Scrambling and solving a 4x4x4 as a 2x2x4

[n0nco]

I have no clue where to put this thread.

As of late, I've been messing around with my 4x4x4, and tried restricting myself to only a limited moveset:

Rw2, Fw2, Bw2, Lw2, and anything for U/D. For rotations you have to choose 2 colours to always keep on bottom/top, easiest choice is white/yellow for most people.

This effectively turns your 4x4x4 into a 2x2x4, minus the shapeshifting.

It's not too hard to solve, and its a fun puzzle to try out, so I'd suggest y'all to give it a shot. One thing I haven't figured out yet is parity, but I have somehow solved it once or twice. I won't be depicting my solving method, but I'm curious how close other peoples methods will be to mine. Happy solving!

(Also, not sure if this has been talked about before, if it has I couldn't find it.)

 

[-Cube Kid-]

That's so cool! I'm gonna do that! I love 4x4 for reasons like that, it is effectively several cubes in one (2x2, 3x3, 4x4, and now 2x2x4, and mby more.)

 

[abunickabhi]

This is so cool!

Various constraints are possible with puzzles that we own

 

[Fred]

Fun challenge!

Spoiler: My Method

Solve it like square-1 corners twice. Figuring out the corner orientation for the "inner" square-1 is by far the trickiest part and should be what you look at in inspection. Try to figure out which pieces belong in the u slice and get them all in the u slice. Once that's done, do corner permutation on the inner square-1, then solve the outer square-1. You can do all corner permutations as a combination of adj/adj swaps (jperm/jperm) which I translate from square-1 as Rw2 Dw' Rw2 Uw Dw Rw2 Uw' Rw2 (or narrow U and D for the outer square-1). You could also use Ortega algs from 2x2 if they have the right moveset.

Edit: Just finished 3x3x4 too, and it was a lot harder for me.

 

[n0nco]

Fun challenge!

Great solution!

Spoiler: Comments on Freds method

Using square-1 algs is brilliant, for the life of me I couldn't figure out how to move outer-layer corners, without adjusting inner-layer corners (I was using standard 2x2 algs), and thats a great solution. It'd likely be faster to simply intuitively solve one layer of the inner-SQ1, then do a standard 2x2 alg/SQ1 alg for the last layer, since it's pretty difficult to figure out which pieces should be in u/d slice.

 

[THE_V01DL0RD]

Umm my 2x2x4 method is reducing it to a 2x2x3
idk what yall are talking about with square one corners or whatever but you do you ig

 

[n0nco]

(I was using standard 2x2 algs)

Just realised that “standard 2x2 algs” don’t quite abide by the restrictions… and that I was solving it incorrectly the entire time.. I can be a bit daft sometimes…!

 

[Jared Burkhart]

I would be more than happy to try it!

 

[qwr]

Does this exist as a real puzzle? Like the 3x3x9 but 2x2 version

 

[acrystal]

Does this exist as a real puzzle? Like the 3x3x9 but 2x2 version

View attachment 48263

WDYM. 2x2x6 that exists)

 

[n0nco]

Does this exist as a real puzzle?

It sort of does; it's called the Rubik's tower. The difference is that the 4x4 version doesn't shape-shift, whilst the real version does.

 

[qwr]

It sort of does; it's called the Rubik's tower. The difference is that the 4x4 version doesn't shape-shift, whilst the real version does.

I know that exists - I was asking about a flattened version that is cube shaped. Maybe it wouldn't be that hard to mod a 4x4 cubies to do that.