It is no surprise that Technic has steadily moved away from studded elements yet, many of the current elements still have the studded 'birthmark'. There are possibly multiple reasons for this yet the most 'obvious' is for backward compatibility. I'll take the simplest element, a 3713 bushing. It is still widely used in studless technic models, yet its shape is rarely put to its 'other' intended use. See, when that bushing was introduced, it served (at least) two purposes, that of spacer on axles, and that of 'key' to make an axle spin a technic plate (the octagonal end of the bushing). Today it is only the 'spacer' functionality that is used. This bushing is not alone, as there are many parts that have 'inherited' such octagonal shape today, but very little use is made of such shape. I'll mention the 3L/4L cardans and the multitude of angle connectors. What other remnants (evolution fossils) can you think of?

Edited October 13, 201311 yr by DrJB

That bushing was also used to engage the rear wheels(8880 wheels) to the axle on the 8857 Street Chopper as well...

I think that octagonal end also fits into the space on a driving ring too...

I think that octagonal end also fits into the space on a driving ring too...

I think this shape allows you to fix the axle on technic plate.

Yes. I've used them to "lock" an axle into a technic plate to hold things together. I like the newer version.

H

I think this shape allows you to fix the axle on technic plate.

Yes, I know... DrJB mentioned that use in his initial post.. I was just adding some other uses for the shape of that bushing...

Edited October 13, 201311 yr by Paul Boratko

If you need a short extendable driveshaft, you can use the octagonal part of a universal joint and put it into both ends of a driving ring.

That offers about 1/2 to 3/4 studs of extension, I doubt it would be very useful in most cases. Although if you have 2 u-joint connected by a 3L axle, you can slide a driving ring on it, which actually really strengthens it.

I wish TLG still used studded Technic beams to build the frames of vehicles etc. Just more fun to build than with liftarms.

Edited October 13, 201311 yr by jantjeuh

I agree with jantjeuh, sets like the F1 racer sets have a perfect blend of liftarms and technic bricks with a brick-built chasis.

One of my favourite old parts are these:

It would be perfect in some different colors (black and red).

With this parts it´s possible to construct nearly all what you want and you can use every angle.

Further more you can combinate them........ very nice parts but only in light grey available..... poor

I wish TLG still used studded Technic beams to build the frames of vehicles etc. Just more fun to build than with liftarms.

I am not sure we'll see a 'reversal' to using more bricks, instead of liftarms. If you think about it, it is a matter of cost, amongst many other considerations. The 1x16 technic studded brick can assume the same functionality as a 1x15 liftarm, yet uses almost twice the amount of plastic (try to weigh both and you will see). So, while studded is stronger/easier to build with, studless is cheaper for lego, and allows TLG to 'market' a LARGER part count. What can be achieved with one brick, you'd need the corresponding lift arm and few 'nails'. Even more convincing is the fact that studdless allows less dense builds. If you take an earlier version of the F1 cars, they have remained at more or less the same size, but the Silver Champion is way heavier than the latest 42000. Same goes for the Space Shuttle 8480, it uses so many bricks, it is heavy. Studdless enables you to build more 'empty' frames, with more connector parts (nails/glue). I bet we will never again see the 1x16 bricks. They're selling for close to a $1.00 a piece on bricklink ...

One of my favourite old parts are these. It would be perfect in some different colors (black and red).

With this parts it´s possible to construct nearly all what you want and you can use every angle.

Further more you can combinate them........ very nice parts but only in light grey available..... poor

I agree with how versatile such part was/is, but by the same token it was very weak and thus would break easily. Thus, I do prefer the newer angle connectors (with fixed angles).

Edited October 14, 201311 yr by DrJB

I agree the fixed angle parts are much more stable but if you want to construct something new these parts are perfect.

For children these parts are not really an alternativ.

But they are really nice for AFOL´s i think.

Edited October 13, 201311 yr by Ralf

One interesting remnant of the old system was the 16t dark gray idle gear. They finally changed it last year but it used to still have the teeth shown above, even though everything else from that system had been phased out about 15 years ago.

I bet we will never again see the 1x16 bricks. They're selling for close to a $1.00 a piece on bricklink ...

The good thing is that studded Technic bricks have become increasingly common in other themes, as long as you aren't too picky about the color. You can also get them from Lego Education, at about the same $1 price for 1x16s. So there is no shortage of pieces for studded builders like me.

I noticed that too, Lego still had the toothed 16t gears on the crappy mobile crane they came out with a while ago (the one with the balloon tires, I can't recall which one it is).

I wish TLG still used studded Technic beams to build the frames of vehicles etc. Just more fun to build than with liftarms.

This is my exact problem with modern Technic. The pre-1999 mix of studded bricks, connectors, gears and axles used to be perfect. There's just something so much more satisfying about brick construction over just beams and connectors.

I agree with jantjeuh, sets like the F1 racer sets have a perfect blend of liftarms and technic bricks with a brick-built chasis.

I completely agree. The 8461 is a perfect example. So much fun to build, thanks to the studded chassis. Very sturdy as well. 8466 is also a good example. Good blend of studded and studless. Wish TLG would go back to that.

I am not sure we'll see a 'reversal' to using more bricks, instead of liftarms. If you think about it, it is a matter of cost, amongst many other considerations. The 1x16 technic studded brick can assume the same functionality as a 1x15 liftarm, yet uses almost twice the amount of plastic (try to weigh both and you will see).

Perhaps, but you need less Technic bricks (and plates) to achieve the same level of 'sturdiness'. Liftarms are very wobbly unless reinforced properly.

Edited October 14, 201311 yr by jantjeuh

I completely agree. The 8461 is a perfect example. So much fun to build, thanks to the studded chassis. Very sturdy as well. 8466 is also a good example. Good blend of studded and studless. Wish TLG would go back to that.

Perhaps, but you need less Technic bricks (and plates) to achieve the same level of 'sturdiness'. Liftarms are very wobbly unless reinforced properly.

Exactly my point ... good to be in agreement.

I completely agree. The 8461 is a perfect example. So much fun to build, thanks to the studded chassis. Very sturdy as well. 8466 is also a good example. Good blend of studded and studless. Wish TLG would go back to that.

Perhaps, but you need less Technic bricks (and plates) to achieve the same level of 'sturdiness'. Liftarms are very wobbly unless reinforced properly.

Agreed. I've noticed some "looseness" with studless.

Models without studded beams are a much more challenging build in my opinion. It is easy to add a plate or subtract one to get that 1/2 a stud difference that you are looking for. I think a mixture of both is good if the model's size calls for it.

It is easy to add a plate or subtract one to get that 1/2 a stud difference that you are looking for.

I thought that the height of a plate is not 1/2 stud, but 4/10 stud to be exact? Anyway I agree with you, I think a studless chasis is more complex/interesting, especially if it is correctly reinforced, like most of the official models. I don't wish at all for studded models.

Studded and studless both have their uses. For example a studded construction can be much stronger but is indeed heavier. However the odd spacings of studded make studless better for compact constructions. But we've had many discussions about studded v studless, both here and elsewhere, do we need to start again? The thread has gone somewhat off-topic; the original post was more specific.

Back on topic, the annoying property of 8t gears to side into the grooves in bricks and liftarms is so you can fit an 8t gear between the studs in a technic plate. Tell me that's useful in studless building today. At least TLG updated the 8t gear.

On the topic of studded building, I think lego should bring back studded building, more advanced this time. I just think studless building is kind of like K'nex, I don't think it's what Lego is meant to be. It is nice and I enjoy building with it,but I just like the old plates, 2x2 slopes, and Technic bricks IMO.

I think both systems have their merits, and it's best to combine their respective strenghts. However, TLG seems to be phasing out all 'studded' elements in the Technic theme, which is a shame. Compare 8461 to 42000. 8461 is just so much more satisfying to build (and looks miles better, to boot).

As I have just recently returned to Lego through my daughter's enthusiasm, I find the studless construction technique makes incorporating Technic elements in System construction (as I try to do when playing across generations) much more difficult, but doable. But more on topic, there are many elements that were originated for Technic which have migrated into System building. For example this plate...

...which was originally released for a Technic engine model kit in 1980

Someone mentioned the old 16t gear, and that finally they changed it and removed the teeth. I thought that now you can put a regular pin into the hole, but I surprised to see that only one side of the gear has the needed groove. So I think that the new 16t idle gear could be improved further.