Jim Posted July 7, 2018 Posted July 7, 2018 14 hours ago, Bublehead said: <off topic> I think you have found a new contest theme @Jim... how many parts can you eliminate from an official TLG set and retain the functions? Bonus points for increasing function count AND reducing part count. Call it a Bare Bones contest... Please don't start intentional off-topic conversations. Especially since we have a contest topic. Quote
mortenm Posted July 7, 2018 Posted July 7, 2018 Is it a new red or what is going on in the video? It seems very deeply dark red - almost like it has been painted I don't mind the size of the model, even if it isn't necessary. Quote
suffocation Posted July 8, 2018 Posted July 8, 2018 10 hours ago, mortenm said: Is it a new red or what is going on in the video? It seems very deeply dark red - almost like it has been painted It looks slightly different to me, too, but I reckon it's the good ol' red that got all polished and shiny for the video. Bloody marketing hustles. So funny how many folks are moaning and groaning about the high part count, especially because some of them were complaining last year about the LOW part count in 42070, which had less than half the parts of 42082 and cost more. Come Black Friday this set'll be selling for €160 with a dumpload of cool parts - seriously, what is there to complain about? Quote
Ngoc Nguyen Posted July 8, 2018 Author Posted July 8, 2018 Not to mention the new and highly coveted 3x7 shell panel in red Quote
Erik Leppen Posted July 8, 2018 Posted July 8, 2018 57 minutes ago, suffocation said: So funny how many folks are moaning and groaning about the high part count, especially because some of them were complaining last year about the LOW part count in 42070, which had less than half the parts of 42082 and cost more. I don't think people complained about low part count in 42070 - I think many complaints were about high cost, unnecessarily big size and general ugliness of the model (the last one is a result of low part count, but it was not the part count itself that spawned the critiques). And I don't think people complain about high part count in 42082 - i think many complaints are about, again, needlessly big size, and high part count in relation to functionality, or differently stated, unnecessarily high part count. I think many of us complain from a buyer's perspective - many of us will buy the set anyway. I think many complaints are from a designer's perspective. Speaking for myself, I think the set could have become a better model, in the case of 42070 by being smaller and more detailed, and in the case of 42082 by being smaller and using fewer parts. But, that said, it still remains to be seen whether the size of 42082 is justified by what's inside. It may very well be. Quote
TeamThrifty Posted July 8, 2018 Posted July 8, 2018 1 hour ago, Erik Leppen said: and high part count in relation to functionality This is something mentioned a few times... but to coin a phrase, its meaningless generalisation. For it stand up as an argument you need to quantify an acceptable function-to-part-count ratio. Its easy to generalise, which is why a poor debating tool. Howmany functions has BWE got for example.. more than 42082? probably not.. (drive, slewing, conveyor, arm raise lower..) vs (boom raise, extend, hook lower, stabilisers, steering, 4wd) Looks to be less and no one mentions the Golden Ratio when discussing it... or Chiron. Steering, engine, gearbox, suspension. Big part count, BIIIIIG price tag, but again no one really jumps on the part count ratio... so why is 42082 in the Golden Ratio spotlight? Obviously my function count was just off the top of my head when typing, but rather generalise meaninglessly, why not do an actual facts based assessment and see what the reality is? For transparency, i love 42082. If it was a 4k piece empty box, i wouldn't.. but it isn't. Quote
Erik Leppen Posted July 8, 2018 Posted July 8, 2018 5 hours ago, TeamThrifty said: For it stand up as an argument you need to quantify an acceptable function-to-part-count ratio. Its easy to generalise, which is why a poor debating tool. Howmany functions has BWE got for example.. more than 42082? It's not a debating tool, because there's no debate. There are personal viewpoints and opinions, supported by arguments based on personal taste and preference. You can't really "debate" those. At most, you can disagree, and state why. Which also means there's no "golden ratio" or whatever "acceptable" ratio. What is acceptable differs per person. Also, the number of functions isn't a very accurate measure, because it disregards the complexity. 42030 has 4 functions but I find it a very boring set, because I find it lacking in technical complexity. Yes, I find the Chiron lacking in functionality and arguably not even Technic, despite the marvellous gearbox and nice looks. But I also personally find the BWE's size perfectly acceptable given what it does, and one of the better and most original Technic sets of recent years. And for me, for now, 42082 seems to be larger than is needed for the functions it seems to have. I don't say you have to agree, or that it's not acceptable. It's just an opinion. And my opinion may change when I see the set being reviewed, or it may stay the same. We'll see. Quote
Ngoc Nguyen Posted July 8, 2018 Author Posted July 8, 2018 (edited) For one thing, the multidirectional gearbox in general requires more space than the multifunctional one. I'd much prefer the former because it is more intuitive to use. Edited July 8, 2018 by Ngoc Nguyen Quote
superdog Posted July 9, 2018 Posted July 9, 2018 No one thinks it looks strange? like 42054 base with 42009 up parts.... so strange in front. Quote
Aleh Posted July 9, 2018 Posted July 9, 2018 Does anybody thought if he is going to buy this set anyway, miss all reviews of it for discovering all features himself? When you know everything before assembling set it's not so fascinating, imho. Interesting to hear your opiniosn, guys! Quote
TeamThrifty Posted July 9, 2018 Posted July 9, 2018 13 hours ago, Erik Leppen said: because it disregards the complexity Complexity is an excellent additional metric. And for all i agree its a personal judgement call on the function part ratio, it still should be quantifiable to at least some degree... 13 hours ago, Erik Leppen said: one of the better and most original Technic sets of recent years I agree completely about BWE, but its part count to piece ratio is worse than 42082.. it gains on originality, so maybe that offsets the function count. Quote
Bublehead Posted July 9, 2018 Posted July 9, 2018 I think the fact that it was “time for a crane” for the kids in the current demographic pipeline is why we see a big, high part count, but not a very different functional model. How many kids have been waiting for a crane? If they were 10 years old and saw the Mk II, they waited 5 years for their chance to build this one. That puts them in the sweet 15 year old demographic now and they are ready. You’ve already lost the kids who were 13+ when the last crane came out. Another year and you loose even more. Quote
Ngoc Nguyen Posted July 9, 2018 Author Posted July 9, 2018 @Bublehead Nah, the last crane came out in 2015. The number is 42042. Quote
Aleh Posted July 9, 2018 Posted July 9, 2018 1 hour ago, Ngoc Nguyen said: @Bublehead Nah, the last crane came out in 2015. The number is 42042. Which became maybe more popular even than 42009. Quote
Bublehead Posted July 9, 2018 Posted July 9, 2018 Yeah, I forgot 42042, it didn’t come up in BL under Construction sub genre. Quote
Maaboo the Witch Posted July 9, 2018 Posted July 9, 2018 4 hours ago, Aleh said: Which became maybe more popular even than 42009. Definitely did with me. Quote
emielroumen Posted July 9, 2018 Posted July 9, 2018 (edited) On 7/6/2018 at 12:06 PM, Jim said: I reckon/hope that they are driven by two separate axles, turning in a different direction. Otherwise the model would be working properly, in the video, right? Not really. The deviation is not that big, and has been discussed in detail in the 8043 thread and if I recall correctly also in the context of 42009. Edited July 9, 2018 by emielroumen Typo Quote
Jim Posted July 10, 2018 Posted July 10, 2018 8 hours ago, ctx1769 said: My only gripe about 42082 is it's not here yet I’m hoping it will be on my desk within a day or two. Quote
1gor Posted July 10, 2018 Posted July 10, 2018 18 minutes ago, Jim said: I’m hoping it will be on my desk within a day or two. That is a good news indeed and now you just need a (few) cup(s) of ☕️ Quote
TeamThrifty Posted July 10, 2018 Posted July 10, 2018 1 hour ago, Jim said: I’m hoping it will be on my desk within a day or two. I'm not jealous.. much. Looking forward to seeing the review and pics of the build process... when roughly do you think you'll have a review posted? Quote
Ngoc Nguyen Posted July 10, 2018 Author Posted July 10, 2018 Does the embargo date mean Jim is not allowed to publish the review before Aug 1st? Quote
Jim Posted July 10, 2018 Posted July 10, 2018 Just now, Ngoc Nguyen said: Does the embargo date mean Jim is not allowed to publish the review before Aug 1st? The current embargo date is indeed the 1st of August. Quote
TeamThrifty Posted July 10, 2018 Posted July 10, 2018 are you allowed to drop hints of good it is, or is feedback zero until the 1st? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.