How much revenue Lego generates out of Technic

[Thelonious monk]

I once read an interview with a LEGO Technic designer who said the designing engineers have a lot of their own projects, most of them of course too big too complex or too expensive to bring out as a set. He also said they have more material in the pipeline than the amount of sets they can bring out. So I think those big/complex/amazing models already exist somewhere, LEGO just doesn't put them into production because of (understandable) reasons.

Once an engineer has designed a project, the design goes to another engineer who tries to edit it to make it buildable for the appropriate age group (ie 11 - 16 years old) and to make it cost less where possible.

I think LEGO can decide to go the road of big complex models - they just have to decide to.

My theory is that the Unimog was an experiment in that direction (aimed at adults as well) - it sure worked for me, it got me out of my dark ages as the Unimog was my first 'renaissance' set.

I'm hoping, since the Unimog is such a great success, that LEGO feels confident enough to conquer the new market of adult fans. I just wonder how much priority it has within the LEGO company.

[nychase]

I think Barman's big V-8 is an excellent example of an unusual type of model that can be built from Technic and would appeal to adults but not so much to kids. 3000 parts, easily driven with only 1 M-motor.

The buit of this engine is interesting. Nevertheless, it is not very Technic.

Moreover, I doubt TLG will release something like that. Not everyone cares about something like that. I'm not sure that displaying an engine is what people want, even among the Technic fans...

I respectfully disagree Anio. I have this set built sitting on my desk at my office in NY and I can tell you that all of my guests/clients/tenants love to see the legos that I have on display (unlike eric usually only 2 or 3) and have especially loved this V8. Everyone knows what an engine is but the few (read: "system") folk who don't, enjoy the very easy way to understand it when I can slow it down to 120rpm and they can see every revolution. To say that the model isn't very technic is absolutly absurd. There is functional chain (for timing), actual correct use of cams heck even the Fiber Optic is perfectly suited for its job as a distributor.

http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=42705

Though I would personally prefer larger, the V8 could certainly start a string of UCS technic based models.

As for a more on-topic comment. I grew up in the midwest and the only reason I even was introduced to technic was because we had a foreign exchange student (german go figure) who saw that I enjoyed legos but was mystified why technic was so hard to obtain here in the states circa 1991. So she started sending them back to me every once in a while. I never understood why the full gamut of model team was available (which I love) but it was so hard to locate technic at toys r us (the best option and frankly still the best option for an in-store purchase). I have never been to any conventions because of what the rest of the americans say on this forum about lack of technic attendance.

I enjoy technic because I have a very mechanical brain. Im not an engineer per se but my daily job requires me to constantly analyze a situation and "design" the best outcome. I don't MOC however, but don't think that diminishes my love of Technic or my commitment to the brand. My forte is not as a builder but I am the guy willing to plop down 400 bucks on a UCS set.

Oh...and speaking of a 5000 piece set, does that mean 1000 black pins????

[Meatman]

It is quite amazing how we all say that we love Technic but so many different people have different opinions of what Technic actually is. Some people don't consider a model Technic even if it is built completely of Technic but has little functions, some people don't consider a complete moving engine to be Technic. I think of anything that is made mostly from Technic parts to be Technic since it is much more difficult and challenging to build a good looking model primarily from Technic parts even if it only steers or an engine moves with the wheels.

For example, the guy that built those amazing Star Wars ships comletely from Technic parts. Even though they don't do anything, they are still Technic Star Wars Ships right? Or are they Star Wars ships made from Technic?

Edited March 8, 2012 by Meatman

[Blakbird]

For example, the guy that built those amazing Star Wars ships comletely from Technic parts. Even though they don't do anything, they are still Technic Star Wars Ships right? Or are they Star Wars ships made from Technic?

Good questions. For example, there are a bunch of Racers models which may or may not be considered Technic depending on who you ask. Roboriders, Throwbots, and early Bionicle even fall into this category. How about Mindstorms? I had to wrestle with these questions when deciding what to include in Technicopedia. I would generally consider the Racers built from Technic parts to be Technic as long as they have at least some function. Additionally, models like Grazi's tow truck are Technic even though they have more System parts than Technic parts. The V-8 is Technic in every way. 95% of the parts are Technic and the model is completely and accurately functional. It is as close to a pure Technic model as I can think of. No form, only function of a purely mechanical item!

[allanp]

I think the racers sets are not really technic, or are they, I don't know, it's hard to decide. What I do know is this, if they are technic, then their lack of complexity and focus on style over substance makes them crap technic. But if they are not technic and they are supposed to be show pieces only then they are great sets. Luckily for them they do not carry the technic logo on them, so I guess that means they are not technic.

[Meatman]

I think the racers sets are not really technic, or are they, I don't know, it's hard to decide. What I do know is this, if they are technic, then their lack of complexity and focus on style over substance makes them crap technic. But if they are not technic and they are supposed to be show pieces only then they are great sets. Luckily for them they do not carry the technic logo on them, so I guess that means they are not technic.

What about the 8041 Technic Race Truck? When you compare the 8653 Ferrari Enzo to it, it has just as many features at the Race Truck plus door mechanisms.

And what about the 1:8 scale 8674 Ferrari F1 Racer? Is that not Technic?

The 8458 Silver Champion was a Technic set

The 8461 Williams F1 was a Racers set even though they were almost 100% identical as far as build goes.

I wouldn't consider the fact that just because a set says Racers that it should count out a set that is 100% Technic. After all, there were actually many themes involved in the Racers line including minifig scale sets.

[cpw]

I played with Technic when I was a teenager, but haven't bought any new sets after coming out of my dark ages a few months ago. I've thought about a little Technic et just for fun and parts; but have been focused on City; which are easier for my kids (4 & 6). Technic doesn't have the same memories though as Castle, Town, or Space, which I had huge layouts of. I haven't been excited by the Star Wars or Alien conquest in the same way as classic space; and the possibility of LOTR replacing the current Kingdoms line means that City is what I've mostly settled on. I'm very lucky in that my Dad was interested in the Castle and managed to keep the sets together, so I have about a dozen sets from circa 1984-1988 to play with. My son likes Ninjago, because it is really popular at school, and I'm actually surprised how many Technic elements there are in the Ninjago sets.