Porsche 911 (992) GT3 R

[Lox Lego]

Hello Gents, I'm very pleased to announce my latest design the Porsche 911 (992) GT3 R! 

Porsche 911 GT3 R by lachlan cameron, on Flickr

When I saw that Anto had created a new gearbox/shifter with the new parts and MTG from Instagram requested this newest Porsche, completely redesigned from the carbon fiber framework to the aerodynamics I knew what had to be done.

Insane gearbox designed by anto !! by lachlan cameron, on Flickr

I have stayed away from designing any Porsche 911 as the original 42056-1 was super iconic and I wanted to create something very different than that. So fast forward to today and Porsche unleashed the latest racecar to the circuit, the 911 (992) GT3 R!

 Porsche 911 GT3 R by lachlan cameron, on Flickr

This design is loaded with functions, 6 speed gearbox with neutral and reverse (thanks ANTO!) HOG with working steering wheel, 5 suspension heights with 3 of the heights having torsion bar, lockable doors, opening trunk, inline 6 engine linked to a gearbox and working paddle shifter!

Porsche 911 GT3 water 💦 by lachlan cameron, on Flickr

I wanted to design the car with the black exterior and red trim, to replicate the real color of the new racecar. The only way to do this with original Lego pcs was to do so with the 13x2 wheel arches. So I had to try an make this work with the larger daytona rims and it turned out to have just enough space under the arches for full steering capabilities at each ride height. Now the car is avail in both red and black colors.

Porsche 911 GT3 R by lachlan cameron, on Flickr

As usual I wanted to showcase all the functions well, the gearbox is highly visible allowing for maximum playability and view of the real mechanics running this 1:8 supercar. 

Porsche 911 GT3 by lachlan cameron, on Flickr

Porsche 911 GT3 R by lachlan cameron, on Flickr

Porsche 911 GT3 R by lachlan cameron, on Flickr

Porsche 911 GT3 R by lachlan cameron, on Flickr

 

I hope you like the build and check out the video of it working in action! 

 

 

 

Edited May 18, 2024 by Lox Lego

[Paul B Technic]

Simply amazing.

[Divitis]

This is great work! And I really appreciate the reference picture, only the brave ones do it! 

In fact, after looking at it, I am not 100% sold of the front. The radriator grill seems to be much slimmer in the original and the hood also is more inclined downward, which gives the car a more aggressive look.

[Milan]

Scheduled for frontpage.

[Ryokeen]

I have to say the bodywork of your projects is always amazing

 

[R4ph]

Congrats, it's looks incredible !
If I may, I think the rear wing looks a bit too low and could be 1 or 2 studs higher

[MAP Tec]

Incredible!

[Celeri]

Just greatly great !

[scarface_le_fou]

Impressive. What a great work

[Count Vroskri]

Masterpiece of design and engineering.

[langko]

I love the black with the red accents! I really like the rear wing design with the new panels in there, as well as the detailed steering wheel. Cool to see Anto's new gearbox in a complete model as well.

I will say though that whilst I appreciate your dedication to replicating the look of the model as accurately as possible, I can't say I'm a fan of some of the methods used to get there... I'm ok with bending the rules here and there, as I understand replicating such ridiculous angles doesn't always fall 100% in system. But techniques like what's used in the doors takes things too far for me, and is not that type of building that I think should be encouraged.

[Lox Lego]

On 5/18/2024 at 9:26 AM, Divitis said:

This is great work! And I really appreciate the reference picture, only the brave ones do it! 

In fact, after looking at it, I am not 100% sold of the front. The radriator grill seems to be much slimmer in the original and the hood also is more inclined downward, which gives the car a more aggressive look.

Hi, I do agree the front could have been at least 1 stud lower. when shaping it is sometimes a compromise as to whether the panel placement will work on the perfect angles. As I went lower, other appearances looked poor so I kept what you see here. 

21 hours ago, R4ph said:

Congrats, it's looks incredible !
If I may, I think the rear wing looks a bit too low and could be 1 or 2 studs higher

This I totally agree. But chose to use the cheaper 4L axles instead of 5L black axles for the wing height to keep the rare part count down.

On 5/18/2024 at 10:16 AM, Milan said:

Scheduled for frontpage.

Thanks!

1 hour ago, langko said:

I love the black with the red accents! I really like the rear wing design with the new panels in there, as well as the detailed steering wheel. Cool to see Anto's new gearbox in a complete model as well.

I will say though that whilst I appreciate your dedication to replicating the look of the model as accurately as possible, I can't say I'm a fan of some of the methods used to get there... I'm ok with bending the rules here and there, as I understand replicating such ridiculous angles doesn't always fall 100% in system. But techniques like what's used in the doors takes things too far for me, and is not that type of building that I think should be encouraged.

 

Thanks Langko, I use Lego as a creative outlet without boundaries and have pushed myself to follow the lines as close to the original as possible, not worrying about perfect connections but placing appearance first. 

Here are a few more photos. Thanks for the interest guys.

Porsche GT3 R by lachlan cameron, on Flickr

Porsche GT3 R vs. BMW M4 GT3 by lachlan cameron, on Flickr

Porsche GT3 R vs. BMW M4 GT3 by lachlan cameron, on Flickr

Porsche GT3 R by lachlan cameron, on Flickr

 

[Divitis]

4 hours ago, langko said:

But techniques like what's used in the doors takes things too far for me, and is not that type of building that I think should be encouraged.

I agree, didn't notice this at first but now I feel bad for these poor pieces.

 

2 hours ago, Lox Lego said:

I use Lego as a creative outlet without boundaries and have pushed myself to follow the lines as close to the original as possible, not worrying about perfect connections but placing appearance first. 

But then - sincere question - where do you draw the line? If forcing pieces in to the point of damaging them is OK to shape the door, why not gluing a black tile to better shape the air intake next to it, which now is too tall?

 

Btw, is that a soda siphon in front of the passenger seat? Such a nice touch. And I guess drinking and driving isn't a problem when you're a minifig 

[LEGO Train 12 Volts]

The mechanical features implemented (suspension, gearbox and steering) are fantastic...but the first photo oooh man the first photo is a masterpiece!

[langko]

20 hours ago, Lox Lego said:

Thanks Langko, I use Lego as a creative outlet without boundaries and have pushed myself to follow the lines as close to the original as possible, not worrying about perfect connections but placing appearance first. 

 

17 hours ago, Divitis said:

I agree, didn't notice this at first but now I feel bad for these poor pieces.

But then - sincere question - where do you draw the line? If forcing pieces in to the point of damaging them is OK to shape the door...

This is my question as well, how much bending, twisting and damaging parts is ok? Surely there has to be a line somewhere? I believe that there are no limitations with what you can make out of LEGO, but there has to be some sort of boundaries on how you get there... I think it gets to a point where all these illegal connections actually detract from the appearance of the model because it just looks less polished and lazy. I guess I just find it hard to believe that with all the possible ways that LEGO fits together, that that is the best solution to get the shape you want 

[Ngoc Nguyen]

I see illegal building techniques, I dismiss.

[T Lego]

Great build Lox!

I like the new direction in which your latest builds are going. I see greater panel density whilst ommiting the usage of small liftarms and connectors to replicate shapes.

I must agree with the critics of some others here regarding the doors. I personally would have kept the door itself rectangular / 'legal', and rather inclined the whole door with respect to the chassis. This does impose a new challenge on the door hinge, but there are many ways to deal with that.

[sm1995]

21 hours ago, langko said:

 

This is my question as well, how much bending, twisting and damaging parts is ok? Surely there has to be a line somewhere? I believe that there are no limitations with what you can make out of LEGO, but there has to be some sort of boundaries on how you get there... I think it gets to a point where all these illegal connections actually detract from the appearance of the model because it just looks less polished and lazy. I guess I just find it hard to believe that with all the possible ways that LEGO fits together, that that is the best solution to get the shape you want 

Agree with the second half (where there were probably other legal solutions that looked good), but disagree with the notion that the technique used in the door is actually somehow that concerning for the parts involved. That is such a shallow angle and is not a load bearing structure, damage to parts from that angle is a moot point.

I think it comes down to principle more than anything.

Oh the car looks great btw! Love the 992 911R

[langko]

1 hour ago, sm1995 said:

Agree with the second half (where there were probably other legal solutions that looked good), but disagree with the notion that the technique used in the door is actually somehow that concerning for the parts involved. That is such a shallow angle and is not a load bearing structure, damage to parts from that angle is a moot point.

I think it comes down to principle more than anything.

Yes I would say it is a principle thing, and I also agree that the damage in this case will be minor - maybe just some slightly bent pins.

But my question was being asked in a more broader sense. If the designer is fine with the methods in the door, and there are “no boundaries”, how far is one willing to push it? Or is there absolutely no limit to the potential damage caused to parts as long as you achieve the look you want?

[astyanax]

26 minutes ago, langko said:

Or is there absolutely no limit to the potential damage caused to parts as long as you achieve the look you want?

I think this is an understandable mindset for those in the camp of "build once, display, never disassemble". To me personally, that goes against the Lego spirit as I grew up with: rebuild, rebuild, rebuild. From this perspective, I'd like all bricks to be undamaged so that they're good to go for building something else. But other people may have different experience and preference. 

When builds get large (say >3000 pieces) and specifically try to replicate some IP, the builder or producer may be more inclined to think it's gonna be too much work to disassemble anyway, and thus be less adverse to so-called illegal techniques. 

As an example, I'm personally bothered by the shown build step in CaDA's Apollo IE. But then I think, who's gonna take it apart anyway to feel the loss of these 3L pins? 

[Lipko]

2 hours ago, astyanax said:

I think this is an understandable mindset for those in the camp of "build once, display, never disassemble". To me personally, that goes against the Lego spirit as I grew up with: rebuild, rebuild, rebuild. From this perspective, I'd like all bricks to be undamaged so that they're good to go for building something else. But other people may have different experience and preference. 

When builds get large (say >3000 pieces) and specifically try to replicate some IP, the builder or producer may be more inclined to think it's gonna be too much work to disassemble anyway, and thus be less adverse to so-called illegal techniques. 

As an example, I'm personally bothered by the shown build step in CaDA's Apollo IE. But then I think, who's gonna take it apart anyway to feel the loss of these 3L pins? 

 

That connection is easily solveable with a ball pin in the second lowest pinhole of the beam in case of Lego parts (dunno about CaDA parts). Not 100% perfect, but no stress on the parts.

[MarkyMark42]

One thing I noticed, was the mention of an in-line six engine a typo or what? Shouldn't it be a flat six?

Aside from that, I do kind of agree about some of techniques used when looking closer. But great work all the same, I could never design something like this

[langko]

3 hours ago, astyanax said:

As an example, I'm personally bothered by the shown build step in CaDA's Apollo IE. But then I think, who's gonna take it apart anyway to feel the loss of these 3L pins? 

I think for me it comes down to the personal satisfaction of putting it together, regardless of whether the model comes apart next month/next year/never.
If you were the designer would you feel content with such a solution? As a builder does it actually feel satisfying to make? 
I guess I find it hard to accept such blatant disregard for geometry, especially when there are better solutions. Like doing what Lipko suggested, or you could use a 2l pin with a 3l bar to get a better result than that step.

[Stereo]

In the case of building on a slight angle (like 1/2 stud per 6-7 studs) there's probably no stress by using frictionless axle-pins to keep things located.  I'm not sure what the actual limits on frictionless pins are but I've seen official lego use them for nearly-ok distances, maybe 5.95 studs instead of 6.

[Divitis]

1 hour ago, Stereo said:

I've seen official lego use them for nearly-ok distances, maybe 5.95 studs instead of 6.

Interesting, do you maybe have an example at hand?