I really like this simple Pirate set designed by MyFirstMOC-Hun but the way the tree is attached to the rock has been bugging me for a while now. Right now the technic brick with a hole is sort of hovering over the plant piece. Is there a better / cleaner way to attach it behind the slope? Lego's go-to solution is using the 15100 piece:

 

But I'm not sold on it (also it comes in odd colours + it's hard to camouflage)

Any ideas are welcome :)

 

https://www.classic-pirates.com/mocs/subtheme/pirates/lonely-island-myfirstmoc

@zinnn

I have not tried this with physical pieces and it would be a single stud connection on the base rather than a technic pin connection, but it should theoretically work to use the following pieces to cover the technic pin on the tail piece and use the round tile with bar to push into the technic pin to convert to a stud connection.

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=18654#T=C&C=88 & https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=20482#T=C&C=88

All three pieces are available in reddish brown.  1x1 round bricks could be added underneath the round tile with bar to increase the height of the trunk for a little variation.  Bars covered in 1x1 round bricks and 1x1 round plates with hole through center could connect in the technic pin to increase the strength of the connection.

Edited October 5, 2024Oct 5 by Slegengr

Secure the brick with a T-style bracket ( https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=4585#T=C ). Also see my old post for how to use such sideways pin connections: https://myleniumsbrickcorner.wordpress.com/2020/05/03/egged-all-over/. You just have to plan for a little more space.

Mylenium

On 10/5/2024 at 4:27 AM, Slegengr said:

@zinnn

I have not tried this with physical pieces and it would be a single stud connection on the base rather than a technic pin connection, but it should theoretically work to use the following pieces to cover the technic pin on the tail piece and use the round tile with bar to push into the technic pin to convert to a stud connection. 

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=18654#T=C&C=88 & https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=20482#T=C&C=88

All three pieces are available in reddish brown.  1x1 round bricks could be added underneath the round tile with bar to increase the height of the trunk for a little variation.  Bars covered in 1x1 round bricks and 1x1 round plates with hole through center could connect in the technic pin to increase the strength of the connection.

This sounds great! Just tested in Studio, unfortunately I don't have the pieces at home to give it a try IRL but will order them and see what happens :)

I think this is a good idea, let us know if it works.

_Kodi

 

 

Edited October 16, 2024Oct 16 by avensis

On 10/5/2024 at 4:27 AM, Slegengr said:

@zinnn

I have not tried this with physical pieces and it would be a single stud connection on the base rather than a technic pin connection, but it should theoretically work to use the following pieces to cover the technic pin on the tail piece and use the round tile with bar to push into the technic pin to convert to a stud connection.

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=18654#T=C&C=88 & https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=20482#T=C&C=88

All three pieces are available in reddish brown.  1x1 round bricks could be added underneath the round tile with bar to increase the height of the trunk for a little variation.  Bars covered in 1x1 round bricks and 1x1 round plates with hole through center could connect in the technic pin to increase the strength of the connection.

So I tried this, and it doesn't work. The bar won't fit into the technic pin.

However that made me realise I can use piece 62462 instead:

 

@zinnn  Yeah, since my previous post, I have read about the newer style "squared" holes inside technic pins that do not allow for bar connections.  I guessed that may be the case with the newer tail/trunk/branch piece and is probably why it does not work.

Your solution looks pretty good.

Edited October 23, 2024Oct 23 by Slegengr

@zinnnNice solution. Looks really good.