42082 - Rough Terrain Crane

[Lipko]

People keep arguing about the suspension, but real cranes of such type doesn't seem to have suspension either (or only a minimal). The mudguards are too close to the wheel.

[Aleh]

1 hour ago, Lipko said:

People keep arguing about the suspension, but real cranes of such type doesn't seem to have suspension either (or only a minimal). The mudguards are too close to the wheel.

They may move together with the wheel as front ones in mostly tractors 

[Vectormatic]

 

The video is a bit cringe-worthy (i mean, cat-erham, really?) but it shows the capabilities of the crane quite well. I especially like the slewing shot with the old classic space set. On one hand it is very impressive that a lego crane can actually do this, on the other hand i find all the flex very worrying, seeing the central part of the chassis warp compared to the wheels makes me fear its going to fall apart.

[Ngoc Nguyen]

Perhaps one day people will ask for a 4 speed gearbox in a crane too.

[Bartybum]

55 minutes ago, Ngoc Nguyen said:

Perhaps one day people will ask for a 4 speed gearbox in a crane too.

They won’t. People want cars to have transmissions because from a functional standpoint that’s one of the only interesting things a car offers, save for suspension and steering geometry. Transmissions are also generally associated with cars in the Technic community and not construction equipment.

Edited August 8, 2018 by Bartybum

[Lipko]

1 hour ago, Aleh said:

They may move together with the wheel as front ones in mostly tractors 

Everything looks pretty fix to me...

[Aleh]

1 hour ago, Lipko said:

Everything looks pretty fix to me...

Ehmmm, you are right actually. sorry.

[Bartybum]

I stand corrected, not much in the way of suspension. I did see a photo with what looked like a pendular axle, but the range of movement would be quite small anyway, so I guess it’s not important for Lego’s model ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edited August 8, 2018 by Bartybum

[suffocation]

I read quite a few product sheets recently. Most models seem to have a combination of solid axles and either floating or oscillating (probably akin to what we Lego nuts call "pendular") axles.

[LucyCol]

6 hours ago, vectormatic said:

The video is a bit cringe-worthy (i mean, cat-erham, really?) but it shows the capabilities of the crane quite well. I especially like the slewing shot with the old classic space set. On one hand it is very impressive that a lego crane can actually do this, on the other hand i find all the flex very worrying, seeing the central part of the chassis warp compared to the wheels makes me fear its going to fall apart.

Would have got a better result, if he actually watched how cranes lift in real life.

[nerdsforprez]

51 minutes ago, LucyCol said:

Would have got a better result, if he actually watched how cranes lift in real life.

Agree.  Actually, I don't think his video showed the capabilities very well at all.  That is not how cranes lift. 

Funny, I remember when 42009 came out there was a slew of youtubers, who got lots of views, but lifted the same way as this guy. With the actuators. 

While the video itself is quite cringe-worthy, I do think it shows something important.  As mentioned, the video already had like 54,000 views and people for the most part are liking it.  This goes to show that I still think the main audience for Technic are not a very technically-sound bunch.  Most of what we argue on this site, like pendular axles for the crane, ackerman steering for our cars, etc. - most people, even those that purchase Technic are not privy to.  Sadly enough, it is exactly why I don't think many of the voices on this site are heard in terms of improving sets......

[TeamThrifty]

17 hours ago, nerdsforprez said:

main audience for Technic are not a very technically-sound bunch

..and most people with PC's are not very i.t. literate but it doesn't mean they can't have one.. not every user has to operate at the top-end of somethings capability. Whether it be Lego, PC's etc. 

What you may find is that those people use technic as a gateway into understanding things. And perhaps most importantly, their money is as good as ours in keeping the wheels at TLG oiled. 

[AVCampos]

3 hours ago, TeamThrifty said:

keeping the wheels at TLG oiled

As long as it's at TLG and not in my models... I'd hate to have yucky slimy parts.

[Bublehead]

Brought this bad boy home tonight... haven’t gone through my ritual yet.  Just been looking at the box.  Not sure it was worth $299 US though.  You start taking that $299 and spend it elsewhere in your head and suddenly all that cheddar sitting on your shelves jumps out at you and says things like “You could have bought a nice used car with all this money dude.” and “Really dude? A Housing complex for dust mites? What were you thinking?”  So one has to savor the build ritual and drag it out as long as possible, because the wife gets a little edgy when you spend money at the rate I have been lately within the last year. I mean, I went from 5 UCS Star Wars sets in June of 2017 (I had given my older Lego to my brother, some $8000 to $10000 worth from 1977 to 2008 and that is an underestimate I am sure, since that is an original costs estimate based on buying it on sale and discounted usually and the fact I would buy multiple copies of flagship sets to build both A and B models and a third set to put in the parts bins.)  to now I have over 50 models worth in the collection again after tracking down most of the flagship sets I had missed and buying everything  Technic that comes across the local Craigslist. 

[nerdsforprez]

I'd be much more interested in why you think the set was not worth it rather than hearing how much Lego you own......

[Jzawesak]

1 hour ago, Bublehead said:

. I mean, I went from 5 UCS Star Wars sets in June of 2017 (I had given my older Lego to my brother, some $8000 to $10000 worth from 1977 to 2008 and that is an underestimate I am sure, since that is an original costs estimate based on buying it on sale and discounted usually and the fact I would buy multiple copies of flagship sets to build both A and B models and a third set to put in the parts bins.)  to now I have over 50 models worth in the collection again after tracking down most of the flagship sets I had missed and buying everything  Technic that comes across the local Craigslist. 

Did you assume that this topic is not about your collection?

[Bublehead]

Sorry @nerdsforprez, didn’t mean to waste your time.  Why is RTC not worth $300? Well I paid $130 dollars for a 8880 new and at ~1343 pieces and got just as much joy and satisfaction back then as the RTC will give me now at $300. I think the part counts per set have risen, but functionality has not.  For 4000 pieces, this thing should make me breakfast in the mornings.  I just don’t think the ballooning of piece count and price has done anyone any favors except make us expect the next set to be even larger than the last.  Being biggest does not make you especially any better.  At 1600 pieces for $250, the 42030 was the pinnacle of what I was willing to part with for the playability of a great functioning set.  Then the 42070 came along and made us rethink what we were willing to pay for what we get. Now we get a crane. Nothing really new, just bigger. 4000 pieces for $300, a bargain, right? In the past, with 4000 parts you could make 3 models at ~1300 pieces. Three 8880 for $300?, sign me up! One model of a crane for $300? Not that thrilled.

[mortenm]

1 minute ago, Bublehead said:

Sorry @nerdsforprez, didn’t mean to waste your time.  Why is RTC not worth $300? Well I paid $130 dollars for a 8880 new and at ~1343 pieces and got just as much joy and satisfaction back then as the RTC will give me now at $300. I think the part counts per set have risen, but functionality has not.  For 4000 pieces, this thing should make me breakfast in the mornings.  I just don’t think the ballooning of piece count and price has done anyone any favors except make us expect the next set to be even larger than the last.  Being biggest does not make you especially any better.  At 1600 pieces for $250, the 42030 was the pinnacle of what I was willing to part with for the playability of a great functioning set.  Then the 42070 came along and made us rethink what we were willing to pay for what we get. Now we get a crane. Nothing really new, just bigger. 4000 pieces for $300, a bargain, right? In the past, with 4000 parts you could make 3 models at ~1300 pieces. Three 8880 for $300?, sign me up! One model of a crane for $300? Not that thrilled.

Then why did you buy it? 

[Bublehead]

@mortenm, why do heroin addicts buy the drugs that kill them? I buy the sets for the build and for the parts. For $300 I get 1.25 new models to build (yeah the B model is not their best effort) and I get black banana gears. Worth it? Eh... 

[nerdsforprez]

23 minutes ago, Bublehead said:

Sorry @nerdsforprez, didn’t mean to waste your time.......

Not a waste of my time at all. I am in the market for this set, but on the fence right now.  I want to get as many opinions as I can. 

I likely will eventually succumb.  I generally don't care about the static nature of a set.  It could be the crappiest design ever made.  But if there are many parts I want, or combined with the actual model a cool B model, or even C, or I envision other cool MOCs others will come up with using primarily the set in question then I will typically get the set.  In a nutshell, I try to envision the future of a set, not what it is at the time of purchasing it. 

Case in point is both 42056 and 083.  At least on this site (not general public) - I don't think either was a smashing hit.  However, others have created awesome builds primarily using the colors/pieces from the sets, certainly the tires for a wheelbase, and the "pimp your ***" version of both models has been super fun.  I purchased both, and have not regretted the decision. However, if it were not for all the modifications, other MOCs, etc. I would have been very disappointed.  In other words, if Lego were not Lego, and only models.  Disappointment.  But because they are Lego.  No disappointment.  I get this is somewhat a circular argument here.... technically, every set can become a parts pack for some cool build.  But I guess that is how I see Lego, period.  An object of circularity, if nothing more.

 

 

[TeamThrifty]

12 minutes ago, Bublehead said:

Worth it?

Define 'worth'.

Price per part its cheap. that's an absolute measure, perhaps the only objective one. Everything else is subjective.

Price per function? do-able but does't tell you how clever or intricate those functions were. 'Gearbox' = 1 function, but is the porsche gearbox the same as the chiron? probably not, so function count looks like an unreliable measure.

17 minutes ago, Bublehead said:

I buy the sets for the build and for the parts

You should love it then, as mentioned already, price per part is low.

What it boils down to, is that our thoughts on a set are a gut feeling as much as anything measurable. We'll all spend for a super-trick function, no doubt there. I'm a sucker for big set. Others are suckers for polished-no-gap-realism. we all have our weakness, but when thse threads try to objectify a reason, it kind of fails for me... its how your gut feels. Simple.

[Maaboo the Witch]

Working winch. Outriggers. Two-stage boom. Slewing. 42082 does all this.

So does 8270.

That should tell you all you need to know.

[J_C]

could someone who has 42042 and 42082 (built at the moment (I hardly ever keep the models built for long time ) please take a picture of them together? thank you.

[Bublehead]

@nerdsforprez, ok, then here is a little more to convince you... in my best Palpatine voice- “You want this, don’t you? Buy it! Take this model to the checkout line and buy it now and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!” 

I think this is a great parts pack, and a C model dream for the gifted designers amongst us.  Black curved gear racks... what’s not to like to like there. Lots of red and black...red 3x11 panels that don’t cost a fortune. Some nice old school 16L Technic beams. The parts list is extensive. Can’t say how I like the build, I haven’t popped the seals yet, going to build it this weekend.

[Manofours]

1 hour ago, J_C said:

could someone who has 42042 and 42082 (built at the moment (I hardly ever keep the models built for long time ) please take a picture of them together? thank you.

A few BIGGER Lego things in a row (delete spaces please):

https://yadi.sk/i/XGZgDodg3a7fne

 

Edited August 10, 2018 by Manofours
Some queer parser behaviour