aFrInaTi0n

Both welcome, glad I could help out :D Generally: Better wait with updating studio for a week until you go - so you don't run into 1st-day issues which may need additional fixes. Also before every switch of versions I would recommend to do a final Backup of the old and put it aside, just in case you accidentally save some changes to the .io file and corrupts it (I think the cases are rare, but for huge models with plenty of efforts put in already I personally would really do regular backups into new .io files). Another recommendation: Save the files with a date-prefix in their filename, this makes sorting easy, for e.g. "2022-11-23_my-awesome-MOC.io" (for sorting reasons I would go with YYYY-MM-DD instead of YYYY-DD-MM).

1. The Download Page of Studio (https://www.bricklink.com/v3/studio/download.page) can be scrolled downwards.. There you can get older Versions of Studio. If they havent fixed the severe bugs of missing or not correctly shown parts on your machine with the 2.22.11(4) then go back to 2.22.10_1 (Select October 27) - this should be the last one before those bugs occured. (direct link to the .dmg: https://s3.amazonaws.com/blstudio/Studio2.0/Archive/2.22.10_1/Studio+2.0.pkg) 2. On Windows the starting dialog which asks if you like to update can be canceled with "no" and you can work with the installed (and outdated version). Don't know if it applies to the Mac Studio version too.. 3. Go to Bricklink and navigate to their Forums for Studio (https://forum.bricklink.com/) and read through the (very long) list of already known / filed bugs (Bugs and Suggestions Index) and if you wouldn't find, feel free to create a new one (How to report a bug). Generally SylvainLS is the mod there and keeps track of user posts etc. But for that specific bug: Because of its severity of affecting all users, this is already know to them, see Update today (Nov. 16 2022) broke Studio

@dickylaban Do you really think I will by now let you get off the hook with re-creating the same MOC under a new ID at RB? Deleted MOC: link removed New MOC: link removed Expect me to give the first comment there :) Edit: One other thing, pelase don't complain at any point in the future if eventually one will prove you wrong (like you asked for) with a real working hubless rc bike design.. 🤷‍♂️

Of you having more severe issues than a non-self-balancing bike? I think everyone here is already sure of that, so I think we don't need mores of your "proves". Btw you were right and you need to be pity with plenty of ppl here because of their opinions. And be sure I bought every single one of them with the money I could have spent on your MOC. You see the reaction and how much more fun I had with the exact same amount of money? Plenty! So please dox me again or regulary or give me bad posts at your fb page - I can live with hatred from people like you. 😘

Visit Bircksafe.com and get an Account - its a free platform to upload and host brick related pictures in whatever quality you upload (belongs to rebrickable). Then just copy the URLs of the images into the thread here and no restrictions for overall size of pictures.

You are so welcome, you deserved every little word & we all had our fun with your "funny" attitude & your view of things which with you have enlightened us! Thanks for the great time and this hilarious thread again. 👌 Edit: For editing your older posts in the fear of getting penalties: be advised that Forums normally give admins / mods full visibility on the original content of users posts. fyi

Yaaay, I made a new friend today! @Andman thanks for your kind message and efforts you already took to get rid of his doxing of mine. @Maaboo35 😂 @dickylaban As others also pointed out, nobody - except you - thinks this is somewhat of a competition between you and any of the other commenters here. I wish you all the best to understand our opinion & concerns at some day. *sadface By the way I hope you don't teach the kids in the class to misstread the equal sign in equations like you do it with "self balancing" for your Bikes.. 😱

Ok so you are not interested in discussions about technics? Why posting here in the first place then? Now you really showed off your kindness and will to discuss topics. Seems you are 100% fitting the definition of a troll. So claim'on - but do you really think people believe you when you already lie / disn't respond to questions in a thruthfull way before? 🤣🤣🤣

Thanks for the details. As the frequency question may already sugested, never went back to rc hobbies since the 90s 😅 Size depends then again also on capacity, but may be a good point that with the default sizes available it will be too much capacity and therefore size for my needs where weight & size unfortunately matters.. :D I generally so much would like tohave the ability to give complete analog input (and without lag and range issues which Buwizz unfortunately has 😫). @pow Its called an Ackermann-Lenkung (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ackermann_steering_geometry) Does it keep the outer wheel straight the whole distance? Or am I getting it wrong as it just showing the difference in the cornering, but would both corner?

Hello Friedl, nice MOC again and looking like plenty of fun :D I am so much thinking about switching from Buwizz to regular RC components some times.. Your picture gives me the thought that the efforts will basically be to just exchange the cables/connectors of the Motors.. The ESC is a 'Pichler Brushed ESC 30A" (Specs: https://www.pichler.de/PDF/C9342) or something? Just to go with this as a basis for further question: Limitation in voltage then would be like 9.4V right? Any recommendations for an ESC that allows to go to ~12V (I guess 14.8V for a 4S then as power source)? Other question regarding the transmission: Is it still the good old 24Mhz like we all remember from the RC hobbies days from our youth? :D

I started to be an absolute megablock and bombed their recent yt-videos with comments about not reacting... so maybe I won't be able to see any future videos of their channel soon or they will ignore this too... Its really getting from "not nice" to a "i am feeling f^%$#ed" feeling in regard of honest communication to their customers... sadly still as the product itself (the hardware) is quite nice..

And I don't understand why you just don't understand that you don't understand in the first place what we speak & complain about. And you are - in consequence - restarting your false claims of having "self balancing working" over and over again with your "ClickBait-Title" thingies. It's just annoying to see those false claims started over and over again by you. Edit: Also if you were here for real open discussions then why not answer to the explanation of what we see as "self-balancing" & what is your opinion on it? Not replying is giving at least me the feeling you are not interested in any technical discussions at all - seems its just about false fame you need & want to have.. But feel free to claim whatever you want, in my opinion you are just fortifying your reputation as a false-claimer and more and more people will start joking about you. Edit2: To point it out once more: I don't see any issue with telling your buyers the restrictions of operation of your model - that would be the absolut least I am expecting from MOC creators! What is your opinion on this? Do you really want to go with the "buy the instructions and prove me wrong approach", which is just childish behavior? Maybe rethink and more people will be willing to pay for your MOCs.. Edit3: Here a nice example of your public behavior when you deal with other opinions: Your messages give a nice picture of your personality I guess..

@pow: Videos for people understanding (hopefully) :D

This is the exact detail where most people will have another opinion on: Your "self-balancing" relies on the wide wheels with their plain surface. @amorti, me (and I guess the other people here complaining about scam) will define "self-balancing" to work even with thin wheels - because then it is really using the physics behind a motorcycle / bicycle to stay up and balanced. I think all people will agree with your MOC being a good tech design / study & also fitting & good looking bodywork. We just don't really get it why you claim it is self balancing, as it is not from our interpretation. Can you agree with our definition and can understand the point? Because we had already several discussions and I think you don't really get what we want to point out. Just some more examples of "really working" self balancing bikes at high speed: Here with one sag-down in a curve because of too low speed & the ramp up and getting straight again: Drivers perspective: @piterx 's Superbike:

@Milan You are right - sorry for stepping over in tone / good behavior here. Will try to use my brain next time before hitting the submit button..

This is what I expected as reaction, this is a discussion forum - at least I am not interested to have to take a look at some video to get details.. As said, if you think those efforts are not needed here, please spare us and stay with just YT maybe?! Edit: I would already be curious about the "world biggest"... https://www.bricklink.com/v3/studio/public_gallery.page?idUser=273818 (from Cameron Tait):

I am with Jurss - sorry but "the world's biggest" is a moving target.. Has your model something interesting techniques included for it to work & to show us? (just as a discussion starter, as you just posted the video without making any efforts to give us some more description - and if you are not willing to do so, then better stay with YT as the platform where you want to publish, but then spare us here please). So for my rude but honest opinion here..

Tutorial of how to bind multiple outputs to one input + how to use power curves for different functionalities at the outputs (from one input still):

Any chance we can have a Status for the PHY_CODED long range mode beeing used for the etablished connection?

@wower here we go:

Ah ok, so your app does the initializationof the BT connection following the API docs? This explains, because with permission models by the OSes (mac and android) wont allow from one app to sniff the connections of another app, thats why I was asking. And with your app following the API instrucions your app on the iPhone12 (BT5, LE are both supported) you don't get the flag set for PHY_CODED? :( I am an IT guy, but unfortunately more kind of a system-engineer and no real developer... But maybe I will give it a try to install Android Dev Studio / VisualStudio and try some basic tutorials for Xamarin.. Would be funny if the firmware would never switch to that mode, but nobody realized yet... At least this would explain the poor ranges we get 😄

@gyenesvi API docs say "if BT5 is supported" - just googled the specs, an iPhone 12 has BT5 (and should therefore also have LE capabilities). Which software do you use? Would be interesting to know if a third party (android for me) app could get information on the smartphone side about the etablished connection.. I have the fear this wont be possible without rooting a( android) phone to be able to grep'em. As Zero asked for, I described the situation which is kind of frustrating for a user and how some more detailed information would help to help yourself by being able to identify if the proper connection (and which kind and what you can expect of it) is etablished and therefore maybe get a clue about the reasons for it not working, like not BT5 on smartphone side supported. The whole Buwizz team will hate me already with all my emails about missing details and feature requests 😅🤓

Will write it up in a separate mail to the regular support mail address. As always, thanks for your additional efforts you take to help! ♥

Ok, sorry for falsly identifiying it as a Buwizz 2, will edit to correct it. So I think from message from @Toastie changing or somehow modding the antenna wouldn't be giving any more range, because the transmission power will basically stay the same. Sorry for so many questions from my side @Zerobricks, but do you know of any way to find out / see if the currently etablished connection uses this long range / coded mode? "The BuWizz3 supports BLE 5 feature called long range / coded mode (also noted as PHY_CODED), where the range is improved on the account of lower data bandwidth and forward error correction." from the API docs.

I just recognized the antenna for the buwizz two is on one side?! Thought this would be on the main horizontal pcb... Does anybody know if the alignment of the antenna may result in some best positioning? Like having the antenna side standing horizontally and at the highest point? And second question: Does anybody know if the PCB arrangement of Buwizz 3 also has the antenna pcb sideways mounted?