Model Team Definition

[Jim]

Hi,

This forum is dedicated to Technic, Mindstorms & Model Team.

Model Team is more or less the Dinasaur of the party. It went extinct several years after the http://brickset.com/...10151-1/Hot-Rod Hot Rod appeared in 2004.

I am very interested in your take on Model Team. My primary question is:

How would you define Model Team?

But I am also interested in:

How does it compare to the Creator series?

Is Creator a worthy replacement?

Would you like to have a dedicated subtheme in Creator, for example Technic Creator.

Any insights are appreciated.

[Appie]

My take on Model Team was back in the days (and still is): very detailed models with steering and/or other minor use of technic parts, but being mostly build from normal Lego bricks. While some models of the Creator series are pretty nice, they don't quite reach the level of detail of the old Model Team nor the scale of some old Model Team sets. The Volkswagen T1 and the new Mini Cooper definitely reach and go beyond the level of detail of old Model Team sets, but lack the basic function of steering (out of the box anyway ) that old Model Team cars had.

[D3K]

I would define it as detailed models built in a scale that allows the integration of certain Technic functions, like steering

[jorgeopesi]

Look at the percentage of Lego used could be defined, bricks or technic pieces but even that way it would be difficult to explain. If you prefer the inside to the outside, you're in technic .

[allanp]

I would define model team as being highly detailed and large models (for their time), often utilising more advanced building techniques and is aimed at slightly older children. It's hard to compare to creator because creator sets are usually less detailed and more for younger children than model team but it has some exceptions like the upcoming mini cooper which is very much like model team.

[hrontos]

very detailed models with steering and/or other minor use of technic parts, but being mostly build from normal Lego bricks.

This definition is pretty good. I would add that Model Team is more about machines than any other LEGO models. There are many detailed and well scaled models of buildings or other structures, but I do not count them as Model Team models, since they are not models of machines.

In Model Team the form and look have higher priority than functions.

Concerning the Creator series: I am not sure which Creator models would fall on a Technic side. If by functions, there are only very few that reach level of technic models. There are also some City sets that have some Technic inside. And some even larger Creator machines have less technic functionality than some city sets.

For me the most technic Creator model was the Monster Dino 4398. I would like to see more such Creator/Technic models.

Edited July 16, 2014 by hrontos

[Jim]

I would define model team as being highly detailed and large models (for their time), often utilising more advanced building techniques and is aimed at slightly older children. It's hard to compare to creator because creator sets are usually less detailed and more for younger children than model team but it has some exceptions like the upcoming mini cooper which is very much like model team.

Exactly! That's one of the reasons why I am asking.

If the MINI would have steering, it would definitely be like Model Team.

There's a thin line between Model Team and Creator sometimes:

http://brickset.com/...22-1/Turbo-Quad

http://brickset.com/...aring-Roadsters

http://brickset.com/.../4955-1/Big-Rig

http://brickset.com/...ool-Convertible

http://brickset.com/.../Off-Road-Power

[hrontos]

Nice examples of models, that could be Model Team, but are may be a bit too simple or have less functionality than a Model Team version would have.

Anyway, these are nice models and it would be good to have a forum where they could be discussed/reviewed, since they do not have any dedicated one.

[Edwin Korstanje]

What i can remember that the old Model Team cars and trucks are build at the scale 1/22 and the newer creator sets have not a real scale.

Sometimes they are bigger and than some smaler scale.

For me is Model Team a defination of a MOC that´s build at a scale that looks at the orginal model, with some working functions (PF ore HOG).

Edited July 16, 2014 by VFracingteam

[Kelkschiz]

I think anything that uses technic LEGO to add core functions belongs in this forum. Model-team and creator are very similar. Some models definitely have core technic functions and some models don't. In general both focus on looks more than on functions. As long as the functions are there, they belong in this forum. That would seem the most logical to me, however it leaves highly advanced models without core technic elements like the recent tugboat VFracingteam build. In my opinion those kinds of models do belong in the creator/model team category and given their complexity i also think they best fit in with the theme of this forum, i'd rather have them here than in some sub-forum that nobody checks.

[allanp]

The above creator examples brings to mind another point. The model team sets were always very life like and not "cartoony" in any way. Some creator sets are life like but most of them are more cartoon versions of real life and others are just wacky like the dino. So I guess model teams focus on being lifelike should also be part of it's definition.

Model team: Large, detailed and life like models of vehicles sometimes using advanced techniques and aimed for older children.

Creator: Intricate models covering a broad range of subjects including vehicles, buildings and animals.

I can't really narrow down the creator definition much further as whenever I think of a rule there are exceptions to disprove it. Creator is not always lifelike or large or aimed at older children. It's kind of a miscellaneous theme. There is also other themes and subthemes like creator expert and the advanced model themes which include modular buildings, the horizon express, the Sydney opera house and so on.

Edited July 16, 2014 by allanp

[rollermonkey]

Some Creator sets use quite a bit of Technic parts, even though you might not be expecting it. Sydney Opera House is my prime example of this. Without beams, pins and ball joints, that set wouldn't look anywhere near as good.

[Rishab N]

I feel like model team is a studded model with a technic chassis and technic solutions for the functions

[Interceptor]

Model team: Large, detailed and life like models of vehicles sometimes using advanced techniques and aimed for older children.

Very well said Allanp. For me Model Team is superior to the Creator line (not Creator Expert subline) because of lifelike feeling, very high detail and expensive and rare parts (chrome elements) therefore MT has more collectible value. Model Team had basically two scales for vehicles and sets are shown well together (see my collection picture http://www.brickshel...y.cgi?i=6107518) while Creator line has many scales and different building technic standards. T1 and Mini Cooper from Creator Expert come close to what Model Team was about in the golden age but these sets lack the steering and therefore have major fault IMO (not playable ones).

Edited July 17, 2014 by Interceptor

[jantjeuh]

Nice Model Team collection you have there!

[Paul Boratko]

I always wondered why Model Team was lumped in with Technic Forum... System brick based Model Team IMO is cool enough to have it's own forum...

Model team is primarily basic steering functioned detailed realistic looking models that are larger than minifigure scale..

There was a jet that came out back in the mid 2000's that people were considering "Model team" even though I thought that it was more of something that would be UCS...

Edited July 17, 2014 by Paul Boratko

[CP5670]

I think some sets in Creator are worthy successors to Model Team, and easily match the level of detail in the earlier (pre-1994 or so) Model Team sets. However, the later Model sets were at a larger scale and/or made extensive use of chrome pieces, which we have never really seen in Creator. They also had a lot more stickers, which made them look more realistic. Creator used to have more of an emphasis on having several buildable models and a high piece-to-price ratio with fewer rare or expensive pieces, but that is less true today than it used to be. Creator in general has a wide variety of sets and is sort of a catch-all theme for anything that doesn't fit into the other established themes.

As for why Model Team and Technic share a forum, many MOCs during the studded Technic era were a mixture of both themes, with a Model Team look but Technic functionality. I think you don't see that many MOCs like that today though.

The above creator examples brings to mind another point. The model team sets were always very life like and not "cartoony" in any way. Some creator sets are life like but most of them are more cartoon versions of real life and others are just wacky like the dino. So I guess model teams focus on being lifelike should also be part of it's definition.

That cartoonish look might be due to the box art rather than the actual models. For some reason, Creator uses 3D renderings of models instead of photos. You can easily see it in the pictures above.

[TheItalianBrick]

I think the question is: why LEGO CREATOR we created at first place? They could have pushed more on LEGO MODEL TEAM and that's it!

Looks like CREATOR it's only a smaller and "cheaper" version of MODEL TEAM.

Too much confusion IMHO

[Anio]

MT is actually like SW UCS, but for regular vehicles.

I hardly see how the Creator shown above could be considered as MT. Some Creator Expert sets are very close to the MT spirit (10220, 10242, and... that's all).

Their details and accuracy even goes beyond old MT. They have no steering, but this is the price to pay for more accuracy. Steering on 10220 and 10242 would ruin their look.

And as far as I remember, not all MT sets had mechanisms.

Creator uses 3D renderings of models instead of photos. You can easily see it in the pictures above.

You are mistaking here.

The photo on the box of a Creator (or any set) is a photo. It is photoshoped to clean it, but it is a photo, not a render.

http://shop.lego.com/fr-FR/Le-quad-turbo-31022

[gti180]

I would consider some of my work to be model team. Technic chassis or Technic guts with Lego blocks for the finish.

[Rockbrick]

creator has swallowed up model team - model team were all with technic features, creator has some non technic piece sets

so I think a subtheme called 'technic creator' makes sense

[gti180]

agree, technic creator makes more sense

[Jim]

Looking at the Model Team models in Interceptor's great collection, I can't help but think that most of these models have a single feature, which is steering. There's even a powerboat, which has ... features?

When we compare some of the models with this one, I think this is more Technic than some of the Model Team models. However, this model lacks the looks to be genuine Model Team.

Why we can't clearly figure it out, is probably the reason why TLG stopped the Model Team theme and started the Creator theme.

I would love to see Model Team return, as Creator Technic or Creator Model Team or whatever.

Creator

Creator Expert

Creator Technic/Model Team

[TheItalianBrick]

Sorry Jim, but "CREATOR EXPERT" makes the "normal" TECHNIC" like an entry level, like something that it's easy to design and to build. Where I think the TECHINIC it's the finest of the fine arts!!!!

I would divide these themes in this way:

LEGO TECHNIC= design, looking, functions, all in one at it's best.

LEGO CREATOR= less looking with few funtions. (or moveble parts....rather then functions)

MODEL TEAM= more looking, and few/none funtions.

Does it make sense?

Edited July 17, 2014 by TheItalianBrick

[Jim]

It does make sense what you are saying.

The MINI looks awesame and has few/none functions, so it would be Model Team, right?

But I'm thinking more in the line of Creator series. TLG has introduced the Creator series, which is a great theme (imho). But there is too much diversity in it. Creator and Creator Expert is simply not sufficient.