Erik Leppen

I don't know. Years ago, I tried using this connection of inserting a bar in one of the holes, and I believe I never got the parts separated again. It could be that the bar was transparent though (back from when transparent pieces were a different material), but not sure. In any case, I avoid the connection ever since. (I actually never needed it since.)

Well, there goes my idea... Back to the brainstorm session, I guess... Which, I would say, should imply that, if we were to do an animal contest in the future, then that contest should include all said 'biological entries'. Even if they're not (entire) animals. Edit: So, just to be sure:

For the bodywork, I had to look a bit longer to notice it was even different, but under the hood this seems pretty innovative. Bodywork-wise, I think the options are a bit limited, so I understand you went with this type of car. But this model does suffer a bit from the fact that on first glance, it looks like a variation on the official set, where actually, it is a complete rebuild. The chassis design looks really clean and I really like the suspension setup. It looks to be pretty interesting to build and totally different from the original set. I also like how you put a more standard gearbox in this, instead of all those levers of the original set. Yeah, all in all it seems like a technically interesting and well-designed model, without any 'messy bits'.

Good to see the contest has started. I'm really curious what people will come up with, as the theme is really open to the wildest ideas. Judging/voting will be nigh impossible though. Actually, I may have just thought of something that might be cool to try to build. Well... if I can get it to work, which is a big 'if'. It would be a good opportunity to order some extra pneumatics, which is always useful.

I think 1 is too niche.

Why does TLC keep releasing trucks with racing tyres? Well, one could also see it as a good thing that those new frames make things simpler, instead of more complicated. The only reason I can think of is that "tipping truck" is American English and "dump truck" is British English, or vice versa. (I'm not enough into English to know this.)

This seems to be the most interesting set of the wave. It's something different, and it seems to have plenty of functions for the size. Or, differently stated, it's the Technic set hiding between the cars.

What Technic? Oh, you mean that Racers line that TLC still calls Technic? Jokes aside, I think it's an effect of the shallowness of society in the 21st century. People (in general) don't care anymore about what works nice. People care about what looks nice. Technic shifting focus on looks (like literally all other themes of Lego), thereby losing its unique selling point, is just a consequence of that. Technic as it was, won't be coming back as long as the general public won't regain interest in functionality over looks.

It looks like this has the cam piece in dark blue, 12 times. (at the rear, besides the large 45-degree macaroni pieces). For the rest, whatever. At least it looks better than a black car. But I consider this Racers, not Technic. I'm kinda baffled by how TLC decides to put huge focus on F1 and then NOT use distinct front and rear tyres. But whatever.

I really don't get these sets. The scale is too small to make any car look like its real-life counterpart. To me, all these sets look exactly the same. Sure, I can see "differences" if I search for them, but from a glance, they all look exactly the same. I couldn't tell any of these sets apart, except maybe the Koenigsegg because that has a quite different shape. The 1:16 System sets like 10295 Porsche or the Countach actually look like the car they're supposed to be, and I can recognize the brands even though I'm not a real gearhead. The best recent Technic car, I would say, is the dark-blue Ford GT. That actually looked like a recognizable brand car, thanks to the slightly bigger scale, which is also big enough to fit some decent functions without creating huge empty spaces and without making sets unwieldy large or expensive. Really, if TLC want 1:16 cars, they should just stick with the System builds. For Technic, 1:16 is just too small to make any result look good IMO. Also, as someone else said, these cars take the slot of what could have been a really cool functional Technic machinery set. 42049, for example, is exactly the type of set I'd like to see from Technic 50 euro range sets.

I'm totally not into these modular buildings, but the Parisian Restaurant has the very interesting quality that it works just as well stand-alone. Because of that, it is the only set of this series I have ever owned.

I would use the Brickstore/Brickstock program (2 names for the same program). I believe it is used by Bricklink sellers to keep their inventory. It's an offline tool so you don't have to do everything via a web interface. It takes its data, including pricing information, from Bricklink.

Let's first start with the basic 2L inline axle joiner in blue, and the basic x-o-x 3L perpendicular connector in blue. Two of the most basic Technic parts are currently not available in one of the 5 original Lego colors... (Yes, the 3L connector exists in blue, but it's super rare)

Congratulations to all those who ended higher than they thought. Actually, I myself didn't expect to end in 6th place at all! I find it interesting how the top 10 is all very close to one another, except the winner who has ended miles ahead of the rest. That's quite astonishing, really. Points-wise, #2 is in fact closer to #12 than to #1. Actually, I see that #2 and #3 differ by a single point. Anyhow, it was a fun contest and it's great to see so many great entries made it to the finish line. I think all contestants can be proud :)

I said "paid [something] is primarily a product". I specifically added "primarily" to address this point. Yes, sold art is still art, but, by entering the realm of economy, it is made into an art product. That was not at all what I wanted to suggest! But I just noticed someone being a seller of instructions (which just happened to be you) decided to not share this particular bit of information for free, even though I would think this community thrives on people sharing things for free. So I was a bit surprised by this and made the link between someone not sharing something for free and, well, not sharing things for free. That is all. I called this "the fun drains out" because I think sharing things for free and getting replies is part of the fun. By involving money, it becomes a transaction, and to me, that feels not-fun. This is a good point. Personally, I don't consider myself good enough (as a builder and as an instruction maker) to make people pay for the things I made.