Evolution or involution?

[XenoRad]

Just now, Erik Leppen said:

Maybe this is part of the problem... the whole fact that there's a "real car" to begin with. With 8880, there was no real car, which means they can go all out and make the best Lego Technic set. They added folding headlights because it made the Lego set better. With 42056, they had to adhere to some kind of "real car", so that means 4 wheel steering is out of the question, even though that would have been really cool. Same for suspension height adjusting, foldable roof, a jack system, a nice B model, or whatever designers would think would improve the Lego set.

The licence limits design freedom. Suddenly, there's not one but two companies which have requirements that must be met.

But apparently, we have a market now that wants "Porsche" above a fantasy car that would have novel functions. In the end, it sits on a shelf, and then "being a Porsche" is apparently cooler than having all those functions. I say "apparently" because I assume Lego builds what they have researched sells best.

But if I'd be the kind of guy to want a Lego Porsche. I would much prefer a Creator Expert Porsche. Those bricks are much more suitable for the sculpting needed to recreate sleek supercars accurately.

 

I think this is a matter of purpose. 8880 had a purpose to show how many functions were possible with Technic at the time while not trying to represent an exact real life car. Modern licensed sets have a purpose to show that Technic can be used to represent an exact real life car while also having a few functions.

We can all agree that the modern licensed sets can have more of the real-life functions and that is definitely something we can ask for, but we can't ask for features that that real cars don't have. Yes, we can ask for fictional vehicles, chock full of functions, but I don't think those functions alone would sell those vehicles.

Even in real life, every vehicle has a purpose that it needs to achieve and it's build to achieve it. Sports cars need to be light and fast, 4x4's to be sturdy and capable off-road, trucks to be dependable and able to carry a lot of weight, etc. So for that, asking TLG to build a generic set of a vehicle chock full of functions with little to no relation to an actual vehicle which would need to fulfill an actual purpose -it's not going to happen. People won't buy it. More than that people that would buy it would just make it themselves out of the parts that they already have.

 

 

[icm]

Just chiming in to point out something that must be pointed out at least once in every discussion of new vs old Technic supercars and Technic in general - - -

8880, for all its amazing features, relied on a set of specialized new molds for the gearshift, the four wheel drive, and the four wheel steering.  Most of those new parts were never used again.  I just got a used copy of 8880 on Tuesday and built it today, so I know firsthand what an amazing set it is - - - but the "soul" of Lego Technic is achieving mechanical solutions with existing parts, not relying on new parts that were never used before or since.  With that in mind, I think the Porsche, Bugatti, and Land Rover, despite all their many flaws, are much better representations of what Technic can do.  They have new wheel rims and mudguards, sure, but those are decorative elements that aren't important to the technical functions.  The technical functions are achieved with existing parts, except for a new wave shifter and blue gear in the Bugatti that are much more generic and therefore versatile than the extremely specialized shifting, drive, and steering system that was invented for the Super Car in 1994.

Dangit, now I might talk myself into getting the Bugatti or the Land Rover.  Wallet, please say no.

[amorti]

Who's to say that new gearbox catch won't disappear from all future sets? Would that be a greater loss than the wheel retention and CV joint system of 8880?

[Bartybum]

1 hour ago, amorti said:

Who's to say that new gearbox catch won't disappear from all future sets? Would that be a greater loss than the wheel retention and CV joint system of 8880?

Why would it? It allows for smaller and therefore cheaper gearboxes.

[amorti]

The supercar after 8880 just had a single cross axle through the wheel to hold it on, so sometimes technology declines. Although as you pointed out, this new piece allows simpler (cheaper) construction of sequential gearboxes which are the current flavour of the month, so no reason for it to fall out of favour.