syclone

Here's one from 1989:

As far as I am concerned - no. Their original patents are expiring and their attempts atmaking a monopoly by making the patents indefinite have been shut down. And TLG themselves have introduced several parts that had already been used by competition previously, with the notable example being the alternating hole beams. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Amazing job rebuilding it and making instructions, having skimmed through it seems a great model.

Well, considering that the motors are placed parallel to each other, chances are extremely low, however, previously there were endless posts of people building incorrectly the 42070 (that abomination of an "offroad tow truck") by placing the differentials the wrong way, then there was the land Rover Defender, where even only 2 differentials seemed problematic and the Volvo had people messing up the gearbox.... and this is just from the EB forum, imagine how many complaint the customer service had lmao. I suppose there will be a new wave of "my zetros won't move" topics this summer/fall, be it 4x4 or 6x6... In regards of the prelims... well, I wouldn't be surprised at all if that's the end design that's gonna hit the shelves, people will buy it anyway, so why try harder? Afterall, it's not that surprising considering the jeep from H1...

Well, they do still look cool showing through , though the calipers are certainly a key part that is missing. The offset does put me closer to what the real car would be, and sort of prevents the suspension setup from rubbing on the wheel as well, as it would be way too close otherwise. @LvdH Just searched for the size of the real brakes of that car, and they're in fact too large (297mm stock brake disc which is about 4'95 studs in-scale). Will give the pulley method a shot.

Many thanks @Zerobricks and @agrof, seeing as the intended use would be a static model, happy to hear that it will hold up (have a bunch of old hard to remove pins as well, and placing an axle with stop is also possible in the intended model)

Small request if someone has the required parts - how strong is the connection between defender wheels and the 1/8 "disc brake" hubs if joined using normal pins?

The instructions were an lxf file and have been reposted by DLuders- check post above. The link posted by DLuders is still active, and I've checked it - the LDD file opens fine (says that 2 bricks have been removed, but I doubt it's anything critical). Seeing as it's a small car, using the hide tool while building it irl should work fine. Here's the link posted again: https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=5641CCE2A1CC0886!322 Please note that it may ask you to login into your Microsoft account to download it.

Wow, it was already a beauty in black, but this vibrant blue colourscheme is something else the wheels look much better with it as well, any chance for the actual livery stickers? Great bg music on the video as well!

Good Day. Today I present a military tow truck inspired by the JSDF one. The base truck is (Mitsubishi) Fuso Super Great FX 6x6 - the self-defence force exclusive variant. My model has full suspension, with "leaf springs" (flexaxles) all around. Drive is permanent 6x6 with 1x M-motor (was decent without cabin and superstructure, but with those added the performance became abysmal), steering is done via another M-motor downgeared with a wormgear. In-cabin steering wheels is moved via a micromotor with rubber belt drive. The truck is built in Tecnic figure scale, with customised front tires to make up for lack of proper width tires in TLG inventory. The crane is completely manual, with all functions controlled via gears on the outside. The function list is: -Outriggers capable of lifting the rear -Boom elevation -Boom rotation (no gearing, just swiwels with some friction to keep it in place) -Boom extension (with stops via a ratcheted gear and an end-stop to prevent the boom from falling out) -Hoisting -Rear winch All in all a mediocre build, but quite happy about it considering how disinterested I was in building something recently. A major improvement would be a L-motor for drive, but there's not enough space in this chassis, a perfect fit would be the mini motor Efferman shown a prototype of. Steering is a tad floppy as well, it was caused by my preferrance for a higher ground clearance, although even if it weren't floppy, the CV joints have a teenncy to pop out due to all the stress (heavy model with suspension and no differentials). The boom has a low weight limit, topping out at about 200g, heavier loads cause the boom to flex until it breaks - unless it is fully contracted, in which case I was able to lift about 400g. I have a complete chassis with a partial cabin lxf file, but I doubt anyone would be interested in building it, so I'll upload the model as is on [https://brickshelf.com/gallery/LXF/mitsubishiFXtowtruck/mitsubishi_fuso_super_great_fx.lxf]Brickshelf[/url] . Video: Photos: Cya!

There's a Key Topic for sets remade in LDD. 3181 is on page 58, however as mentioned previously stickers aren't available in LDD, only a limited number of prints.

I'm not sure what you mean SNIPE, since if it were freely rotating from the axle that goes through it, the Grey clutch ring would be useless as the only thing it could do would be engaging with the red clutch gear, but couldn't trnasfer the movement anywhere... Unless what you want is a part that allows the Grey clutch ring remain stationary when not engaged? However, I see no benefit in that, as the switching would be made harder, since both the red gear and the clutch would have to be alligned correctly or a great force applied as they're both static and start rotating only when engaged.

The rear wheelarch definitely looks good! May the lights look better if the dish were the other way around? Or part nº2654 maybe? Another option could be a continuous light bar on the rear without the round lenses:

It's a pinhole with axle in white 22961 Screenshot from the video MikeTwo9398 mentioned. @ 07:27 min

Have made some long ago: - Flatbed towtruck EB Topic - Truck with trailer EB Topic Generic trial trucks:

Good looking chassis. Great way to secure the servo with quarter pins (on the second one)

You needed to remove this last part from the link: /revision/latest?cb=20190129141709

My best guess is that it'd cost somewhere in the tens of thousands of euros to develop and make these videos in collaboration with contracted engineers/teachers. And a bunch of sets for 5-7 volunteers is a fraction of that cost My university teachers get paid to do these "STEM" problems for students.

Your link is the shortened version, you need the full one (the one you see in your browser bar, not the one you get from sharing it on mobile) Here's what you should paste for it to be automatically embedded: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMyCtJ3kZMM Interesting idea with the freecoasting!

Technic category in Extended Mode. You can use the rounded window to search part by it's ID. For any LDD related questions please refer to https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/forum/128-lego-digital-designer-and-other-digital-tools/ , rather than revamping an old topic.

This should help you:

Well I do have a few zamor spheres from NXT 2.0 so it would be fun to go out of the usual vehicular technic into something else.

https://buwizz.com/buwizz-3-0-pro/ As of right now 149 euro. Once it releases the price seem to would be 169.

I only own one, that comes from a genuine set (from a few years back), and there are no markings whatsoever on it. As mentioned by Rudivdk the ones with the logo seem to be a newer variation

The C+/Pup L and XL motors are identical in regards of their speed and torque (data from https://www.philohome.com/motors/motorcomp.htm). The difference is in efficiency, with the XL motor being more efficient. Based on this: 1) Yes you can connect them directly. 2)Yes and No. Yes, you would get more mechanical power, but 2 Xl motors linked together would be more power efficient. Take my answer with a grain of salt, as I am not well-versed in mechanics, electrics/electronics and especially C+ system, my deductions are based on my limited knowledge and data provided by Philo's tests.

Oooh, that looks very interesting. 5x3x2 studs right? Loving the connectivity options, much better than m-motor in that sense.