DLuders

Hmmm, the Lego Technic 8265 Front Loader (1,061 Parts, 2009) vs. 8043-2 (B-Model) of the Motorized Excavator set (1,123 Parts, 2010): I would get the 8043 to make the Tracked Loader Excavator, which measures over 18" (45 cm) long.

On his Brickshelf gallery, Hungarian AFOL mbmc137/ 1hengeresVmotor posted 20 pictures and this of his Lego Technic Mini Trial Truck -- a GAZ 4x4. He wrote, "This is one of my most succesful TTs, light and strong compare to the size. Driven by two Xl motor. The weak point is the front U-joint drive, but not soo wrong. Comments to - kopaszkis@freemail.hu ." The model looks like a GAZ-66 (a Russian vehicle from the 1960s). It is tethered, but can climb some STEEP rocks.

Recommend that Crowkillers and Anio communicate in private about their disagreements. This conversation is getting too critical and personal. The Eurobricks Frontpage banner says we're supposed to be "Uniting LEGO Fans Around the World". As the saying goes, one should "Praise in public, and criticize in private."

Your vehicles are too small for Power Functions to fit. However, you could look through the BrickGun website for ideas. They offer an Instruction CD.

Steven Marshall added three more "cutaway" views on his Flickr photoset:

By coincidence, "jwiger" just posted this on "Comparing LEGO large pneumatic cylinder, first generation Linear Actuator, and a new mini-LA.P.S. When turned slowly by hand, the mini-LA was pushing a little over 2.0 kg. The faster you spin it the less force it will apply." This test MAY help answer the question, "Which is better -- Lego Pneumatics or Linear Actuators?"

AlessandroSolbiati posted this on "How to put out a fire with LEGO Technic 8052 & 8047":

On his Brickshelf gallery, "Barman" has an entire page of possible Lego Technic Parts that could be created someday. He has many "Technic elements I have designed for fun. I had a lot of comments so far. If you want tot reacted sent your comment to barebos@hotmail.com." He anticipated fairly well the new piece featured on the top of the boom of the new 8067 Mini Mobile Crane/ Tow Truck: "01_axle_joiner_perpendicular_double_split_1_hole": Which of these other desirable pieces below do you think The Lego Group (TLG) will manufacture someday? Since new Lego part molds cost US$100,000 to create (see this Eurobricks post for proof), TLG isn't going to introduce new parts without being able to use them in multiple sets. Here are SOME of Barman's ideas -- do you like them and would you use them?/b][ color="#FF0000"]"03_drivingaxle":[/color] "13_extension_tube_5L": "17_axle_joiner_perpendicular_1_x_2_x_2": "26_gear_wheel_parts2":

On his Brickshelf gallery, grohl/ grohl666 has posted 138 photo-sequence images of his "Alternative model of 8052 Container truck with working steering, towing arm, outriggers, opening doors and bonnet and tilting towing fixture." He also provided the URL for his .

On MOCpages, GYUTA K recently posted his Lego T1H1 UN-version "White Tiger, Auto-Loading RC TANK. This tank had been made in August 2010, but I couldn't post it because it was expected to take part the contest of Brickinside which the largest LEGO commnity in Korea. The participants of the contest are not allowed to reveal theirs ID. Anyway the contest is over, I posted this on MOCpages. There was some wonderful creations of LEGO RC tank before. But my White Tiger has an unique function, Auto-loading and firing. It can hold 4 rounds and auto-loads the shell and fire it through the gun." The shows it well. All of the images below appear in large format on Gyuta's Brickshelf gallery.

Yes, the 8053-2 ("B Model") looks interesting:

Thanks, JunkstyleGio, for the movie!

Here are Lego Batteries:

Welcome to Eurobricks, ClintonWBlackmore! Your is quite intriguing: "This video shows off Enchanting version 0.0.4, which can be used to program LEGO Mindstorms NXT robots in a Scratch-like environment." "What Is Enchanting? -- Enchanting is an open-source graphical programming environment for children to program their LEGO Mindstorms NXT robots(and, in the future, possibly other devices.) Enchanting is based on Scratch from the MIT Media Laboratory. Scratch is an excellent tool for empowering children to program, and familiarity with it will be very valuable for anyone using Enchanting. See the Vision For Enchanting."

@ Grohl: For those (like me) who want to build your "Beast v2" model, could you describe the differences between Version 1 and Version 2 on your Brickshelf folder? There are 12 step-by-step, photo-sequence Building Instructions for Version 1, but it is not clear what the INTERNAL differences are. Version 2's video shows that it is VERY FAST and nimble, but how is it built inside differently than v1? I can see that the PF Receiver is in a different spot, but is there more? "THE BEAST" VERSION 1: * * * "THE BEAST" VERSION 2:

On the Powerfunctions.Lego.com website, there is a "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQ) page. As pictured below, there is excess capacity on the one Power Functions (PF) Receiver shown for other stuff. The FAQ #2 answer says, "As a rule of thumb, you can drive 2 Power Functions XL-Motors, 3 Power Functions Train Motors or 4 Power Functions M-Motors at the same time from one Power Functions Battery Box. If you wish to run a combination of motors, you can e.g. have 1 XL and 2 M running together. The XL-Motor requires about twice as much power as the M-Motor. The Battery Boxes and the IR Receiver have overload protection, so attempting to drive too many motors will not damage anything. The power a motor consumes depends on what function the motor is performing. Motors will operate best when driving a small load." FAQ #12 answer: "Overload protection is activated when too much power is consumed from either a Power Functions Battery Box or the IR Receiver. This can happen when a motor is blocked or when too many motors are running at the same time. If overload protection is activated, the Battery Box or the IR Receiver will cut off power to the output until power consumption has dropped under the allowed value. To regain power, unblock the motor or disconnect motors from the output – then turn the Battery Box OFF and ON again. Under overload protection, the green light on the Power Functions Battery Box will still be ON."

From this Eurobricks post, here is Rien/Buffalo's diagram for charging the 11.1V LiPo battery pack. Tobbe Arnesson advises that "This is important: You'll need a charger that's intended for the LiPo battery, preferably one with load balancing that can charge the individual cells in the battery pack separately."

Rien, I personally agree with you -- a Lego Technic MOC built with a non-Lego battery box (or no battery box) is still a Lego model. The argument by the so-called "Lego purists" (that one MUST use 100%-Lego parts) is absurd, when one considers that many REAL CARS don't have their original dealer-provided batteries in them. I've been to Lego shows, and they don't even judge MOCs whether or not they are battery-powered, plugged into an AC wall outlet, etc. There are no "bonus points" awarded for having 100%-Lego parts. I think creativity is stifled by being LIMITED to using stock Lego battery boxes. Rien, you have "pushed the envelope" by using the 11.1V LiPo battery pack for GREATER PERFORMANCE. It's the same thing one would do in their real car, by replacing their cheapo dealer-provided battery with another one with more CRANKING AMPS.

On his Brickshelf gallery, vkyppwnsall (Victor Kojenov) posted two different "Lowrider" cars built for LowLUG's Allround Car Competition (ACC). They are his "First models made for ACC. Made in two versions - yellow and black. Yellow version features lights and is powered by normal battery box. Black version does not have lights and is powered by 8878 rechargeable battery." The Yellow Version has 16 BIG pictures and "Features lights, but is powered by a normal battery box. Therefore, the car is heavier": The Black Version has 17 BIG pictures and has "No lights, but is powered by the 8878 rechargeable battery and therefore lighter":

On his Flickr photostream, Lego911 posted 21 pictures of his Lego 1955 Chevrolet Cameo pickup truck. He wrote, "The 1955 Chevrolet Cameo was the first pickup truck to merge luxury passenger car and pickup design. Featuring full styled sides along the load box, it was a forerunner to the 'styled side' series from GM and its competitors. The load box featured the standard box insert from the other Chev commercial series, and added the styled side in fibreglass, a low tooling cost solution, from from the supplier of the Corvette bodies (Molded Fiberglass Products Company). The Cameo also featured six and Vee-eight cylinder engines of up to 265 cid but with lower power than the Passenger cars. The Cameo, as the premium offereing from Chevrolet Truck division, was well dressed in large chrome bumpers, grille and other trimings. The stylist was none other than Chuck Jordan who later became Vice President of Design. The single colour scheme for 1955 was white body, with red detailing in the bed and interior. For 1956 the colour options were expanded, which nonetheless still resulted in significantly fewer sales. As the name suggests, the Cameo only made a brief appearance on Chevrolet's sales list, ceasing at the end of 1958. They now comand a high premium among light truck collectors from this period. This model has been created in Lego miniland scale for Flickr LUGNuts 38th build challenge "By Random Appointment" - where the build model is selected by the group administrators and assigned to builders in the manner of a commission."

Whoa, the Black Devil really looks wicked! I like the color scheme and the rear spoiler. If TLG ever wanted to update their 8880 Supercar, yours would be it:

The 8067-2 (B Model, pictured below) looks interesting. There is a new Technic part at the top of the boom (where the string goes through). I think that Grohl could probably make lots of different creations with these parts (since he has built 27 alternates from the 8271 set)!

You can write the first review and post it on Brickset. Alternatively, you can add your opinion directly to the Shop.Lego.com website, where the 8067 model is averaging "4 Stars" out of 5 (after only two Customer Reviews so far).

This is a nice, compact Flight Simulator to "fly" the "Vic Viper" spaceship in the Gradius video games.

If "cost is no object", then the Rechargeable batteries are "best" but they are expensive. If one is just going to play with their 8043 for a few minutes and then park it on a shelf, then AA Alkaline batteries are "better" because they cost less and do an adequate job for a few minutes of hard play. On the Powerstream.com website, there is a side-by-side discharge test of AA Alkaline batteries. For high-current applications like the Lego 8043 Motorized Excatator, the results are interesting. There is a table which I cannot easily reproduce here, so recommend viewing the website. CODES USED IN THE GRAPH BELOW: Radio Shack Enercell Plus = RS Duracell Coppertop = DC Energizer Titanium = ET Energizer Max = EM Eveready Gold = EG Energizer Lithium = E2 "This test compares the different manufacturer's cells at 2 amps discharge rate. The manufacturer codes are listed in the table above. Note that at 2 Amps discharge rate the Radio Shack (RS) has higher voltage and more amp hours than the Duracell Coppertop (DC)": "At 1 Amp discharge rate the Radio Shack still has some advantage over the Duracell Coppertop": "At 500 mA discharge rate the Radio Shack and Duracell are neck and neck":