model850

I guess you're right since I haven't tested that option. Lower RPM certainly make this case even stranger. Maybe space constraints in the back part do not allow for the gearing mechanism to be placed or stronger motor is required for the 3rd power function which I can't figure out. I think the real question is which of the following options has the best cost/benefit: 1) 1 pump + 1 M motor = cheapest / lowest speed / smallest space consuption in the back cabin b) 1 pump + 1 M motor + gearing up mechanism = cheap / sufficient speed / modest space consumption c) 2 pumps + M motor = expensive / sufficient speed / significant space consumption d) 1 pump + L motor = maybe cheaper than option "c" / performance unknown / small space consumption e) L motor is needed for B model or 3rd power function

I'm arriving late to the discussion but I guess they've opted for the L motor because of the double (large) cilinder configuration that lifts the log. Those cylinders have large volume that needs to be filled quickly in order to have decent lifting speed, at least judgeing by this video https://tinyurl.com/ybwk5ntb where small pump and M motor supply one cylinder at the time. Or maybe it has something to do with the B model where they need additional power.

Is this that mysterious 40th anniversary commemorative brick? xD I've just marked the location of the bricks as the pictures are quite large to post them.

20:10 12:6 3:4 22:3 25:2 32:1 Reasons why: 20 - Backhoes are my favourite and this one has many design features true to the real world counterparts that unfortunately 8455 lacked. 12 - Polished out to the last detail. Basically ready to be packed into a box and sold. :D (Would give it 9 points if I could) 3 - If one more function was added that thing would explode. xD Simply stunning how compact it is. 22 - Simple, powerful and sexy. Looks like a lot of fun. 25 - You don't see that every day. Interesting choice and very nicely executed. 32 - Nice basic chasis. It has a lot of potential to be aestetically upraged to fit any era.

Now that I've rewatched designers video of the Tumbler ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riPTENi587w ) presenter sad tires will be introdced for the first time. My mistake ^^' P.S. ...now back to the man subject. ;)

I guess parts have to be made in large quantities for them to pay off and since sets with "exclusive" parts are in most cases are expensive ones this "one time deal" of "exclusiveness" would never actally pay off. :/

Tumbler tyres from 76023 set were also exclusive but here we have them repearing again in last years Drag racer set 42050 :P

That jet looks like F-35 with a bad paint job. :D Since it's has power functions maybe it will be capable of doing something like this:

Boat, BMW bike and Container transport machines look really nice. Color variety and combinations definitely make them more life like, unlike second half of the sets that are more or less two toned. :)

Nice pictures. :D Seems like that turning knob on the B model can't be placed on the other side of the axle because it would interfere with the bucket bellcranck. :/

That was my initial tought too, but it seems like this mechanicm is some kind of a "claw" so I suppose it doesn't affect it's main purpose that much. Unless that atachement is used as a fork(lift). Worst case scenairo is that you put that knob on the other end of the axle.

In demostration video it can be clearely seen that steering wheel is connected to some sort of "clutch gear assambley" situated in the middle of the drivetrain, so I supprt this theory.

That Xerion wheels and steerig could be the solid foundation for JCB 4CX backhoe loader. Not to mentin uprgraded pnaumatics. Unless someone mods the set maybe next year 8455 finally gets a decent successor.

Outriggers are definitely not fasionable but I like different design approach. They are compact, easy to deploy, and safely lock in place. This desing has great strenght necessary to hold all that weight.

Judging by the box art (or the lack of space to add new pictures/information) I would agree on that one. We are probably overthinking the whole subject. As far as new pump design goes I would say that new pump has sping encapsulated in the piston to prevent any "catching"...for smoother operation.

That pneuatic pump doesn't have exposed spring. Maybe new design has removable spring to better suit PF motor. :/

Well when designing studless you are sssentially reducing shape to it's bare neccesities, therefore reducing the number of parts required to achieve desired shape/function. In other words studless pieces are bare connections (basically beams). This type of design makes you form peaces in such way that most basic shape object can take is triangle/pyramid. This structure offers great structural strenght with minimal part count, parts that could be otherwise used to buld something else. Also variety of parts/molds reduces dropping the cost even futher. Ony exception I can think of is the case where one is stacking beams on top of each other. In this case sides holes on the studded pieces can be used as secondary connection point, but this kind of desing can be easely replaced. Aesthetics wise I find studless designs more apropriate when trying to capture fluid lines of modern day machines. :)

I'm new to the forum, but let me shre some of my thoughts about B models in flagship sets. :) Althought from an adult side of view they may seem as a "cheaper" alternative version of the set, sets are mostly made for kids (target group), therefore LEGO still tries to promote it's basic idea of the unlimited configurability ("build what you imagine"). Kids tend to play with sets, not to collect them like AFOL's often do, and don't see the value adults see. Not only that, but B model adds additional value to the main set alone by expending diversity of themes (somebody may buy the set for the B model alone). Also "unfinished" B model can provide the foundation for implementing additional upgrades (wich won't come cheap if you don't already own the neccesary parts) therefore creating new demand among buyers. Going a bit of the subject here but I would like to point out the fact that there is change in trend. Seems like LEGO tends to build ever more complex flagship models each year and boosting up their price (possibly targeting adolt group of buyes), but also leaving smaller, more affordable "second best" model for the kids (like this years 42042 crawler crane).