trekman

22: 4 17: 2 31: 2 27: 1 23: 1

Now that is one serious RC car. Well done, but I would fear that in a long term setting there is going to be some meltdown somewhere...

I noticed that the sound of the RC motor changed a lot with the variation of pitch. Did the motor actually run at the same RPM? and were the batteries fresh ones each time. These variables do make a difference when you are talking about such small changes in results. I reckon that the motor was under more load in the later tests. You would really need to hook up to a more consistent AC - transformer supply, and also do a test with pitch variations, but just measure the load on the motor. You would need to maintain consistent RPM on all tests to give a fair reading on the scales. (I used to do some work in R&D /stress analysis for an aerospace firm)

I am just curious to know if there was any water which made its way into the tyres. If there was, does that mean that over a prolonged time in the water such a model would eventually sink? Very good model anyway.

"I love it when a plan comes together" Very nice van

Myself and my ten year old son. Sometimes it is good to have a younger perspective. He normally conducts all the field trials of what ever I make. Also my MOCs give him a serious "cool" factor, as these models are usually more awesome than anything that his school friends can put together.

In our current MOC, we have decided to scrap our idea of having outriggers that slide out, in favour of two jacks that are fixed to the truck chassis. For our purposes, we have found this to be much more effective.

I would think you would need to make a bracket to clamp the yellow part of the cylinders to the chassis. This would stop them deflecting when you put down the jacks. For the drilling head, you could make a bracket to strap around the mast, which would allow it to slide up and down - 1/2 liftarms would be thick enough and more discreet. On the whole, a very good MOC. Better than my first attempts.

I think it is not all about the length to which outriggers extend. But it is their effectiveness in providing stability to the vehicle. Some of my best "outriggers" did not extend at all, but provided great support to the vehicle and took the load off the axles. The longer the outrigger, then you face the challenge of minimising the deflection in the outrigger structure.

Those receivers will only work when you power them through the PF battery box. I normally use a Lego railway mains transformer, but you still need to connect it to an empty battery box, and then connect the other receivers on top.

Go ahead and cut the differential down to a 24T clutch. I was tempted to do the same thing a while back. It would expand the possibilities, especially when needing to transmit rotation through a gear, whilst allowing the gear to turn in a different direction.

1. What's the longest you've stayed 'away' from this hobby When I was studying for my GCSE exams (1988/9), my small collection of 8859,8865 and 853 had to be put away. They remained in their boxes until I moved nearer home in 2004. By that stage I had already picked up a few job lots on Ebay, 8479, 8868 and the pneumatic loader to bring into a slightly more modern age. My first new set then was 8275 bulldozer, and have been picking up a new set each Christmas since 2004. 2. How long have you been assembling bricks? Since the age of 6 3. How long do you see yourself carrying on such 'obsession', into the 40/50/60 I'm already in my 40's, and have a 10 year old who is my biggest fan. 4. What brings you back: Memories of old legos, new sets/parts ... I have enough of the main bits now, but new parts, if there are enough in a set, will warrant a complete set, otherwise I'm doing the old brickshelf. 5. Feel free to volunteer any AFOL 'perspective' These AFOL sites, have helped to take away my shame, as up until the invention of the internet, I thought that it was a shameful thing for an adult to "play" with a child's toy. You guys have helped me a lot.

Now that is one smart piece of building. I like the shape, and the colour. The steering is nicely done in so little space. Back in the day, the UK government had the bright idea of having all cars which were towing caravans to be 4WD. Someone mentioned the 4WD Panda, and the legislation was dead in the water.

Stutter is a low battery in the RC transmitter. When the Transmitter is near the receiver module, there is no problem. Actually the rear wheels are in the perfect position, as I had a PDF drawing, which was scaled up to the size of the wheels, and then everything was placed on top of it. It is the most accurately scaled MOC that I have ever built. Thanks for the comments.

I have just taken some video footage of my JCB groundhog. so I thought that some of you might be interested. It is not without its faults, but I had to forsake 4wd because the front differential would have pushed the track width out too far. This is the Groundhog, not a Workmax, and the buggy motors worked well for the trailing arm suspension at the rear. The Workmax version has rear wishbones. The steering wheel works, seats slide, and the cargo deck tips. It piggybacked the RC module, which can be easily removed.

8853 from 1988 would be a closer match to what you are looking for. The loader arms go down the sides of the cab and it also has rear wheel steel.. I don't have it, but it was a nice mid-range set.

Very smart machine, great detail, also very smart video and well put together in sync with the music. Well done!

I have one of those, and initially considered using it, but it wouldn't fit my scale or track width. I think I might just use a wired system, attached to a handheld battery box or train transformer, which is what I am currently using. It is a bit restrictive, but at least I get the right sort of power to the wheels.

I'm just finishing off a MOC and I am using two buggy motors for the drive. I would have liked to use an IR remote and the receiver, but I have noticed that the power to the buggy motors is not what it should be, especially compared to the Lego 9v mains transformer which I use. Is there anyway around this without modifying the protection circuit in the standard PF battery box. Would the rechargeable battery box work any better, or would it suffer from the same overload protection when using two buggy motors? I am using a buggy motor on each rear wheel and a M motor for steering.

Thanks DLuders for sorting the link out. It seemed to work last night so I don't know what happened. My favourite function is the rear jacks, it took a bit of time to integrate them well into the frame so that they would lift the backend.

I just put this quick video together of a Giant Wrecker which we were working on. It has the crane boom from 8421. The rest is built from scratch. 6WD, v8 engine, quite powerful rear jacks, independant suspension, plus many other features. It has its flaws, but was a nice challenging build. It is now due for dismantling - parts are needed elsewhere. Comments are welcome http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnejabg_9QM

Hey Studless, welcome to Eurobricks. Been there, being brought up with studded, and now have a good number of studless sets. I would recommend building from official instructions. You will pick up the principles quicker and understand the need for the cross bracing. Leaving this out will be at your peril! Do bear in mind that there is a lot more planning ahead needed for studless, as extra beams etc are not as easy to add on afterwards. One benefit of the studless beams is that they can pivot tighter on the end hole, without needing the clearance demanded by the corner of the studded bricks.

It is a nice idea, but i would say that reliability and cost of manufacture will prevent this getting very far. Also the challenge of sending drive throught the middle of the turntable is a nice mechanical solution, which creates a measure of "amazement" to the user anyway. We need to be careful that we don't "over-electrify" the original Lego product. Even with the brightest minds in industry, those same units used in track machines eventually give problems.

I built this model even before the manual version. To my dissappointment I discovered that I needed more gear reduction. The XL motor will skip on forward/reverse work. It is too fast for its intended purpose. I ended up having to rework the whole back end to get it working to my satisfaction. So be warned!

Using my present design, the good the thing about the 24T is that it meshes with a worm drive over three studs. It is 2 1/2 approx for a 16T, which is a hassle to make up. The white 24T clutch might get ruined. I think I might change around the gears and have the 24T with axel at one end(previously in the middle), and then the other two 24T gears with 3L axles just mounted in a frame. They will spin independently. I will take drives off these two gears from the bottom using an 8T gear. Should now avoid cutting 4L Diff case, but it was a nice idea.