11 hours ago, LvdH said:

I’m not sure what you’re getting at because I highly doubt there is a noticeable difference in driving speed between the various brands of motors. 

No need to doubt or believe or whatsoever when there is evidence easily to be found on youtube. CaDA Pro M motor is about 1.7 times as fast as Lego M Motor; CaDA Pro L motor is about 1.85 times as fast as Lego L motor. Having tested the motors myself I can confirm these numbers.

1 hour ago, brickphisto said:

No need to doubt or believe or whatsoever when there is evidence easily to be found on youtube. CaDA Pro M motor is about 1.7 times as fast as Lego M Motor; CaDA Pro L motor is about 1.85 times as fast as Lego L motor. Having tested the motors myself I can confirm these numbers.

There is reason to doubt, because zero load RPM doesn’t mean a whole lot if you don’t have the torque numbers. Not to mention my comment was about the DRIVING speed difference.

Edited December 18, 20222 yr by LvdH

Guys, thank you for all your input! I made a quick video of my little Sunday morning ride. There are 4x CaDA Pro L motors in the drivetrain which are definitely stonger and faster than Lego L motors. All powered by a fresh BuWizz 3.0 battery. Have a nice day!

 

P.S.: the BuWizz 3.0 runs at 12V as far as I´m concerned. However there is no difference in the output performance if I switch through the modes. So I guess it´s all in ludicrous already, at least it spins faster than on BuWizz 2.0 in ludicrous mode according to my tests made separately few weeks ago.

Edited December 18, 20222 yr by brunojj1

1 hour ago, brunojj1 said:

However there is no difference in the output performance if I switch through the modes.

New to Bw3? The modes are just for the Bw2, no functin at the Version 3 at all. So yes, it will give ~12V to the outputs at full batt.

28 minutes ago, aFrInaTi0n said:

New to Bw3? The modes are just for the Bw2, no functin at the Version 3 at all. So yes, it will give ~12V to the outputs at full batt.

Never sure if I have the right app version, running on the current android version, running more or less reliably on a relatively old phone (Sony Xperia XZ1). Happy to know it´s all OK, thanks .

The performance seems to be ok

 

A little bit unusual obstacle for Monster Trucks as Teaser for the instruction.

Edit:

Instructions

https://bricksafe.com/pages/efferman/buggyfoot

Edited December 26, 20222 yr by efferman

20 hours ago, efferman said:

A little bit unusual obstacle for Monster Trucks as Teaser for the instruction.

Edit:

Instructions

https://bricksafe.com/pages/efferman/buggyfoot

thanks again sir for sharing, not many people care to share their knowledge & experiences this day.

is it possible to change the motor with 2 XL motor ? my aim is make it as more capable crawler.

Edited December 27, 20222 yr by artic13

3 hours ago, artic13 said:

is it possible to change the motor with 2 XL motor ?

nearly everything is possible, but for real crawling i would change many things to something like this:

around my new planetary portal hub

Edited December 27, 20222 yr by efferman

4 hours ago, efferman said:

around my new planetary portal hub

Both planetary and portal? How much reduction does that have? Is that really needed? Won't it be super slow?

Is this piece identical in form factor to the lego piece, except the planetary part? It does not fit fully into the Defender rims, right? I mean the steering pivot point won't be right next/slightly inside the wheel?

What's the function of the teeth on the inside?

2 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

Both planetary and portal? How much reduction does that have? Is that really needed? Won't it be super slow?

Is this piece identical in form factor to the lego piece, except the planetary part? It does not fit fully into the Defender rims, right? I mean the steering pivot point won't be right next/slightly inside the wheel?

What's the function of the teeth on the inside?

Planetary (4:1) and portal (3:1) = 12:1 in the same dimensions like the standard lego Portal hub. So it fits what fits onto the standard portal hub. My V2 which i have ordered this morning should fit to the Defender rim.

for a really tight Pivot point you need my other Portal hubs.

The Teeth are part of the planetary gearbox.

When the other reduction is not to high it should not be slower, only more solid.

Edit²

this is the Pivot point with the Defender rim

https://bricksafe.com/files/efferman/buggyfoot/planetary portal hub.io

Edited December 27, 20222 yr by efferman

3 hours ago, efferman said:

My V2 which i have ordered this morning should fit to the Defender rim.

this is the Pivot point with the Defender rim

Is that V2 shown on the image? That seems to be 1 stud further in than possible with the current lego one. I did try to see how the lego version could be modified to fit into the Defender rim and make it thinner to move the pivot 2 studs closer to the wheel, I came up with this in part designer (it would need rounding down in a few places..). Is your V2 similar on the top part (that's what would hit the rim on the current version)? On this one, I also cut off one stud from the hub part itself, as I think it does not need to be so thick (if there are no planetary gears), since the axle is supported on the other side of the gear too. Do you think you could clean up this design to make it 3D printable? It would need a matching shorter 3-pin wheel holder insert as well though..

3 hours ago, efferman said:

for a really tight Pivot point you need my other Portal hubs.

Yes, I know about that part, seems interesting, but less 'buildable', as it's all pre-printed in a few pieces that are only compatible with each other. Though I really like the camber angle in it..

2 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

Is your V2 similar on the top part

Yes, it is V2 like in the IO file

interresting idea, my solution makes a 8 tooth gear neccessary in the top position.

2 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

Do you think you could clean up this design to make it 3D printable?

give me some time

edit:

Edited December 27, 20222 yr by efferman

2 hours ago, efferman said:

Yes, it is V2 like in the IO file

Oh, sorry, I didn't see the link. Now that I looked into it, it's a really neat design!

2 hours ago, efferman said:

give me some time

That was fast :) thanks for taking the time! So yes, that's something like it, if I understand correctly, the whole big round part with the 6 pinholes can rotate, right? But the middle hole should be an axle hole!

Apart from that, it has one more glitch. On the top, you added one more axle hole, like in a perpendicular connector. That was my first try, but that does not fly, it hits the Defender rims unfortunately. So it has to be some kind of a slope like in my version to make it insertable into the deep rim.

Also, a 16T gear on the top would just touch the rim on the inside, but a 12T would work. With a not so deep rim, even the 16T may work, and even in that case, the pivot gets 1 stud closer to the wheel. BTW, the rim connector itself can be half a stud thicker to make the rim positioned like similar lego wheel hubs I think, because the original lego 3-pin connector part has a half stud protrusion before the pins themselves. But the axle hole in the middle should not extrude to that extra half pin, to allow for rims that have a half stud extrusion in the middle (like 43mm rims). I hope it's clear what I'm trying to say.

16 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

BTW, the rim connector itself can be half a stud thicker to make the rim positioned like similar lego wheel hubs I think,

with standard tires, or narrow third party tires, the hub has the correct thickness, but with the xerion tires the hub is a half stud to narrow with the defender rim.

https://bricksafe.com/files/efferman/stud.io-parts/narrow planet.io

22 hours ago, efferman said:

with standard tires, or narrow third party tires, the hub has the correct thickness, but with the xerion tires the hub is a half stud to narrow with the defender rim.

It's getting pretty good! Yes, such a steering link mount is necessary because otherwise it is impossible to build anything there for connecting the steering link.

Indeed, with standard tires on Defender rims, we could even get rid of that extra half stud on the wheel mount itself, and that's great because the whole part then becomes 1.5 studs thinner than the lego version. However, I checked it with 56mm 6 spoke rims, and that does not work in that case. The reason is that the spokes in that rim are slanted a bit inwards on the inside, and those hit the upper part of the portal hub where the 3L axle with stop of the incoming U-joint would be. So for that rim, the extra half stud is also required. I can see that your idea for the inner rotating piece that holds the pins is to make it insertable from the inside, right? So that only works if it's 1 stud thick, if it was 1.5 studs thick, it would not be possible to insert it from the inside..

I was wondering what could be a way to have both 1 stud and 1.5 studs thick options. For example, if that part could instead be made of two halves, one inserted from the inside, the other from the outside, and jointed together by the 2L friction pins themselves. Then, another option would be to joint the two halves with 3 half pins, add a 6-hole pulley wheel as spacer, and put 2L friction pins into the remaining 3 holes of the pulley wheel, connecting the pulley wheel and the outer half of the rotating piece (first image). That way the Defender rim could be added with a half stud offset as well. Still that would not work for 56mm rims, because of the extrusion on the inside in the center would collide with the spacer pulley wheel. At least it could work for the Defender rim, which is where the whole thing makes the most sense.

Another area that may be improved is the mounting point on the top. I was wondering if it could be a good idea to use an axle hole there instead of a pinhole. A frictionless axle-pin provides a more solid connection than a simple frictionless pin. Furthermore, another interesting way to use this hub would be with independent suspension, as in a hummer. However, that would require the U-joint to bend upwards, which needs a bit of clearance. Do you think it would be possible to cut off a corner of the upper mounting point to make space for the U-joint (second image)? The axle with towball would sit a bit higher anyway, as that part cannot be fully inserted into axle holes.

BTW, we are really off-topic in this thread, maybe we should move this discussion to your custom parts thread?

seeing that CADA is allowed here is it possible we could have a thread for mouldking? im happy to start one if its ok

1 minute ago, 9v system said:

seeing that CADA is allowed here is it possible we could have a thread for mouldking? im happy to start one if its ok

You won't see acceptance of MK here. Keep in mind there are active members who've had designs stolen by them.

2 minutes ago, amorti said:

You won't see acceptance of MK here. Keep in mind there are active members who've had designs stolen by them.

regarding the stolen designs, there are fake mouldking websites that steal designs. MK have confirmed this

Edited December 30, 20222 yr by 9v system

5 minutes ago, 9v system said:

regarding the stolen designs, there are fake mouldking websites that steal designs. MK have confirmed this

Its about MK activly steeling / copying MOCs from Rebrickable users and creating sets out of that stolen IP without asking the creator - there were rare cases where they had an agreement, but unfortunately that decided to not follow that road and just copy again... :(

4 minutes ago, aFrInaTi0n said:

Its about MK activly steeling / copying MOCs from Rebrickable users and creating sets out of that stolen IP without asking the creator - there were rare cases where they had an agreement, but unfortunately that decided to not follow that road and just copy again... :(

interesting, from what i have seen they work with designers frequently, i am currently getting one of my gbc designs to be possibly made into a set, they have also been nice enough to send me copies of the GBC sets

Go ask Milan or Jim if they agree to have a distinct MK thread. If they allow, its all fine.

If you are in contact with them in regard of having a licenced MOC it's good for you, but please inform yourself a little bit further about the company you are having business with, then you may understand other opinions here.
 

3 minutes ago, aFrInaTi0n said:

Go ask Milan or Jim if they agree to have a distinct MK thread. If they allow, its all fine.

If you are in contact with them in regard of having a licenced MOC it's good for you, but please inform yourself a little bit further about the company you are having business with, then you may understand other opinions here.
 

i will send @Jim a message and see what he says

I have a small and speedy 3 Day project for you.

A Race truck, 15 wide, 350 parts and powered by two CaDA buggys

instruction: https://bricksafe.com/pages/efferman/speedy-delivery-a-race-truck

I post it here, even when there are only a few Cada parts included and it isn't buildable without Lego.

Edited January 1, 20232 yr by efferman

3 hours ago, efferman said:

I have a small and speedy 3 Day project for you.

That’s got an insane speed :)

3 hours ago, efferman said:

I post it here, even when there are only a few Cada parts included and it isn't buildable without Lego

Which part is not buildable with lego? Do you mean the motors?