Would You Buy This PF-Motorized Set 8048 (Buggy)?

[DLuders]

A fellow named "ZED" posted pictures of his modified #8048 set on Brickshelf: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=416557 . ZED wrote "LEGO 8048 is a nice set, but with PF in is much better. It is very easy to build. 2 M-motors for drive 1 M-motor for steer 1 PF-lights, Self-retern steering system." My question is, if The Lego Group offered the #8048 set modified with Power Functions (PF) components, would you buy one?

From the Lego.com website http://shop.lego.com/ByTheme/Product.aspx?...;cn=57&d=70 , you start off with the US$40 Buggy Set #8048. Then from the website http://shop.lego.com/ByTheme/Leaf.aspx?cn=...p;d=70&va=1 , you add in these PF components:

3 ea. #8883 PF Medium motors @ ~US$7.50 ea. = ~$22.50.

1 ea. PF battery box (I know that ZED used the expensive RECHARGABLE battery box, but if one could find a way of using the less-expensive #8881 box, the cost would be held down) -- ~US$7

1 ea. #8870 PF lights = ~US$6.50.

1 ea. #8884 PF receiver (assuming that you can get one; they're backordered) = ~US$15.

1 ea. #8885 PF remote control = ~US$9.50

GRAND TOTAL = ~US$100.50 (equivalent to ~73.64 Euros today)

I know that the model could be simplified by using 1 ea. ~US$15 PF XL motor instead of the 2 ea. PF Medium motors, but the question is WOULD YOU BUY ONE if TLG issued this as an official set? The set could be built as-is (as a standard #8048 set) WITH AN OPTION OF UPGRADING IT to a PF-enabled set. Those Lego fans without a lot of money could buy the ~US$40 set, and those with more money could afford the ~US$60 upgrade? Would the set be enjoyable for both teenagers and AFOLs? Please indicate "why" or "why not". What changes should be made?

[Enilder]

Price seems to be alright considering how much PF stuffs are going in. I'd not buy it mainly because it's not aesthetically pleasing nor it has tons of functionality besides putting PFs together. I am not a fan of buggies so I may be biased.

[Anio]

The genuine set is much better, by far.

Especially because it has no PF.

[Blakbird]

A fellow named "ZED" posted pictures of his modified #8048 set on Brickshelf: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=416557 . ZED wrote "LEGO 8048 is a nice set, but with PF in is much better. It is very easy to build. 2 M-motors for drive 1 M-motor for steer 1 PF-lights, Self-retern steering system." My question is, if The Lego Group offered the #8048 set modified with Power Functions (PF) components, would you buy one?

Personally, no way. In most cases, I don't find that the addition of motors to a Technic set makes it any better. For me Technic is about realistic reproduction of functions, and the addition of motors usually replaces these functions. The exception to this is models with linear actuators which are not much fun to use with a motor to do the cranking for you. Vehicles with motorized drive systems are the least interesting to me.

[Anio]

Personally, no way. In most cases, I don't find that the addition of motors to a Technic set makes it any better. For me Technic is about realistic reproduction of functions, and the addition of motors usually replaces these functions. The exception to this is models with linear actuators which are not much fun to use with a motor to do the cranking for you. Vehicles with motorized drive systems are the least interesting to me.

I totally agree with you Blakbird.

That is exactly my opinion.

Edited March 11, 2010 by Anio

[DLuders]

Personally, no way. In most cases, I don't find that the addition of motors to a Technic set makes it any better. For me Technic is about realistic reproduction of functions, and the addition of motors usually replaces these functions. The exception to this is models with linear actuators which are not much fun to use with a motor to do the cranking for you. Vehicles with motorized drive systems are the least interesting to me.

I respectfully disagree, for the following reasons. Instead of having a mere "Hand of God" (HoG) knob on the model to turn the steering, one can actually DRIVE the same model using Power Functions, have races with friends, etc. Turning a HoG knob may be interesting for about 30 seconds to see "functionality", but then the model sits on a shelf instead of being ENJOYED for minutes and perhaps hours. Instead of just pushing the model along the floor with your hand (which is OK for those less than 10 years old), having PF motors allows for fun "smash-ups" and hand-eye coordination. The kit could be taken apart to make other "free-style", driveable MOCs.

Again, if folks don't like/want motors in their sets, then one doesn't have to use them. If one has the money to motorize them, the SAME KIT could be easily modified. Many teenagers don't search the web to find instructions on how to motorize the kits -- the standard Lego kit instructions could show them.

[mahjqa]

Motors are awesome. Ever since I was a wee lad just into technic, putting motors in something added a bit of charm, because then your car, plane or horseshoe factory did things by itself! It's like magic! Of course, the earlier 9v systems were crippled by the use of wires, but with the Power functions systems I like nothing better than to race around with a self-built car, just because I can. Building this and then racing it against other people is even better :D

[allanp]

That's a great MOC their friend but, if your asking if i'de spend my own money on it, sorry I wouldn't buy it. I would prefere it if the budget of a set is spent on the realistic reproduction of real life mechanisms and not turning them into toys for children only by making them "RC" with PF running riot. I know adults have RC toys but their motors are usually hyper powerful making there cars go 60mph+ or run on nitro or can actually fly. Still it looks like fun to play with

[Jetro]

Short answer: no way!

Long answer: I don't think it makes any sense to have a 60$ motor package for a 40$ set. If things were the other way round (at least proportionally) I might start thinking about it.. Secondly, although the integration is fine, the final result is not exactly attractive. What I mean to say is, as an exercise in putting motors in a standard model it is great - as a MOC not so much. If TLG were to bring out something like some of the models Mahjqa posted things might be different, but even so I have to agree with him that there is nothing like designing something like that by yourself.

[Blakbird]

I respectfully disagree, for the following reasons. Instead of having a mere "Hand of God" (HoG) knob on the model to turn the steering, one can actually DRIVE the same model using Power Functions, have races with friends, etc. Turning a HoG knob may be interesting for about 30 seconds to see "functionality", but then the model sits on a shelf instead of being ENJOYED for minutes and perhaps hours. Instead of just pushing the model along the floor with your hand (which is OK for those less than 10 years old), having PF motors allows for fun "smash-ups" and hand-eye coordination. The kit could be taken apart to make other "free-style", driveable MOCs.

I don't in any way mean to imply that I dislike motors. For instance, sets 8094 and 8485 (Control Centers) are among my favorites ever. On the other hand, most smaller sets have come with the ability to add a motor. In many cases it required the removal of an existing function to add a motor. In cases in which this made the wheels driven, it still wasn't really usable as a motorized vehicle because it had no remote controllability and no steering so it would just run into a wall. So, in my opinion, if a set is going to be motorized for drive, it needs to be fully remote controlled. The 8275 bulldozer is a great example. But this doesn't make any financial sense for a small set, not to mention the fact that the motors cannot be integrated in a small model in a way that actually looks good.

Like most things in life, motors are only a good thing in moderation!

....unless you are Paul Sariel.

[Milan]

Buying motorized set like this: No, i like to order specialized parts, not bulk of various pieces.

I am also the big fan of motors in the models, it usually sacrifice realistic motors positions, and on smaller models it can even ruin the look.

But when I see it in action, it is rewarding enough to forget these downsides!

On bigger models downsides are much less visible.

[Conchas]

I don't think it would make sense to motorize every Technic set.

That's why there is a motor kit for instance. To help motorize official sets, even when official instructions to do it are not included.

Also believe such inclusion, could decrease the sales figures, because of the overall price increase of the set.

It will start competing with larger sets, leaving less options at the lower prices range.

[DLuders]

My son got the 8048 Nitro Buggy set, and he's going to motorize it using the 8-MB PDF download instructions available from http://yourfiles.to/?d=F074913A37 . Here's what it looks like when completed (from the Brickshelf folder by "indusol"):