Erik Leppen

Actually I think the same thing. I was raging before, true, but actually I think this may be the only set I get (if at all). Pneumatics, green, not too large, and an interesting subject matter. I'd rather have 8 lime parts than 0 ;)

What piece is that? Maybe I was right after all :P

Probably similar to 42055, given the piece count. May be less (small pieces), may be more, we can only guess. Wow, nice find! This makes me wonder if the outriggers extend horizontally at all, or that it's just 8460-style. (sorry for using an ancient set as comparison). The latter would be a massive letdown on such a huge set.

You're totally correct @nerdsforprez. I'd much, much rather see actual roller bearings. But I'm not trying to hold high hopes just from a picture, so I'm trying to find a possible solution with current parts. As soon as reviewers can get their hands on sets and actually find out what's going on, then we can draw conclusions and get all thrilled for innovative design I just don't want to build up unfounded enthousiasm :) In fact, I'd find the fixed ball-joint solution not ideal, because it would create scratches on the ball joints over prolonged use if the crane is not balanced over the turntable.

I was wondering why it was at an angle, @Maaboo35. I thought it would have a reason. A sloppy build would be quite a mistake for a billion dollar company.

Can you please ask the Technic designers why it is that sets in interesting colors seem to deliberately cut back on piece counts in those colors? I have noticed this in many sets, but the new 42080 forest harvester is again a sign of this. Eight lime pieces in the whole set. Why so stingy? (Yes, I know there's green too, which is cool. But why then not just build a green model? Why is it green plus a bunch of other colors?) (Same goes for the forklift and dark-blue by the way, but I haven't counted that yet). I mean, compare with that nice crane 42082. Why can't we have that in dark purple? Just to prove I'm not talking nonsense, here's some other sets also guilty of this: (8,5%): 42059 (stunt truck): 12 out of 142 medium-azure (4,5%): 42063 (BMW bike): 27 out of 603 blue (2,2%): 42064 (ocean explorer): 29 out of 1327 dark-blue (4,7%): 42066 (jet): 54 out of 1151 medium-blue (1,5%): 42069 (extreme adventure): 36 out of 2382 dark-purple (3,0%): 42070 (4x4): 56 out of 1862 dark azure (3,2%): 42065 (tracked racer): 12 out of 370 lime (4,1%): 42048 (go kart): 14 out of 345 orange (2,8%): 42050 (funny car): 18 out of 647 medium azure (3,9%): 42054 (Claas): 77 out of 1976 lime (3,7%): 42036 (street bike): 14 out of 375 medium-blue (5,1%): 42037 (buggy): 25 out of 494 lime and medium blue As a comparison with common colors: (17,3%) 42075 (first responder): 89 out of 513 red (16,8%) 42049 (mine loader): 80 out of 476 yellow (9,9%) 42042 (crawler crane): 139 out of 1400 blue (10,1%) 42056 (Porsche): 274 out of 2704 orange (see, they can do it if they want!) (of course, not counting axles and pins and stuff.) It's cool to get new colors, of course, but how're we supposed to build our own stuff in those cool new colors if there are no sets providing the parts? What I wonder is whether sets are designed with MOCing in mind. If so, this decision to deliberately keep part counts down in nice colors (this is too often to be coincidence, really) actively works against that goal. Maybe to get any chance of an answer, you might want to rephrase the question to what purpose they design their sets for: play with the sets, display the sets, build the sets, or build new things with the pieces, and how it affects their designs. But if you ask a question this generic, you'd probably also get a generic answer, hence carrying little new information... Sorry for the rant, but if you get the chance, this is something I'd really like to know from them.

What I find interesting, is that in the high-res image, if you look under the second axle, it seems like there's a white transverse beam there. At first sight that's just the beam holding the axle, but it seems to be at an angle. The holes don't seem to face completely upward, but about about 15 degrees away. Why is that beam angled? Do I look for a function that just isn't there, or do I misinterpret the image? Anyhow. I think it's an interesting set. Too bad about the clashing colors. I don't mean the greens, I like the combination of green, lime, black and white. It's those red speckles everywhere that I can hardly stand. Why couldn't they just go with gray bushes and black bush-pins? Also, is this me or are the elbow pieces in some kind of dark pearl gray color? Also, too bad the whole set has only 8 lime pieces. Why? Does the color have to be kept rare on purpose? And if the arm is white, then why isn't the whole arm white? Why do there have to be weird dark-gray 5x9 beams and why is the end of the arm black? Pick a color and stick with it, TLC. Personally, I don't like all these system details. They dilute the theme. I hope this is not becoming a trend...

Interesting thought, @mpj. I noticed the connectors sitting at an angle, but couldn't link it to a door function. I think you might just be correct :) (By the way, strange panel usage for the seat.)

I don't count on it. I think they just used Mixel joint pieces or something, attached to the upper section. I think if there would be actual balls, there would be too much slack to prevent them from just falling out. The rail in the 11x11 gearracks is too thin for the balls to "fall" in that. Except if the balls are attached to a separate third ring, but I don't count on that. Personally I think it would have been cool to see 1.8 stud diameter flat round pieces that would fit in the rail, similar to how 1x1 round tiles do, but this might be too specific of a piece to expect.

So we have steering arm bucket tilt moveable counterweight rear axle height adjustment That's 5 functions for 5 knobs. Don't know the exact mapping yet, but 5 function isn't bad. If it has fake engine, that's 6 functions, which is quite good even.

Are you sure the switch is symmetric? The bottom half looks very different than the top half. Could also be the picture, but I do hope it has 2 pinholes, one on each side, rather than just one.

Nice set, but because the main driving force behind the fork is the 14L gear rack, which only has a range of 8 studs, the maximum fork height is only 16 studs - at most. That's only 2x the wheel height. That seems quite limited for a set this size. Or am I missing something?

I think I should head for this topic when doing a new supercar. I can learn from this! What your models shows that other's don't is how a supercar is built up. It's a great educational build. I like that! Good work so far. Curious how you will change the rear axle. I'm not sure what's wrong, is it not strong enough?

Personally I think this is a really ugly model, and function-wise it doesn't seem to hold much new ground either... I see a knob on the side of the arm, near the connection to the base, that drives an axle in the arm going forward. That will probably be for tilting the bucket. I doubt it's linked to anything, since the knob is on the arm and not on the hinge point. The whole body seems to be static - from front axle to the rear end; but maybe the rear axle can move up/down. The other image shows a LA under the arm, but we can't see if that's linked to anything else. At least there's a black 5x7 frame on the rear axle.

LDraw has both. 32209.dat is the old type, called Technic Axle 5.5 with Stop 59426.dat is the new type, called Technic Axle 5.5 with Stop Type 2

Yes, the old ones are actually 5.4. In fact, the old one is 0.9 axle + 0.1 ring + 0.4 cylinder + 4.0 axle, total 5.4 the new one is 0.9 axle + 0.1 ring + 0.4 cylinder + 4.1 axle, total 5.5 The 0.1 difference is equal to the ridges in all pinholes. I think the difference has to do with the fact that if the short end (0.9 long), is inserted into an axlehole (such as an axle joiner), 0.1 length of the axlehole remains unused and it's actually not in system. If you do that with the new one, it's 0.1 too long. But if the old one is inserted into a pinhole (such as a 3L differential), then there is no 0.1 shortage, but it's still 5.4 so the long end is now too short. This might be why the new ones are longer. Edit: by the way, there are also dark-gray old ones (I mean current dark-gray, not old dark-gray).

Personally I hate seeing two topics about the same model. How the model evolved is as important, if not more important, as the result, IMO. This is Technic, it's about the inside as much as the outside.

While we're on the topic of the header background - I don't care whether it stays or is changed to another set (I say, why bother), but the wheel height measurement is a factor 10 off. It says 81.6, which should probably be 8.16, given the other measurements.

I usually don't reply to your topic, @grum64 but I also really enjoy reading through your building journeys. Like Didumos69 I don't know the particular circumstances you're in, but I'm fine with that. It's precisely the fact that the build takes you longer than us mere mortals, that gives you the time to contemplate and think about the build itself, and I notice that I really like all these considerations. For me, it's kind of a new style of review, that covers the building process to an extent that you don't see in other set reviews - those normally focus on the finished model. Also, I like your style of writing and humor, but I can't really say why. I can remember though, that your topic had the subtitle "Where no project is too hard" in its title. Did it? Was there a reason it's gone? Was the 42055 maybe a tad too ambitious?

I also wonder whether it's different for people who let their models assembled for years on end, compared to people (like me) who disassemble everything right away after it's finished and photographed. Except if you use pieces that are already out of production, I don't see any of the parts mentioned to be prone to getting out of production any time soon. I am a bit worried though about the outer axle holes on the 11x11 quarter gear rings, as these are also only half-width and therefore prone to breaking as well, and those are rare and expensive pieces. (That's also why I'm so happy that pneumatic cylinders have only pinholes.) @I_Igor Your question seem to fall a bit in the middle of a discussion, so it might tend to be forgotten a bit. I think what you need really depends on what you're wanting to do. It may be a good idea to create a new topic to ask for help on what you want to achieve. I'm tempted to point you to the existence of 8x8 round tiles with 4 studs in the center: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=6177#T=C, as wel as various qurater-round sloped wedges, such as https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=58846&idColor=59#T=C&C=59, or https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=95188&idColor=59#T=C&C=59, but I have no idea if these are of any use for you.

Not sure what's wrong with Project Supercar X to be honest, it's how it's known by us right now, so why change? But in the end, it's not up to us what you are naming your projects. We're here to give feedback on the build, not on its name :)

Interesting idea. But please bear in mind that if the tracks will be technic fig scaled (which they aren't, even for a wild mouse, but OK, let's assume that) then the truck must technic fig scaled as well. Which is about the scale of the Mack. So your truck will be much smaller than your previous one, if you want to stay in scale. https://rcdb.com/10456.htm#p=38432 This image gives an idea of scale. I know, this is another type of coaster than you are describing, (it's a similar layout, but with rotating cars) so it could be the tracks are wider, but I suspect they are the same track, just different cars. As you can see, the tracks are almost the same width as the middle two people in the car together. That is to say, for a technic-fig sized coaster, Lego's track pieces are too small. (Remember all TLC official sets using the tracks are minifig-scaled) https://rcdb.com/14721.htm#p=86924 I also stumbled on this picture while looking for good scale pictures, which might give you a sense of how the real world has solved the problem of transporting a coaster. I'm afraid that if you would do it like this, it wouldn't be a very exciting Technic model... But I'm sure you have better and cooler ideas of how to "unfold" things.

I see 6 x 8, but I don't see any seams. As far as I know there is no 6 x 8 tile piece. So I'm assuming 1x6 + 6x6 + 1x6. Or it's a new piece.

Because it's a cool feature and it's cool to see cool features in sets, just to see how they pulled that off. I'd rather have a function with slack and play than no function at all. This is all built up from generic plastic prefabricated pieces, we all understand the limitations of the system and it's cool to see what they can achieve with that system. Leaving a function out because it would have slack and play, is lame, in my opinion. By the way, as much as I like the crane, it still doesn't looke like 4000 parts to me. It doesn't seem to be bigger than 42009, which was 2700 parts. Wonder where the other 1300 parts go.

I actually quite like it! There's no unsightly gaps in the bodywork and it seems to all connect together quite well. Pretty good usage of panels at angles to make it a bit less "straight". The roof is also much better now. I like how you used flex axles at the sides to create a rounder look. I do think that when you have the 42000 tyres on, I would personally go for gray rims instead of black, to break the blackness of the wheel area a bit. I think the bottom part of the rear window is a bit "thin" with only a single red flex axle. I think this is because of the black you used for the panels behind. I'm not sure I like that, but I understand from the roof you ran out of red 5x11s. Maybe you can change those two black 5x11s to red too (and the black 7L beams), but maybe you were already planning to do this? But I like the suggeston by @BrickbyBrickTechnic to lengthen the rear window a bit. I think that would improve things indeed. But I think it's quite a nice car already! Well done :)