 | | Re: 8421 first impressions —John Barnes
|
| | | Well, I just finished building this set and all I can say is WOW!! This supplants the space shuttle set as the ultimate technic building set in my humble opinion. The whole body section of the vehicle is chocked full of mechanisms. There's (...) (19 years ago, 19-Jun-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —Thomas D. Fulk, Jr.
|
| | | | (...) I just finished mine as well. It is quite an incredible set to build and operate. I like how the cable spools itself in and out with the boom extension/retract though sometimes one seems to outrun the other. With the boom up and extended I (...) (19 years ago, 19-Jun-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —Vineet Honkan
|
| | | | (...) I also have finished this set and I also like the boom extension, but the main problems for me seem to be that the boom extension doesn't move smoothly, and the outriggers follow the same pattern as the ones from earlier sets (8862, 8460). (...) (19 years ago, 19-Jun-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | (...) I like the smaller lift & carry cranes, which actually run the hoist cable through the boom extension, so that extending the boom doesn't require letting out any cable at all. (...) That may be a playability decision. As I found with my (URL) (...) (19 years ago, 19-Jun-05, to lugnet.technic, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —Gyl Midroni
|
| | | | Just completed 8421 myself. Impressions: -certainly the longest technic build I've ever had. -an excellent parts pack -looks very impressive when complete -functionality: vaguely disappointing. When all is said and done, what can this, the biggest (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —Gyl Midroni
|
| | | | One other question regarding this set. Why the new type of motor? It is bigger than it needs to be, not any better as far as I can tell than the standard type (just as noisy anyway), and no doubt added to the cost of the set. It has two places that (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —danny staple
|
| | | | | (...) I think it is supposed to deliver more torque than the standard motor. Anyone care to verify that for me? (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —Philippe Hurbain
|
| | | | | | (...) Indeed... more torque, but lower efficiency: (URL) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —danny staple
|
| | | | | | (...) Hmm - not a lot more torque, but a huge amoutn of additional consumption, and fairly highly reduced efficiency. The 5292 appears to definately be the American SUV of the Lego motor range. I take it that for heavier torque - it is still better (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —Gyl Midroni
|
| | | | | | (...) Thanks for the info. Still, I don't see the need to use this motor in the 8421. It only uses one motor, and it is not a very demanding application. They could have used the minimotor easily. It would have been smaller and less expensive, and (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —Vineet Honkan
|
| | | | | | | Yes. When I built the crane, I had the same problem. This can be fixed however. All you have to do is attach the extra tubes. (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —Gyl Midroni
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Hi Vineet. In what way did you atached the extra tubes (there were a few cm of back and blue tubing left over after I cut the size I needed - I assume you are referring to those). Thanks, Gyl (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —Thomas D. Fulk, Jr.
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I will make an assumption (not always a good idea) and say the 2 unused cylinder retract ports should be hooked together with 2 legs of a Tee, then the third leg of the Tee attaced to the unused port on the pneumatic switch. Every other (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —Gyl Midroni
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Thanks, I did do that and it works so so, but not great (I stil have to very carefully partially open the switch so it leaks slowly) but certainly better than before. What's wierd is that there is actually an extra tee in the set, although not (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —Steve Hassenplug
|
| | | | | | | On Fri, July 1, 2005 10:17 am, Gyl said: (...) I replaced the single pair of pneumatic cylinders with two pair of pneumatic cylinders. It's a very easy change (except for securing the two cylinders end-to-end) That allows the boom to hold much more (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —John Barnes
|
| | | | | | | (...) As far as I understand it, having had a chance to chat with the set designer in Billund during the inside tour, the "buggy" motor is cheaper than the smaller one you are referring to. The buggy motor uses a conventional iron cored armature (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —Matthew Jeffery
|
| | | | | | | (...) well... you could just only switch the pneumatic switch to the centre stop. I have done this and the air gently flows out and the boom slowly lowers (not too slowly mind you, but it doesn't slam down). I think this is designed to only use two (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | (...) Hi Gyl, one thing you could try is adding hoses to the unused cylinder outlets, and pushing lever handle partially in the end of the hose. I've found by adjusting how far the lever is up the hose you can partially block the hose, which would (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: 8421 first impressions —Steve Hassenplug
|
| | | | On Thu, June 30, 2005 11:49 pm, Gyl said: (...) The motor is the same used in the RC Racers. It's much more powerful than the other motor, runs three times as fast, but also draws more current. The two outputs run at different speeds. Steve (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | |
