I'd like to add that I feel we are lacking in certain colours (i.e.: white and blue).

This will please you then

IMHO there is a reason for the new hubs: Kids and size/weight.

The axle by itself totally lacks the structural integrity necessary for big vehicles like Unimog. The model weight causes too much friction/tension and kids easily bend the axles or break the rims at the axle cross. Portal hubs and 42000 hubs provide a strong 3 point support at the rim side and benefit from several mounting holes for the chassis.

Not matter how well designed custom hubs are or reinforced the axles.with half bushes are, in the end there is always a point where there is only the axle supporting weight, That is weak.

Edit: I know that some designs using turntables don't have that problem, but that is not the point, those are not always suitable for models and are quite bulky.

Edited January 17, 201411 yr by aol000xw

I agree, hubs are a good idea. But not those hubs. And the CV joints have a much too limited movement range.

At risk of enraging many, I don't see plenty of need for new parts (apart from occasional PF additions, wheels, or variations of LA's, pneumatics, telescopic joints, etc.). Basic structural Technic parts are currently sufficient for almost anything, as evident from official sets and many insanely great MOC's (and new coming up all the time ).

Whereas, expanding the palette into other, over-specialized parts somehow defeats the idea of Technic ― at least for me. If a mechanism can't possibly be built on a reasonable scale with existing parts, the be it, rather than introducing new dedicated parts that are difficult to use beyond their one main purpose. E.g. portal hubs were a slight disappointment for me in that respect.

Well, new, specialized parts mean builders can push the limits of Technic even further. I, for one, am happy that I don't have to custom build a differential or ball joint links so I can focus on more interesting things (not that I am able to push any limits anywhere).

About the "how awesome things were made long ago with limited parts" argument, well, most of those I saw used custom, or even metal parts at the most crucial parts of the model. Or at least some glue here or there that's not visible on photographs. Or were not so awesome compared to today's "standards". Imagine Sheepo's latest cars in with 1980 parts inventory (the reason I don't mention you, Nicjasno because you use custom parts).

Fortunately Technic is nowhere near the level some Lego system/town/whatever models and pars became, where there is almost a complete car part with two random studs to make it "Lego".

Edited January 17, 201411 yr by Lipko

I just hope it doesn't get to the stage where all we're doing is assembling special pieces and the resemblance to LEGO is lost. It'll then turn into something between Airfix and a plastic mecano set, or some such thing. Studless is already a step in this direction (yeah I know, it's good for some things, I'm not arguing that).

You're right, some of that System stuff is barely LEGO - whole car chassis in one piece...

I go to a kids group with my nippers and some of the Mums know that I'm into LEGO. They complain that all the sets these days are far too complex and have too many small parts. They just want bricks (I know you can buy them at S@H, but you never see them in shops) so that their kids can build houses, bridges and stuff like that.

I agree, hubs are a good idea. But not those hubs. And the CV joints have a much too limited movement range.

Yeah, aside from them having far too much play in them, the CV joint steering radius is a bit too limited... I would be a bit surprised to see Lego ever use the front hubs for steering and have drive axles running to them, but then again, they have released some models in the past that had somewhat limited steering... I actually just built a new front drive suspension module using the new steering arms and the new hubs and while it works well, the steering should be able to turn more than it does before the CV Joints begin to bind up when rotating...

Edited January 17, 201411 yr by Paul Boratko

OMG, look at all the terrible new parts. When I was a child, I only had cuboid bricks.

http://tweeaffect.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/yall-fogies-stand-down.html

Yeah, aside from them having far too much play in them, the CV joint steering radius is a bit too limited... I would be a bit surprised to see Lego ever use the front hubs for steering and have drive axles running to them, but then again, they have released some models in the past that had somewhat limited steering... I actually just built a new front drive suspension module using the new steering arms and the new hubs and while it works well, the steering should be able to turn more than it does before the CV Joints begin to bind up when rotating...

How do the new hubs compare to the old () hubs, when used with the new 5L snowmobile arms? Are they more wobbly than the old hubs in this setup, or are they about the same? Thanks!

^The "bearing" in the black hub doesn't have as much play in it as the new hub does... The CV joint doesn't bind up when steered...

I wish the new hubs were somewhere between the old ones and the new ones.. I would rather have the black hub with pin holes in the top and bottom...

Lego went the right direction with these new hubs with them being universally more usefull (I would also have rather had more offset with them too) but the end result isn't up to par with how good they should have been...

Something that I don't like with the Technic line's recent models are the overuse of stickers to pretty them up. When the entire studless cycle went into full effect the more the stickers were used.

Well It is hard to put stickers over studs, isnt it?

Well It is hard to put stickers over studs, isnt it?

Yes, it is.

I have got the new hubs in an 8x8 truck (twin steering axles, driven by a single XL motor, with reduction at the hubs).

It's chewing up the CV joints pretty badly. At even moderate angles the CV joints bind, and can pop out. The two protruding pins are then getting chewed and ground down.

They're not a bad part, they unlocked some building possibilities for this truck, but they're not a great part either

Edited January 17, 201411 yr by andythenorth

A larger cv joint like that used in 8880 (low friction, high torque capacity, large turning angle) combined with something like new style hub with the same play and as little friction as the newer smaller turn table would be very good. Combine that with this http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/radbot/custom-parts/new_diff_assembled.jpg and these http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/radbot/custom-parts/new_gears.jpg in a gorgeous white supercar and now you have a worthy successor to 8880.

Edited January 17, 201411 yr by allanp

I am trying to build just that :P

The 8880 hubs are very soft and bend easily under high load. This is why I never used them on my RC MOC. They are excellent, though.

They need to be redone, without ball joints of course. I have a design in my head to make them proper.

The thing is, that the rotor part needs to have the 3 pin connector as the new wheel hubs, and it needs to be insertable the same way also.

Similar to how the helicopter blade part that fits the 8880 hubs is designed, but without the poisbility to slide out without depressing the 2 notches (like in the new lego wheel hub).

The stator itself needs to be symetric, with a solid half stud thicknes, not the soft thin 8880 style and it needs to have axlehole attachments on all 4 corners. I'm undecided if split by one stud or together. Will make some drawings tomorrow.

Edited January 18, 201411 yr by nicjasno

Look forward to it!