Erik Leppen

For how long was the roller coaster on your wish list of sets to make? And what considerations and criteria have led to the track system we see in the various sets?

I think in this respect, a nice and very simple question to ask would be "Which function of the Lego Technic Bugatti model are you (the designers) most proud of to have achieved?". Can you add that to your list @Jim?

That's pretty strange. I strongly suspect that either the parts you get are actually different from the parts I get, or the climate conditions are different. Does the place you live have any particular climate characteristics? Like humidity, temperature etc.? Also, maybe someone else can confirm or reject this, but do sets sold in different countries come from different factories? That said though, I have bought only 3 or so Technic sets since 2014. But I didn't notice anything strange there.

After how many uses? I mean, I have a few cracked "bush" ends of parts (especially 1x2, 1x3 and 2x2 crossblocks, but normal bushes too), but not 80%. On actual bush parts, I have the idea that red ones are slightly better, but this may just be an idea. They can also just be newer on average than the gray ones in my collection. The difference is not so noticable for me that I consider actual differences in the parts. If it's on a common $0.02 part, like a gray bush, or one I have too many of anyway, such as a black 1x2 crossblock, I just throw it away. I do not want to get annoyed by something so cheap. But I do also have a few of those 3L bush pins in yellow that are cracked (from 8421, I think, so ~12 years old), which are rarer so I keep them for as long as they are usable, but most of them have cracked and sit really loose on axles. The axles don't have the freedom to rotate, but if it's not locked it just slides out. The problem for me is not so bad on U-joints. But I don't really use those very often, and I sold all my 4L U-joints so I only have the newer 3L version. I have the same problem with thin beams by the way. 1x2x0.5 beams are particularly bad. In my case, especially black ones, but these are probably the oldest I have in my collection. So yeah. I stil think it's a design fault. If the bush had half the clutch power, it would work just as well, but the deformation would also be halved, so it would last longer. Edit: but oh well. Who uses a bush these days. Most axles have stops these days, and we have 1L "bush with round hole" parts to use as axle fillers now.

Not sure why you're asking me for photo tips, I don't know much about photography as a discipline, and I think many people here on the forums have much greater knowledge of that. All I can say is, please, let that daylight come in! Why are all the curtains (or how are they called) closed? Open them! If there's one thing you really have to have for good pictures, it's light. But to answer your question what I do for pictures: well, firstly, the walls and desk in my room are white and the floor is light too. I just have a very light room, which helps a lot. It means most of the light coming in is reflected into all kinds of directions. Then, I clear the part of the table next to the window (maximum-daylight part of the room), so that everything is out of the way so the background is plain and doesn't detract. Also, I prefer not making pictures in the evening, I rather wait for the next day. I just use a Samsung tablet to shoot the pics, and I do no editing (except cutting away empty space), so no rocket science there :) (And yes, I really like that you take the time to explain what you do. That's what makes it interesting, IMO)

I'm not so sure about the Porsche wheel arches, and the closed body, to be honest. I think the whole thing looks too boxy. It looks a bit like a bus even. I don't say that to make fun of it, but that thought crossed my mind, sorry. I think the problem is that you built everything closed, while in reality these cranes are more bare-bones (at least that's how I remember them). My advie would be to avoid build a body around your frame, and instead using the showing parts of the frame itself to be the body, by simply doing the outermost beams of the frame in orange instead of black. Gears can show, that's no problem. You don't hav eto cover everything up - that cover over the whole back and rear makes it too bulky IMO. Gears and other technical parts are less of an eyesore on a colored model. On a black model, they stand out more. So my suggestion would be to spend less parts on a separate body, but instead replace some structural parts to orange so that it becomes the body. Your crane would become "slimmer" in a way. That all said, I think I'm just personally not fond of orange-black. Orange is a very intense color and I think it creates too much contrast with black. I'd prefer mostly orange, with black as an accent color, or adding something like gray or dark-gray as a third color. (It also blends well with the LAs, which you have 8 of). But of course, this is easy to say for me - I don't know your collection, and color advice to people with smaller collections is always hard. (And yes, I think the photo quiality is also to blame... but I can't help you on this - maybe someone with actual knowledge on photography can give you some tips?) Personally I think I would go with wheel arches made with 4x6 bent beams in dark-gray with a the outermost edge orange, and between the wheels I'd add only as little bodywork as needed to give it a bit of color. For example, using red axles (if you want to add red as a color besides orange, that is). That's one thing I'd try if it were my own model. It may be a very bad idea though...

Much better with the larger wheels. Also, I really like that interior, and that gearbox seems like it has been a nightmare to design and test. I like how the front half of the car looks fairly normal, like nothing is going on really, but then when you see the back half it's basically nothing but one big chunk of gears. Especially the underside photo shows that. Wicked. Looking forward to see more of this, curious how you will be doing the doors and bodywork.

I've been following this topic with great interest, because this is basically the set I wanted TLC to make for years. Still though, I might not get it, as I have nowhere to put it! (and €300+ on a single set feels hard to justify) I would love to build it one day though. Personaly I think it ended up perfect. I like the use of guide wheels, because I think it's the best solution for the given problem. There are real roller coasters with curved lift hills, I suspect TLC drew inspiration from those (Iike the one @DragonKhan has linked to a few posts above). I see only 2 ways they could have got rid of the wheels, and they both have problems: adding a small "pre-drop" directly after the lift hill (using the 16-stud-long 3-stud-height-difference "vertical S bend" piece) Introduce sloped curves, and use one downwards sloped curve after the lift hill instead of the normal curve Adding a pre-drop would have made the coaster another 16 studs longer, which would really be too much. The second option would require new track pieces (a downwards-bending curve) and I don't think the train could run over such a thing. Also, both options would lose them 3 studs of height, and for scaled coaster models, potential energy is a scarce commodity you can beter use to your maximum advantage. So all in all, I think the current method is the best possible way to keep the model compact and working. Also, I think the guide wheels add some interesting technical functionality, which I like :) (It would have been even greater if it were possible to add those wheels beneath the track, rather than on the side. But the diagonal bracing of the track is in the way :( ) One thing I pity a bit is that the layout has only rightwards curves. A horizontal S-bend piece would be cool, but doing a good layout with them would have been harder. I think the current layout is the best possible within the given size. What I really like about the set is that it looks like a super cool coaster, because of that impressive first drop and the tall curve following it. Banked curves would have been cool, but simply not possible within TLC constraints (easy to build, etc.). The second half of the layout looks a bit bland, but I don think much more is possible within the given size. I like how there's track going through the support structure. Does it have headchoppers? I think the color choice is brilliant. The red track really stands out. What I like less is the 2 x 2 round plates in the supports are gray. Why not white? This is an Expert set... Also, something in me says this set could have benefited greatly from a 2 x 2 x N round brick... (for a suitable value of N). Anyhow, I think it's a great set, and could end up as a real icon for years to come. I'm also curious to see what AFOLs will do with the track pieces.

It's hard to give tips on bodywork if you have not started on that part of the build yet, but personally I'd start with the wheel arches. That's tjhe part that will need to "fit" around the wheels without touching them, so if you do them first you know how you will be able to fill the rest. As for color: personally I find that lots of colors go really nicely with dark gray, so you could opt for dark gray as a "filler" color. Maybe do the wheel arches with dark gray beams (coated with some tiles maybe) and then use your orange/black/white combo idea for all the rest. But we can't look in your parts collection to say anything more I'm afraid. Anyhow, that chassis looks very interesting with a lot of cool stuff going on. I like the symmetry it has. I see it has crab steering. Cool (even though it's just motors that do it, which is technically a bit simple). Also, good to see suspension, but the travel seems a bit limited. Have you considered using the long springs to get more travel? Those outrigers with 8 LAs look pretty beefy. Isn't the motor struggling to drive all that? Also, do you have the ring gears from the BWE (42055) set? You might need that with such a large model, just to keep the superstructure in balance. Anyhow, it's going to be an interesting model for sure. What's gonna be interesting in your case is how it will compare to the upcoming 42082 set, which is the same type of crane in the same scale (even though yours looks huge. I wonder whether the set will be as big as this).

Wow, that's good to know! That's quite something! How could I work for years with this program and not know this? (I'm sure I read somewhere on a tutorial page or something that it couldn't be changed. And then to think that the control to do it is so simple. Thank you! (your username suits you well) :D I immediately changed the 16 base colors to my liking :) I don't use the LDview part list export that often anymore. I found out recently you could import LDraw models into BrickStock, which works great (I just found out today you can import Brickstock files into Bricklink wanted lists, and with the Buy All feature from Bricklink this means the route from creating a model to buying all the parts needed is now conveniently short :D

I have no idea how the steering mode switcher works, but it's one of the cooler functions of this thing. Which has a lot of cool stuff going on. I actually like the red/yellow axles. They add a touch of colour, and white-yellow-red works quite well. I do notice on the photo that the right two outriggers have their extender worms attached differently than the left two outriggers. Is that needed to reverse the direction? Anyhow, great job so far. That said though... the undercarriage is the easy part. The superstructure and boom will be harder, especially with this monster :)

Do you have a photo or two of the front suspension? The number and type of springs isn't everything, the actual geometry matters too. My base rule-of-thumb is, the larger the suspension travel, the lower the weight a given spring can support, and the ratio of those is approximately the same. So, if the geometry is changed to halve the suspension travel, then one spring could carry double the weight it does now. It's not an exact rule, a lot depends on the angles of the spring and attachment points and how they change over the range of movement, but it's a workable simple rule. Personally for supercars I try to keep the travel low (only around 1 stud), for various reasons: I can support more weight per spring I can do with smaller wheel arches The front of the car doesn't touch the ground so easily Your rear suspension seems to have 2.5 stud travel, which is quite a lot. Suspensions in actual sets usually have quite long range too (for my taste). I don't know about the Porsche (which, given the use of panels on your car, you probably own) but 8070 was also about 2 studs I believe. (42039 front suspension had quite short travel.) The panel usage seems quite agressive! Nice! But it looks like the car is pretty wide. But that may be me though. I thought 27 or 29 studs was about good for these wheels, but I could be wrong.

I really like this car. I think the all-black color scheme works very well here. It adds a sense of pureness, seriousness. But it's good that the internals are gray, for contrast. In the side view, it looks as if the roof is a tad too far backwards for me - I would personally make the hood slightly shorter I think. That would make it look more like a regular car. But this is just a feeling. Also, I think the spoiler is a bit large in comparison. But as your car is not replicating an existing car, you're basically free to shape as you like, and I think you did really well. Great panel usage. And the curved panels at the roof work really well here. Smart part usage for the 9L links on the windscreen. I also really like the front, with all the angles. Too bad you needed unofficial part usage for the front suspension. My purism-oriented mind doesn't like that :) I can't identify the part you used for the sides of the rear window. It looks like a pneumatic tube, but thicker. What is it?

Speaking of that roller coaster set (which is great, by the way)... it is planned for May 15 for VIP members and June 1 for the general public, and I believe the Chiron has a similar schedule. As we have already had the official announcement for the roller coaster, I personally expect any announcement for the Chiron to be imminent.

What us the role of the linkage with the wedge belt wheels, 6L links and ball joint parts? What does that linkage do?

I assume you mean scaler.sariel.pl? Cool, I didn't know about this tool, it looks super handy! Thanks for sharing :) (and thanks @Sariel for making it)

Given the size of the wheels, the axle is too wide, yes. What scale are you after? Do you have any info on the size of the real car? It can help tremendously if at least you know length of the car width of the car height of the car size of the wheels (radius/diameter) distance between the axles (wheel base) Then, using the Lego wheels and the size of the actual wheels, you can calculate the scale, and using that you can calculate the size in studs to aim for.

If you noticed, the name of the file is "jamieberard_brickstress_bf0". and the first page says "presented by Jamie Berard". If you now google that name, you will find that indeed, this is the name of a Lego designer.

I don't think members can be expected to remember for every member how they like to see the replies to their model. I think it's very simple. People let know in their replies what they find important. If someone makes a reply about realism or whatever other aspect you don't find so interesting, you can just say "thanks for the comment, but if I did that, playability would suffer and I prefer a playable version over a realistic version". You don't have to cater to every reply - you create your model as you wish, people tell their views on it as they wish, you pick out the comments you find useful and disregard the rest. I don't think people should have to be careful and only tell you what you want to hear. Of course, you can ask readers to focus on specific aspects if you want. But people aren't obliged to follow this, IMO. And, of course, clarify your goals when you start your topic, so people can understand what design preferences you followed that lead to your model. But that was exactly what you did, which is good :) Which gives exactly the biased viewpoint I'm against. If praise is good and critique is bad, then what's the point? I think everyone is allowed to say what they like about a model, and what they like less about a model, provided they are constructive. (And if people bash a model in non-constructive ways, it's probably against forum rules and you can report them.) I don't. I'm stricter for sets. The reason: sets are designed by people as their jobs, who are paid good money for designing sets all day. If any model should be (near-)perfect, it's an official set produced in many thousands of copies that customers are expected to pay big money for. If a MOC has a flaw, it's one person who missed something, and nothing is lost. If a set has a flaw, it's because a whole carefully set-up design-process of the billion-dollar toy company we all like, didn't catch it. I find that deserves critique. Also, it's often said that sets are play sets. I know. But if that's the philosophy of the designers, then I disagree with the designers. I don't see Technic as a play theme. If any Lego theme is not a play theme, it's Technic. It's a build theme (to me), so the build must be interesting (to me), and if the build is boring, the set is bad (to me). 42056, 42064 and 42077 all suffer from this, IMO (42070 doesn't, by the way). Also, we as AFOLs are also customers of TLC (albeit far fewer in number than children) so I feel we are allowed to express our opinions. Which I find a shame, really. I find WIP topics the most interesting topics there are, because they don't only show a model, but also how it came to be. For me, a large part of Technic is the process that leads to a model. A Technic model is just as much about all the failed try-outs that lead to it, as it's about the one success. Then I'm curious what forums you have been involved in, because I see this in all kinds of communities I've been. (drawing, pixel art, music creation, game programming, rollercoaster design). There's always people assuming creators do their best and show their work to get feedback, and feedback-givers focusing on details the creator might have missed.

Well, if no one cared, no one would have posted. Apparently, there are people who care. If you don't care, that's your right of course, so disregard that comment (whether it's your own MOC or not), but don't expect of others that they shouldn't care either (I know you don't say that, so please don't see this as critique on you). I would be really happy if people pointed things like that out for my models. It means they took the time to check out my model in detail (and with different eyes than my own) and write feedback - which is quite an honor in itself - and give me the opportunity to learn some new things. I think it's great if people dare to critique a model everyone else praises. I can't stand the herd mentality of 100 people posting "wow" and "HoF" and little else, falsely insinuating a model is perfect and can't be improved. Also, (I know what model you're talking about) - the model is great, but in a sea of many great models this is not "exceptional" in the literal sense of the word - being great is not an exception here, because many great builders have gathered and made each other even greater through feedback and motivation.

It's finished when I lose interest. If that happens, I stop and take it apart, whether it's actually completed or not. If it happens to be a complete model, I can post it; if not, noone will know about it. And I might pick up the same idea later, sometimes years later. I still have some ideas that I never fully realized that I want to do some day.

Interesting, Bublehead. I have not long ago argued against the opposite - that I find that there is too much critiqueless praise on MOCs (and some sets). Don't get me wrong - a LOT of really good models are built, but nothing is perfect and there's always ways to improve. I'm not sure that's the reason. I think we have become so critical because we have years of experience and are hence very good builders, and this is partly because we received such critiques from other builders. I am still of the opinion that receiving detailed, specific feedback on any piece of work can be a tremendous learning aid when trying to improve your skills on that type of work. This doesn't hold only for Lego building, but also for music, drawing, programming, SimCity city building or any other creative outlet. Also, if someone posts their model, I assume that they did their best on it. That is, that every self-critique they might have had, they already used before posting it. So I assume that if someone posts anything, it's as good as they can do it. Otherwise they'd improve it, right? So that's why I feel jusitified to give my view on it - any critique I can see is something the builder didn't think of (or sees differently) otherwise he/she would already have processed it. So I see this critique as the life-blood of a learning community. I hope it stays this way. To be clear - with "critique" I don't mean only negative points. It's just as valuable to point to specific highlights on a model. Where by "specific" I don't mean "Wow, this is great" (althought it can't hurt to say that too, to praise the work that went into a model and the persistence needed to finish it). Specific is "I like the way you did [X] because [Y]". Or, speaking for myself, I want critique on my models. That's why I post them. I don't post them to show the world how good I am. I don't care how good other people think I am. I want to learn to become better, because that's what the hobby is about for me. Plus, I really hate bragging. Simple as that. Show, don't tell. If you're good, people will notice.

The only suggestion I would have is to add a bit of color. It looks a bit like a big black box, which I think is a waste, because it looks like a nice truck, but it's hard to see.

I assume the molds for them are gone. So if they would produce new figures, they'd have to acquire new molds, which are very expensive. So doing a "test run" would probably be almost as expensive as doing a full production run. Unfortunately. As the Technic designers don't want to pin themselves to a single scale, I don't think Technic-specific figures will return in any near future.

Will you guys be doing a full studless body, or can there be studded parts added for detailing? I really like the first setup for the body. Because I like thinking along, maybe I had a little suggestion, but I can't see if it's possible. What if you replace the 3x11 red panel and the two 13L beams (which are forming a 5x13 rectangle) with a 5x11 panel, leaving the frontmost two studs out. Then, the front of the panel lines up with the front of the 1x5 half beams and 2x5 panels. If, then, you push 1/2 pins in the front-facing holes of the 5x11 panel, you can add a curve using curved slopes or cheese slopes. Also, was it planned to have some kind of grille at the front bottom center, below the red "trapezium" with the #5 angle connectors? If it were my model, I'd add some black 1x2 grille tiles there. The headlights may become pretty small. What would happen if you would replace the red 1x3 tooth pieces with trans-clear ones, to form the innermost part of the headlights? Then, together with whatever comes in the gap, you would get more sizable headlights. ...but maybe I shouldn't go into details before the whole body is sketched out first... Maybe things need to be moved afterwards. Has anyone calculated yet what the roof height will be?