Technic 2014 Discussion and Speculation

[aol000xw]

While that might be true

That's sad, indeed. Most adult Technic fans don't give a shit to Lego models which are not motorized or motorisable (8293).

While that may be true I do believe that for example 9392 is a little beauty and the dozer is ugly and boring. Not always is about of size and motors and everyone judges by their own criteria.

Anyways I don't know why that is sad, I understand that everyone can focus on their own interests. After all TLC sells this models and not cheap. It is a bussiness, not carity.

From my point of view I don't need to appraise what I don't like. We are not talking of bashing a kid 's work and traumatizing him for the rest of its life. IMHO fanboyism and praising for no reason, that is really sad.

[Meatman]

That's sad, indeed. Most adult Technic fans don't give a shit to Lego models which are not motorized or motorisable (8293).

I have noticed this as well. This goes the same for mocs. You'll see a fantastically designed non motorized moc that goes on unappreciated meanwhile a less than stellar model gets praise for driving around in circles.

While that might be true

While that may be true I do believe that for example 9392 is a little beauty and the dozer is ugly and boring. Not always is about of size and motors and everyone judges by their own criteria.

Anyways I don't know why that is sad, I understand that everyone can focus on their own interests. After all TLC sells this models and not cheap. It is a bussiness, not carity.

From my point of view I don't need to appraise what I don't like. We are not talking of bashing a kid 's work and traumatizing him for the rest of its life. IMHO fanboyism and praising for no reason, that is really sad.

What he probably means by sad is AFOL not appreciating what actually goes into designing a model that is released to the public.

[aol000xw]

I have noticed this as well. This goes the same for mocs. You'll see a fantastically designed non motorized moc that goes on unappreciated meanwhile a less than stellar model gets praise for driving around in circles.

Well I think it is fair play, is a matter of opinion.

What he probably means by sad is AFOL not appreciating what actually goes into designing a model that is released to the public.

Any single model that gets released by TLC goes by the same process, some do success, some don't. If TLC takes steps to improve their design and release cycle I will praise them and then expect the process to be at minimum that good. I won't be continually praising them with every single model and amazing myself about the complex process involved in the release of a model. They take my money and I think that is enough.

Perhaps I am a bit harsh, but appreciation is something that needs to be earned, not taken as granted, complacency can't be rewarded. In the end is the final result what counts and I think criticism is as fair as appraisal and I see both of those in Eurobricks. On the other hand if most of AFOLs want big and complex and don't give a s*** -excuse my klatchian- about what does it take to release a model... be it. This is business not a MOC.

[Saberwing40k]

Well, sometimes it feels like the design of certain sets is half assed, or rushed, or that the Technic theme is stagnating. That's what I find more sad. We have every right to complain about stuff we don't like.

[rener]

Another interpretation of "sad" could be that, for an adult, it's a bit of a waste of time (to put it mildly) to complain over and over again about toy models they're not intending to purchase anyway.

The bulldozer may be a bit simple for my taste, but I think it looks good and for my 8 year old son it might be a perfect holiday gift!

[aol000xw]

The whole Lego thing could be a waste for an adult. However here we are right? Complaining, and some people even is complaining on the complains. How much of a waste of time is that? Nothing if you are enjoying it, however I feel less and less adult as the years pass so my opinions may not be mature enough for the average adult.

[Meatman]

These models were not designed for us in the first place.

When I first seen the pics of this bulldozer, I thought it looked pretty good.

[D3K]

I would just like to clarify, that I just think the bulldozer is a missed opportunity to make a great little pneumatic set. I actually find it rather good looking

[Anio]

You'll see a fantastically designed non motorized moc that goes on unappreciated meanwhile a less than stellar model gets praise for driving around in circles.

Tell me about it ! :(

[Saberwing40k]

The reason that I get disappointed in sets is that, in my mind,undermine the key values of Technic, or are needlessly simple. Like, the 42029 pickup was a great wasted opportunity to introduce a proper supercar/truck. The bulldozer could also have been easily pneumatic, at little extra cost.

Tell me about it ! :(

Now let me tell you, building a motorized MOC is a lot harder than building a not motorized one. Also, what kind of stellar non motorized MOC are you talking about? Most, if not all of the best Technic MOCs I've seen have been motorized to some degree. The only exception seem to be the cars that Crowkillers builds.

[Anio]

building a motorized MOC is a lot harder than building a not motorized one.

I'm just gonna say LOL.

Your post doesn't deserve more.

[jantjeuh]

Not a very mature response Anio. He's entitled to his own opinion. Anyway, IMO it really depends on the MOC in question. Some MOCs are great with motorization, others are better without any motors. I think Crowkillers' cars are a good example of the latter category.

Edited February 17, 2014 by jantjeuh

[aol000xw]

I'm just gonna say LOL.

Your post doesn't deserve more.

I think any post which expresses a legi opinion deserves more, is a matter of respect.

[Anio]

Not a very mature response Anio.

Certainely. But hell, I am appaled to read that kind of message (motor = complexity, what a joke).

Many people are much more confortable with English than me to explain all the subtleties that can be involved in the design process of a non motorized model.

Just look NK01. Or 8284.

Many models are also motorized or can be motorized, but the challenge lays definitely not in the PFS (8109, 9396, 8265).

On the contrary, some fully motorized models are very simple (8275). It is not a bad thing, but still, it is very simple.

It is the same for MOCs.

[jantjeuh]

Ofcourse. Some models can be very mechanically complex without using PF motors, whereas some sets that incorporate the PF system are mechanically very simple (8275 is indeed a good example of the latter). We don't get mechanically complex sets (i.e., with complex geartrains) with PF motors because they typically don't perform very well due to friction and what not, and TLG obviously only releases models that perform well. 8043 was a bit an exception I guess, and we all know what happened: TLG had to do a costly recall action because the LA's weren't up to task. I think that might have put TLG off from releasing complex PF-enabled sets.

Edited February 17, 2014 by jantjeuh

[aol000xw]

Take any given set of functions or any non PF design. That gives X complexity. Adding PF to that design just adds complexity.

It simply makes no sense comparing different sets of functions to justify that PF is more or less complex.

[Anio]

Take any given set of functions or any non PF design. That gives X complexity. Adding PF to that design just adds complexity.

In what universe adding a M motor on an Technic axle in 8265, 9396 etc adds complexity ?

Even look at 42024. When motorized, you need 8t/24t to reach the gearbox. With non motorized design, it requires 16t/16t, 12t/12t, 20t/12t.

Bingo ! It precisely make the model more simple ! (but technically speaking, it is pretty much the same and not more or less interesting IMO)

[aol000xw]

In what universe adding a M motor on an Technic axle in 8265, 9396 etc adds complexity ?

Let me guess ¿not in yours?

Even look at 42024. When motorized, you need 8t/24t to reach the gearbox. With non motorized design, it requires 16t/16t, 12t/12t, 20t/12t.

Bingo ! It precisely make the model more simple ! (but technically speaking, it is pretty much the same and not more or less interesting IMO)

So when talking about complexity designing with PF in mind vs no PF your best argument is how easy some Lego models are powered with ONE M Motor? Isn't that a bit weak? One sounds a like a teeny weeny number when talking about complexity doesn't it?

But I'll pretend you made a good point and argue that anecdotal samples are not relevant. To begin with usually official models are designed taking into account motorization so that work was already done. Furthermore you are talking about a few gears, not taking into account how hard can be to find the room to fit one or more motors and one or more battery boxes in most models. How challenging can be to make a proper supporting structure for the motors and delivering the right amount of torque.

From my point of view your reasoning gets easily reduced to absurd. When I think on removing PF from Sheepo's Land rover I don't see complexity being magically added to it..

But I am an heretic, zealots of complexity may forgive me for my unholiness.

[Jim]

Let's end the off topic discussion about PF and stick to the 2014 models discussion!!

Start a new topic if you want to discuss whether a PF model is more complex or not!

...and btw... are ppl too lazy to rotate a couple of knobs to rise/lowering the blade and the ripper? because thats the only 2 functions ;)

Please don't use text style words like "ppl". Don't be too lazy to type people

And please use proper capitalization (when beginning a sentence).

Most adult Technic fans don't give a shit to Lego models which are not motorized or motorisable (8293).

You could choose other words to state your opinion, especially being a Lego Ambassador!

Really looking forward to the pneumatic MODs some of you will be adding to the Bulldozer!

[Mestari]

Speaking of ambassadors... since we haven't got any pneumatic model this year can someone among them ask if TLG is still considering releasing pneumatic models in short future? I was really waiting for another model with big cylinders, like Unimog...

[eiker86]

Added more videos of the Bulldozer and red pickup.

[jantjeuh]

42028 looks pretty damn good. 42029 is growing on me.

[Freekysch]

The dozer is looking very good imho, it will be a must buy for me ! I wonder how many pieces will it have and the price ?

[Anio]

Finally we can see its differentiaI.

I also think the bulldozer can be motorized.

Two clues lead me to think that :

- there are a lot of empty spaces below the model. Enough for a battery box and a M motor

- there are some curious gear if not motorizable (a tan 20t at the back, what for ?)

The motorization would be very simple. And the model would not be able to steer. But still, I think it would be damn fun for a child !!

I think that the speed of the model could be controlled though, depending on how you plug the M motor. Either you use the 16t/16t gear reduction, or 12t/20t.

edit : hum, I looked more carefully... not sure there is enough room for a battery box... Not sure at all... :/

[legolijntje]

Anyone noticed the new Technic pieces on some of the Chima sets presented at the Toy Fair? Take a look at for example this picture. The black things attaching the flames/claws to the speedor.

I've been dreaming of that piece for years