Advice, examples, methods, materials, puzzle ideas, and on-going projects.



Author Message

kindard_ Post subject: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2016 4:53 am Sun Dec 18, 2016 4:53 am



Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 9:34 pm

Today I'm planning on a very, very big puzzle project.

Yes, a 33x33x33 Rubik's cube.

Which, well... I don't know how this will turn out!

Will it work or not? There's a lot of questions echoing in my head.

I have to think over and over about starting this project!

This project has a high chance of failure



This topic will be about the design and build of the puzzle. Please leave comments and everything down so I can improve my project!



Alright, let's start.



I use a modified conical design that was originally by Verdes.



i'm working on the sketch plane



Edit: Yes, this is my first post, yay! Hello, internet.Today I'm planning on a very, very big puzzle project.Yes, a 33x33x33 Rubik's cube.Which, well... I don't know how this will turn out!Will it work or not? There's a lot of questions echoing in my head.I have to think over and over about starting this project!This project has a high chance of failureThis topic will be about the design and build of the puzzle. Please leave comments and everything down so I can improve my project!Alright, let's start.I use a modified conical design that was originally by Verdes.i'm working on the sketch planeEdit: Yes, this is my first post, yay!



Last edited by kindard_ on Sun Dec 18, 2016 5:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

Konrad Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2016 5:07 am Sun Dec 18, 2016 5:07 am



Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:07 am

Website: https://sites.google.com/site/twistykon/

Location: Germany, Bavaria



This is a very special first post

Your project sounds audacious.



In any case, I cannot see a problem showing sketches here. The Verdes patent covers cubes <= 11x11x11.

The current world record is 17x17x17 by Oskar van Deventer.



I can certainly not contribute, but good luck. Welcome to the forum!This is a very special first postYour project sounds audacious.In any case, I cannot see a problem showing sketches here. The Verdes patent covers cubes <= 11x11x11.The current world record is 17x17x17 by Oskar van Deventer.I can certainly not contribute, but good luck.

_________________

My collection at: _________________My collection at: https://sites.google.com/site/twistykon/home

ilyaToporgilka Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2016 5:09 am Sun Dec 18, 2016 5:09 am

The largest cube is 22x22x22 by corenpuzzle.

Grégoire Pfennig Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2016 6:04 am Sun Dec 18, 2016 6:04 am



Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:48 am

Location: Belfort, France



Sorry to burst you bubble, but I'm printing this as soon as I buy myself the sintratec printer (in may at the latest), or as soon as Brandon finishes his The reason is that it would otherwise cost 7000$ to produce



(I'm not showing the mechanism yet, it's not Oskar's anchor mech, I'm thinking this might be more stable, and I don't like simply copying mechanisms)



I was hoping I wouldn't have to release this until it's complete, but I don't really have a choice anymore



Drawing the mechanism took me ~4 hours, filleting, tolerancing and shelling each part took me ~21 hours... Welcome to the forum !Sorry to burst you bubble, but I'm printing this as soon as I buy myself the sintratec printer (in may at the latest), or as soon as Brandon finishes hisThe reason is that it would otherwise cost 7000$ to produce(I'm not showing the mechanism yet, it's not Oskar's anchor mech, I'm thinking this might be more stable, and I don't like simply copying mechanisms)I was hoping I wouldn't have to release this until it's complete, but I don't really have a choice anymoreDrawing the mechanism took me ~4 hours, filleting, tolerancing and shelling each part took me ~21 hours...



Attachments: 33x33x33.jpg (43.12 KiB) Viewed 1816 times

_________________

Follow me on Facebook!

Follow me on YouTube!

Follow me on Twitter!

My Designs

My Spreadshirt Shop (15% off with coupon code: welcome-100194923)



All my designs are copyrighted Grégoire Pfennig©

Previously known as RubixFreakGreg _________________All my designs are copyrighted Grégoire Pfennig©

Gus Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2016 6:30 am Sun Dec 18, 2016 6:30 am



Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 12:00 am

Location: UK My god Greg, you are going to make your computer explode! And the universe implode.

kindard_ Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2016 7:30 am Sun Dec 18, 2016 7:30 am



Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 9:34 pm Grégoire Pfennig wrote: Welcome to the forum !



Sorry to burst you bubble, but I'm printing this as soon as I buy myself the sintratec printer (in may at the latest), or as soon as Brandon finishes his The reason is that it would otherwise cost 7000$ to produce



(I'm not showing the mechanism yet, it's not Oskar's anchor mech, I'm thinking this might be more stable, and I don't like simply copying mechanisms)



I was hoping I wouldn't have to release this until it's complete, but I don't really have a choice anymore



Drawing the mechanism took me ~4 hours, filleting, tolerancing and shelling each part took me ~21 hours... Welcome to the forum !Sorry to burst you bubble, but I'm printing this as soon as I buy myself the sintratec printer (in may at the latest), or as soon as Brandon finishes hisThe reason is that it would otherwise cost 7000$ to produce(I'm not showing the mechanism yet, it's not Oskar's anchor mech, I'm thinking this might be more stable, and I don't like simply copying mechanisms)I was hoping I wouldn't have to release this until it's complete, but I don't really have a choice anymoreDrawing the mechanism took me ~4 hours, filleting, tolerancing and shelling each part took me ~21 hours... My bubble exploded, and my brain imploded.



Woah, please do it then! (greg i am your fan)



...or I should go for a 41x41.... just kidding! XD

A 33x33 would have around 6k parts, not so budget-friendly, eh?







all abord ze hype trainnnn My bubble exploded, and my brain imploded.Woah, please do it then!(greg i am your fan)...or I should go for a 41x41.... just kidding! XDA 33x33 would have around 6k parts, not so budget-friendly, eh?all abord ze hype trainnnn

Grégoire Pfennig Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2016 8:07 am Sun Dec 18, 2016 8:07 am



Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:48 am

Location: Belfort, France



Kindard, it's easier to make a 33x33x33, because you can use a 3x3 as a 5x5 core, 5x5 as a 9x9 core etc. (3,5,9,17,33)



And yeah the puzzle has 6153 pieces, so I'm guessing an assembly time of a whole weekend ! Oh believe me Gus, the design process was about 15% design, 85% lagKindard, it's easier to make a 33x33x33, because you can use a 3x3 as a 5x5 core, 5x5 as a 9x9 core etc. (3,5,9,17,33)And yeah the puzzle has 6153 pieces, so I'm guessing an assembly time of a whole weekend !

_________________

Follow me on Facebook!

Follow me on YouTube!

Follow me on Twitter!

My Designs

My Spreadshirt Shop (15% off with coupon code: welcome-100194923)



All my designs are copyrighted Grégoire Pfennig©

Previously known as RubixFreakGreg _________________All my designs are copyrighted Grégoire Pfennig©

Tony Fisher Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2016 8:20 am Sun Dec 18, 2016 8:20 am



Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm

Website: http://tonyfisherpuzzles.net

Location: A free independent country

Facebook: tony.fisher.509

Twitter: TonyFisherPuzls

YouTube: KaiXevandStanley kindard_ wrote: Please leave comments and everything down so I can improve my project! What have you successfully got printed in the past? Anyone attempting such puzzles would probably need a huge amount of experience and success (like Greg). What have you successfully got printed in the past? Anyone attempting such puzzles would probably need a huge amount of experience and success (like Greg).

_________________









When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use _________________When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use Olivér's Stickers

kindard_ Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2016 8:27 am Sun Dec 18, 2016 8:27 am



Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 9:34 pm Tony Fisher wrote: kindard_ wrote: Please leave comments and everything down so I can improve my project! What have you successfully got printed in the past? Anyone attempting such puzzles would probably need a huge amount of experience and success (like Greg). What have you successfully got printed in the past? Anyone attempting such puzzles would probably need a huge amount of experience and success (like Greg). A 54mm 5x5.



It's not a big project, but that got me into big cube designs. A 54mm 5x5.It's not a big project, but that got me into big cube designs.

Booskop Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2016 9:49 am Sun Dec 18, 2016 9:49 am



Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 4:50 am

Location: The Netherlands Grégoire Pfennig wrote: Kindard, it's easier to make a 33x33x33, because you can use a 3x3 as a 5x5 core, 5x5 as a 9x9 core etc. (3,5,9,17,33) Kindard, it's easier to make a 33x33x33, because you can use a 3x3 as a 5x5 core, 5x5 as a 9x9 core etc. (3,5,9,17,33) So What comes after that? 65x65x65? So What comes after that? 65x65x65?

_________________

- Eric

Oskar Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2016 4:20 pm Sun Dec 18, 2016 4:20 pm



Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 1:03 pm Grégoire Pfennig wrote: Kindard, it's easier to make a 33x33x33, because you can use a 3x3 as a 5x5 core, 5x5 as a 9x9 core etc. (3,5,9,17,33) My first 17x17x17 prototype used this binary approach. As Claus can testify, it was a big failure. I used too much volume for the binary mechanism, and not enough volume to keep the pieces upright. So even with a binary mechanism, I suggest to have a solution to have long pieces that stray upright.



Oskar My first 17x17x17 prototype used this binary approach. As Claus can testify, it was a big failure. I used too much volume for the binary mechanism, and not enough volume to keep the pieces upright. So even with a binary mechanism, I suggest to have a solution to have long pieces that stray upright.Oskar

_________________

Oskar's YouTube, Shapeways Shop,

. _________________Oskar's home page Puzzlemaster , and fan club

Grégoire Pfennig Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2016 2:54 am Tue Dec 20, 2016 2:54 am



Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:48 am

Location: Belfort, France Oskar wrote: Grégoire Pfennig wrote: Kindard, it's easier to make a 33x33x33, because you can use a 3x3 as a 5x5 core, 5x5 as a 9x9 core etc. (3,5,9,17,33) My first 17x17x17 prototype used this binary approach. As Claus can testify, it was a big failure. I used too much volume for the binary mechanism, and not enough volume to keep the pieces upright. So even with a binary mechanism, I suggest to have a solution to have long pieces that stray upright.



Oskar My first 17x17x17 prototype used this binary approach. As Claus can testify, it was a big failure. I used too much volume for the binary mechanism, and not enough volume to keep the pieces upright. So even with a binary mechanism, I suggest to have a solution to have long pieces that stray upright.Oskar Don't worry Oskar, i've got this covered, each piece is minimum 1.5 cm deep, on average 4cm deep, and hooks are minimum 4mm wide (6mm on average), more than all of my designs Don't worry Oskar, i've got this covered, each piece is minimum 1.5 cm deep, on average 4cm deep, and hooks are minimum 4mm wide (6mm on average), more than all of my designs

_________________

Follow me on Facebook!

Follow me on YouTube!

Follow me on Twitter!

My Designs

My Spreadshirt Shop (15% off with coupon code: welcome-100194923)



All my designs are copyrighted Grégoire Pfennig©

Previously known as RubixFreakGreg _________________All my designs are copyrighted Grégoire Pfennig©

Roth Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:00 pm Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:00 pm



Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 8:19 pm Grégoire Pfennig wrote: Don't worry Oskar, i've got this covered, each piece is minimum 1.5 cm deep, on average 4cm deep, and hooks are minimum 4mm wide (6mm on average), more than all of my designs Don't worry Oskar, i've got this covered, each piece is minimum 1.5 cm deep, on average 4cm deep, and hooks are minimum 4mm wide (6mm on average), more than all of my designs A pretty handy cube to put in your pocket for holidays A pretty handy cube to put in your pocket for holidays

Tony Fisher Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:35 pm Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:35 pm



Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm

Website: http://tonyfisherpuzzles.net

Location: A free independent country

Facebook: tony.fisher.509

Twitter: TonyFisherPuzls

YouTube: KaiXevandStanley Greg, My lack of CADding experience means you should probably ignore this but I have always been very sceptical of the binary approach. Our hands are poorly designed for turning big puzzles and pressure is applied unevenly. This results in gaps opening or wanting to open. Combine this with constant minor misalignments and roughness of 3D printing and in my opinion you get a puzzle that falls apart. I am hoping you will prove me wrong but please be absolutely sure before you start printing it.

_________________









When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use _________________When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use Olivér's Stickers

kindard_ Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:05 am Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:05 am



Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 9:34 pm Sketch done.

I have 20% motivation now so whatever.



Even if this breaks, I'm still happy.



Attachments: 33Sketch.png (30.16 KiB) Viewed 1386 times

Tony Fisher Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2017 7:26 am Sat Jan 07, 2017 7:26 am



Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm

Website: http://tonyfisherpuzzles.net

Location: A free independent country

Facebook: tony.fisher.509

Twitter: TonyFisherPuzls

YouTube: KaiXevandStanley kindard_ wrote: Sketch done.

I have 20% motivation now so whatever. Then you have 2 options. Make if before anyone else or go higher. Personally however I think jumping to a 33x33x33 is too ambitious especially when we saw how the 22x22x22 worked. A 23x23x23 seems the most logical size for anyone going higher (based on my opinion that the binary approach is not a good one). I would much rather see a 23x23x23 with proof of function by doing a chequerboard pattern than a 33x33x33 without. The former would put you in the Guinness Book of Records but the latter would not. Then you have 2 options. Make if before anyone else or go higher. Personally however I think jumping to a 33x33x33 is too ambitious especially when we saw how the 22x22x22 worked. A 23x23x23 seems the most logical size for anyone going higher (based on my opinion that the binary approach is not a good one). I would much rather see a 23x23x23 with proof of function by doing a chequerboard pattern than a 33x33x33 without. The former would put you in the Guinness Book of Records but the latter would not.

_________________









When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use _________________When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use Olivér's Stickers

kindard_ Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 4:49 am Mon Jan 09, 2017 4:49 am



Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 9:34 pm I changed the mechanism to floating anchors. saves me a lot of plastic actually.

(0.4mm gaps between pieces)



Also, 2 questions.



1) Should I make the parts smaller? The current size is 50cm, with 1x1cm center cubies and 9.5cm outer layers.

I think this thing should be at least 20% smaller, to, of course, save plastic.



2) For the inside "core" should I make plastic parts to hold the centers (superglue-coated, 100% infill PLA plastic), or should I use metal screws?



and yes this will be made with a FDM 3D printing machine.



Attachments: wake me up inside

dragonflyamber78 Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:51 am Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:51 am



Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 10:52 am

Location: Germany kindard_ wrote:

1) Should I make the parts smaller? The current size is 50cm, with 1x1cm center cubies and 9.5cm outer layers.

I think this thing should be at least 20% smaller, to, of course, save plastic.

I'm not a designer but I'd definatelly try to make this puzzle smaller. 50cm? thats really HUGE and probably even too heavy to move in any way. If it is mechanically possible I'd make the cube way samller. I just measured some center parts on my 7x7 - those are not even 1cm (about 0.8-0.9cm) So on higher ordered puzzles I would suggest a smaller scale. If it is a 33x33 cube, I would not make it bigger than about 35cm edge length unless that serves the mechanism... I'm not a designer but I'd definatelly try to make this puzzle smaller. 50cm? thats really HUGE and probably even too heavy to move in any way. If it is mechanically possible I'd make the cube way samller. I just measured some center parts on my 7x7 - those are not even 1cm (about 0.8-0.9cm) So on higher ordered puzzles I would suggest a smaller scale. If it is a 33x33 cube, I would not make it bigger than about 35cm edge length unless that serves the mechanism...

_________________

You can call me Dario.



Youtube Channel : ND Puzzles

Discord:



My puzzles are now available at Chewie's sticker shop _________________Discord: Puzzle Design Group

Tony Fisher Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 4:46 pm Mon Jan 09, 2017 4:46 pm



Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm

Website: http://tonyfisherpuzzles.net

Location: A free independent country

Facebook: tony.fisher.509

Twitter: TonyFisherPuzls

YouTube: KaiXevandStanley Whatever size or mechanism is used I would strongly suggest that a turning aid is also made. This could be a large disc of 3mm plastic with a square hole slightly bigger than a face. This would be slid over the cube to make turns. It might even be necessary to make two to hold a neighbouring layer in place.

_________________









When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use _________________When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use Olivér's Stickers

Brandon Enright Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 6:31 pm Mon Jan 09, 2017 6:31 pm



Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm

Website: http://www.brandonenright.net

Location: Bay Area, California kindard_ wrote: I changed the mechanism to floating anchors. saves me a lot of plastic actually.

(0.4mm gaps between pieces) I changed the mechanism to floating anchors. saves me a lot of plastic actually.(0.4mm gaps between pieces) The ratio of the size of this puzzle to the size of the single center piece holding all the other centers in place is absurd. There is no realistic way this design is going to work at all. PLA (and ABS) are just too brittle and weak for there to be any chance that the center will be able to do it's job and hold those pieces in. The corner stalks probably have the same issue where the stalk is too small relative to the rest of the puzzle. The ratio of the size of this puzzle to the size of the single center piece holding all the other centers in place is absurd. There is no realistic way this design is going to work at all. PLA (and ABS) are just too brittle and weak for there to be any chance that the center will be able to do it's job and hold those pieces in. The corner stalks probably have the same issue where the stalk is too small relative to the rest of the puzzle.

_________________

Twisty Renderer -- Jaap's Spheres with POV-Ray _________________

crypticat Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 11:19 pm Mon Jan 09, 2017 11:19 pm



Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:06 pm kindard_ wrote: Sketch done.

I have 20% motivation now so whatever.

Even if this breaks, I'm still happy. no you're not.



i've destroyed many good projects with this attitude, and have never gone back to them.



set this aside for awhile. go play with your dog or your cat, read a book, go hiking, go climb Everest if you need to...but put your mind on other things until the rest of your motivation returns.



don't try to do something this complex and costly if you aren't fully motivated and focused.

no you're not.i've destroyed many good projects with this attitude, and have never gone back to them.set this aside for awhile. go play with your dog or your cat, read a book, go hiking, go climb Everest if you need to...but put your mind on other things until the rest of your motivation returns.don't try to do something this complex and costly if you aren't fully motivated and focused.

Grégoire Pfennig Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:57 am Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:57 am



Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:48 am

Location: Belfort, France kindard_ wrote: 1) Should I make the parts smaller? The current size is 50cm, with 1x1cm center cubies and 9.5cm outer layers.

I think this thing should be at least 20% smaller, to, of course, save plastic.



2) For the inside "core" should I make plastic parts to hold the centers (superglue-coated, 100% infill PLA plastic), or should I use metal screws?



and yes this will be made with a FDM 3D printing machine. 1) Yes, a 50cm puzzle is basically useless. For comparison, my design would have a 20cm edge length (stickering will be harder than assembly though )



2) If you need to ask this question, you clearly sho that you don't have the experience for this project. using plastic to hold the centers would only finish the same way the 22x22 did...



As for the FDM machine, this is the cherry on top of the cake, it would never work. Not enough precision, not enough sturdiness. It's completely unrealistic to go after such a project before having puzzle designing and building experience.



Also let's remember that a piece of my 33x33 would take maybe 3 min to print on an fdm printer, yours maybe 15 minutes (it's approximately proportionnal to the cube of the scale between the two puzzles). That's a total printing time of 64 days, not counting the printing flaxs, reprints and time to prep the pieces (you can triple the time). Just for the parts, 250 days.



I agree with crypticat all the way... 1) Yes, a 50cm puzzle is basically useless. For comparison, my design would have a 20cm edge length (stickering will be harder than assembly though2) If you need to ask this question, you clearly sho that you don't have the experience for this project. using plastic to hold the centers would only finish the same way the 22x22 did...As for the FDM machine, this is the cherry on top of the cake, it would never work. Not enough precision, not enough sturdiness. It's completely unrealistic to go after such a project before having puzzle designing and building experience.Also let's remember that a piece of my 33x33 would take maybe 3 min to print on an fdm printer, yours maybe 15 minutes (it's approximately proportionnal to the cube of the scale between the two puzzles). That's a total printing time of 64 days, not counting the printing flaxs, reprints and time to prep the pieces (you can triple the time). Just for the parts, 250 days.I agree with crypticat all the way...

_________________

Follow me on Facebook!

Follow me on YouTube!

Follow me on Twitter!

My Designs

My Spreadshirt Shop (15% off with coupon code: welcome-100194923)



All my designs are copyrighted Grégoire Pfennig©

Previously known as RubixFreakGreg _________________All my designs are copyrighted Grégoire Pfennig©

kindard_ Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 5:28 am Tue Jan 10, 2017 5:28 am



Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 9:34 pm



V3 is in the works! (again, lolwhat)



List of what I should fix:

-ADD FILLETS

-corner stalk thickness

-use to a 17x17 "core" or something similar

-make a turning tool

-a lot of things

-buy a cat or a dog

-go for a smaller project

-many more

Grégoire Pfennig wrote: 2) If you need to ask this question, you clearly show that you don't have the experience for this project. Using plastic to hold the centers would only finish the same way the 22x22 did... (to be honest, yes.) I thank everyone who pointed out about flaws on this puzzle! (and, sorry for my stupidity!)V3 is in the works! (again, lolwhat)List of what I should fix:-corner stalk thickness-use to a 17x17 "core" or something similar-make a turning tool-a lot of things-go for a smaller project-many more

Brandon Enright Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2017 3:33 pm Sat Jan 14, 2017 3:33 pm



Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm

Website: http://www.brandonenright.net

Location: Bay Area, California kindard_ wrote: I thank everyone who pointed out about flaws on this puzzle! (and, sorry for my stupidity!) You aren't stupid for showing off your design



Even though it won't work, the CAD experience and the design learning are well worth the effort you put into it.



Experience is one of those things that comes from

doing and especially from failing. Finding out why something doesn't work is often more valuable that something just working. If it just works you may not even know why. When it doesn't work you have to find all the ingredients needed for something to work.



If you're itcthing to print a physical puzzle I suggest starting much smaller so that you can iterate through the failure process more quickly and cheaply to gain the experience and eventually get a working design. You aren't stupid for showing off your designEven though it won't work, the CAD experience and the design learning are well worth the effort you put into it.Experience is one of those things that comes fromdoing and especially from failing. Finding out why something doesn't work is often more valuable that something just working. If it just works you may not even know why. When it doesn't work you have to find all the ingredients needed for something to work.If you're itcthing to print a physical puzzle I suggest starting much smaller so that you can iterate through the failure process more quickly and cheaply to gain the experience and eventually get a working design.

_________________

Twisty Renderer -- Jaap's Spheres with POV-Ray _________________

JackRTully Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2017 4:05 pm Sat Jan 14, 2017 4:05 pm



Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 10:01 am Fully agree with what Brandon said; I have had my fair share of failed puzzles, and it has actually been more help than I would have ever imagined!

_________________

, including a _________________ My YouTube , including a FF Siamese 2x2x2 Walkthrough

kindard_ Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 8:42 am Fri Jan 20, 2017 8:42 am



Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 9:34 pm JackRTully wrote: Fully agree with what Brandon said; I have had my fair share of failed puzzles, and it has actually been more help than I would have ever imagined! Brandon Enright wrote: kindard_ wrote: I thank everyone who pointed out about flaws on this puzzle! (and, sorry for my stupidity!) You aren't stupid for showing off your design



Even though it won't work, the CAD experience and the design learning are well worth the effort you put into it.



Experience is one of those things that comes from

doing and especially from failing. Finding out why something doesn't work is often more valuable that something just working. If it just works you may not even know why. When it doesn't work you have to find all the ingredients needed for something to work.



If you're itcthing to print a physical puzzle I suggest starting much smaller so that you can iterate through the failure process more quickly and cheaply to gain the experience and eventually get a working design. You aren't stupid for showing off your designEven though it won't work, the CAD experience and the design learning are well worth the effort you put into it.Experience is one of those things that comes fromdoing and especially from failing. Finding out why something doesn't work is often more valuable that something just working. If it just works you may not even know why. When it doesn't work you have to find all the ingredients needed for something to work.If you're itcthing to print a physical puzzle I suggest starting much smaller so that you can iterate through the failure process more quickly and cheaply to gain the experience and eventually get a working design. Thank you! Failing had never been a good feeling for me until now. Thank you! Failing had never been a good feeling for me until now.

alaskajoe Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2017 9:50 am Wed Feb 01, 2017 9:50 am



Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:52 am https://opisina.wordpress.com/2012/03/0 ... rzenegger/



I am not the total last person who has experience in 3d printed puzzles. I made it to a single one. A very simple one. So I am the almost last person to give advice on this, you have other people here with faaar more experience to listen to but I will add to this discussion now.

I am also not encouraging you to go on with this project as I regard it as an insane money pit that will never work.



With all that being said, I do agree with arnold on the most part, so who knows. It seems that following the rules will work. So far you seem to be follow all of them expect maybe one:



If you do this, regard failing as progress. If you hate to fail on this, you will not make it. You will fail. But if you learn from it, then who knows one day you will be "the first one that has done it." But prepare to not make it for some tries. I am not the total last person who has experience in 3d printed puzzles. I made it to a single one. A very simple one. So I am the almost last person to give advice on this, you have other people here with faaar more experience to listen to but I will add to this discussion now.I am also not encouraging you to go on with this project as I regard it as an insane money pit that will never work.With all that being said, I do agree with arnold on the most part, so who knows. It seems that following the rules will work. So far you seem to be follow all of them expect maybe one:If you do this, regard failing as progress. If you hate to fail on this, you will not make it. You will fail. But if you learn from it, then who knows one day you will be "the first one that has done it." But prepare to not make it for some tries.

_________________

Rings, Tie Bars and Cufflinks with engineering themes on my webpage _________________Rings, Tie Bars and Cufflinks with engineering themes on my webpage Engineer's Jewelry or in my shapeways shop

kastellorizo Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 7:19 am Sun Feb 05, 2017 7:19 am



Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:31 am

Website: http://www.houlis.com

Location: Greece, Australia, Thailand, India, Singapore.

you should really start simple as everyone above state. Any new mechanism, or an extension of a known one,

will definitely (one million per cent) provide new challenges. And trust me, you don't want to face those when

dealing with a complex design!



My take is to first design a few simple puzzles, and then tackle this one.



In any case, good luck!









Pantazis Theory to Practice is a long long way. Having printed, made of scratch, organised special orders of prototypes,you should really start simple as everyone above state. Any new mechanism, or an extension of a known one,will definitely (one million per cent) provide new challenges. And trust me, you don't want to face those whendealing with a complex design!My take is to first design a few simple puzzles, and then tackle this one.In any case, good luck!Pantazis

_________________

Megistian Aenigma Agon, Puzzle Ninja, Education, Gravity, 4D Symmetry, Matrix Mech,

Alien Tech.

_________________

Tony Fisher Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 3:06 pm Sun Feb 05, 2017 3:06 pm



Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm

Website: http://tonyfisherpuzzles.net

Location: A free independent country

Facebook: tony.fisher.509

Twitter: TonyFisherPuzls

YouTube: KaiXevandStanley alaskajoe wrote: https://opisina.wordpress.com/2012/03/0 ... rzenegger/ There is one huge problem with that advice. Let's say I want to break Usain Bolt's 100m WR. I am determined to do it and no one will tell me otherwise. I will spend time and effort pursuing my dream. I will not stop until I achieve my goal! I will succeed! The simply truth is that I very obviously will not succeed and the popular phrase "you can achieve anything if you put your mind to it" is nonsense. So I would replace no. 6 (which is meaningless) with - Be realistic in what you are attempting to achieve. There is one huge problem with that advice. Let's say I want to break Usain Bolt's 100m WR. I am determined to do it and no one will tell me otherwise. I will spend time and effort pursuing my dream. I will not stop until I achieve my goal! I will succeed! The simply truth is that I very obviously will not succeed and the popular phrase "you can achieve anything if you put your mind to it" is nonsense. So I would replace no. 6 (which is meaningless) with - Be realistic in what you are attempting to achieve.

_________________









When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use _________________When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use Olivér's Stickers

alaskajoe Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2017 3:45 pm Fri Feb 24, 2017 3:45 pm



Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:52 am Tony Fisher wrote: alaskajoe wrote: https://opisina.wordpress.com/2012/03/0 ... rzenegger/ There is one huge problem with that advice. Let's say I want to break Usain Bolt's 100m WR. I am determined to do it and no one will tell me otherwise. I will spend time and effort pursuing my dream. I will not stop until I achieve my goal! I will succeed! The simply truth is that I very obviously will not succeed and the popular phrase "you can achieve anything if you put your mind to it" is nonsense. So I would replace no. 6 (which is meaningless) with - Be realistic in what you are attempting to achieve. There is one huge problem with that advice. Let's say I want to break Usain Bolt's 100m WR. I am determined to do it and no one will tell me otherwise. I will spend time and effort pursuing my dream. I will not stop until I achieve my goal! I will succeed! The simply truth is that I very obviously will not succeed and the popular phrase "you can achieve anything if you put your mind to it" is nonsense. So I would replace no. 6 (which is meaningless) with - Be realistic in what you are attempting to achieve. You are pretty much right about the fact that not everything can be done with that mindset. So yes, the Usain Bolt example is spot on. My genetics would never allow me to beat him. Even if I took not only all the advice but also all the illegal little helpers that exist. So being realistic is a very good point. And as I said I regarded the undertaking as "insane money pit that will never work". However I might just be wrong. You never know. I was worried about the underlying attitude of kindard_ because if this is to be tackled, there will be a loong way with a lot of failures, so I might as well throw this stuff in because I was reminded of it.



Off topic:

As for rule #6 I don't ever see this as totally supurflous or meaningless. Giving back in some way to someone (not necessarily monetary) might as well open a new door. That happens all the time and it can hardly be planned or anticipated. So the basic attitude of this recommendation is not so bad.



That one time in the gym a couple of days ago, this guy wanted to use the dumbells I had placed in the rack in front of me and I interrupted him, because I was going to use them. So after I was done I carried them all the way over to his bench. Just with no reason other than being helpfull. I thought to myself why the heck actually? I just felt like it. This sort of "gym bro" behavior is just better. Before you know it, I find the same guy in some cable apparatus I had on my list and needless to say I didnt even have to open my mouth he made the gesture to take turns haha. Real story, sounds like I made it up conveniently. This has nothing to do with the specific topic but it was funny. You are pretty much right about the fact that not everything can be done with that mindset. So yes, the Usain Bolt example is spot on. My genetics would never allow me to beat him. Even if I took not only all the advice but also all the illegal little helpers that exist. So being realistic is a very good point. And as I said I regarded the undertaking as "insane money pit that will never work". However I might just be wrong. You never know. I was worried about the underlying attitude of kindard_ because if this is to be tackled, there will be a loong way with a lot of failures, so I might as well throw this stuff in because I was reminded of it.Off topic:As for rule #6 I don't ever see this as totally supurflous or meaningless. Giving back in some way to someone (not necessarily monetary) might as well open a new door. That happens all the time and it can hardly be planned or anticipated. So the basic attitude of this recommendation is not so bad.That one time in the gym a couple of days ago, this guy wanted to use the dumbells I had placed in the rack in front of me and I interrupted him, because I was going to use them. So after I was done I carried them all the way over to his bench. Just with no reason other than being helpfull. I thought to myself why the heck actually? I just felt like it. This sort of "gym bro" behavior is just better. Before you know it, I find the same guy in some cable apparatus I had on my list and needless to say I didnt even have to open my mouth he made the gesture to take turns haha. Real story, sounds like I made it up conveniently. This has nothing to do with the specific topic but it was funny.

_________________

Rings, Tie Bars and Cufflinks with engineering themes on my webpage _________________Rings, Tie Bars and Cufflinks with engineering themes on my webpage Engineer's Jewelry or in my shapeways shop

Gus Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2017 7:27 am Sat Feb 25, 2017 7:27 am



Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 12:00 am

Location: UK alaskajoe wrote: https://opisina.wordpress.com/2012/03/0 ... rzenegger/ I think rule 4 should be:



4. Don’t Listen to the Naysayers but do listen to advice from people you respect.



So, in the 100m record case, just talking to the head coach of your local athletics club might be a good idea.



In the case of the proposed 33x33x33, it may indeed be possible, but making this your first 3D design would be foolhardy in the extreme. I'll think you'll find the 17x17x17 was not Oskar's first puzzle I think rule 4 should be:So, in the 100m record case, just talking to the head coach of your local athletics club might be a good idea.In the case of the proposed 33x33x33, it may indeed be possible, but making this your first 3D design would be foolhardy in the extreme. I'll think you'll find the 17x17x17 was not Oskar's first puzzle

Tony Fisher Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:24 am Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:24 am



Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm

Website: http://tonyfisherpuzzles.net

Location: A free independent country

Facebook: tony.fisher.509

Twitter: TonyFisherPuzls

YouTube: KaiXevandStanley Gus wrote: In the case of the proposed 33x33x33, it may indeed be possible, but making this your first 3D design would be foolhardy in the extreme. I'll think you'll find the 17x17x17 was not Oskar's first puzzle :lol: Yes, compare it also to my worlds largest Rubik's Cube and the history behind it. I as many will know wanted to build it for several years. It was something I felt was ultimately possible but previously the cost / lack of efficient design / time to make / space required factors were not good enough to make a start. It was only in 2016 that things tipped slightly in favour of the attempt that I tried. People close to me thought the design was flawed and I suspect many on the forum would have as well if I had discussed it. Based on my experience though with similar puzzles I felt my knowledge in that field was greater than anyone else's and estimated an 80% chance of success. Since there were multiple adjustment and improvement options after completion it allowed for an initial failure to become a success. I'm guessing a complex 3d printed puzzle has little room for improvement once printed. Yes, compare it also to my worlds largest Rubik's Cube and the history behind it. I as many will know wanted to build it for several years. It was something I felt was ultimately possible but previously the cost / lack of efficient design / time to make / space required factors were not good enough to make a start. It was only in 2016 that things tipped slightly in favour of the attempt that I tried. People close to me thought the design was flawed and I suspect many on the forum would have as well if I had discussed it. Based on my experience though with similar puzzles I felt my knowledge in that field was greater than anyone else's and estimated an 80% chance of success. Since there were multiple adjustment and improvement options after completion it allowed for an initial failure to become a success. I'm guessing a complex 3d printed puzzle has little room for improvement once printed.

_________________









When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use _________________When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use Olivér's Stickers

Gus Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2017 6:33 pm Sat Feb 25, 2017 6:33 pm



Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 12:00 am

Location: UK Tony Fisher wrote: I'm guessing a complex 3d printed puzzle has little room for improvement once printed. Well, such are the fine tolerances and many different ways of solving the same problem, and the flexibility of 3D CAD programs, improvements are always possible. Well, such are the fine tolerances and many different ways of solving the same problem, and the flexibility of 3D CAD programs, improvements are always possible.

Tony Fisher Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:58 pm Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:58 pm



Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm

Website: http://tonyfisherpuzzles.net

Location: A free independent country

Facebook: tony.fisher.509

Twitter: TonyFisherPuzls

YouTube: KaiXevandStanley Gus wrote: Tony Fisher wrote: I'm guessing a complex 3d printed puzzle has little room for improvement once printed. Well, such are the fine tolerances and many different ways of solving the same problem, and the flexibility of 3D CAD programs, improvements are always possible. Well, such are the fine tolerances and many different ways of solving the same problem, and the flexibility of 3D CAD programs, improvements are always possible. How does flexibility of 3D CAD programs allow improvements once printed? How does flexibility of 3D CAD programs allow improvements once printed?

_________________









When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use _________________When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use Olivér's Stickers

Gus Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 6:55 am Sun Feb 26, 2017 6:55 am



Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 12:00 am

Location: UK Tony Fisher wrote: Gus wrote: Tony Fisher wrote: I'm guessing a complex 3d printed puzzle has little room for improvement once printed. Well, such are the fine tolerances and many different ways of solving the same problem, and the flexibility of 3D CAD programs, improvements are always possible. Well, such are the fine tolerances and many different ways of solving the same problem, and the flexibility of 3D CAD programs, improvements are always possible. How does flexibility of 3D CAD programs allow improvements once printed? How does flexibility of 3D CAD programs allow improvements once printed? They don't of course, but it is easy to correct errors and re-print the parts again. It's like you writing a document in Word (or somesuch), printing it out, spotting an error, correcting it in the file on the computer and re-printing it. Or I suppose you could get some Tippex, cover the error, and very carefully, remembering to match the font, correct the word(s) using a very fine tipped pen. They don't of course, but it is easy to correct errors and re-print the parts again. It's like you writing a document in Word (or somesuch), printing it out, spotting an error, correcting it in the file on the computer and re-printing it. Or I suppose you could get some Tippex, cover the error, and very carefully, remembering to match the font, correct the word(s) using a very fine tipped pen.

Tony Fisher Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 8:00 am Sun Feb 26, 2017 8:00 am



Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm

Website: http://tonyfisherpuzzles.net

Location: A free independent country

Facebook: tony.fisher.509

Twitter: TonyFisherPuzls

YouTube: KaiXevandStanley Gus wrote: They don't of course, but it is easy to correct errors and re-print the parts again. It's like you writing a document in Word (or somesuch), printing it out, spotting an error, correcting it in the file on the computer and re-printing it. Or I suppose you could get some Tippex, cover the error, and very carefully, remembering to match the font, correct the word(s) using a very fine tipped pen. Yes I get that but who would want to print out a 2nd (or 3rd) 33x33x33? The original V-Cube 6 went through 11 changes and still never worked well. Yes I get that but who would want to print out a 2nd (or 3rd) 33x33x33? The original V-Cube 6 went through 11 changes and still never worked well.

_________________









When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use _________________When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use Olivér's Stickers

Gus Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 8:35 am Sun Feb 26, 2017 8:35 am



Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 12:00 am

Location: UK Tony Fisher wrote: Yes I get that but who would want to print out a 2nd (or 3rd) 33x33x33? Some body who really really wanted to be the first person to make it, and had lots of spare cash? Also, remember, a lot of the big complex expensive puzzles designed on these forums would not have been possible without being sponsored by TP members.



I would like to ask Tony, what is the alternative to CAD design and 3D printing to make a 33x33x33? Have you already got a hand-built one in progress? Some body who reallywanted to be the first person to make it, and had lots of spare cash? Also, remember, a lot of the big complex expensive puzzles designed on these forums would not have been possible without being sponsored by TP members.I would like to ask Tony, what is the alternative to CAD design and 3D printing to make a 33x33x33? Have you already got a hand-built one in progress?

Tony Fisher Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 2:28 pm Sun Feb 26, 2017 2:28 pm



Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm

Website: http://tonyfisherpuzzles.net

Location: A free independent country

Facebook: tony.fisher.509

Twitter: TonyFisherPuzls

YouTube: KaiXevandStanley Gus wrote: Tony Fisher wrote: Yes I get that but who would want to print out a 2nd (or 3rd) 33x33x33? Some body who really really wanted to be the first person to make it, and had lots of spare cash? Also, remember, a lot of the big complex expensive puzzles designed on these forums would not have been possible without being sponsored by TP members.



I would like to ask Tony, what is the alternative to CAD design and 3D printing to make a 33x33x33? Have you already got a hand-built one in progress? :wink: Some body who reallywanted to be the first person to make it, and had lots of spare cash? Also, remember, a lot of the big complex expensive puzzles designed on these forums would not have been possible without being sponsored by TP members.I would like to ask Tony, what is the alternative to CAD design and 3D printing to make a 33x33x33? Have you already got a hand-built one in progress? :wink: I have no idea how this point was reached in the conversation. I was merely saying that in my project there was more wiggle room so I didn't have to be as confident of success as someone planning to print out a 33x33x33 has to be. If money (and printing time) is no issue then my comments are irrelevant. I have no idea how this point was reached in the conversation. I was merely saying that in my project there was more wiggle room so I didn't have to be as confident of success as someone planning to print out a 33x33x33 has to be. If money (and printing time) is no issue then my comments are irrelevant.

_________________









When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use _________________When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use Olivér's Stickers

michael1234252 Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 2:33 pm Tue Feb 28, 2017 2:33 pm



Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 9:23 pm I just found this one guy in instagram who is currently working on a 25x25x25 https://www.instagram.com/albertcuber88/

_________________

My youtube videos

My mod shop

My eBay shop _________________My youtube videos http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCoHSPKg-qwAxAJe7-CzIp2A My mod shop http://mikeni.startlogic.com My eBay shop https://www.ebay.com/usr/michael1234251

Tony Fisher Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sat May 26, 2018 6:59 am Sat May 26, 2018 6:59 am



Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm

Website: http://tonyfisherpuzzles.net

Location: A free independent country

Facebook: tony.fisher.509

Twitter: TonyFisherPuzls

YouTube: KaiXevandStanley I hope this bump is OK since it provides new and relevant information. Greg's cube has been accepted and is now listed on The Guinness World Records site- http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/new ... x33-rubiks . Congratulations once again.

_________________









When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use _________________When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use Olivér's Stickers

Konrad Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sat May 26, 2018 8:11 am Sat May 26, 2018 8:11 am



Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:07 am

Website: https://sites.google.com/site/twistykon/

Location: Germany, Bavaria



Heavy applause from the audience! Great!Heavy applause from the audience!

_________________

My collection at: _________________My collection at: https://sites.google.com/site/twistykon/home

otischeng Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sat May 26, 2018 9:13 am Sat May 26, 2018 9:13 am



Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 11:12 am

Location: Hong Kong/Beijing Oh this would be a top for a while. Can't imagine a Rubik's cube with more than 33 layer can be produced with in 10......no, 5......., no 3 years may be......who knows!

Skallos Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sat May 26, 2018 10:43 am Sat May 26, 2018 10:43 am



Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 9:53 pm Nice acievement! Corenpuzzle's 22z22x22 seems to have been forgotten.

_________________

█ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █

grigr Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sat May 26, 2018 10:47 am Sat May 26, 2018 10:47 am



Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 8:38 pm

Website: http://www.grigorusha.com

Location: Russia



ps

several guys from the forum got there: Evgeniy, Tony, Oskar and Greg

is there someone else? Welcome to the Club of Guinness Bookpsseveral guys from the forum got there: Evgeniy, Tony, Oskar and Gregis there someone else?

_________________

Living Puzzles by Grigorusha: Vintage Soviet Puzzles - Blog | My Collection

You can buy puzzles from Oskar,Pitcher,Timur and many great puzzle designers -

_________________Living Puzzles by Grigorusha: http://www.grigorusha.com You can buy puzzles from Oskar,Pitcher,Timur and many great puzzle designers - Blog

Tony Fisher Post subject: Re: 33x33x33 Rubik's cube Post Posted: Sat May 26, 2018 12:09 pm Sat May 26, 2018 12:09 pm



Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm

Website: http://tonyfisherpuzzles.net

Location: A free independent country

Facebook: tony.fisher.509

Twitter: TonyFisherPuzls

YouTube: KaiXevandStanley grigr wrote: Welcome to the Club of Guinness Book :)



ps

several guys from the forum got there: Evgeniy, Tony, Oskar and Greg

is there someone else? The closest I can think of is Erik Akkersdijk who held the speedcubing record in 2008 with 7.08. He is no longer a member though. I'm not sure if Ron van Bruchem was ever (or is) a member but he is probably the most likely out of the other speedcubers. The closest I can think of is Erik Akkersdijk who held the speedcubing record in 2008 with 7.08. He is no longer a member though. I'm not sure if Ron van Bruchem was ever (or is) a member but he is probably the most likely out of the other speedcubers.

_________________









When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use _________________When I'm too lazy to hand cut my own I use Olivér's Stickers