42055 - Bucket Wheel Excavator

[andythenorth]

The recommended retail prices are known, from Brickset report of London toy fair. TechnicBricks have it copied http://www.technicbricks.com/2016/01/2h2016-technic-sets.html

£180 for BWE.

Still it's nice for people to talk around in circles, eh?

[rocklego]

Not sure if because of shooting angle or because of the weight, but the base is bending significantly.

https://www.facebook...?type=3

I found this photo (above link) from Promobricks facebook that no signs of bending on the undercarriage.

[andrewganschow]

So with the copy of 42035 in this set, I'll have 3 copies of 42035 when I buy this set. I think the Arocs would be more appropriate here.

[aminnich]

If you want everything in the same scale, I disagree, the Arocs is technically too big. 42035 is a perfect match, those trucks in real life are Giants, just goes to show you how large the BWE really is. IF the BWE was made in Arocs scale, the part count could be easily 4,000,000!

EDIT: 4000 wasn't enough, it would have 4000 tread parts alone

Edited January 29, 2016 by aminnich

[ludi]

surely you mean 40000 or even 400000, right?

[Jump]

Would be a great starterset with 4 million blocks (of which 1 million black pins)

[agrof]

A new video appeared, nothing new verbal, visually might be more.

[Ngoc Nguyen]

At 2:39, the end of the video, I heard that "we do have another instruction included for a second model".

ALL HAIL THE LEGO GROUP

(/' ')/ TLG \(' '\)

[JimDude]

Included in the box, or included in the App ?

So far I've printed all B-model booklets myself (I literally can't build in front of screen - I'd flick my eyeballs out with a rusty spoon after about five minutes or so), but for a 4000-piece set, that would be getting silly...

Anyway, I'm missing something obvious (as always): there are three axles running down to the 'superstructure base'. What for:

1) driving the offloader belt;

2) driving the BWE itself;

3) [EDIT]Turning the superstructure, obviously...

Rotating the offloader belt is manual, after all. Which reminds me of another question: why can this rotation be locked?

Edited January 29, 2016 by JimDude

[agrof]

At 2:39, the end of the video, I heard that "we do have another instruction included for a second model".

snip

Don't bet on this, on the box printing is clearly see the remark: "building instruction only at", with the notebook pic.

You might know:

If one explains You the way where to go, always believe the hand moves, and not the words.

Edited January 29, 2016 by agrof

[barman]

Atfer looking at the pictures and the snapshots I made from the video's I was able to 3D draw the new yellow Quarter Circle Turntable.

LEGO Technic new part 2016H2 Quarter ring with 34 teeth by Barry Bosman, on Flickr

More info about this can be found in the discription of the picture on Flickr.

It is a very interessting play set. I say play set because it is a nice interpretation of a Bucket Wheeled Excavator, but it is not a scale model.

The biggest technic set ever with a price to match. So I don't know if it is really going to sell, because you get a lot of standard part in this set and for me it isn't that appealing. For older kids it is just too expensive.

O well, we will see if this is really going to be the flag ship of 2016.

[Ngoc Nguyen]

Included in the box, or included in the App ?

So far I've printed all B-model booklets myself (I literally can't build in front of screen - I'd flick my eyeballs out with a rusty spoon after about five minutes or so), but for a 4000-piece set, that would be getting silly...

Anyway, I'm missing something obvious (as always): there are three axles running down to the 'superstructure base'. What for:

1) driving the offloader belt;

2) driving the BWE itself;

3) ...

Rotating the offloader belt is manual, after all. Which reminds me of another question: why can this rotation be locked?

1) One axle goes down and then up again to drive the lower conveyor belt (the one that can be turned manually)

2) One axle goes down to turn the whole super structure

3) One axle goes way down to the base to drive the two tracks that are connected to one axle.

Don't bet on this, on the box printing is clearly see the remark: "building instruction only at", with the notebook pic.

You might know:

If one explains You the way where to go, always believe the hand moves, and not the words.

But, but, but, the presenter said "included"

[roppie11]

But, but, but, the presenter said "included"

Yeah, but people make mistakes...

[Patman]

I think Sariel's hamster will like that yellow 136t ring gear.....

[higgins91]

A new video appeared, nothing new verbal, visually might be more.

thank's for the new link

the lower conveyor really do not turn round! he jerks (0:50 on the vid)

Edited January 29, 2016 by higgins91

[bob st-claire]

I am afraid B instructions will be only pdf.

(I really hate this policy - I do not like building from screen - I do not want to (but I have to) always get it printed and sealed into booklet)

[1974]

It's jerky because TLG do not understand that they need to put more motors in the thing and have higher rotation speed in all axles and gear down where the action is happening. I think that was established when Archimedes was around

It's continuing the happy tradition of the 42009 with a week motor and 127 gears. End result is not pretty and in some cases hardly work

More motors, less gearboxi'ng TLG

I found this photo (above link) from Promobricks facebook that no signs of bending on the undercarriage.

I see it clearly, look at the bottom liftarms and the frames. Even the tracks seem to point inwards at the top. No wonder as the superstructure must weigh quite a bit

[Beard]

Would be a great starterset with 4 million blocks (of which 1 million black pins)

Ok, so this will be the Ultimate BWE MOC until TLG releases it.

[allanp]

It's jerky because TLG do not understand that they need to put more motors in the thing and have higher rotation speed in all axles and gear down where the action is happening. I think that was established when Archimedes was around

It's continuing the happy tradition of the 42009 with a week motor and 127 gears. End result is not pretty and in some cases hardly work

More motors, less gearboxi'ng TLG

I see it clearly, look at the bottom liftarms and the frames. Even the tracks seem to point inwards at the top. No wonder as the superstructure must weigh quite a bit

I mostly agree with you though I don't think more motors or more powerful motors would help the BWE in particular. But definitely not having so much gearing down done for you in the motor would help. This is Technic, isn't the whole point of it that we should be building the gearing and the mechanics ourselves and not having it done for you in the motor? The XL motor is way too slow and has way too much torque to use it to drive any axle longer than 8M whilst expecting the axle not to twist and spring back causing those jerky movements. Take the gearing out of the motor so it can be built by the customer where it is needed. In the case of the BWE, a little before the gearbox to incorporate the safety clutch and avoid power losses and then a lot at the function to be driven. A good example would be like 8480. I have removed the gearing down entirely from one of my XL motors and it's much more fun and practical to use. I usually have the first stage of reduction done by belts which makes it very quiet and protects the drive train like the white clutch gear does.

Edited January 29, 2016 by allanp

[doug72]

I have found when building cranes that using worm drives helps stops the jerkyness in long drive axles.

Allows drive shafts to rotate at a good RPM to eliminate the flexing as the large gear reduction is done close to where it is required at turntable or drums.

My tower crane with 75L long drive up the tower suffered from jerkyness at first, until I moved the large reduction from the motor at the base to top of the tower just below the turntable / rope drums.

Definitly something I will be MOCing when building the BWE.

Edited January 29, 2016 by Doug72

[1974]

I mostly agree with you though I don't think more motors or more powerful motors would help the BWE in particular. But definitely not having so much gearing down done for you in the motor would help. This is Technic, isn't the whole point of it that we should be building the gearing and the mechanics ourselves and not having it done for you in the motor? The XL motor is way too slow and has way too much torque to use it to drive any axle longer than 8M whilst expecting the axle not to twist and spring back causing those jerky movements. Take the gearing out of the motor so it can be built by the customer where it is needed. In the case of the BWE, a little before the gearbox to incorporate the safety clutch and avoid power losses and then a lot at the function to be driven. A good example would be like 8480. I have removed the gearing down entirely from one of my XL motors and it's much more fun and practical to use. I usually have the first stage of reduction done by belts which makes it very quiet and protects the drive train like the white clutch gear does.

Oh, Gawd, not more powerfull motors please! The XL can rip enough ;)

Yes, more gearing is fun, but the limits of what LEGO Technic is capable of have been reached (see 42009). I really think powering a complicated set (BWE/42009) is not doable with Technic parts and only one motor as we can see. Gearboxes are fun, and complicated, but does not work for those two sets

I'd prefer a motor for the bucket, the conveyoer belts and the moving of the rig (<-- which would need a gear box)

And maybe a(nother) gearbox that would lifte the arms with wires instead of manually(!!!) activated LAs

That would also make the whole set pretty complicated allthough more expensive, I know

Yes, that would might mean less gearing/gearboxes, but you know, the set might actually work ;)

Keep the intricate gearing systems to sets where they actually works

In real life these machines have tons of motors and very little gearing

I like the idea of this set, but for that price (which is VERY good) I could buy parts and MOC something much more suitable to my taste (note, I did not say "better")

Still way cool that TLG made this

(And it's going to do very well for us that have a BL shop, hehe)

[Appie]

And maybe a(nother) gearbox that would lifte the arms with wires instead of manually(!!!) activated LAs

I mentioned this before, but the main reason the arm lift and especially lowering is manual is for safety. Remember kids will also be playing with this.

[1974]

There could be clutch gears all around, that would be safe enough

Also, big brother could grind little sister's dollhouse into dust with - or without - manually operated LAs

[Appie]

Clutchgears would have a harder time with that arm than the gear reduction in the 42009 to not stall the clutchgear in that model. So that's not an option.

And the difference between a smashed dollhouse with PF LA's and manual is that Lego enabled the first method and in the second case it's just a brother being destructive. In the first case Lego would get sued. Especially in countries like the USA where they sue companies because the manual didn't mention you can't put a cat in a microwave. In the second it's just the brother's fault.

[andythenorth]

What if little sister ground big brother's dollhouse into dust? Who to blame then?