kamil

Thank you, Of course each reader may interpret my intro story from the perspective of their own. My actual story goes within Star Wars so here George is George Lucas. After watching the seventh movie, the “Clone Wars”, I’m trying to get used to be familiar with computer graphics instead of live actors. Then I connected the story with my own life because I always try to fix broken things in the real life, especially the things broken in my childhood. Maybe a deeper issue :) Kamil

I havent seen "Bender's Big score" movie but I found a picture of "chuannaka zombie's tie fighter" via internet. It would be funny to see it in Lego so I tried one: http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/technick.../zombietie2.jpg Kamil

Then, everyone in the garage was relieved after the start of repair: http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/technick.../SW/dwswad2.jpg http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/technick.../SW/dwswad3.jpg

1. My answer to your first question is yes. Everything can again be compacted to fit the same compartment in a different combination: 2. My answer to your second question is no. With the 8287 motor, the car can not start moving even on a flat surface. In my opinion, this motor is faster than XL but has less torque. So my former gear ratio is not suitable for the 8287 motor. The gear ratio must be designed again to fit this motors specifications. The motor works only when the car is raised above the ground: http://s282.photobucket.com/albums/kk255/k...rrent=8448q.flv Kamil

OK, luckily I have an 8287 motor and technic-PF adapter cable: My first opinion (as you already mentioned) is 8287 motor turns faster than the XL motor. I will try to replace XL motor with 8287 for you but this may take few days because of time shortage. I'll try to finish the test as soon as possible. Kamil