Erik Leppen

The thing about this though, is that it makes the model look better, without making the model better. So it skewes the perception. In the end, the people at a disadvantage are those who don't do this. If you want the better pictures, without putting people at an advantage (or a disadvantage), I think this could only happen if someone would offer editing the pictures of other people's entries. Then one has the best of both worlds. Then again, as long as it's merely this I can't make too much of a point out of it really ;)

I agree as well - this is a building competition. Not a photo editing competition. I thin kthe rule suggestion by Mbmc is a good one.

First step: find a set from 2005+ that I haven't yet done an alternative model on... Anyhow, cool competition theme. Sounds like a good reason to buy a set :D

Wow, third! Thanks guys, for all the votes. And for the great competition of course. And all those great entries. (And for the cool badge :P) But I have to say, I'm quite baffled by the lack of votes on that lovely roadster. I guess this is really a case of "well, somebody had to come last"..., because it's a great model. But all entries were great.

Instead of giving the answer straight away, I think it's of more help to the topic starter if you would tell how to find the answer, so that next time he/she doesn't have to ask again. The thing is, the inventory of sets is on Bricklink. If you go to Bricklink, then find the Catalog, and then find set 42009, and then find a link that says "View Inv". This shows all parts, and this list also shows all part IDs (linkable to the pages of those parts and their price/availability info.

The more I look at the thing the more I doubt it has any steering at all. I have found no steering links yet, and more importantly, the main picture shows the tracks in a straight position, and I figure they wouldn't do that if the model would feature steering.

How close is close enough? That's the topic question, after all.

You can only do this if a cylinder can support its own weight. Only then will adding a cylinder help anything.

So many great entries, it's hard to pick favorites here. Well done to all! 2: 10 3: 6 1: 4 11: 3 5: 2 6: 1

I do think many people over-sort. I have seen plenty of pictures of endless rows of boxes containing everything sorted into the tinyest detail. I am talking about people sorting #3 axles apart, then #4 axles apart, then #5 axles apart, and about people sorting red 1 x 2 plates apart, then black 1 x 2 plates apart, then gray plates 1 x 2 apart. And I wonder, why do people do that? Can't they tell a red plate from a black one during building, or can't they find an axle #4 if there are axles #3 and #5 in the same box? Sorting is needed to decrease the time spent looking for parts, and to have a general overview of the contents of one's collection. So as long as sorting parts has this effect, then it's useful to do. When sorting further doesn't decrease lookup times or further increases this overview, it has no point (other than the fact that it's relaxing to do, which I find myself as well). Also, sorting pieces in 10 bins that could go in one, means the time looking for bins increases. So my rule of thumb is, split a bin into two only if I have difficulty finding parts in it. Only then will it save time in the long run. Also all bins I use often have no lid - so I lose no time opening and closing them. So I sort the parts according to how often I need them, how long it takes to find them, how long it takes to sort them, how enjoyable they are to sort and the number of bins I need at the same time when building. For example, Technic pins and axles I find personally annoying to sort. Quite recently I lumped all pins and axles in one big box and to be honest, I like it. Sorting takes less time, there is now one bin I always need instead of five bins I almost-always need, and the lookup times for pins and axles hasn't really gone up a lot, thanks to their color coding! In contrast, I also recently separated #15 Technic beams from the box that contained #7 up to #15 straight beams, as that helped me find #7 to #13 beams much quicker.

And black, in the new Tumbler :)

Probably those people who are interested in displaying the model, rather than reusing the parts (and think the model looks better with stickers on). I mean, who doesn't put stickers on Technic sets? If you're interested in the parts, you can just bricklink them so you don't end up with 5000 superfluous pins, right? ;) (In case it's not clear, I'm not being very serious here - I buy sets and I don't put stickers on). But you're making a valid point. I wonder why designers put so many stickers on their models. This wasn't the case ten years ago, at least not in my memory. Are they less capable of producing good models without stickers? If so, why? Are budgets tighter and stickers cheaper? Are customers more demanding and do stickers help?

I like this so much better without the gray roof. It breathes Model Team. Could have been a set. Perfect. And the fact that it's an alternate model makes it even better.

This thing is lovely! So many little details, and a magnificent total image. And a super original idea! What I like most is the fact that you seem to have thought of everything. Stabilizers for the camper unit, rear view mirrors, etc. etc. The driver is not an exact fit, but it's perfect really.

I have built the entire yesterday evening to put the finishing touches to the model, and I am proud to announce that it's finally finished. I'm done! And I'm pretty happy with it. Just in time, because I was getting frustrated by it. Fiddling for half an hour on a part no one will even notice was pretty frustrating. Just today I thought of a neat way to have the outrigger footers done, a solution of a problem that persisted the entire time, so that one's finally solved as well. I measured the dimensions, it's 45 x 15 studs including everything. The carrier is 39 x 12. These are the functions. A pretty decent list, if I say so myself: Four-wheel steering - via knob on the back of the carrier Outriggers - manual Slewing - manual Boom luffing - via LA Boom second stage extension - via knob on boom. Boom third stage extension - manual Hoist - via knob on superstructure Also, per the advice on the previous photos, I decided to look for another spot to take the pictures, and the garden presented itself as a perfect opportunity, where the model's colors look much more vibrant than the attic's floor that's almost exactly the Lego tan color. As you can see I changed the rims to light gray. I experimented with wheel covers, silver 3x3 dishes being the only option I had (the ones from the 10220 VW camper van), but I opted against it because it gave the model a classic look, where I thought a more modern look fits the type of model better. So I went with the lime dots of the prototype. The engine cover doesn't open. Also I still have no doors, as I saw no good way to add them without harming the look of the cabin. Also the shape of the superstructure forced me to remove the Technic frame inside, so there is no vertical bracing for the part that holds the boom, but it's still pretty rigid. I'm quite happy with that as well. I moved the attachement point of the LA one stud upwards to increase the maximum elevation angle of the boom. The part that caused me a lot of frustation is the crane head and the hook. I wanted to use a pulley, but that required the boom end to have a point to attach the string to, and the size of the pulley in the hook meant I couldn't "pack" it for road travel neatly. The current packed position is still not perfect (very little ground clearance) but at least it fits. I managed to hide the hoist behind the La's attachement point, and I could neatly use the off-centeredness of the constructon to put the driving gears for the hoist at the side, within the counterweight. So that's why the knob for that is on top. There "gear on friction pin" that Technic sets use is not present, the system somehow has enough friction by itself. Anyhow, I'm happy. This is already a great competition - otherwise I wouldn't have built this. I might do instructions if I have time.

9. Three-axle compact crane Four-wheel steering - via knob on the back of the carrier Outriggers - manual Slewing - manual Boom luffing - via LA Boom second stage extension - via knob on boom. Boom third stage extension - manual Hoist - via knob on superstructure http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=99393

Why are you only considering the extremes (Monday or Friday)? No one ever talked about Monday. As I said myself, "Both parties" meaning the contestants on one hand who could use the Saturday for the final touches and the photography, the competition leader (you) on the other hand, who could use the Sunday to set up the voting topic. I agree that Monday is a bad idea. I also agree that Sunday is not optimal. That's why I suggested Saturday. You know how people "manage" deadlines, right? Most people "manage" to do most of the stuff right in time, but rarely sooner ;)

Wheels are single-use parts. I'd rather see them invent multi-purpose generic parts, like the recent 3 x 5 "dog bone" beam. So I'm glad they don't spend their limited new moulds budget on wheels.

Well, I think you can't know for sure. I'm sure Lego does research on these things. Afol's wishes are different from children's wishes.

Behind the cab you can see some gray beams including a 3L beam with pin. Behind that you can see ribbed hoses. I presume these are styling for an engine sitting there. Such a car should at the very least have an engine. Suspension was already spotted, so we have three fnctions - engine, suspension, steering. I presume there is a hood that can open to show the engine. Still, I think this is quite poor for 1200 parts. But I stil think it's uiglier than the prelim. The monocoque is too wide for such a car, it looks really boxy. Second, the new panels make the wheel cases very large and this makes the wheels look tiny. Another consequence is the headlight sections which are now too tall I think. They should have kept the old panels. If these were too prone to breaking, they should have made them from the same material as flex axles. I do think the color scheme is an improvement, there is more green and more white, and less black. But the windscreen should have been white - this would already have made the monocoque more streamlined.

I agree with all the sentiment about 42039 having become ugly as heck. The wheels are tiny, I think the model is just too large. Also the monocoque looks like a box and not streamlined at all. The windscreen should have been white, in my opinion. The headlight sections are too tall, probably to accommodate for the new fenders. The old fanders were way better for this model. (But I presume the new fenders are more versatile parts). Also I liked the white longitudinal "fin" that ran from the rear of the monocoque to the rear spoiler. They seem to have ditched that. Oh well. At least it's a great parts pack :)

The superstructure. It's not yet done, I'm not yet happy with some things. Also the cable drum and hook are still missing. I changed the cabin's top and front to light gray because I happened to have the right parts in that color, and changed the windscreen from vertical to slanted. I changed the counterweight from straight to curved, which is closer to reality. On the carrier, I moved the turntable two studs backwards and completed the engine bay. I also moved the spare wheel to where it is on pictures of real cranes of this type. Also, contrary to the model team spirit, there won't be doors... also the carrier could use a bit more lights at the sides. Stuff that needs to be done: front end of the carrier, outrigger footers, some space to store outrigger footers, boom end, winch, hook, controls in the cabin, and general polishing.

By the way, why is the deadline on a Friday? Isn't that the worst possible day of the week to have a deadline for a hobby compo? I mean, most people have more time in the weekends for hobbies. The description in the starting post says "I have the whole Friday to build", but actually I have not, because I, like many people, have to work on Friday, and to take the photographs of the finished model I need daylight, so the last moment I could do that before the deadline is Friday before evening sets in. I'd like to have the deadline on a weekend day for future competitions. I understand it not being Sunday so the host can finish things up the day after, but a Saturday would be the best option for both parties, I think.

Probably not - but it can be much lighter :)

The boom bends because the bottom is compressed and the top is stretched. So if you awnt to minimize the bending, try to minimize the amount that the bottom will compress, and the amount that the top will stretch. If the bottom and top are further apart, the same amount of stretch/compression will result in less bending. So, strengthen the bottom and the top, and keep them at the right distance by vertical bracing of any kind. It doesn't have much use to strengthen the center, as long as the center is there as a spacer for the bottom and the top. By the way - that's also why real crane booms are half-oval shaped - with a round bottom and a flat top. A rounded surface has a better resistance against compression then a straight surface, so that's why it'sround at the bottom, and for tension it doesn't matter, so as much material as possible is put at the top, hence the flat top. Edit: also, a lot of the bending comes from the weight. If you can make your boom lighter, it will bend less already. Maybe you could start designing the last (innermost) section and try to make it really lightweight. Then, design the pre-last section, make sure the last section fits tight in it and keep the combination as light as possible. Using that, work your way to the main section.