TuRBo Edges versus M2 Edges

[CT_Warrior]

I'm going to start learning BLD now, and I have some questions about the two edge methods.

Which has an easier memo?
Which uses the least moves (on average)?
Which is faster (on the long run / overall)?

I'd also like to ask the same questions for 3OP and R2 corners.

 

[byu]

Which has easier memo?
TuRBo, just because M2 requires slice memorization

Which uses the least moves (on average)?
Probably M2.

Which is faster?
In the long run, TuRBo.

If you're looking for edges, look at these tutorials:

TuRBo Edges (Part 1):

M2/R2 (Part 1):

I don't recommend TuRBo to start off with though. It's difficult.

As for corners:

Which has an easier memo?
R2

Which uses the least moves (on average)?
R2

Which is faster?
Depends.

3OP Corners

R2 Corners

 

[fanwuq]

Which has easier memo?
TuRBo, just because M2 requires slice memorization

Which uses the least moves (on average)?
Probably M2.

Which is faster?
In the long run, TuRBo.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong.
I thought you are a BLD master?

M2 memo is the same; the slice really does not matter.

M2 uses more moves usually.

M2 is faster, even in the long run. Especially if you modify it into deadalnix's version.

 

[Faz]

Guys, it's just opinion
My opinion is that M2 is faster to execute.

 

[Escher]

I turbo. Its a 3 cycling method, which is nice as you only have to really execute 5 or 6 algorithms (just going on Eriks example solve) to solve the edges. Using UF as a buffer is also pretty good, and only 0-3 set up moves is cool. In STM, the avg move count of the algorithms is 8.5, so I'm *guessing* it takes around 50-70 moves to solve the edges, which isn't half bad. Particularly if you compare it to classic pochmann
Keep in mind I am a turbo noob though.

M2 is also a great method. Like others said, it has some good benefits, particularly the 'swapping alg' as M2, as its 14x shorter than the classic pochmann swapping alg. I dunno about setup moves though, or the average move count. Example solve 1 is 63 moves in stefans site and solve 2
is 55 (obviously STM), though both seem to be easier than normal scrambles, just looking at the algs.

In the end its probably personal preference. I'd suggest learning both though, so you can make up your mind properly. It looks like you used to use Old Pochmann, so perhaps the transition to M2 might be easier? Not really sure.

 

[Erik]

Actually you could do with only 2 setup moves too for TuRBo if you learn to solve with FL and FR and UB and UR and UB and UL etc etc as your shooting points, its quit easy to get used to I think. It's not even learning more algs, it's like solving F2L pairs from the back and left etc too.

 

[CT_Warrior]

Thanks guys. I think I'll learn M2, and use R2 for corners since I already started to learn M2 and the moves are friendlier for OH if I ever urge for OH BLD.

What am I supposed to do when UB is in DF, and DF is in UB and all other pieces are solved?

 

[Stefan]

What am I supposed to do when UB is in DF, and DF is in UB and all other pieces are solved?

Smack the person that made your cube invalid.

 

[CT_Warrior]

Oh, I didn't mean the corners, I meant just edges being solved.
I'm not really attempting any blindsolves until I can solve using M2 sighted, but sometimes the DF piece is already at UB, and I have the UB piece in the buffer. I still have a lot of kinks to work out. x_x

 

[Stefan]

If only two edges are left to swap (like your DF vs UB), swap them along with swapping two corners. When/how you do that depends on how you solve the corners. If you do use R2, you can just use the parity fix alg for the M2/R2 method, for example the one I have on my page about it.

 

[byu]

Stefan- is it easier/faster to solve M2/R2 parity with:

r2 F2 U (N-Permutation) U' F2

 

[Stefan]

Stefan- is it easier/faster to solve M2/R2 parity with:

r2 F2 U (N-Permutation) U' F2

Brian - is that a question.

 

[byu]

Stefan- is it easier/faster to solve M2/R2 parity with:

r2 F2 U (N-Permutation) U' F2

Brian - is that a question.

Yes, that is a question, sorry for not including a question mark.

 

[Stefan]

Well, I can't tell whether it's easier/faster because different people prefer different algs (though I think I like mine better).

 

[dbeyer]

Why do you look at the algorithms move count, and ignore the setups?
I feel as though the a dedicated devotion to a large scale method, that really does have a low move count average. Where you can solve every case optimally.

Rather than working on making fast algorithms, why not practice triggers? Which have a broader application to solving. You are inhibiting yourself by limiting the algorithms, rather than expanding your understanding of concepts.

Later,
DB

 

[CT_Warrior]

After one or two attempts a day, I'm now able to solve the edges blindfolded.
Thanks guys.

I still haven't fully decided on whether to use 3OP and R2 yet though.

How does R2 corners with the worst cases compare to 3OP in number of moves and fluent execution time?

 

[byu]

Well, the worst R2 cases are just algorithms, you need 3 algs and their inverses, and they're pretty fast to execute.

 

[Zane_C]

This thread has made me think twice about TuRBo edges. I just don't know, I think with practice TuRBo would become quite fast, but after hearing all the M2 fans .

I'm going to learn TuRBo Edges and see how it goes, after I've mastered TuRBo Edges I will learn M2 and maby master that. I'll see which one is faster for me.

I hope learning TuRBo isn't ganna be a waste of time, if I change to M2.

 

[rubikmaster]

5 year old bump ftw. I know I'm probably the 500th person to ask this but I've been having trouble at finding an accurate anwser to this question even though I have pretty good knowledge of both of these methods and I've looked at a few a threads like these. I was not able to find any newer threads on TuRBo vs M2, so hopefully, there should be more people who are advanced enough in M2 and/or TuRBo now and have the proper knowledge to determine which one is faster and has a bigger potential for getting faster.

I realise that TuRBo makes it much easier to gradually transition into BH (3-style) but I'm not planning on doing that any time soon. I'm just looking for a good method I could stick to. I was planning on posting this in the One Answer Question forum but I now realise that this is a topic that really needs to be discussed in depth.

 

[PenguinsDontFly]

5 year old bump ftw. I know I'm probably the 500th person to ask this but I've been having trouble at finding an accurate anwser to this question even though I have pretty good knowledge of both of these methods and I've looked at a few a threads like these. I was not able to find any newer threads on TuRBo vs M2, so hopefully, there should be more people who are advanced enough in M2 and/or TuRBo now and have the proper knowledge to determine which one is faster and has a bigger potential for getting faster.

I realise that TuRBo makes it much easier to gradually transition into BH (3-style) but I'm not planning on doing that any time soon. I'm just looking for a good method I could stick to. I was planning on posting this in the One Answer Question forum but I now realise that this is a topic that really needs to be discussed in depth.

I know tons of people who are super fast with just M2 and OP, but I think TuRBo is easier to understand, faster, and yeah easier transition into full 3 style.