Erik Leppen

Love that color scheme. The blue-white-red areas flow nicely. Also, some interesting panel usage with all those angles. Love the angled sides. The custom black stickers for the windcreen are not my favorite part, but in all honesty, I didn't notice them right away.

Sorry for not updating for so long, but I have continued building on this and I think it's going very well. First thing you may notice is the ugly white "seat panls" at the front. Yes, I'm not happy with those either, (or with the white front in general) I'm looking for alternatives there. So I'm going for a black-and-white color scheme. Kinda dictated by the parts (especially the white suspension arms). Also, yes, I'll be having doors that open. Kinda scissor doors. I played with having a ball-joint in the roof, but this becomes too bulky really fast and has limited movement. In the end I figured that having 2 well-positioned ball joints at the front gives the same effect. I have no mechanism for opening the doors yet, and since there's no friction they'll fall shut, so I want to devise something for that. No concrete ideas yet. This gives a better shot on the suspension arms for the doors, as well as for how the roof is attached (via the seat, and various ball joint linkages. So the roof is not "in system", but together with the seat it gives enough rigidity. (The dark-gray link above the 20t gear has no structural use, it only holds the large white panels). Also as you can see the engine is now V6. This is now the rear. The 5x4 ball joint frame works as an exhaust, but for the rest there's no bodywork yet. Not sure what I'll do here. Anything I add would make it bulkier I'm afraid. A picture from below. Replies welcome :D

Maybe this is part of the problem... the whole fact that there's a "real car" to begin with. With 8880, there was no real car, which means they can go all out and make the best Lego Technic set. They added folding headlights because it made the Lego set better. With 42056, they had to adhere to some kind of "real car", so that means 4 wheel steering is out of the question, even though that would have been really cool. Same for suspension height adjusting, foldable roof, a jack system, a nice B model, or whatever designers would think would improve the Lego set. The licence limits design freedom. Suddenly, there's not one but two companies which have requirements that must be met. But apparently, we have a market now that wants "Porsche" above a fantasy car that would have novel functions. In the end, it sits on a shelf, and then "being a Porsche" is apparently cooler than having all those functions. I say "apparently" because I assume Lego builds what they have researched sells best. But if I'd be the kind of guy to want a Lego Porsche. I would much prefer a Creator Expert Porsche. Those bricks are much more suitable for the sculpting needed to recreate sleek supercars accurately.

What I dislike most about the modern Technic look is not that we can't see how it works, but that the cover-up costs a lot of extra parts, and therefore, price and weight. Just look at the Bugatti, about 40% through the build, all the funtionality is finished. Good looks are nice, but that's not Technic. For looks, there's almost all the other themes. Please keep Technic technical. The best example (in my opinion) being the demise of B models. I believe this started in licenced sets, but now pops up in generic sets too. I wonder that too. i often use photos of real vehicles as inspiration, but mostly to create a "similar-working" model. At the moment, I'm building a vehicle I have never built before, and I found pictures of existing examples, but I'm giving my own "spin" to it (I like to combine featurs from different existing vehicles in one model). E.g. different wheel setup, fewer/more axles, different outriggers, such things, trying to make it a more interesting Lego build. Keeping the same "spirit" but still a personal execution.

What it looks like people do not know is that the reason for the maximum number of images is to prevent problems loading the page (at least, that's how I always understood it). I.e. just limit the internet traffic, because not all of us on the planet have the same internet speed. If this is true, then allowing compilations makes sense, because it stays within the "file size limit" of 4 images of given maximum size.

Maybe add this to the first post for maximum clarity. Something like "A picture of the buttom of the whole model is not enough"

Are you sure the 256 ratios are all different? If I understand your scheme at 5:25 well, S1 and S3 have the same ratio, and S2 and S6 also have the same ratio (1/3 : 1/2 = 2/1 : 3/1). So does that not reduce the total number of different combinations to 64?

Could you show an image of the rear suspension without the wheel? I'd like to see how the springs are attached to the swingarms. Reason is that I expect that when the angle between the arm and spring increases too much when the suspension is compressed, it doesn't work as well as you'd want. (In the extreme case when the angle reaches 180 degree, the suspension force would be zero.)

First photo I was a bit hesitant, but seen from the side with the wheels on and the engine complete, it really starts looking very promising. I think black with dark-azure works well. The silver wheel covers work nicely here. I'd say so far in general it looks very "clean", and I like the modular approach. Also, indeed, nice engine :) Curious how you will do the wheel arches :)

I'd say you're off to a great start. I really like the white-black front with the metallic bumper, and it works really well with the dark azure body. The only thing I'not really a fan of, is the very low ground clearance. I'd personally put the whole thing one stud higher (or, the wheel axles one stud lower. Maybe this is just a typical hot-rod thing, but in your reference picture the ground clearance seems to be higher. The steering angle is pretty impressive! (best I've seen in all the WIPs so far), I hope you can keep that :) Keep up the good work :)

Do you have the gray (or dark gray) shock absorbers? You really don't need yellow ones here, these are way too strong for such small cars (which puts unnecessary force on the whole thing when playing with the suspension.) Also I'm afraid the shock absorber connection will be too weak. I'd suggest to connect the top of the shock absorber to something on the chassis and then try the suspension to get an idea of weakspots. In any case, curious to see where this will go.

What if you would make the axle 2 studs narrower? I.e. replace the white 11L beam by a 9L and see if you can move the connection points for the steering arms 1 stud inwards (and move the connection points for the springs also 1 or 0.5 stud inwards. I'm sure it's possible :) You can always keep your current axle for another project :) By the way, you don't have to "ask" to rejoin - put [TC18] before the topic title, and somehwere before the deadline, put a post in the entry topic, and then you're in.

Thanks, @1980SomethingSpaceGuy :D Ok, so as promised, pictures of yesterday's rear suspension build. As you can see, the engine is much closer to the rear axle (4.5 studs to be exact). It's somewhat less rigid, but I hope to solve that later. Also, the suspension travel is now only about 0.4 studs. Which, I think, for this type of car, is fine. I don't even use the ball-joint, so that might serve as some kind of "exhaust" (necessarily). The 20t from the diff is directly meshed with a 12t above, which is on a hinged axle. This in turn drives the 20t near the engine, which meshes with the 12t below on the crankshaft. So an added bonus of this setup is that the engine also runs about 3 times as fast. I might change the engine to V6 when joining this part to the front half.

I like how functional this thing is. Adjustable ride height in a rather small car, and steering on these swingarms, those are functions I wouldn't even expect in larger models. Especially that steering system seems super ingenious. (I get Batman Tumbler vibes from it) I also like how the differential is nearly in the center of the car, allowing you to put the engine between the rear wheels. That's some smart space usage. The seat position betwen te front swingarms seems the most sensible place. About the bodywork, there's not so much yet to say. I'm not a fan of the large black side panels, but I lke the use of hoses for a sort of "rollcage" around the seat and steering wheel. But, as I'm looking at the photos, it came to me that your color combo of red + dark azure + orange, seems very striking to me. I'd hate to see it covered by a rather "mainstream" black-red body. But I don't know if you have enough parts in the other colors to use it here. Also, maybe, as you called your car "futuristic" (which I think is very accurate) you could go for a more "minimalistic" bodywork, it would be kind of a shame to hide all these mechanics. The blue arms for the wheels could be "legs" of some kind of "futuristic spider" or something, so I think it'd be a shame if the bodywork went the "normal car" route. (That said, I don't know what's allowed in the contest. You should ask @Jim.)

I see you have found a challenge that's fit for your building level :D With all the round shapes and a-symmetry, this will surely become interesting. Even if disqualified because of the width, it will still be a great entry. It's a bit hard to judge without the wheels though. I'd like to see a quick sketch with a simple frame tacked on with where the wheels will be (how high and such). Also, I'm not sure how you want to balance studless vs. studded, but right now the studded light-gray front is slightly out-of-style. Maybe you can use the Technic macaroni pieces for that. Also, on the reference, the front is slightly overhanging, while yours is perfectly vertical. With axles it may be easier to add the slight angle. Also the reference photo you showed, seems to suggest the sides of the car bend slightly inwards a the front and rear ends (similar to the recently-announced Fiat 500 official set). It seems that your model is slightly too "square" (when seen from above). Same from the side-view, the mdidle seems to be taller than the front and rear ends, but in your model the top seems to be "flat". But I'm not sure if anything can be done about that. I think flex axles (and angle connectors) will be very important in this design, and personally I'd suggest experimenting with more flex axles to suggest curves instead of panels, because maybe for this car, even panels are too "rectangular". Just thinking out loud here, no idea whether it would even work. It's always easy to criticize :)

I think you have very good panel usage. My favorite detail is the usage of the "old" small white panels at the back, above the rear wheels. Also the panels you used for the front wheel fenders are a nice find, even though you're probably not the first to use those panels for that. I think the colors work rather well, also with the light gray. But I wouldn't use the dark gray headrests though. That's maybe just one color too many. Maybe you can try full red seats? Another suggestion but I don't know if it's possible, but slightly inclined seats? With the seats completely vertical, it does look a bit "square", I think if the seats are slightly at an angle, the design may "flow" better. It does sit rather tall though (maybe you could experiment with lowering the front fenders?) but this is probably needed to fit the rear suspensoin setup with the engine and all the gearing. Your solution looks ingeniious and also quite sturdy.

The thought crossed my mind, but I would expect this would ruin rigidity and would have a huge ugly thing protruding in the back, so I dismissed that idea. But I gave it another shot today and I think I have found a nice solution that is much more compact, even though it's indeed less rigid. No pictures right now because no daylight, but will take pictures tomorrow. Thanks for the suggestion! :D The next challenge will now be to fit the new rear end to the existing chassis. (Because I like the previous chassis for it's simplicity and relative strength) I think I mis-renamed the file by accident on my computer a while back while sorting files. Wow, thanks for finding the correct car! (I renamed the topic.) This helps a lot because I can now find other angles. Also, maybe, because of the more compact rear suspension, I might actually fit in a V6 using the standard cylinder parts. :D

I love how, after all those years of Technic cars on Eurobricks, this thing manages to be totally different. It's totally not how I would do it, it's wicked, it's a very daring build style. The result will not be to everyone's taste, but it's highly original and novel, and I love that. Great job :D It does look a bit like it's your take on a Batmobile design proposal :D As this is the Technic forum though, I'd like to see a bit of the inside. Do you have a bottom view? Or a view with the roof/windscreen removed? What's inside? I'm just curious how you made the chassis, and how you connected all those body parts at weird angles, and how all the wiring is done for the lights. What functions does it have, besides motorized driving/steering and lights? Is there suspension? Is there a fake engine? Are there doors that open?

I really love this design. Very good use of the panels. I like the inverted 3x13 panels on the sides. It looks a bit like a car from a futuristic video game. Is it weird to get a Carmageddon vibe from this? Also it's rather functional! Cool that you managed to put a gearbox in and I really like your floating-diff rear-suspension design. My only very tiny gripe would be that the mirrors stand quite tall. I'd put them 1 stud lower. That's all :D Also the orange color is really popping out, very striking. Love it (also the blue engine details) :)

So, let me join the fun :D I want to have at least the following functions: front suspension rear suspension front steering rear drive - fake engine All of those are working in the above WIP, but I probably won't have any HOG for the steering - just the steering wheel. For my entry I'm taking inspiration from this: the filename says it's a Jaguar XJR19, which I'm not sure is even correct as I couldn't find other pictures of the same car. I won't be using green though, I don't have a good variety of small parts. Not sure yet which color I'll do instead. Maybe yellow, since that would give me axles to work with. Because front suspension, steering, seat, engine, rear suspension and rear wing are all in a row behind one another, my model is rather long. In fact, it's somewhere between 40.9 and 41.1 studs long (hard to measure exactly), so I'm not sure it's even a valid entry right now... I'd like to make it shorter (i.e. move the rear axle forward), not only for the competition, but also to match the reference better. Problem is, I don't know how. The rear suspension with the ball joint takes a lot of space, but I see no way to make it shorter. I already saved space by leaving out the 1x3x5 trapezium-shaped engine connector block and using "only" 4 cylinders. Also, the rear suspension and drive are working quite well now. But ideas to make it shorter are welcome! I could place the engine on the suspended part, but somehow I don't like that solution. So yeah, the result will probably be that I keep this chassis layout (and hence, keep the somewhat out-of-proportion length), postpone working on this problem, and just continue working on other parts of the car. Replies are welcome :D

Good to see 49.5 tires being allowed. I thought about proposing it, but I didn't want to be the one opening the can of worms (for once). I see many people have started already, and lots of really graet stuff comes about really quickly. I should really join the fun, but I'm building something else that may be interesting. But I'll come up with something :)

I'm slightly surprised by the critiques on the looks. I think it looks quite good, given the theme and its limitations. But I'm not a car fanatic, I don't care if it's an exact replica, as long as it's recognizable. As totally not knowledgeable in cars, I think it's close enough to recognize what type of car this represents, and whether it's a Charger, I don't really care. This is Technic, this is about functions. I do hope that for 1000 parts, there's more than steering, front suspension, fake engine and wheelie bar. I think there should be rear suspension at least. In any case, I probably won't buy it - there's too little new parts for me and black is not a color I'm running short of, and I'll probably that the 11x15 frame elsewhere. But yes, I agree the front wheels are way too wide and I'm waiting for years for TLC to produce thinner car or truck tyres so we don't have to use 64x20 tyres for everything. I just don't get why tyres are so wide. Why is this, at all?

Seconded - 8043 is a super interesting model. Not too huge, but has a load of stuff happening inside, and very little unused space. Six (!) motorized functions. A joy to build. I also agree on 42043, even though I don't even own that. Besides pneumatics you also learn a lot about suspension. It's as far as I know the only 8-wheeled set with full suspension, and both front axles are steering. Another gem is 8258, the crane truck. The innards are a bit messy but it's great to see how all the crane functions are driven, and how frames are used to add structural rigidity to a long model. For newer sets I don't really know. I'm not much of a Technic set buyer anymore since I already have most of the parts. Most recent set was the Chiron, because of the color, the gearbox and the fact I didn't own any 1:8 cars so was curious how that was built. But the chassis has a lot of redundancy and the marriage produces a structural weakspot, and the gearbox is about the least educational ever because it's such a mess. Another, somewhat older, set I want to mention is 8448. I find it better than 8880 because the suspension is much softer and actually works, it's more part-efficient/optimized (not a single part is redundant, at least in the chassis), it has a modular buildup (which is very educational), and it has wing doors using damped springs. As a bonus, can put the fake engine either front or rear. But I predict that this set is very hard to find. Also, the wheels are very specialized and may not be everyone's taste. Same for the very open bodywork. It's great for showing the innards and keeping the weight down, but it's not what we're used to today.

Sorry for quoting the picture, but for me a very promising section of this particular picture is the dark-gray frame corner at the far right bottom. Comparing to the other parts, it really looks dark-gray, which is a non-existing color for frames right now. I see no particular reason to introduce that color for frames, because we have light-gray and black for 5x7 and black for 7x11. UNLESS, of course, if it's the 11x15 frame, which only exists in medium azure. Also, assuming the chassis is symmetrical and the light-gray cross 1x2 blocks left and right are 7 studs wide, implies the frame is 11 wide. The black beam that forms the wheelie stand is below the frame and we see from other pictures it's probably an 11L beam, this means the frame needs to have this space there, and so, cannot be a 7x11 frame sideways. That would intersect this 11L beam. So here's my prediction. I think this set has the 11x15 frame in dark gray.

You should drive the thing the other way, turning the slow side, gearing up one billion times and see what happens when the fast side is doing 1 billion rpm.