Lego Motorized vs Manual

[jorgeopesi]

Almost all my MOCs are motorized but I always have felt admiration for the manual ones and in the end play with them is almost the same. Of course that some of them have to be motorized like trial trucks but I think that the machinery for example would be funny to play motorized or not, what do you think?, what are they advantages and disadvantages in your opinion?. I start first, manual ones would be cheaper and easier to scale well so you have a lot of them to choose in the other hand motorized ones are expensive and you have to find machines where you can put all the components respecting its scale which is always a big problem but in the end you are doing something that moves by itself... it is difficult to choose... I would like to start manual MOCs just to not to see more wires anymore...

Edited May 1, 2019 by jorgeopesi

[Maaboo the Witch]

Manual means you don't need batteries and can worry less about gear trains and friction.

[howitzer]

Both have their advantages and disadvantages and you should choose the one which is more appropriate for the task at hand.

Manual functions of course have the advantage of extremely accurate control. There's no way you can achieve such an accuracy with motors, unless you're going to full Mindstorms with your model. For example, smooth steering of a vehicle is almost impossible with PF only. On the other hand, some functions would be really tedious to operate with manual control, such as booms and hoists of larger cranes.

[1gor]

Generally speaking manual models (that I make) are smaller and lighter (no batteries) and motorized are bigger ... But as time goes by I try to make simpler models even with power functions.

[m00se]

Manual has the advantage that you don't have the irritating noise of the motors ;-)

[1gor]

Just now, m00se said:

Manual has the advantage that you don't have the irritating noise of the motors ;-)

You sound like my wife 

[jorgeopesi]

2 minutes ago, I_Igor said:

You sound like my wife 

I know what you say  . 

2 hours ago, howitzer said:

On the other hand, some functions would be really tedious to operate with manual control, such as booms and hoists of larger cranes.

We should have an external unit to operate them without having to have them in the MOC, when I say external unit it means a motor with a battery connected  .

[Meatman]

Weight for motorized models is definitely a drawback.

[Lipko]

Motorized models and kids don't go well together.

• They will click the crap out of linear actuators if motorized. They will be worn after some hours and the clutch force will noticeably smaller.
• They tend to be impatient and move/force things manually, so they might stress or break gear-trains/transmissions etc. (if the functions are form locked/worm gear driven then there's no difference between manual and motorized) Some of the most obvious examples:
  • steering
  • working steering wheel
  • drive
• They tend to leave motors spinning/battery on. Which is not that good for pneumatic models for example (just pushing around the models for 5 minutes without playing with a single pneumatic function).

Some other disadvantages of motorized models

• Even if linear actuator clinking is normal and expected, it sounds awkward for non-Technic people and I don't like explaining myself
• Bigger weight
• Annoying cables during development
• Posing things during development is harder and needs batteries to be connected (which can be a bit of a problem when the battery box doesn't have a place yet)

So if I ever do "professional" design again, I will definitely go manual, because I can let kids play with it without much worry (I have four small cousins all into machinery at the moment and one daughter), but with a motorized model I have to be careful and watch every moment they play and it's very tiring.

[jotta93]

I prefer to build manual MOCs, as they are indeed cheaper, more silent and to, more representative of what LEGO is (but of course one could argue exactly the opposite)

But I do admit some models must have some motorised functions, as otherwise they would be unplayable (think of something like 42055)

[jorgeopesi]

1 hour ago, Lipko said:

Motorized models and kids don't go well together.

• They will click the crap out of linear actuators if motorized. They will be worn after some hours and the clutch force will noticeably smaller.
• They tend to be impatient and move/force things manually, so they might stress or break gear-trains/transmissions etc. (if the functions are form locked/worm gear driven then there's no difference between manual and motorized) Some of the most obvious examples:
  • steering
  • working steering wheel
  • drive
• They tend to leave motors spinning/battery on. Which is not that good for pneumatic models for example (just pushing around the models for 5 minutes without playing with a single pneumatic function).

Some other disadvantages of motorized models

• Even if linear actuator clinking is normal and expected, it sounds awkward for non-Technic people and I don't like explaining myself
• Bigger weight
• Annoying cables during development
• Posing things during development is harder and needs batteries to be connected (which can be a bit of a problem when the battery box doesn't have a place yet)

So if I ever do "professional" design again, I will definitely go manual, because I can let kids play with it without much worry (I have four small cousins all into machinery at the moment and one daughter), but with a motorized model I have to be careful and watch every moment they play and it's very tiring.

I agree with everything and I still do not understand why I have built so many motorized MOCs, I guess it is for having even less space to build which is a challenge for me... but everytime I go into the cables it is torture again and again...

[nerdsforprez]

2 hours ago, Lipko said:

"click the crap out"

Never a more apt description.....

[Attika]

3 hours ago, Lipko said:

Motorized models and kids don't go well together.

• They will click the crap out of linear actuators if motorized. They will be worn after some hours and the clutch force will noticeably smaller.
• They tend to be impatient and move/force things manually, so they might stress or break gear-trains/transmissions etc. (if the functions are form locked/worm gear driven then there's no difference between manual and motorized) Some of the most obvious examples:
  • steering
  • working steering wheel
  • drive
• They tend to leave motors spinning/battery on. Which is not that good for pneumatic models for example (just pushing around the models for 5 minutes without playing with a single pneumatic function).

Some other disadvantages of motorized models

• Even if linear actuator clinking is normal and expected, it sounds awkward for non-Technic people and I don't like explaining myself
• Bigger weight
• Annoying cables during development
• Posing things during development is harder and needs batteries to be connected (which can be a bit of a problem when the battery box doesn't have a place yet)

So if I ever do "professional" design again, I will definitely go manual, because I can let kids play with it without much worry (I have four small cousins all into machinery at the moment and one daughter), but with a motorized model I have to be careful and watch every moment they play and it's very tiring.

My nephews aren't allowed to play my builds until their 18. birthdays. So I've got another 6 years in peace.  Just kidding, they'll never be allowed... 

On the subject: For me the motorized builds are more of a fun, the non motorized are more of an art of the mechanics. Many of my motorized MOCs are getting their non motorized counterparts, but it rarely goes the other way around. 

Edited May 1, 2019 by Attika

[T Lego]

2 hours ago, Attika said:

For me the motorized builds are more of a fun, the non motorized are more of an art of the mechanics.

I completely agree. 

One of the most satisfying things (IMO) in Lego technic is shifting gears when driving an RC vehicle. To realy see a gearbox in action is also an importantie part for me. In this way you can realy show people how it works. On the other hand, in a Manuel vehicle you can make things more realistic and there is more space for other mechanisms beceause you don’t need gaint PF components. 

RC sometimes is also the ultimate test for gearboxes, transmissions and axles. They are brought under high load, which means a sophisticated design is even more important. This is why I like @Madoca 1977 MOCs so much - they are nearly perfect in what they do. 

[Kio Liex]

I prefer the motorized model and I really like the extra weight, if the model is build to carry it properly. I try to teach my kids (6, 10 and 12) how to play with them in the right way. I do have plans to build some models that are manual but this is only because they are relatively small.

 

[Sariel]

Motorized all the way. It's fun to ride your MOC around, it's fun to control it remotely, especially with fast RC vehicles when you can really feel the handling, the acceleration, the way the suspension works. RC drifters are extremely fun too, and you just can't have that sort of fun without motors.

[jorgeopesi]

9 hours ago, Sariel said:

Motorized all the way. It's fun to ride your MOC around, it's fun to control it remotely, especially with fast RC vehicles when you can really feel the handling, the acceleration, the way the suspension works. RC drifters are extremely fun too, and you just can't have that sort of fun without motors.

I understand you but when the pleasure is mostly in the building sometimes wires and motors everywhere are boring, I like to see gearboxes, manual steering or axles you have to turn, if I counted the time I play with my MOCs it would be no doubt less than an 1%100 of the total time.

[iLego]

TLG has been treading the fine line between manual and RC very well. Given the limitations of the medium, they don't try to compete with real RC. They just motorize select portions with a single motor controlling multiple functions. So the user gets some fun of RC along with interesting  mechanical complexity.

I think Lego is intended more to demonstrate the mechanisms. The actual performance, like speed, lifting capacity is typically not the strong point.

Some of the new flagships have been an exception to this wisdom though. Models are huge and the motors struggle to cope.

Perhaps the new off roader will have surprises for us. Strong metal transmission wrapped in traditional Technic. But I feel I am hoping for too much 

[Saberwing40k]

I think this is false dichotomy, because there are actually 3 choices:

1. Completely manual
2. Motorized
3. Remote Control

For some things, different options might be better. For instance, my Volvo ETS model is completely manual, and is a major pain to use, so I will be upgrading it to have a motor. @Lipko, I think that Lego actually follows your philosophy in some areas, regarding motorized models. However, I personally disagree with it. In my opinion, any kid that can't not click linear actuators or tries to move something on a worm gear should not be playing with Technic. Personally, a lot of my models are either motorized or RC, barring my really small models, but when it comes to buying preferences, it's the opposite. I tend to shy away from RC Lego sets, because they are often boring in terms of design, and overpriced.

My point is, there is really no right answer to this question.

[Lipko]

1 hour ago, Saberwing40k said:

I think this is false dichotomy, because there are actually 3 choices:

1. Completely manual
2. Motorized
3. Remote Control

For some things, different options might be better. For instance, my Volvo ETS model is completely manual, and is a major pain to use, so I will be upgrading it to have a motor. @Lipko, I think that Lego actually follows your philosophy in some areas, regarding motorized models. However, I personally disagree with it. In my opinion, any kid that can't not click linear actuators or tries to move something on a worm gear should not be playing with Technic. Personally, a lot of my models are either motorized or RC, barring my really small models, but when it comes to buying preferences, it's the opposite. I tend to shy away from RC Lego sets, because they are often boring in terms of design, and overpriced.

My point is, there is really no right answer to this question.

I don't think anyone has right questions, mine was merely an opinion, I like to let kids play with my models, even on exhibitions.

To slow manual operation: I think TLG went for looks a bit on this one. Old models had cranks instead of knobs and it was way easier to operate cranks quickly.

Edited May 3, 2019 by Lipko

[howitzer]

1 hour ago, Lipko said:

In my opinion, any kid that can't not click linear actuators or tries to move something on a worm gear should not be playing with Technic.

Maybe they should not be playing with Technic, but matter of fact is that they still are. Recalling my own childhood, I did a lot of things that were hard on the parts, and while I know better now, I don't think I'm an exception. Official sets have to be usable for children.

[dr_spock]

Depends on the MOC.   Motorized works better for GBCs.  Cranking it all day at a public event can wear you out if you didn't train for it.  

 

 

[Captainowie]

2 hours ago, dr_spock said:

Depends on the MOC.   Motorized works better for GBCs.  Cranking it all day at a public event can wear you out if you didn't train for it.  

That said, it has been on my TODO list for some time to build a GBC module with a hand crank, that the public turn to make (a small portion of) the GBC move.

[Tomik]

I've built just few motorized MOCs and I can see their advantages in higher playability and mostly faster operation of functions. These adavantages are bought out by demand of space for battery box and motors and you also have to deal with batteries (recharging them and so on). So I prefer manual functions even they are slower and not so fancy.

I wish to have motorized functions only sometimes at exhibitions where I demonstrate functions of my models to visitors. Besides this I don't "play" much with finished models - I enjoy building them more. Also portfolio of sets with PF is very limited so I don't have much "resources" for building motorized alternative models.

[Mechbuilds]

I prefer fully RC mocs.. However, it's a pain in the megablocks trying to get the motors and batteryboxes fit. Currently i'm struggling with my rear axle cause i can't get it to fit in the moc if it has to have a motor attached to it. So i have to combine the motor and the rear axle to make a one big unit.