kodlovag

I cannot do a 3D plot, however I think my original colored charts were a kind of 3D plots. But I made these six comparisions, but I have no idea what we can learn from them. Prices are adjusted with US inflation data, and 2019 equivalent prices are displayed. I'm not really sure about the method to use US inflation, because the manufacturing is in the EU, so it would probably be better to use some kind of EU inflation (?) and EUR/USD conversion rates. But it should not be too different. The orange spots are the sets with Power Functions. My original charts told me more, I cannot see the added value from these ones. I think I will not create more charts. Let's discuss these ones.

I have all the data required for these graphs (except inflation correction). But it took me about 6 hours to collect the data, draw the graphs and analyze them. So it's quite time consuming, but I will try to make them later. 8275 released in 2007, so it is included in the data. I went back to 2005, because that was the time when TLG migrated to the new beam/liftarm design, and the darkest year with only 5 sets released. Definitely many things changed at that time. I already have the colored data for PF, pneumatics, long linear actuators and pullback motors. Every pullback sets are 20 USD RRP, no exception. If a set contains pneumatics, then both PPG and PPP are in the trend line, only exception is the 42080 with the new pneumatics +PF. Only heavily motorized and licensed sets can jump out, and thats why I only posted the colored PF chart. And marked the Porsche and the Bugatti. I think the licese fee is about 15% of these sets.

It is the flagship set 8285 Tow Truck from 2006. It has big wheels, metalized parts and pneumatics, and these do not reflected at all in the price. Only PF increases the price, and only when there is more than a battery box and an M motor is present in the set. I think there is no physical or economical reason, why a log would fit better. A logarithmic curve bends down much faster than our data points. Anyway I tried, and it fit worse. A log vs. log fit tells nothing new, just compressing the upper segments, and it is harder to see, that big sets are cheaper. Any slowly bending curve could fit better, but there are too few data points in the upper segment. I would simply propose to use two linear fits, with a break point around 2000-2300g. It will work fine. What we actually see here (I think) is the "volume" pricing. The price of a set is composed from volume related (like weight of plastic, longer instruction, etc.) and fixed costs (like box design, standard process of accepting a set design(kid proof?, using bricks currently in production? etc.). And some others in between, like the number of lots described by @nerdsforprez... The fixed costs increasing the price of a small set faster, than a big set. On the other hand small sets are selling faster, than big sets, so the fixed costs are distributed better. What I want to say, there is no way to tell the exact shape of the curve. Maybe TLG could, but we have no chance. Therefor a simple broken line is good enough. True, I'm correcting it. It is 42070, I confused weight with piece count when manually marked the point.

OK, I made these graphs to check the PPP vs. PPG, because I like to visualize things, I underastand things better in this way. I used the same sources as @nerdsforprez, USD RRP prices are from Brickset, weights are from Bricklink. Weights are containing box and instructions too, but it would be too much work to calculate the net weight. On the other hand, all sets have box and instructions, and bigger sets have bigger box and lomger instructions. So I think weights are still proportional. First the price vs piece: I checked several special elements, like the long linear actuators, the pullback motors, the pneumatics and the Power Functions in the sets. I found, that only PF counts significantly in the price. The PPP scatters a lot, but only the PF sets pops out. Then, the price vs. weight: The graph is much more clear. What we can see? (42099 is not included in the graph, because there is no weight data available) Inflation: 25-30% price increase is visible over the 15 years. Big sets are cheaper. Only several overpriced sets. All heavily motorized, or licensed. I think Porsche is also overpriced compared to big sets.

Thanks you like it. One more people faved it on flickr, and I also like it, So we four together are already a little crowd.

I always liked the shape of the otherwise old 8081 set, and when I decided to create my first RC car, I selected this set to mod. Of course, an offroader must be 4x4, and to speed up the development I used the 4x4 mod by @Thirdwigg, see it there: https://thirdwigg.com/2012/04/26/4x4-8081/ I added a 2 speed gearbox with the new orange selector, and used the HOG steering gear on the top of the original 8081 to switch gears. Then I added my RC solution with x2 L-motors, steering by servo, and used the CADA battery box for remote controlling. Finally I reshaped and recolored the body and the chassis, and upgraded the interior. Well, after writing the list of mods, I realized that only a part of the body survived without modifications. But the mod is still a recognizable 8081. I'm not really happy with the performance of the offroader, because the chassis is too weak around the L-motors, and the power of the two motors disassembles some pins in the chassis, and the driving gears start to jump. I failed to find an easy correction, the whole middle part of the chassis should be redesigned, so I abandoned this project, and started a new, bigger and better offroader, based on the experience from this first RC model. But I decided to post this mod here, anyway. Some more pics here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/138715943@N07/albums/72157709895583186/with/48379303261/

Extremely well made. I recognized it immediately.

Something like the 21309 Saturn V? Or even larger?

Today afternoon I noticed, that Bricks & Pieces does not ship to Hungary anymore. Only US, UK, Germany and Switzerland are supported. B&P was the best way to buy the rare and expensive bricks, which cost a little fortune on BrickLink and elsewhere. PaB is not comparable with B&P, this is a real loss. Why does TLG stop selling individual pieces? Anyone know details? Will we get it back later?

The tentacles side is the front. There is the cockpit with 4 seats for the minifigs and many control instruments. And thanks for everyone who comments and likes this creation.

I add this rendered image, and enter the spaceship to the race.

This is very original and I like it very much.

This contest is really interesting, so I decided to try something. Please remember, this is my very first attempt to build a spaceship since 25 years or so. My largest spaceship sets were 6824 and 6846. Well, very different era compared to recent MOCs or SW ships. I selected category A, because it is much faster to develop something, and have some immediate fun. A little problem, that I don't have many sets, I'm only buying modulars and some Technic, but they are not a good base to be bennyfied. So this will be a digital entry. But can be built, I just don't have the bricks. My first idea was to turn a tree to a spaceship, but there are no good trees, and the IDEAS treehouse is not a product yet. I didn't want to moc something first, so this idea was skipped. But then I found the 21313 - Ship In A Bottle set... And I created this during the weekend. The original set And the bennyfied I'm not really sure, what is this. Alien? Catfish? Submarine? Maybe spaceship? But this might be a good news, because it fits to the spirit of the contest. This is not my final entry, work in progress. I will regularly update this first post to the actual state.

I like this, and my personal favourite point is (what a surprise) the typewriter. I gonna build that for sure. This is a digital MOC, and cannot be built without color scheme redesign, and/or replacing several parts. Therefor selling instructions is not 'fair'. So I cannot see why not to submit it to Ideas. Unlikely to succseed, but the only way to have it in its original shine.

I had a similar idea for this shrink-a-set type contest. Build a smaller version of any set with less, than half bricks count. While keeping the look and functionalities of the original set as much, as possible. You can use any bricks, not only the ones in the set, but the final brick count has to be less than half of the original set.

No, I think the Corvette scale would be perfect for a small car competition. Most of us disliked the Corvette, but only because it is not similar enough. However I see the potential in this 15 studs wide format. Small enough to develop fast, and large enough to have several working features. The new small mudguard piece is very useful too. But we have to wait with such a contest until the release of the car transporter, to allow more color options. Because now half of the entries would be orange, while other half use flex hoses as mudguard.

Thanks to everybody who voted on my entry! I hoped to finish at the first half of the race, and definitely not expected a medal, because there were so many good entries. Congratulations to @Rudivdk and @braker23!

How does it possible, that the lower 8t gear does not stuck with the grey 3L output axle? Am I miscalculating something?

I think the biggest problem with the modular lighting is the wires between the levels, and therefor it is very hard to remove the upper levels of the modulars without installing connectors between the levels. But what about a semi-solution? Light up only the ground floors with wall mounted lights and the street lights / traffic lights. These wires can be hidden easily, and can be operated from a single connector from the back side corner of the building. I don't have any lights yet, but this would be a good idea to light up a city.

Hmm, many people are voting with less than 50 posts (see voting rules in the opening post of this topic). Anyway, I don't think it will change anything to include or exclude their votes, unless they are voting in the same direction.

3: 10 6: 6 1: 4 17: 3 13: 2 10: 1

Perfect hit, just perfect!

Yes, true. There are two ways to do it correctly. Either, one of the 20t gears on the side has to be driven instead of the middle one, or the differentials have to be reversed. Both solves the problem. Kind of... Because driving the side gears causing slack on the other side (works correctly, but not too elegant). Or reversing the differentials, but then the middle 16t gear can sometimes stuck with the edge of the 28t differentials (so its not reliable), or the middle gear can be changed to a half conical 12t gear, but it can sometimes slip/jump (so its not reliable). I tried all the versions, and the decision was to use the backward roll. Maybe not the best decision, and driving a side gear would be better, like on this old concept from the beginning of the topic. Unfortunately there is no perfect solution, at least I couldn't find one.

See Volante in the [TC15] Technic Aircraft Contest - Entry Topic!

4. VOLANTE This aircraft is inspired by The Aston Martin Volante Vision Concept. The Volante Vision Concept is Aston Martin’s exploration into personal air mobility, a kind of luxury flying car. Produced in partnership with Cranfield Aerospace Solutions, Cranfield University and Rolls-Royce, the concept aircraft with vertical take-off and landing capabilities demonstrates Aston Martin’s forward-looking design ingenuity. I myself find the concept very interesting and different from other air mobility solutions, like the drone style flying taxi concepts (Uber/Bell, Audi/Airbus, etc...). Contains ~1100 parts in total, plus the stand. FEATURES Elegant bodywork glass canopy detailed cockpit: 3 seats, one for the pilot with controls, and two passengers PF powered propulsion spinning main rotor spinning twin propellers PF L-motor with System 9V battery box Vertical Take-Off and Landing (VTOL) pilot yoke control (left hand, up-down): switching between fly mode and VTOL mode. when switching, twin propellers are rotated from horizontal to vertical, and landing legs are released Twin rudder pilot yoke control (left hand, left-right) Elevon Mixed elevator and aileron controls on the same control flaps pilot yoke control (right hand, left-right for aileron, up-down for elevator) VIDEO MORE IMAGES DISCUSSION TOPIC Find more images in the discussion topic and in my Flickr album.