 | | | | | | |
| |
|
I hope this isn't old news - at least I couldn't find any mention
of it here, so...
While rummaging through a new copy of the Ultimate Builders
Set (#3800), I noticed that the 9V mini-motor that came with
the set was somewhat different than ones I've encountered
before. Normally, when I get a new one of these motors,
I twirl the shaft with my fingers to hear that nice purring gear
box sound they tend to make. Well, to my surprise, this
one made a lot of noise. Not only that, but when I let go
of the shaft after giving it a twirl, it only continued to rotate
for about 2 seconds (as opposed to the 5 seconds or so for
a normal motor). I thought "Darn, I got a bad motor!".
However, after looking at this new motor for a while and
comparing its operation to a "normal" motor, I noticed that
indeed there were cosmetic differences as well. And, the
number on the bottom of the motor in question was different
than all the other motors in my collection (i.e. new motor =
43362, old motors = 71427). Here's an image of the
differences I found between the two versions:
http://home.surewest.net/markril/Lego/motors.jpg
Oh, one more thing - while writing this I noticed that the
new motor is definitely lighter (i.e. less mass) than normal
motors.
What's funny is that this is the second copy of set 3800
I've acquired. The first set must have shipped with the
normal version of the motor, because all my other motors
are of the 71427 variety.
Now, up to this point I've tried to be objective about this
new motor. But, since the new version makes more noise
and doesn't rotate as freely, I'm led to believe that this
might be a cost cutting move on Lego's part. That, or I
really do have a bad motor and it's just a coincidence
that it happens to be the new version.
So, does anybody else have one of these new motors?
And, how does its operation compare to the others you
have?
Mark
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
I too, just got one of these, though it shipped in August from PITSCO. All
of the things you mention. I thought I had a bad one. But I am giving it
the benefit of the doubt, and it seems to operate well. I have not done a
no-load rotation count test yet, which I do with all motors.
It may well be that these are superior motors. The first ones had some
noted flaws, and LEGO replaced a lot of them. That would be enough
motivation to redesign. I also note that it appears these can be taken
apart more easily. You first!
Let's see how it goes.
--Jack Gregory
"Mark Riley" <markril@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:H40C99.G88@lugnet.com...
> I hope this isn't old news - at least I couldn't find any mention
> of it here, so...
>
> While rummaging through a new copy of the Ultimate Builders
> Set (#3800), I noticed that the 9V mini-motor that came with
> the set was somewhat different than ones I've encountered
> before. Normally, when I get a new one of these motors,
> I twirl the shaft with my fingers to hear that nice purring gear
> box sound they tend to make. Well, to my surprise, this
> one made a lot of noise. Not only that, but when I let go
> of the shaft after giving it a twirl, it only continued to rotate
> for about 2 seconds (as opposed to the 5 seconds or so for
> a normal motor). I thought "Darn, I got a bad motor!".
>
> However, after looking at this new motor for a while and
> comparing its operation to a "normal" motor, I noticed that
> indeed there were cosmetic differences as well. And, the
> number on the bottom of the motor in question was different
> than all the other motors in my collection (i.e. new motor =
> 43362, old motors = 71427). Here's an image of the
> differences I found between the two versions:
>
> http://home.surewest.net/markril/Lego/motors.jpg
>
> Oh, one more thing - while writing this I noticed that the
> new motor is definitely lighter (i.e. less mass) than normal
> motors.
>
> What's funny is that this is the second copy of set 3800
> I've acquired. The first set must have shipped with the
> normal version of the motor, because all my other motors
> are of the 71427 variety.
>
> Now, up to this point I've tried to be objective about this
> new motor. But, since the new version makes more noise
> and doesn't rotate as freely, I'm led to believe that this
> might be a cost cutting move on Lego's part. That, or I
> really do have a bad motor and it's just a coincidence
> that it happens to be the new version.
>
> So, does anybody else have one of these new motors?
> And, how does its operation compare to the others you
> have?
>
> Mark
>
>
>
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.robotics, Mark Riley writes:
> Here's an image of the
> differences I found between the two versions:
>
> http://home.surewest.net/markril/Lego/motors.jpg
This link doesn't work for me. Is your website down? Does anyone else have
an image of the new motor?
thanks,
TJ
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
TJ,
Mark has graciously allowed his picture to be added to my Brickshelf
comparison page. Here's a deep link until the moderation is done:
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/ClarkCorner/Vintage/Comparisons/motor_9v_gear.jpg
Hope that helps,
Clark
Visit my Vintage Parts pages, submissions always welcome:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=8642
Looking for a minifig, head, torso, or color information? Try my helper:
http://clarkcorner.home.att.net/VisualMiniHelper.html
In lugnet.robotics, Thomas Avery writes:
> In lugnet.robotics, Mark Riley writes:
> > Here's an image of the
> > differences I found between the two versions:
>
> This link doesn't work for me. Is your website down? Does anyone else have
> an image of the new motor?
>
> thanks,
> TJ
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.robotics, Clark Stephens writes:
> TJ,
> Mark has graciously allowed his picture to be added to my Brickshelf
> comparison page. Here's a deep link until the moderation is done:
> http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/ClarkCorner/Vintage/Comparisons/motor_9v_gear.jpg
I examined my motors and did not really notice anything like this in them;
all were of the older type you have listed there. (one from the barcode set,
two from the Mindstorms RDS and one extra I got from ebay)
One thing that came to mind though was that the first version of these
motors did have some problems with them, and there were a number of
complaints about the motors breaking down, becoming too stiff, and some
other such things. These were only present in the very first 8735 and 8479
sets though, and I think TLC made a corrected version after a few months.
-Gaurav
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.robotics, Gaurav Thakur writes:
> In lugnet.robotics, Clark Stephens writes:
> > TJ,
> > Mark has graciously allowed his picture to be added to my Brickshelf
> > comparison page. Here's a deep link until the moderation is done:
> > http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/ClarkCorner/Vintage/Comparisons/motor_9v_gear.jpg
>
> I examined my motors and did not really notice anything like this in them;
> all were of the older type you have listed there. (one from the barcode set,
> two from the Mindstorms RDS and one extra I got from ebay)
>
> One thing that came to mind though was that the first version of these
> motors did have some problems with them, and there were a number of
> complaints about the motors breaking down, becoming too stiff, and some
> other such things. These were only present in the very first 8735 and 8479
> sets though, and I think TLC made a corrected version after a few months.
>
> -Gaurav
From what I noticed...
The permanent magnet is made by pressing together metal filings under
pressure (my deduction, dunno if its true), and sometimes the magnet
literally disintegrates, which causes metal filings to gum up the entire
works. When I took my seized motor apart, it looked as if the coating
around the magnet was bubbled, and in areas, opened up to let loose the
metal filings into the rest of the motor. As well, when the coating of the
magnet starts to bubble, it presses against the winding casing, which is the
'slowdown' before the 'seize'.
Either way, I received replacements for all my seized motors (3) from LEGO.
I now have 16 working motors, and so far, no more seized ones.
Dave K
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.robotics, Clark Stephens writes:
> TJ,
> Mark has graciously allowed his picture to be added to my Brickshelf
> comparison page. Here's a deep link until the moderation is done:
> http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/ClarkCorner/Vintage/Comparisons/motor_9v_gear.jpg
Thanks Clark!
TJ
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
<<snip>>
Just checked mine and eight of them are all the 'old' version, I can not
tell about the nineth since it's deep in a MOC.
Four of them is from 8457 Power Puller, two replaced by LEGO, two from the
RIS and one 8479 BarCode truck.
One of the replacements came spring 2002 so the newer ones should be from
summer or younger...
Just delurking some :)
/Tobbe, still alive and kickin'!
http://www.arnesson.nu/lotek/
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.robotics, Mark Riley writes:
> I hope this isn't old news - at least I couldn't find any mention
> of it here, so...
>
> While rummaging through a new copy of the Ultimate Builders
> Set (#3800), I noticed that the 9V mini-motor that came with
> the set was somewhat different than ones I've encountered
> before. Normally, when I get a new one of these motors,
> I twirl the shaft with my fingers to hear that nice purring gear
> box sound they tend to make. Well, to my surprise, this
> one made a lot of noise. Not only that, but when I let go
> of the shaft after giving it a twirl, it only continued to rotate
> for about 2 seconds (as opposed to the 5 seconds or so for
> a normal motor). I thought "Darn, I got a bad motor!".
>
> However, after looking at this new motor for a while and
> comparing its operation to a "normal" motor, I noticed that
> indeed there were cosmetic differences as well. And, the
> number on the bottom of the motor in question was different
> than all the other motors in my collection (i.e. new motor =
> 43362, old motors = 71427). Here's an image of the
> differences I found between the two versions:
>
> http://home.surewest.net/markril/Lego/motors.jpg
>
> Oh, one more thing - while writing this I noticed that the
> new motor is definitely lighter (i.e. less mass) than normal
> motors.
>
> What's funny is that this is the second copy of set 3800
> I've acquired. The first set must have shipped with the
> normal version of the motor, because all my other motors
> are of the 71427 variety.
>
> Now, up to this point I've tried to be objective about this
> new motor. But, since the new version makes more noise
> and doesn't rotate as freely, I'm led to believe that this
> might be a cost cutting move on Lego's part. That, or I
> really do have a bad motor and it's just a coincidence
> that it happens to be the new version.
>
> So, does anybody else have one of these new motors?
> And, how does its operation compare to the others you
> have?
>
> Mark
Yes, there now seems to be at least TWO different versions of the 5225 9V Gear
reduced motor. On the motor bases there is a number '71427' and in the bottom
left corner there is a number '1' on the older version. The new version has
'43362' and in the corner a '2' and above the '2' the is a smaller 'R2' in
italics. Note- these are on the motors I have but there may be differences on
other motors.
The new motor is lighter, noisier and doesn't free spin as long as the older
model.
Just in a basic test of direct connecting an old style to a new style motor
(using one as a generator and one as a motor). You get different results
turning the old style to power the new than the other way around. I don't know
if this is the gearing difference or one is generating less power. A one
revolution turn gives different results from old to new and then new to old.
The internal construction is different. When you pop off the back. The brushes
are connected to the back panel. (In comparing this with some other faulty
motors I just pulled apart I found there were two slightly different designs of
the older style as well. The number on the bottom is the same but is is a
different point size !?! The internal moulding in one is black and the other
white.) (pps. I just found one with the same old number but had '-002' after it
but the '2' was mirrored?!?)
There is a difference in the weight. The old style had a metal casing around
the internals. The new style has a plastic internal casing. I remember seeing a
posting where someone had found that the magnet was losing filings and that
had caused the motor to seize. Maybe in the plastic it is more contained ?!?
The old style gear ratio is 10 - 43 - 12 -37
The new style gears are 10 - 44 - 11- 35
I am petty sure these figures are correct. I was going cross eyed counting but
doubled checked the counts and they seem correct.
Sorry this is so Q&D. If I can grab a digital camera I'll post some pics.
Regards,
Bernard
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.robotics, Mark Riley wrote:
> I hope this isn't old news - at least I couldn't find any mention
> of it here, so...
>
> While rummaging through a new copy of the Ultimate Builders
> Set (#3800), I noticed that the 9V mini-motor that came with
> the set was somewhat different than ones I've encountered
> before. Normally, when I get a new one of these motors,
> I twirl the shaft with my fingers to hear that nice purring gear
> box sound they tend to make. Well, to my surprise, this
> one made a lot of noise. Not only that, but when I let go
> of the shaft after giving it a twirl, it only continued to rotate
> for about 2 seconds (as opposed to the 5 seconds or so for
> a normal motor). I thought "Darn, I got a bad motor!".
>
> However, after looking at this new motor for a while and
> comparing its operation to a "normal" motor, I noticed that
> indeed there were cosmetic differences as well. And, the
> number on the bottom of the motor in question was different
> than all the other motors in my collection (i.e. new motor =
> 43362, old motors = 71427). Here's an image of the
> differences I found between the two versions:
>
> http://home.surewest.net/markril/Lego/motors.jpg
>
> Oh, one more thing - while writing this I noticed that the
> new motor is definitely lighter (i.e. less mass) than normal
> motors.
>
> What's funny is that this is the second copy of set 3800
> I've acquired. The first set must have shipped with the
> normal version of the motor, because all my other motors
> are of the 71427 variety.
>
> Now, up to this point I've tried to be objective about this
> new motor. But, since the new version makes more noise
> and doesn't rotate as freely, I'm led to believe that this
> might be a cost cutting move on Lego's part. That, or I
> really do have a bad motor and it's just a coincidence
> that it happens to be the new version.
>
> So, does anybody else have one of these new motors?
> And, how does its operation compare to the others you
> have?
>
> Mark
Dear Mark
I couldn't find any data about the radios of 43362 motor in the website. Do you
have any information about this motor's radios?
Best Regards
Sahar
| | | | | | |
