Status
Not open for further replies.
Just disassembled my first Guhong v2 (I'm used to Zhanchis) to lube it. Zhanchis typically have a washer at the bottom of the cavity in the center piece. next goes the spring. Next goes the screw. In other words, the spring sits between the washer and the screw head.

The Guhong I just took apart has the washer between the spring and screw head. Is that right? Is it different than Zhanchis?
 
Just disassembled my first Guhong v2 (I'm used to Zhanchis) to lube it. Zhanchis typically have a washer at the bottom of the cavity in the center piece. next goes the spring. Next goes the screw. In other words, the spring sits between the washer and the screw head.

The Guhong I just took apart has the washer between the spring and screw head. Is that right? Is it different than Zhanchis?

My GuHongs always have a washer at the bottom of the centerpiece underneath the screw. All DaYan hardware is the same ,no?
 
I find puzzles with partial move restrictions very hard. Like latch cube and bandaged cubes.

Agreed. Latch cube is definetly my hardest puzzle; it takes me a lot effort to solve it, sometimes more than a 7x7 - which is a relatively easy puzzle.
Note that the definition of "hard" and "easy" is subjective here, and I have no idea how to define them in an exact way.
 
I've never had much success on modding my cubes, but I was thinking about filling in edges and corners with epoxy sculpt. What do you think about this? Does it improve anything?
 
I've never had much success on modding my cubes, but I was thinking about filling in edges and corners with epoxy sculpt. What do you think about this? Does it improve anything?

All it will do is make the ube much heavier without improving performance really. The gaps don't cause any problems on their own, only on some cubes with sharper corners they can get a bit stuck (lockups) but its rare.
 
I've never had much success on modding my cubes, but I was thinking about filling in edges and corners with epoxy sculpt. What do you think about this? Does it improve anything?

What sort of cube are you talking about?
if there are gaps in the edges/corners that other pieces are catching on, so locking up your cube, then yes that may be a good idea... however if they're not causing a problem then you'll only be adding weight to your cube, making it slower.
 
Agreed. Latch cube is definetly my hardest puzzle; it takes me a lot effort to solve it, sometimes more than a 7x7 - which is a relatively easy puzzle.
Note that the definition of "hard" and "easy" is subjective here, and I have no idea how to define them in an exact way.

Does

more permutations = a higher "God's number?"

For example, on the latch cube, you can (in some cases) do R3 instead of R'. This changes the number of moves without changing the number of permutations. My guess would be that the latch cube has a higher God's number even though it has less permutations than a Rubik's cube (43,125,471,270,862,848,000 compared to 43,252,003,274,489,856,000.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

What sort of cube are you talking about?
if there are gaps in the edges/corners that other pieces are catching on, so locking up your cube, then yes that may be a good idea... however if they're not causing a problem then you'll only be adding weight to your cube, making it slower.

I like to use unmodded cubes. Just my opinion. I'm also not quite certain how this particular mod is supposed to work.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

A couple of hours later, I have another point I would like to make.

Do sliding puzzles have more permutations because you are allowed to move one piece at a time, and each piece can move in a different direction? Unlike twisty puzzles, where you have to move multiple pieces at once, based on what face they are located on.
 
Last edited:
F R' F' R and F' L F L', Fast fingertrick them for me.

I have an awkward right/left thumb way of doing these that's not very fast and I would like to find a better way.
 
Does anyone use a last layer like EO+CP, then 2GLL? Would it be good at all?
Which brings me to the question, what is the least number of algs you need to knmow to solve the last layer in 2 looks? For example, OLL+PLL=78, CLL+ELL=71, etc...
 
Does anyone use a last layer like EO+CP, then 2GLL? Would it be good at all?
Which brings me to the question, what is the least number of algs you need to knmow to solve the last layer in 2 looks? For example, OLL+PLL=78, CLL+ELL=71, etc...

If you use ZZ, 7 OCLL's and 21 PLL's.
 
Does anyone use a last layer like EO+CP, then 2GLL? Would it be good at all?
Which brings me to the question, what is the least number of algs you need to knmow to solve the last layer in 2 looks? For example, OLL+PLL=78, CLL+ELL=71, etc...

That's the idea of zz-d, zz-orbit, and zz-rainbow

Also as post above, 7 oll 21 pll, aka 28 algs
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top