• Welcome to SpeedSolving.com — the world’s largest puzzle community!

    You’re currently browsing as a guest, which means you have limited access to discussions, resources, member profiles, and community features.

    Join 50,000+ cubers and puzzle enthusiasts from around the world to ask questions, share solves, improve faster, and be part of the community.

    Registration is free, fast, and easy — create your account today.

    Already a member? Log in here to hide this message and start participating.

Olypmicube #6a

I'm sorry to disagree with this 42$ thing.
Adding one layer to a cube requires to have a much more complicated rotating system than the previous system.
So I think it's more an exponential that linear relaitonship between the number of layers of a cube and its price. ;-)

Gilles.
 
As long as the price isnt $100 or above, the sides turn very well, and the puzzle is stable, I would buy one! I would love to own one, just toy play with it, even if i dont speedsolve it.
 
Gilles: Notice how it is exponential?!?!?!

Everyone else: It will be solved the same as any other puzzle bigger than 3x3...Centers, edges, solve as 3x3, as you get to bigger cubes you almost have to do this...Edges first starts to fail...And yes...I need one...
 
I would solve it like this:

2 opposite centers
2 other opposite centers
2 last centers
Put all the edges together
Solve 3x3
Fix Parity

I know it works, how do you think I solved a 40x40? :P
 
Originally posted by CraigBouchard@Mar 22 2006, 11:16 PM
Gilles: Notice how it is exponential?!?!?!

Everyone else: It will be solved the same as any other puzzle bigger than 3x3...Centers, edges, solve as 3x3, as you get to bigger cubes you almost have to do this...Edges first starts to fail...And yes...I need one...
Click to expand...
Why would Per's cage method be worse for bigger cubes than the traditional centers first method ?
 
Originally posted by Scott@Mar 23 2006, 05:49 AM
because you'd have ALOT more center piece to work with i think, i dunno.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think you would be right if Per relied only on 3-cycles of single pieces to solve the center. But considering he doesn't 3-cycle single blocks all the time, he also cycles blocks of pieces, I think his method woudl still be very efficient.

-Doug
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top