Opinions on LEGO Technic Theme

[Ngoc Nguyen]

The only set with an off putting size for me is 42025. It has long measurements in two dimensions instead of one like other sets, so I ended up having nowhere to display it and disassembling it instead. Most other sets are big but are so in length only, so storing them isn't a problem for me.

[Erik Leppen]

2 hours ago, Ludo Visser said:

Now look at the studless era. I'd argue that 42043 is 8868's studless successor:

I'd say 8868's studless successor is 9397. https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?id=104623#T=I. Clocking in at only ~1300 parts, I think you could say that studless building requires about 40% more parts than studded.

For the rest, I agree with all you said. I think 42043 and 42009 are the largest reasonable sets. Anything beyond that and sets become unwieldy. (The BWE 42055 is unwieldy too, but I take a exception for that because it's such a unique subject matter and I think the size is justified there)

[dr_spock]

One of my LUG member's motto is "go big or go home".   

I don't think LEGO releasing larger and larger sets is a problem for me. If the set doesn't fit my requirements, then I don't buy it.  Nothing personal, just business.