42140 - App-controlled Transformation Vehicle

[SNIPE]

  On 10/16/2021 at 9:42 AM, Jundis said:

@SNIPE Looks more like 3 x 3&4 x 5 to me:

Still, the pricings sounds reasonable for a Control+ set with 700+ pieces.

Promobricks mods speculated in a video about using the "moving hub" with 2 integrated motors: https://www.lego.com/de-de/product/move-hub-88006

Expand  

That's right.

[howitzer]

The Move hub doesn't fit into the current style of Technic building though, with its even width and mostly stud-based connections. Obviously a set could be built around it but I don't think TLG would stray so far from the studless building style. It's much more probable that it has the usual Technic hub with 2 motors.

[Ngoc Nguyen]

I'm not sure what I'm seeing here.

 

[weavil]

The small pic in the book looks like it "transforms" when it gets flipped. It looks like it's driving up a wall.

[TechnicRCRacer]

Micro panel extenders on the back??

[mahjqa]

I think the cockpit just flips up and down, and that the bottom has another one, like with these:

https://toysfromthepast.blogspot.com/2016/11/748-hot-wheels-lionel-trains-inc-3.html

(So the wheel on top of the cockpit we see now pushes everything to the top when it flips)

[madn3ss795]

  On 12/12/2021 at 1:36 AM, TechnicRCRacer said:

Micro panel extenders on the back??

Expand  

 

Looks like 2 2x3x1 panels (71682) and 3 1x2 beams in between.

[mpj]

  On 12/12/2021 at 3:30 AM, madn3ss795 said:

 

Looks like 2 2x3x1 panels (71682) and 3 1x2 beams in between.

Expand  

That means there are 2 1x2 beams with axle hole in yellow for the first time.

[astyanax]

Kinda reminds of of this MOC:

 

[R0Sch]

So it's basically 42065/42095 that can flip 180° on it's back but 50€ more expensive and lacking the physical remote control? Wow LEGO, really creative. The reverse side is probably supposed to compensate for the lack of the B-model again? Please include the obligatory fart sounds feature in the App.

[Maaboo the Witch]

  On 12/12/2021 at 1:10 PM, R0Sch said:

So it's basically 42065/42095 that can flip 180° on it's back but 50€ more expensive and lacking the physical remote control? Wow LEGO, really creative. The reverse side is probably supposed to compensate for the lack of the B-model again? Please include the obligatory fart sounds feature in the App.

Expand  

It ain't a CONTROL+ set if it don't fart.

[R0Sch]

Notice that mono-wheel on the cabin? So it won't even change it's track shape to pull back the cabin and prevent it touching the floor. So much for the ability to "transform". And again the features are misleading with the "alternative control" showing a joystick+hand as opposed to the "main control" with a smart device. Of course both are only on the smart device!

[1gor]

  On 12/12/2021 at 1:22 PM, Maaboo35 said:

It ain't a CONTROL+ set if it don't fart.

Expand  

Now we now that control+ stinks 

[Maaboo the Witch]

Giving the image a good look, this thing is based on the classic Rebound R/C car with two different body designs that are interchangeable depending on whichever way up it faces. That's pretty much the extent of the "transformation" function as far as I can tell.

[1gor]

  On 12/12/2021 at 4:19 PM, Maaboo35 said:

Giving the image a good look, this thing is based on the classic Rebound R/C car with two different body designs that are interchangeable depending on whichever way up it faces. That's pretty much the extent of the "transformation" function as far as I can tell.

Expand  

Yes it looks that way; even colors look from 42095 (only big sprockets look like dark bluish gray from Liebherr)

[howitzer]

For me it seems to be much larger than 42095, but unless there's something surprising that the (admittedly blurry) catalog photo doesn't show, it doesn't appear to do much beyond what 42095 did. And yeah, physical remote would be nice to have here...

[Maaboo the Witch]

The blue body resembles 42095-A while the orange one looks like 42075-B. Overall it looks like those two sets have been smashed into one.

[Polarlicht]

What i always wonder why someone takes like the crappiest camera they can find and take these pictures.

[Dylan M]

  On 12/12/2021 at 8:42 PM, Polarlicht said:

What i always wonder why someone takes like the crappiest camera they can find and take these pictures.

Expand  

Because all leak image is well "Played" 

Part of promotional Technic/tactics 😉

[R0Sch]

  On 12/13/2021 at 6:59 AM, Dylan M said:

Because all leak image is well "Played" 

Part of promotional Technic/tactics 😉

Expand  

Here we go again with the conspiracy theories.

It's just because not everyone can afford the latest iPhone/DSLR camera or is a skilled photographer. Besides, you lose image quality after every transfer or upload.

Edited December 13, 2021 by R0Sch

[mpj]

  On 12/13/2021 at 6:49 PM, R0Sch said:

Here we go again with the conspiracy theories.

It's just because not everyone can afford the latest iPhone/DSLR camera or is a skilled photographer. Besides, you lose image quality after every transfer or upload.

Expand  

No conspiracy theory, but it is really "strange" that no one of the leaked image is clear. You don't need a top quality camera, a 5 years old smartphone takes better photos than this. The quality of the image does not lower after every transfer, unless you take a screenshot of a screenshot, but this is not the case.

Who takes these photos is surely in a hurry, that's the only reason to explain a badly angled shot.

[Dami]

I got higher quality image of this set. Anyone want to see it? 

[mahjqa]

Nah.

[2GodBDGlory]

I for one would be curious!

[zagdima]

need better quality photo, nevermind i got one 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Edited December 14, 2021 by zagdima