Collision test of 70km/h brushless Lego

[ZENE]

When I first saw this Youtuber video, I was attracted by its professionalism and creativity. Simple collision tests are not something every LEGO player dares to try. So I contacted them without hesitation, hoping that our brushless modification plan could make his collision test more realistic

* In addition, to achieve better video effects, a 3s battery is used

Lego Technic Porsche 911 CRASH!!!! 🚨 70 Km/H 🚨 Lego RC Car Crash Test - YouTube

Edited October 4, 2024 by ZENE

[Davidz90]

2 hours ago, ZENE said:

Simple collision tests are not something every LEGO player dares to try.

Because it seems pretty pointless?

Also, while the car is certainly fast (good job with RC setup!), this definitely doesn't look like 70 km/h, more like 30.

[ZENE]

4 minutes ago, Davidz90 said:

Because it seems pretty pointless?

 Also, while the car is certainly fast (good job with RC setup!), this definitely doesn't look like 70 km/h, more like 30.

Just like extreme sports, sometimes it's for a challenge and adventure.

Regarding speed, I think it's difficult to capture and achieve collisions at the highest speed very well, but based on our previous testing with speed detection equipment, the 42143 Ferrari can exceed 60km/h (let alone 42096 Porsche 911 is lighter). Of course, if strict exploration speed is required, maybe better venues and testing methods may be needed. I respect your rigorous attitude.

[Murdoch17]

One question: WHY on Earth would you destroy a Lego model this way? It reminds me of the people who buy memorabilia of a singer they don't like, and then burn it. You're destroying your own money, and for what?!

[ZENE]

5 minutes ago, Murdoch17 said:

One question: WHY on Earth would you destroy a Lego model this way? It reminds me of the people who buy memorabilia of a singer they don't like, and then burn it. You're destroying your own money, and for what?!

I also asked Youtuber this question immediately, and the answer was: there are only some minor flaws in the parts, it just takes time to reassemble. Lego's parts have high strength.

[Ryokeen]

18 minutes ago, Davidz90 said:

Because it seems pretty pointless?

Also, while the car is certainly fast (good job with RC setup!), this definitely doesn't look like 70 km/h, more like 30.

Thought the same, i have some RC cars(and lego hybrids) that can drive 50km/h+ and they are waaay faster than shown here.

But yea a crashtest is pretty pointless unless one is still designing an RC car and wants to know the weak spots.

8 minutes ago, ZENE said:

I also asked Youtuber this question immediately, and the answer was: there are only some minor flaws in the parts, it just takes time to reassemble. Lego's parts have high strength.

I doubt that. I had a crash at 20km/h , not even frontal. A lot of pins broke/bent, same for Liftarms and axles. Panels are quite stable though

[ZENE]

17 minutes ago, Ryokeen said:

I doubt that. I had a crash at 20km/h , not even frontal. A lot of pins broke/bent, same for Liftarms and axles. Panels are quite stable though

They used metal axles and some of the pins are broken. I think he has many spare parts, it's not a big problem

[pleegwat]

Hey, the professionals did it years ago, why shouldn't amateurs follow suit?

 

[ZENE]

4 minutes ago, pleegwat said:

Hey, the professionals did it years ago, why shouldn't amateurs follow suit?

 

Yes, they did the same before, using springs and similar devices to achieve high-speed collisions. But I recommend them to use ZENE Bricks' brushless RC kit to achieve high-speed collisions, which is more realistic

[LegoTT]

Damn, I'm impressed by your speed ! You disassemble that thing as fast as you build it !

I took 5 whole hours to build it...

(Which was already very fast, on the box it was stated 10+)

[bruh]

Wow! I feel very sorry for those wheels!

(and the rest of the parts obviously :D)

[ZENE]

8 hours ago, LegoTT said:

Damn, I'm impressed by your speed ! You disassemble that thing as fast as you build it !

I took 5 whole hours to build it...

(Which was already very fast, on the box it was stated 10+)

Then you are already very fast. If you test the collision, you can assemble it faster

7 hours ago, bruh said:

Wow! I feel very sorry for those wheels!

(and the rest of the parts obviously :D)

The RC wheels used are much cheaper than Lego's

[SpacePolice89]

What a complete waste of money and Lego! 

Edited October 6, 2024 by SpacePolice89

[bruh]

On 10/6/2024 at 12:32 AM, SpacePolice89 said:

What a complete waste of money and Lego! 

To be fair, it is their LEGO. And also, not all of the pieces are being broken. To be honest, and ZENE can correct me, but probably only ~10 pieces were probably broken. On the other hand, they now have a cool video, and a better knowledge of how to build stronger frames. They are experimenting. Dunno if you've seen any of the brick testing channels on Youtube, like Brick Experiment Channel, but they also break bricks for the purpose of finding the limits of LEGO. That is also applying here.

In fact, it is somewhat similar to what car manafacturers do; Lamborghini literally sends multi-million dollar cars in for crash tests, and they just don't have that car anymore. So, I think it is personally reasonable to do extreme tests to LEGO. I used to create head on collisions with LEGO cars with my brothers to see who could engineer the best and most resilient car.

Edited October 7, 2024 by bruh
wanted to add another point

[williamyzfr1]

I can't believe I actually wasted time reading this thread......

[SpacePolice89]

8 hours ago, bruh said:

To be fair, it is their LEGO. And also, not all of the pieces are being broken. To be honest, and ZENE can correct me, but probably only ~10 pieces were probably broken. On the other hand, they now have a cool video, and a better knowledge of how to build stronger frames. They are experimenting. Dunno if you've seen any of the brick testing channels on Youtube, like Brick Experiment Channel, but they also break bricks for the purpose of finding the limits of LEGO. That is also applying here.

In fact, it is somewhat similar to what car manafacturers do; Lamborghini literally sends multi-million dollar cars in for crash tests, and they just don't have that car anymore. So, I think it is personally reasonable to do extreme tests to LEGO. I used to create head on collisions with LEGO cars with my brothers to see who could engineer the best and most resilient car.

But why crash test Lego vehicles? Minifig safety? When I was a kid I had a crazy classmate with a lot of money that used to set action figures on fire. This falls into the same category. 

[johnnytifosi]

On 10/6/2024 at 6:32 AM, SpacePolice89 said:

What a complete waste of money and Lego! 

If only they could rebuild Lego!

[Davidz90]

13 hours ago, bruh said:

On the other hand, they now have a cool video, and a better knowledge of how to build stronger frames.

That is questionable. There is no knowledge gained from smashing a Lego car into a wall. Loose pieces will fall off, stiffer connections will break pieces. End of story. Mechanically, Lego car frame has almost nothing in common with real car frame so any parallels to real crash tests are misguided.

I like Brick Experiment Channel, but he does do actual science and acomplishes impressive feats with Lego. This is not the case here.

[ZENE]

7 hours ago, Davidz90 said:

That is questionable. There is no knowledge gained from smashing a Lego car into a wall. Loose pieces will fall off, stiffer connections will break pieces. End of story. Mechanically, Lego car frame has almost nothing in common with real car frame so any parallels to real crash tests are misguided.

I like Brick Experiment Channel, but he does do actual science and acomplishes impressive feats with Lego. This is not the case here.

Okay, although I don't agree, I respect your thoughts 

[bruh]

@SpacePolice89, I would argue that setting action figures on fire is different. While that has literally NO reason other seeing something be destroyed, Lego can give better results, especially ones that can help you build better. 
@Davidz90, I kind of agree. But, Lego can be paralleled to a real can: you can engineer a crumple zone for that car, and see how that version crashes. So, while I think you have a point, I personally see a few ways that point could be incorrect. However, to each his own.

[gyenesvi]

On 10/8/2024 at 11:06 AM, Davidz90 said:

That is questionable. There is no knowledge gained from smashing a Lego car into a wall. Loose pieces will fall off, stiffer connections will break pieces. End of story. Mechanically, Lego car frame has almost nothing in common with real car frame so any parallels to real crash tests are misguided.

I like Brick Experiment Channel, but he does do actual science and acomplishes impressive feats with Lego. This is not the case here.

I tend to agree with this.

23 hours ago, ZENE said:

Okay, although I don't agree, I respect your thoughts 

So if you don't agree, what is your counter argument?

On 10/4/2024 at 4:26 PM, ZENE said:

I also asked Youtuber this question immediately, and the answer was: there are only some minor flaws in the parts, it just takes time to reassemble. Lego's parts have high strength.

Because this one is not a counter argument, it just says why not? It does not tell what your benefit is from all this. Apart from making a video with a big wow factor that attracts a lot of views.. Which can be legitimate, but is different from something useful in the technical sense.

[Davidz90]

On 10/8/2024 at 8:10 PM, bruh said:

But, Lego can be paralleled to a real can: you can engineer a crumple zone for that car, and see how that version crashes. So, while I think you have a point, I personally see a few ways that point could be incorrect. However, to each his own.

Sure, but aren't crumple zones meant to, well, crumple? Not turn into thousand pieces flying in various directions? Also, the point of engineering a crumple zone is safety, and I don't see any crash dummies or acceleration sensors here. "See how that version crashes" is a pretty meaningless statement. It crashes like a Lego car. Sorry for being harsh, but in my opinion there's really no point to this, apart from video views. Which, of course, is a valid reason.

Edited October 9, 2024 by Davidz90

[bruh]

Ok, I see your point. However, for me, it is mostly the fact of: ok, this time it broke. How can I make it survive? 
If that comes at the price of breaking pieces, and I’m fine with that, then I’ll do it. Personally, I don’t want to. But in this guy’s case, he wanted to and did. If you disagree, fine. I see your point and I hope you see mine.

[Davidz90]

16 minutes ago, bruh said:

ok, this time it broke. How can I make it survive? 

Sure, I see your point. If he actually rebuilt the car multiple times and crashed it in the same, controlled conditions, iteratively improving the structure then yeah, that would be a legit engineering problem (a bit niche since who needs (alleged) 70 km/h impact resistant Lego structure but oh well...). In the end, surviving an impact is all about dissipating the energy; pieces flying in all directions are a good thing. Making things more sturdy will only result in more broken pieces so hard to say what the actual goal here might be. If piece survival, then oversized body sticking far out of the chassis, made out of flex tubes or soft panels linked with rubber connectors would be way to go, I guess?

[bruh]

Agreed. He didn’t improve on his design, I don’t think he thought of improving it, but just wanted a video. Anyway, yes I agree. Many flying pieces=safer for occupants (who aren’t even there lol)