42009 Mobile Crane Mk II - Parts Count

[DrJB]

The set consists of 2603 parts, the largest ever under the Technic theme. Thought I'd give a 'perspective' as to how many of those are most common. Of the total 2603, 1002 are pins and bushings ( e.g. 495× 2780 , 113× 43093 , 214× 6558 , 68× 3713 , 64× 32054 , ... ), 300 are axles of various lengths (e.g. 76× 32062 , 62× 4519 , 29× 32073 , ...). Thus, of the total 2603 parts, about half are pins, bushings and axles. I do consider those parts the equivalent of nails in a piece of furniture or screws and bolts in a car. They do up the part count substantially, but weight wise ... they're but a small fraction. I wonder if such statistic is 'typical' across other Technic Models ... should be a rather easy (yet tedious) task to undertake.

[JoeKaydear]

Well, one could use the set inventories on Rebrickable to determine the percentage of "nails" in other Technic models, but really, what difference does it make? One doesn't count the number of fasteners or welds on real cars to determine which one is "the best".

[DrJB]

Here again, there are of course different 'perspectives'. My attempt was merely at .... if you're getting this set for parts/MOCS (as many of us are) ... and half of them are "nails" ... just know what you're getting. And, is such parts distribution 'uniform' across the Technic theme? Or maybe even more: if one were to track the % of small parts (nails) in sets over the years ... what would be the trend? No intent to affect one's decision to go and buy their favorite set (I do have a large collection) .... but just a statistic.

Edited September 1, 2013 by DrJB

[Theo van Vroenhoven]

If you check Rebrickable you can easily see the distribution over the different part types in the box on the top right.

http://rebrickable.com/sets/42009-1/mobile-crane-mk-ii-construction-2013

Wouldn't be too difficult for Nathan to compile a nice graph showing the trends...

[Junpei]

Well, I'm pretty sure the nails-to-legitimate-technic-pieces is a lot lower in small sets, as larger parts and structures need more bracing, larger parts, and just overall way more pins than the proportionate version of a smaller model.

[DrJB]

Good point. This explains why, in general, smaller sets tend to have a larger price per part value ... more technic pieces and less nails.

[Blakbird]

This ratio of pins to "good parts" is typical of modern Technic sets, but the ratio has certainly increased over the years. I think the ratio is pretty constant of the years of pure studless models. However, if you go way back in time to "Expert Builder", there were virtually no pins at all in sets because parts were held together with studs.

[technicmad]

If you check Rebrickable you can easily see the distribution over the different part types in the box on the top right.

http://rebrickable.c...nstruction-2013

Wouldn't be too difficult for Nathan to compile a nice graph showing the trends...

I'm tired so this may be slightly completely wrong...

- technic sets only

- sum(#pins)/sum(total parts) for all sets in each year

Edited September 5, 2013 by technicmad

[Hopey]

What happened in 1987?

[technicmad]

What happened in 1987?

A supplementary set with just 150 pins :) http://rebrickable.com/sets/1316-1/connector-peg-technic-1987

After excluding all supplementary sets (that I have previously manually identified so might have missed some):

[JM1971]

What happened in 1987?

http://www.brickset.com/browse/themes/?theme=Technic&year=1987

That robot lol?

[Jim]

Nice to have these stats at your disposal

Interesting to see the difference between 2008 and 2009, where 2008 didn't have a real flagship (1097 pieces for the off roader) while 2009 has three 1000+ sets.

http://www.brickset....chnic&year=2008

http://www.brickset....chnic&year=2009

So it's pretty fair to say that a huge flagship does raise the percentage quite a bit, which kinda was the purpose of this topic to begin with

Edited September 5, 2013 by Ted

[Theo van Vroenhoven]

The trend of more and more pins used is ofcourse caused by the transition from studded to studless.

If there should exist a graph that shows the % of (technic) bricks I suggest it would go down.

[Jim]

True!

I am wondering if the percentage of 34/35 will change much in the future. if Lego keeps making bigger flagships it might.

[Theo van Vroenhoven]

@Jim: No more Gekke Ted (Crazy Ted) ?

[DrJB]

Very good job guys ... my intuition was 'confirmed'. Besides Blakbird's valid observation that the move to studless liftarms has caused the increase in nails in the technic theme, it is nonetheless a valid observation that all themes have seen an increase in parts count and reduction of average part size/weight. For example, where (2x) 32316 are needed on the 8448 lower chassis, the instructions call for using (4x) 32017 instead. While granted, a set's value goes beyond the number of nails and small parts, it is nonetheless 'interesting' to note the constant push for smaller parts and higher part counts. Another interesting statistic would be to compute:

1. The average weight per part over the years

2. The percentage of small parts vs. ALL .... small parts could include 1x1 slope, 1x1 round plate (I see them useful for mosaic/styling only)

Why small parts are 'not' my favorite? Difficult to handle (especially when sorting) ... and very easy to get misplaced

Edited September 5, 2013 by DrJB

[1974]

Yes, one should not be blinded by the partscount (and just why is that on US boxes - what's the point?), but actually look at the inventory. technicmad-ninja could probably do a similar chart with gears and that would maybe be more interesting. Or with motors. Or with bricks

We all look for different parts. Some need LAs (<-- not allanp), some look for wheels, some look for orange beams and others get their kick out of soft axles

Theo, let us just dub him Crazy Jim

Edit: DrJB - what's up with the formatting?

Edited September 5, 2013 by 1974