allanp

The Kawasaki looks cool, but I'm mostly plesently surprised by the space sets! I wasn't expecting much, but they look like fun little play things, and they seem to be purposely compatible with the system space sets. Is this the first time sets from two entirely different themes have been designed to be directly compatible and played with together like this? The model of the Sun, Earth and Moon also looks great, I like vehicles but it's nice to get a non vehicle, and it's not covered in panels so you can see the natural beauty of the mechanics in motion. Great stuff! It's only a shame that they didn't recolour the gears and axles to look more pleasing to the eye, maybe like in a pearl gold and black colour scheme with some metallic gunmetal grey thrown in, but apart from that it looks better than expected.

TBH the poor feedback and lack of development makes me think PU may be retired soon, or at least drastically overhauled. We need physical remotes and not to have any dependency on third party smart devices, and you shouldn't need to know how to code in order to make your own MOCs. However, now that that ability is in Technic, the genie is out the bottle, and some might see it as regressive to remove that now. It's a tricky situation made of their own, it has to be said, admirable ambition, but not every experiment can be a success and I'm sure they'll learn from failed ones. There are solutions but nothing quick and easy. This is pure speculation but I think development on PU v1 has stopped while they work on a proper solution, but it could be a while yet.

Well let's be a bit fair to TLG. When they released the first 1:5 scale motorbike we pointed out our disappointment. But when they released the second one they appeared to listen. So maybe the same is true for the Merc? Also remember what Merc sets we've had in the past. The great unimog, the almighty Arocs, and the Zetros which is the only RC set to retain any semblance of mechanical interest and authenticity (although the Liebherr crane is also fairly authentic in its rigging). There's a chance for something good here, maybe the first F1 car with a gearbox (except for 8880 b model). F1 cars also have a 2 stage final drive with a fairly high gear ratio which, if replicated, would allow for a nice and fast spinning engine through the new low friction gearbox pieces.

That's better .

Yup, I mentioned that in the other topic

The bending is mostly to do with where it is connected at the middle. The support tie thingies need to attach at the end of the boom, not in the middle. The booms work by transferring the weight down to the base by compressing only, not by being so rigid that they can hold up the weight like a lever.

Nicely done

I dunno, I've seen a few clone branded 1:8 cars like this and they look very boring, nothing but bodywork and a couple of very weak motors. Better to leave that sort of thing to the proper RC companies such as Tamiya, Traxxas or Arrma. I really don't mind technic being RC but I hate it when the RC is used as a replacement for the far more interesting and realistic mechanical novelties of a model, such as with the majority or control+ sets. I liked the Zetros because it still has much of that mechanical novelty, and RC is there to compliment it rather than to replace it.

Your tracks are placed too high. Look at page 96, found it at 7:55 in this video: The top beam of the yellow 3x19 yellow frame on the track segment should be aligned to the bottom beam of the yellow 3x19 frame of the central turntable structure.

Variety is the spice of life. I like @kbalage spoken word reviews so I can focus my eyes on the set instead of the words at the bottom of the screen, but I also like listening to some nice music while watching a review which is only really doable with subtitles. But this needn't be the end for Sariels reviews, he may still buy the occasional set if it's something he wants to buy for himself, and there's nothing stopping him from reviewing the set. I also liked his reviews of older classics like 8868, so he could always do those as well. It would be kinda funny if TLG said to us "you think our products are expensive but we think they are good value" then when it came to sending review copies they were like "Aw hell naw, they're way too expensive for that!"

Maybe it's a view count thing? Pure speculation, but Sariels review of 42160 got 26k views, while @kbalage got 230K for the same set. It is a shame though, the youtube algorithm can make and then break you through no fault or lack of effort on your part. And while it is nice to get free sets, if I think of my hourly rate at work, and multiply that by the hours it takes to film and edit a review, the cost of the set doesn't cover that, so it really isn't for free. I didn't agree with his scoring system or many of his opinions but I still enjoyed watching his, and any video review of a new set as it lets me see it in action, and it's mechanical realism, and make up my own mind. Personally I think his choice of music wasn't bad either.

I've been looking forward to seeing this video, nice work. Nice to see a MOC with some of the new gearbox parts, glad they are working well for you

@Lego Tom It certainly looks better, however I think you need to move the attachment point from the middle of the main boom to the top to stop it bending.

I have had the feeling for a few years that the technic team want to give us cool stuff, with the pneumatic tow truck, John Deere skidder, Airbus helicopter and the great new parts like the planetary reduction hubs, Yamaha gearbox parts, new stronger diffs, larger CV joints etc. When they say that the issues (such as CONtrol minus and colour vomit) are coming from higher up the chain, I tend to believe them. I really do, more than ever, find the whole powered up/CONtrol minus thing to be the biggest problem. Yes, there are too many cars, but we are still getting some of the cool sets as well so what's a few extra sets that don't interest me? But with all these sets that require a smart phone, it's starting to really piss me off if I allow myself to actually think about it. Firstly, Lego charges a premium for their products but leaving out AT MINIMUM the physical controller, but preferably one that you can program the set on the device itself, and expecting you to add to the already expensive but incomplete set with your own smart device to just to make it a complete product is cheap and nasty. The original control center sets and the code pilot came with everything you needed out of the box. They might have needed batteries, but control center 2 even came with a wall plug so you didn't even need batteries with that set. Everything you needed to play with and program your models was in the box, and Technic isn't meant to be mindstorms. I believe it is absolutely possible to do that with control+, which I have detailed in my "lets fix powered up" thread and even gave an example of how you could program the CAT bulldozer from scratch on the large remote itself without a smart phone. Secondly, smart devices go out of date and become obsolete very quickly, with support being stopped and so on. Will the very expensive control+ sets be like the old dacta sets and mindstorms sets, which, for someone who doesn't have massive computer knowledge, are now a right pain in the megablocks to get working now without (or even with) third party fan community support and virtual machines and so on. Will expensive control+ sets become useless landfill in 10 or 15 years due to their cheap and nasty strategy while my old control center sets are still going strong? And finally, Lego as a brand is always going on and on about quality, "only the best is good enough" and child safety. While taking the cheap and nasty approach of not having everything come in the box and being reliant on a device that will be obsolete in a few short years definitely does not meet the standard of "only the best is good enough" heirloom quality that they were known for (and still charge for), child safety is also out the window as far as I'm concerned. Children are already under immense mental stress and social pressure from being hooked to their smart devices which they really don't need. "Oh you don't have a smart phone, you must be poor!". Then when they do force their parents to get them one, they are bombarded with edited highlights the lives of everyone else on the planet, making their own lives and outward appearance and wealth feel inadequate in comparison. Not to mention the online dangers they can be exposed to, dangers that make me sick to think about. As adults we can mostly see it for what it is but children are not mentally mature enough to cope. With all the mental health issues, and WORSE that this causes among children, what should Lego do? You know, that well loved childrens brand that stood for heirloom quality and child safety? Ah yes, lets release a bunch of products that they can only have and play with if they have a bloody smart device, as if all children have one and if they don't have one, they should and are missing out. What a joke. It is truly disgusting. But it's okay because that's just the way of the world right? Who cares if we just add to the misery instead of actually trying to make it better. And the higher ups are making their money and fattening their bonuses for making ever more profits so we should all just be happy little sheep about it right? Bollocks!

Well, Markus has said he would like to remake the space shuttle. And the space sets releasing next year only makes it more likely, that is, if they based on real designs/concepts from NASA. If they are purely fictional then that makes a space shuttle less likely IMHO. But as the subject of a space shuttle comes up quite often (perhaps almost as much as a JCB 3CX or 4CX), what would this new Technic space shuttle be like? Apart from being fully covered in panels and stud less, what would it have over 8480 to make it worthwhile? For me, hopefully it would be fully motorized but not app controlled. The Canadarm would have the same functions as 8480 but with the addition of an elbow joint and a grabber to be able to grab and let go of the satellite (4 functions total for the arm), and placed to the side of the shuttle bay like the real one (not in the middle like 8480) to allow more room for the slightly bigger and more complex satellite. Whilst I usually complain about unrealistic mechanisms, the space shuttle is an exception (they couldn't really make a real working rocket!), so it could have a multifunction gearbox to honor the original, plus a new micromotor to unfold the satellite solar panels, which this time would be made of multiple panels that fold out in a cool way to make them much bigger. The roof of the cockpit could be removed to allow access to the Canadarm twin control levers placed at the rear of the cockpit. Similar to the two direction controls of the 42042 crane, the two control levers would have direction control, however, each lever also has two functions, as they could move forwards/backwards but also left/right, allowing two direction control of all four functions of the Canadarm simultaneously from one motor. Yes it would be very complex and in a very tight space, but that was what the 8480 was all about! There would be other levers to control the motorized bay doors and also now motorized landing gear (also a bit unrealistic as I believe the shuttle never had powered retraction of the landing gear, only powered deployment). The landing gear would also have working suspension and bay doors. Finally, the control surfaces on the wings and tail fin would be controlled by a correctly positioned control in he front of the cockpit.

A combine would be really cool, a farming sort of, unofficial subtheme would be great with a bunch of sets released in the same scale (like the 1:10 cars but as farming machinery differs in size there would be many different sized models but all in the same scale). Not sure they would make a combine a flagship, but certainly the one below the flagship, hopefully with all the internal belt work and rotating drums. Could have a basic battery box and motor, and drive would be motorised but geared to be quite slow so you can manually steering it via HoG.

@shampo0o Unfortunately it is kinda normal for these gearboxes. Too complicated with too many gears on too many axles. Thankfully the new Yamaha motorcycle has some new gearbox parts which are much more true to life and have much less friction, we are hoping these will be used, with a few more gear sizes, in the next supercar. In your case however, I think all you could do is try a bit of lubricant, if you don't mind the pieces getting slippery and caked in dust as it sticks to the lubricant!

I like it! I like how it looks heavy when it moves, like it's got a lot of momentum like a real tank, but it still moves at a decent speed seemingly quite easily.

Do you have the motors built into the car yet? The steering motor usually runs a calibration step first, where it finds its mechanical limits of travel.

There used to be a pattern of just after Christmas we'd see "leaked" images of the second half sets but now there doesn't appear to be much of a pattern to it, other than being about a month before release at the earliest.

Edit: nevermind, I'm being dumb!

To be fair, your test used 4 buggy motors which is quite a lot if power, probably more than is ever intended for a Lego model. You also used a 28t diff which might not be good for the overall stability/rigidity of the gearbox. I think where these new gearbox pieces really shine is in their increased realism and much lower friction, meaning you can transmit more of the motors available power to the wheels without much power loss due to friction in the gearbox. So you might not need quite as much of a powerful motor, as it's power can be used more efficiently.

Ah yes, forgot that one.

This is what I've been saying. Yes people use their phone/tablet screens but I think it's something they put up with, not something they actually want. And most MOCs are not stationary, certainly every Lego PU set has been mobile unless I'm forgetting something.

You also have to pair each hub which you previously made out to be simple. I might end up making a prototype if I can get my embedded systems expert friend on board, I'm pretty sure he could do it if anyone can, but we're not being paid to make prototypes for Lego and we have other non Lego projects on our plate at the moment. Regards the need to use a smart device, I think this is something that people tend to "put up with" rather than saying "oh goodie, it doesn't come with a proper remote, my phone is already full with other apps and crap and might not be compatible and the use of my phone will be a no go while I'm playing with my Lego, how wonderful!"