XL motor swap in the LEGO Technic 42124 Off-road buggy - is it any better?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 มิ.ย. 2024
- The LEGO Technic 42124 Off-road buggy has two Powered Up L motors for drive and steering. The 42109 Top Gear Rally Car had an XL motor for drive, what happens if we add that to the buggy?
Philo's motor chart - www.philohome.com/motors/moto...
If you'd like to see more LEGO® RC fun then please follow me on Instagram, on my Facebook page or on my blog:
/ racing.brick
/ racingbrick
www.racingbrick.com - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
the limitation is the technic hub, not the motor. the reason why the vehicle stop is not becase the motor is overloaded, but because the mosfet in the Hub that's driving the motor is overheating. the Motor drivers used in the hubs are intended for an optimal range of 0.5-1A output with a max capacity of 2.5A devided between 2 channels. the problem is that the efficiency curve gets shot to hell alove 1A draw, and the driver chip overheats, causing a shutdown. the larger motor draws more power, so it will shutdown faster since the driver chip will overheat LONG before the motor has reached its limit. the L motor draws less power, so it can push out more torque effectively before tripping the overheat.
Does this mean with something like BuWizz brick (3rd party) the difference would be there?
@@akauppi2 yes. thats a large reason why Bwizz 3.0 is targeted to PU motors.
Does this mean the hub has a design defect or does Lego also make (plan to make) a bigger hub to handle the larger motor? In the Philo chart the L and XL seem to have the exact same torque, but the L has a barely faster rotation speed. That seems like some pretty weird specs for something called an XL motor.
At least with the Power Function line the XL motor provided over twice the torque for a slower rotation speed trade off.
id be curious to test the L vs XL motors on the Buwizz 3.0 to see if its just that the motors really are a marketing gimmic, or if the poor design of the hub is screwing them over.
I highly doubt lego will release any more higher power motor parts or they would have all ready, given how popular and sought after the buggy motor is; same goes for power packs.
im curious if the use of an insufficient driver IC is a lame downcosting measure, or if it was done to change the product classification to clear EU laws.
id imagine the PU system skirts the border between consumer electronics and toys under EU regulations, so that may have something to do with it
Does this mean that Lego made a mistake? Or they did it in purpose and XL means just the physical size of motor?
I think now we need to see a PF version
Yeesss please!
Agree!
Agreed
Such a neat house :)
Thanks, at least the carefully selected areas where I could film, this would be impossible in the LEGO building area :D
:)
@@RacingBrick:D
Sariel!!!
Very interesting. Thanks for this comparison!
This is really cool content
Recently I bought the 42099 Xtreme Offroader and was surprised to notice that at some times (while testing in heavy terrain, fresh batteries) the _rear_ XL motor would simply cut out, followed by the front motor as that one got all the load. My guess: the Powered Up brick does some serious current limiting. At its maximum output power, the XL motor needs more current than the L motor, but by no means it *gets* that current. At the same rpm and voltage, this practically means that the XL motor is no stronger than the L motor. I think that a good tuned Buwizz can unlock a lot of potential here. Can you hook these up to a Buwizz? If there is a big difference, this means that the reason is not the motor itself but the crazy low current limit set by TLG.
I think you gotta wait till february, because thats when the new BuWizz version with 4 PU ports comes out.
Its the 42099s safety auto stop so when the motors are put through too much stress the hub automaticly stops the motors so the motors dont break from stress
@@QuincySonOfQuincy_ power functions didnt have that
Thanks, I was looking for this after Sariel's double L motor test
That was great . You have solved a problem of mine for me.
Many thanks .
Keep up the toil.
I reached your video after wanting to try the exact same thing. I'm glad I did not purchase an XL motor to test it. Thank you
Maybe the hub can't deliver so much current to the XL motor so it cuts out.
Hmm. Very interesting observation.
I was going to say first but I remembered I had brain cells
First
🙏 thank you brother ☺️
Its really cool to see such an expert like you in Lego modelling.
one xl motor on each wheel, 4 wheels, claas tires, very fun machine, good climbing, good test with l motors aswell
Just picked this up with my fiancé. Can’t wait to build. I mainly got this for the drives and Bluetooth! I have the mustang and Porsche and doms challenger
Szia Balázs. Én nagyon nagyon díjaznám hogy ha csinálnál ilyen legós videókat magyarul. Nagyon jók a videóid.
He deseves a lot more subscribers
After reading philos page multiple times, watching some videos and testing myself I would say: If there is a difference in rotation speed and torque it is insignificant.
Maybe there are internal differences which cause advantages/disadvanteges in longlivity or other properties under different load characteristics. But who knows.... :D Maybe do a long run test with medium load variation? Like rubberbands attached to a liftarm so it gets more and less stretched while the motor rotates (with downgearing) .
I was not expecting that
So in my oppinion this set can't be really upgraded. Thanks for some informations about this set and xl motor
could you try also with the angular motor from the 42114 it could be interesting i think
I enjoy these different tests two see real world results
Outstanding test as always !!! I would never have guessed the result myself.
Just a shot in the dark: PERHAPS the advantages of the XL motor are only noticeable when the Voltage is increased a little, like with a BuWizz.
Usually greater Torque requires higher Voltage and rechargeable batteries run those motors pretty poorly with their nominal 1.2 volts.
What I am saying is that in this test the L motor was being run close to its true potential while the XL was still far from it.
Well they should show whatever potential they have with the Powered Up hubs since that's where they are supposed to be used in LEGO sets.
@@RacingBrick True. Only one way to find out though. Could you try with Alkaline batteries and see if there is any change?
@@KastaRules I won't waste 12 alkalines for this. The pack of fully charged LADDAs is around 8.4V (as they can be charged over the nominal 1.2V). A pack of average alkalines is 9V, and it drops quickly with use so there's not much difference. I'll try with higher voltage though, but not alkalines ;)
@@RacingBrick Fair enough. I assumed you were swimming in cash, being a TH-cam celebrity and all!
Seriously though, I believe a pack of rechargeable NiZn batteries or better yet, the upcoming PU compatible BuWizz, could show the difference in power between L and XL.
Lol, YT celebrity swimming in cash? I'm lightyears away of that...
So cool. May be you can build your own Engine.
What are the blocks needed on step 65 for? Cause I was thinking of swapping the gears out to make it run faster when I get it.
Very interesting tests! Glad it confirms my doubts about the usefulness of the XL motor... The only thing I can hope is an increased reliability in the long run at high power, but...
I will do additional tests to have a better view on this, can't believe there's no purpose of the XL :)
Couldn't believe that either, but...
Ive been curious about using two motors at the same time to drive the wheels. Have one on the other and run it in reverse
Great test, that's exactly the comparison I was curious about, wondering why they put the L motor into the buggy instead of an XL one. I am also experimenting with a faster car with two XL motors, and find that it soon becomes quite bad at climbing. My current theory is that the XL motor may be better suited for larger/slower constructions, especially if only one motor is used for drive, like in the Volvo hauler. Maybe, it would be a good test to swap an L motor into the hauler and see how it compares to the original XL version. Would you like to try that? It also gives the possibility to test with different gear ratios. Hopefully the swap would not need too much rebuilding.
Will try the swap with another set, but that'll also show the difference
That's weird, have you tried that with another XL motor? Or is legos definition of XL more planetary gears?
Thanks for this great and insightful comparison! You could try building the XTreme Offroader (I think 42099) with L instead of XL motors. Also, it would be interesting to know how the C+L motor stacks up against the PF L. Thanks!
I think i saw this comparison on YT already.
I compared the PU versions with the PF ones already, it's linked in this video as well
@@RacingBrick Great to know, thanks!
Next up: PF Buggy motor (with full PF conversion)! Or how about a 4x4 mod...powered by a buggy motor(s?)!
So. Many. Questions.
I really don't understand what's going on at Lego.
I just recently got into Lego Technic. At the beginning I thought I was dumb, not getting what's happening.
They seem to be head and shoulders above everyone else building ABS plastic Elements.
Yet, App-Design and very basic motors are all over the place. I'm so puzzled.
They put out a Helicopter with a useful part, but take it off the market before release, and it's like a thousand money.
They put out a cool servo motor in the same generation where all motors can be servos. - and they still don't let people play with it, still not supporting it on their Powered Up App.
I believe the XL motor actually has a lot of capabilities, but the smart hub cuts off the engine if he's submitted to "too much" stress and it ruins everything, with PF you could actually use all the torque of the engine...sad
i was thinking to make a new motor in to have more stength when driving in the garden on gras. but that shows that its not really nessesary
The Motors may perform similar but they’re vastly different in design! Put an axle in both of them and try to spin it! You can feel the motor almost turn at the same rate you spin with the XL motor(only slightly geared) whilst the L motor is quite hard to spin meaning it’s majorly geared down.
Think of the L motor like a small high revving engine whilst the XL is a low revving bigger one! With the gears inside the motor they end up producing very similar rpm and torque at the shaft. The XL will be better suited for harder, longer use and should be slightly more efficient!
It does seem odd that at the shaft we use they’re virtually identical in performance but I’m pretty sure Lego knew what they were doing here. Guessing it’s down to reliability and energy efficiency when under hard load which is why the lighter vehicles probably use the smaller L motor and the heavy ones the XL.
Well except the Top Gear Rally Car uses the XL motor and it is very far from being heavy. I also wish LEGO knew what they were doing but I still cannot see the evidence yet.
@@RacingBrick hey I’ve done an RPM test video if youed like to see! After watching your video I was intrigued to see how much quicker it was! Appears to be hardly quicker with no more torque! It’s bizarre!
So I configured some Lego motors to hack together my own Arduino-controlled Lego car... The weight of that circuit board, breadboard and two 9V batteries was likely the cause for my L motor's miserable attempt at movement, so I stuck in an XL and now it actually moves at a decent speed. I am convinced there is an increase in performance here.
I’d love to see if you swap the gear ratio from 36:12 to 40:8 ! That’d be awesome to see if it’s worth it !!!
what app you use for steep measurement ?
How hard would it be to change the drive motor and put in its place a pull back motor
Loved the video! Are you Hungarian?😃
Igen
Power up motors be like:
XL motor = L motor
L motor = XL motor
add some weight on top of the L motor to balance the weight difference. And swap the batteries between two cars and run the experiment again just in case there's a factor there.
And it would probably make sense to test with standard batteries, the 9V vs 7.2 can make the difference
I did this test multiple times and the batteries were charged and mixed so it is not about the batteries.
Since both hubs was using the same type of batteries, if there's a difference then it should be visible at 7.2V as well.
Problem is your batteries. As They are only 1,2 Volts you are undervolting the entire Control + brick. This leads to higher current going to the motors to preform the same task, and the XL motor requires more current than the L motor. By using the 1,2 V batteries the current becomes so high that the Control+ brick cuts power, and as the XL motor draw more power this will cut before the L, giving it worse acceleration and less torque.
I do not know how high the current limit for the Control+ hub is, but in my experience it is fare lower than it was in the old PF hub (and even that was low). It would be interesting to see the same test again with alkaline batterie (non rechargable), and it would also be interesting if you could meassure the total batteri voltage with the rechargeable batteries compared to 1,5 Volt alkaline batteries. Normally a fresh 1,5 battery is close to 1,7 volts but quickly drops to 1.5 Volts when the chemistry starts (power drawn from the battery), but a old unused battery can be lower due to current drawn through the batterys internal resistance (this is why batteries are stamped with a date - after this the internal current leakage will have taped the of so much power they no longer are within spec).Normally a rechargeable AA battery is close to 1,35 Volts fully charges, and quickly drops to 1,2 Volts, but this is dependent on the chemestry, and some batteries can go as high as 1,5 Volts, and have as slower drop i voltage.
I use DC/DC steppers to increas the voltage delivered to my PF hubs, and this allows them to deliver a lot more power before the current protection cuts in, making them useable with even heavy machines. I guess the same should be possible with the Controll+ Hub, but haven't looked into it yet. It may also be possible to remove or short circuit the current limiter... But I suggest you start with using better (higher volt) batteries to understand the true difference between these motors.
It's a nice theory, but practice is different. XL motor still shows less torque and overall power than the L one even when I use alkaline batteries (yep, tested). Btw rechargeables are closer to 1.4V fully charged, and let's agree that an average alkaline is around 1.5V and then drops quicker than the rechargeable ones, so if you're considering a real life scenario and not a lab test then there should be no significant difference from this aspect. The "true difference" as you say should be clearly visible with average use and not only in very specific cases, e.g. when you use high-power brand new alkalines for about 5 minutes before their voltage starts to drop.
I found a really good app from the powered up motors it's called Controls it's really good
Now I am really confused....
i like the xl
The Control+ XL motor is pointless. Just another drawback of switching to Control+.
I am really disappointed by Lego motors these days, there seems to be no further development. Would be curious to see what you think of the motor of the Mould King 18001 Buggy. I know, Mould King :-( ... but the motor performance.
I've tested this swap too on my 42124 and got the exact same results with the exact same confusion (XL motor picked on my 42099). Basically I was asking the same question: why Lego made this XL motor since the L can do the same and even a bit better ?
While searching for an answer and testing myself in a lot of different situation it seems that the internal motor speed on the XL is slower than the one in the L (fairly less noisy) despite a very similar output speed, I guess it means that the XL has more torque before reduction than the L but I still cant understand where this would be useful.
In my opinion it would be interesting to test both L and XL on the future Buwizz 3.0 to see if things change at 11V+.
This little set is still very interesting, even if the default suspension is basically useless since they are way too stiff and the rear pivot way to short. I'm currently modding it to get the model lighter (better power to weight ratio) and fix that suspension problem, the front was easy (dark grey shocks are perfect for it), but the rear is still complicated to upgrade efficiently without guetting the wheelbase longer even if I still have some ideas for that.
thx for the info!
i saw a youtube video on third party PF - C+ adapter cables, that said that the C+hub is cutting power extremely early for motor damage prevention. if powered by the PF battery box, both the C+ L and XL where more powerful and the difference was more pronounced. also, PF Motors powered by the C+hub where less powerful and cut power earlier. so the buwizz will be interesting, but those adapters are as well
How can I connect my L motor and my rear Xl motor the app is given my me a hard time by passing the blues to the batter pack
How to swap the cable for the motors
Try to test 2x L motors, 2x XL motors and the Last one combination of both. Use one L and one XL motor.
The original buggy was test driven outside. Could the parts have loosened
or have enough wear to effect the test?
Nope
It has slightly better efficiency and lower no-load current, So i would say you can try comparing runtime. From Philo's data and/or Sariel's motor app.
Opposite switch in 42099 would be interesting, and current measurement during test also.
I'm more interested in practical tests than such as runtime tests since from an average user's perspective that doe not change much. People expect XL motors to have higher torque than L motors and that's simply does not seem to be the case here.
The max power output of the hub may be limited.
Why not make use power functions in it ??
Swap motors between units, still same results? Balance weight difference between units, still same results?
The 2 builds are exactly the same, no point to swap.Weight difference is less than 3%
Have they made it so that to get the full potential of the XL motor you have to use a control play present control? Bit with the l motor you can use it how ever you want as they haven't coded In The limits of the XL motor in powered up uet?
I don't think the Powered Up app limits the motors in any ways. Both motors were coded to run at 100%, I highly doubt LEGO would artificially limit the performance of the XL motor. What would be the point?
Upon seeing this video I am pretty sure I will never buy an XL motor or a set with XL motors. What was TLG thinking... The old PF XL motors at least had a purpose.
This is very logical... Example: L size underpants is smaller than XL size underpants. But the XL underpants breaks at the exact same moment the L does : )
Very interesting. Maybe a comparison of the two motors in 42099 is in order?
Need to get another 42099 :)
Honestly wish lego would release metal components with stronger higher rpm motors, i know a guy makee metal beams and axels on ebay
Is it possible to alter the gearbox in order to produce more torque with the XL motor
There's no gearbox, only a gear driving the differential. You need to replace the differential as well to have a different gearing, but in that case it'll become pretty slow. You would get a crawler that looks like a buggy :)
Can you test 42109 with XL as drive (default) vs 42109 with L as drive? Same for 42099 XL vs 42009 L.
42109 is a straightforward swap but 42099 might be more tricky, the XL motors are structural part of the chassis.
For your next test: Use the BrickControl 2 app and use a PS4 controler. As well use a L shape guide rail which should help with straight line comparison
I made several videos with the BrickController2 app, you can check them out
Jó néha belefutni random magyarokba :)
My guess: the amperage is limited in the software to match a L motor and will not fully power the XL motor. Did you try the buwizz app to power them? Maybe that makes a difference? (Edit) just noticed you used your own controls. It is either the batterybox or the batteries that limit the current...
I'm almost sure it is not related to the software. If anything is limiting the motor's capabilities then it js the hub. Already preparing the next experiment :)
Brake open the plastic shell of the motor to see
is it possible that the XL motor just used up the batteries quicker so there was less charge for the later test ?
I did the test several times, and the batteries were fully charged between them. I just did not record all attempts.
Have you noticed that the tie rod ( black O========O in the steering assembly) gets disconnected even with minor bumps?
Not really
@@RacingBrick :(
Great video. Maybe because of the higher amper XL motors consume or voltage. you should try it via the modifitaction of philo with 8,4 volt 2 cell lipo which i have in my rocky model. but i don't think it will change. and you should always make model's weight same not to remain any ? . thank you )
The weight difference is less than 3%, that should not play any significant role
@@RacingBrick yes agree but you have said maybe it's because of the weight difference. So thats why i ve said it's better not to leave any question marks in the minds and eliminate all the factors to test more accurately . Best Regards
@@Bricksfaction next time I'll make the weight equal, I just need better weather for a longer run outside :)
@@RacingBrick i will try to test it with powerful philo lipo mod in new technic hub. xl motor should have hp advantage . othervise it's completely useless.
can you do 42124 4x4
Just open both motors to see what is inside.
Like a lot of the comments here, it is very likely that the hub is the problem, cutting out the XL faster than the L.
Great video. But of course the XL was not going to be as good. You had no stickers!
Lol 🤣
I have some Lego models, but I am not an expert. However, according video you have used just 3 batteries. Usually there are 6 batteries in the box. But I do not know, how they are connected - serial or paralel.
You might want to check again, that battery holder has two sides for 3-3 batteries :)
maybe the fact that they both use the same batteries has something to do with it? like if two engines receive the same amount of fuel and air they will probably make the same amount of power
Well except if one is the engine of a Suzuki Swift and the other is the engine of a Ford Raptor...
if the fuse and the ptc inside the motor is removed , it will perform a lot lot better . lego is killing the fun with too many safety features
Do XL motor for acceleration and L motor for torque so both sacrifice something
2:57 So only the powered up XL is faster than the power functions XL, the rest of the PU motors are slower than their respective PF counterparts. I assume the internal planetary gear sets were adjusted for the powered up motors for more torque on medium and large motors, but the XL motor was adjusted for speed as opposed to torque.
i want to see the unboxing buwizz 3.0 pro
I want to see it too
What about M motor? will it be faster?
Definitely not
4:30 This was also my thought when I saw the specs of the L and XL motor. The torque of the XL is exactly the same as the L motor according to the specs. Talk about useless.
The XL motor seems completely pointless now. I wonder how long it will take until we get something like an XXL motor that's actually better
xxxxl motor in late 2k26 incoming for sure.
Very big maybe, but maybe the batteries were low.
Absolutely not, as I said in the video they were fully charged in both cars
The main benefit of the XL motor is that they'll probably be cheaper, because who wants to buy an inferior motor?
Also it might be worth trying with stronger batteries (I've heard most rechargeable batteries are weaker) as well as down the line if any firmware updates come out.
What ir you use L motors on the 42099?
XL motors are structural parts of the chassis there so it's not that trivial to swap.
@@RacingBrick yes i know, this was a suggestion for the long Run! ;)
Maybe just a bigger capacity
nah bro motor swapt a lego car :o
Now that you have two L motors you can do a quicker version. Maybe sariel has done it before, if i'm not wrong.
I have many L motors, but as you said Sariel already filmed it so we know what is the outcome :)
@@RacingBrick yes, but you will race the bricks out of it 😏
Maybe your Batteries are to weak for stressing these motors as hard
Hmmm so I guess XL just means that the Motor uses up more space and is worse :/
You could wire one more 1.2v battery to the batterypack and see what happens.
Not sure what you expect to happen. Both versions had the exact same type and amount of batteries, if there's a difference at 9V then there should be a difference at a lower voltage as well.
I was just thinking, would XL motor be better optimized with the correct voltage compared to L motor?
More torque perhaps?
I don't get this "correct voltage" theory. The fully charged LADDA battery pack has around 8.4V. Alkalines start at 9V but drop the voltage quickly, so only brand new alkalines should have any visible difference. And all properties like torque or speed should be proportional to the voltage, so if both the L & XL motor gets a similar voltage then any difference between them should be proportionally visible compared to a higher or lower voltage.
I upgraded my buggy with 2 XL motors, now it's super strong
Omg
I did Tests with the motors too:
As far as I can See the xl Motor hast the exakt Same Motor inside it That is also in the l motor
I dont know Why Lego did this
Would agree but they make a completely different sound! Unless that’s due to the xl motor having in effect more sound proofing with its extra thick sides?...
Put an axle in the motor and try to spin it as ive just tried! These motors have vastly different gearing! L motor spins really fast but is geared down inside whilst the XL motor has little gearing! The bizarre thing is why are they so similar, why have both when at the shaft we use they’re nearly identical? Could be due to reliability under heavy load or energy efficiency
You need extra power... kind of “rocket fuel”. Use a LiPo instead of these batteries and the speed will improve drastically.
The whole exercise is not about the power but the comparison of the 2 motors to see what is the difference. I could easily wire it up with a 3S LiPo but that's not the point.
@@RacingBrick Wouldn't 3s be too much?
@@nickvledder depends more on the controller, the motors should be able to handle it
RacingBrick Else, LiFePo might be worthwhile to consider. Little less votage per cell and stronger in withstanding mistreatment.
Hmm. And then why is exist a PU XL motor? Power Functions remains the only good system.
Here's why :) th-cam.com/video/L3iNvkLIw-0/w-d-xo.html
Nice video ! I'm sure LEGO is scared to make more powerful solutions cause it's supposed to be for kids. They don't want to get sued cause some kid ruined his finger with some motorized stuff. Also at some point they would have to produce new parts to handle the power, so more metal parts and more complex parts.
Agreed, that's why we will never get RC buggy motors again. But producing very similar motors make no real sense, so more tests are needed.
Put a lego buggy motor in it