I think the shape of the windscreen frame is wrong. it should be, how should I say it, concave, meaning the curve in front and above the dashboard should be more level while the rest is more steep.
I've checked that against this photo:

take a close look at the point where two parts are anchored together near the mirrors - there is small angle difference.

50 minutes ago, Erik Leppen said:

I'm not so sure about this one, to be honest. For me it feels a little bit too much of a literal copy. It's not (yet) within the studless build style, it just uses studless parts. The bodywork especially, feels like a literal brick-for-beam replacement... I'd use more panels and flex-axles. I do like the white interior though :)

This is something that I too wonder how should this be treated. For smaller builds where you really need to figure out how to assemble it to make sense and be true to original, it seems okay to do so, but for big builds, especially this one, you're simply making a compatible chassis with all the modern solutions to the mechanical problems presented first in this set and simply rebuilding the body which seems kind of easy to do this way. This way, it's just about who can sink more money into the bricks of matching colours for bigger model with more features.

At the same time, I feel like this is something that makes this contest a bit flawed. On one hand, since there's no specific limitation, why not pick something like that if you have means to go through with it, and people will be voting on bigger models even if they weren't really that challenging to do, regardless of what admins will write in the voting rules, like "you should take things into account in this order and the size shouldn't matter". On the other hands, admins arbitrarily affecting the verdict when something was done by the rules doesn't seem fine either.

Anyway, I think that @Samolot's contest entry is something that's a perfect example of how I see the bigger models being remade.

I agree that direct brick to beam -replacement doesn't really work here. You definitely should think of way to achieve the same feel as the original with more panels and maybe flex axles/ribbed hoses, even if you don't make a closed bodywork but leave many gaps there like the original. One problem is that the original bricks, stacked with hinge plates were much thicker and more massive than liftarms, which contributes to the look significantly, even when the parts are all in the original places. I'd maybe attempt to build a proper fenders and add some panels to the hood, though I'm not sure what to do with the windscreen/roof, some flex axles maybe? And don't forget the yellow skirt line between the wheels.

Personally I'll vote for the builds that not only use newer pieces, but also refresh the styling and upgrade the functions to something more modern.

In this build, with so much empty space inside, a 8 speed gearbox (or a 6 speed manual) would have been a must for me.

Just copying the technic solutions of the original model isn't really interesting imo. No offense, this was probably a good bit of work too, but for me the innovation is missing.

Edited July 4, 20213 yr by Gray Gear

@Gray Gear Having almost finished my build I can tell you that recreating a model with less parts is actually difficult. Studded Technic models obviously used the studs to connect beams which need to be replaced with pins/axles and then just to get the equivalent of a plate or a bespoke system part you’ll use a lot of Technic parts as replacement.

@Seasider I don't mind a increased part count, in fact I think it is good thing! But I think the the bigger models should also offer some improved and updated technic funtions.

And I also think it should be built with bricks that are not outdated. The wheel hubs used here have not been used for over a decade.

 

Comrades, you make me worry)

I really respect your opinion, but the rules says "Try to stay as close to the original as possible" many times in every case. You know that "replacement" it is not so easy - connecting by plates and 1/2 studs displacement, specific details in original makes a lot of complications in "studless" design. I think that main problems for me - another gear ratios, modified steering system and some creatives in interior... Anyway, I will continue in the same spirit for now and then we'll see. Thanks for feedback!

 

13 hours ago, SaperPL said:

I think the shape of the windscreen frame is wrong. it should be, how should I say it, concave, meaning the curve in front and above the dashboard should be more level while the rest is more steep.
I've checked that against this photo:

take a close look at the point where two parts are anchored together near the mirrors - there is small angle difference.

Yeah, I see that too now. Probably need to lengthen the lower part of the windshield

14 minutes ago, Gray Gear said:

@Seasider I don't mind a increased part count, in fact I think it is good thing! But I think the the bigger models should also offer some improved and updated technic funtions.

And I also think it should be built with bricks that are not outdated. The wheel hubs used here have not been used for over a decade.

 

The wheel hubs in 8880 or in my fake?

 

@RazzPinazzo Never mind about the Wheel hubs. I looked at a bad angle and my dumb a$$ thougth I saw These.

Yes, the rules do say to stay as close to the original as possible. And you have done that very well with your chassis, and I applaud you for it.

I myself think that bringing an old model into the new technic age also involves bringing the old functions up to scratch as well, so I would have appreachiated a more modern transmission design. 4 speeds is basically never used anymore. But that's just my take on the matter, others might think differently 

3 hours ago, RazzPinazzo said:

I really respect your opinion, but the rules says "Try to stay as close to the original as possible" many times in every case.

Those three times where rules state that are about: scale (don't make supercar scale model out of city car set), features (adding more features/mechanical functionality to set shouldn't matter in this contest), colour (you should try to make the colour scheme somewhat similar to the original set). None of it is about building techniques.

With that said, the top of the contest info states: The idea behind the contest is to replicate the chosen set as close as possible

And this gets really interesting when you look at this set - while I understand that making some structure with liftarms is different than with beams, I still think it's really easy to make a big model like this that is just about the edges built with beams. 

I don't know...

So-so for now in my opinion.

But looks like replica of old Lambo =)

Each panel moves away from the original

 

And what are you think about some crazy idea about arches?

 

Hm, it looks weird if I may say so. The bodywork doesn't look as good as the studded 8880 bodywork. I don't think 8880 is beautiful, but it looks "cool". And your bodywork lost that "cool" somewhere. Maybe it is the more rounded off look, idk

One of the things I think need improvement are the pop up headlights. They are way too small, and give the car a bit of a tired look.

5 hours ago, RazzPinazzo said:

And what are you think about some crazy idea about arches?

just don't

I love it. Screw what the naysayers say! :D

Sure, it looks weird. But so did the original! Great job so far @RazzPinazzo

You're missing the beams on the sides of the cabin, which would contribute to the looks pretty significantly. Also are missing the yellow accents of the skirtline on the sides. The hood looks like it's bulging out more than it should, the shape of those curved panels doesn't seem to be ideal or maybe they should be attached a bit lower or something. I'm also not sure about the rear spoiler.

The interior and the engine cover look really nice and the rear (except the spoiler) is also well done.

9 hours ago, RazzPinazzo said:

So-so for now in my opinion.

Each panel moves away from the original

Unfortunately I have to agree. I think the wing shaped panels work well on the front and rear bumpers, to replace the wing shaped plates in the original and also on the roof, but not otherwise. Also, I think the arches are not a good move.

On the other hand, the slightly curved piece on the hood does work. I think you could even use it instead of the beams, just two of those. In general, I think it needs some cleanup, the bodywork is getting fuzzy now. The rear wing is also a bit raw, too simple.

What I would do is first replicate the original faithfully with beams as a baseline, and then see where I can improve things with more modern techniques. Maybe something like the flexible hoses on the top of the wheel arches.. could look good if you can make them symmetric.

But anyway, nice job so far, keep it up, cudos for taking on this big one!

Edited July 10, 20213 yr by gyenesvi

4 hours ago, Gray Gear said:

Hm, it looks weird if I may say so. The bodywork doesn't look as good as the studded 8880 bodywork. I don't think 8880 is beautiful, but it looks "cool". And your bodywork lost that "cool" somewhere. Maybe it is the more rounded off look, idk

One of the things I think need improvement are the pop up headlights. They are way too small, and give the car a bit of a tired look.

At first, I guess I just don't know how to work with panels. 

8880 is beautiful like 80th and early 90th supercars like Lambo Countach, Ferrari F512, Corvette C4. Strong lines, edges. And using technnic panels - it is biodesign of 90th (like paintings by salvador dali).

About headlights - I will try to make the look more joyful

4 hours ago, Jurss said:

just don't

Ok)

3 hours ago, ScT said:

I love it. Screw what the naysayers say! :D

Sure, it looks weird. But so did the original! Great job so far @RazzPinazzo

Thanks 

But I must not disgrace the legend

3 hours ago, howitzer said:

You're missing the beams on the sides of the cabin, which would contribute to the looks pretty significantly. Also are missing the yellow accents of the skirtline on the sides. The hood looks like it's bulging out more than it should, the shape of those curved panels doesn't seem to be ideal or maybe they should be attached a bit lower or something. I'm also not sure about the rear spoiler.

The interior and the engine cover look really nice and the rear (except the spoiler) is also well done.

Sides are in progress now. I have not yet decided whether to make doors that open or strictly follow the original design.

Rear spoiler is absolutely temporary, I know that it ugly.

For engine I did not use standard modern mounts and make like original - large camber almost like the boxer.

1 hour ago, gyenesvi said:

What I would do is first replicate the original faithfully with beams as a baseline, and then see where I can improve things with more modern techniques. Maybe something like the flexible hoses on the top of the wheel arches.. could look good if you can make them symmetric.

But anyway, nice job so far, keep it up, cudos for taking on this big one!

Thanks 

I try to replicate original frame in body, but tail of 8880 - it is nightmare for today lego :)

 

And I understand that design is "dirty" for now

Maybe that rear spoilr could be done similar way like on Siān?

21 minutes ago, Jurss said:

Maybe that rear spoilr could be done similar way like on Siān?

100500 bends? Spare me))

It don't have enough black connectors #3

I think this looks pretty close to the original. Converting this set to studless is no mean feat either. Great work. 

You may wanna check out this thread for some inspiration ;)

 

I think it's either go fully for the panels and round shapes or stick to liftarms where the beams where in original.

Also I feel like you've changed continuous line that was going from front wheel arch to the rear, that was angled, to a horizontal one, and it affected the original shape which was a bit more "wedgy".

On 7/11/2021 at 1:44 AM, SaperPL said:

I think it's either go fully for the panels and round shapes or stick to liftarms where the beams where in original.

Also I feel like you've changed continuous line that was going from front wheel arch to the rear, that was angled, to a horizontal one, and it affected the original shape which was a bit more "wedgy".

I have to admit, the panels are not mine. So, I continue to use mostly beams.

And after some hours of measuring I found a fault in geometry - the rear pillar really turned out to be lower than necessary. Now I need to seriously change the rear part, at the same time redo the roof.

Thans for remark. How did you see that?) Diamond eye!

On 7/10/2021 at 3:44 PM, sm1995 said:

You may wanna check out this thread for some inspiration ;)

 

I think this is a loose interpretation

On 7/10/2021 at 2:04 PM, Maaboo35 said:

I think this looks pretty close to the original. Converting this set to studless is no mean feat either. Great work. 

Thanks)

Maybe close to original, but far from good work