Discussion on comparative sales volumes of PF Motors by Lego vs third-parties

[shroomzofdoom]

I was hanging with my non-AFOL friends and showed them a few Lego Technic sets and third party sets. As the story veered off into discussions about the motors, I made a glib comment to the effect of 'third parties have probably sold ten times as many units in this form factor when compared to Lego since Lego killed the original line.'

These are generally business-minded folks so naturally they challenged my premise and we discussed things like what Lego has learned, how they responded, etc.

Sure, I pulled that number out of my big behind but the premise remains the same:

1. Is my argument generally valid?
2. Who sold more units by sales volume? Lego or all other third parties?
3. Is that advantage 10X? 20X? 100X?
4. While we think killing PF form factor was a mistake, do you think Lego has regrets?

Instead of advancing or improving existing lines, TLG responded by almost totally abandoning the 'rebuild' pillar of the Technic line. I find this ironic especially since third parties aren't knocking off the PU line. Instead of mindstorms, we have a limited grab bag of motors and stuff like this:

Closed and destined to be released in 20 different uninspiring color variants to a 5 year parade of yawns, I absolutely hate this thing. Did Lego really give the market what the market wanted? Ironically, several of their competitors offer something similar that IS programmable!

I searched for anything I could find but that the fact is that TLG is a private company and so are there competitors so sales numbers are likely nonexistent.

If you respond, please keep it about the PF form factor and related market:

• I don't want to devolve into right/wrong, IP theft, model quality, etc
• Please don't mention third parties by name, just say '3P' or 'third-party', if you're not into the whole brevity thing.

 

Edited September 27, 2025 by shroomzofdoom
typo

[2GodBDGlory]

That's an interesting question! I'm not sure how accurately we can answer it, though. My current collection is probably half-and-half for Lego vs 3P PF motors, but my feeling would be that the collections of builders in the Western world would still favor original Lego PF motors by a large margin. I think I'm well on the cheap side of AFOLs, so I would probably have 100% 3P if I had started collecting recently, but since I built a collection while PF was still available, it's still half-and-half. Putting me on the cheap side, then, would imply that most other western AFOLs would have less than half 3P PF collections.

The real question for me, though, is how large the Technic building community is in China and other countries more in their sphere of influence. I don't think we hear a ton from that world, so it's hard to know how big it is, but I'd expect that's where we'd find the bulk of 3P motor sales going to.

[1gor]

I have all Lego PF motors and no 3P (I won't considder CADA Dominator because set is assembled and not canibalized for parts). Since I have no PU parts (the only - controlled via mobile device solution that I accept is BuWizz, but in that case in my experience with IR receivers on it PF Servo works smoother than over mobile phone), I start to think about 3P like buggy / BuWizz motor...or some proportional servo if I would not be able to fix my 5 servos with wire issues during advent...

[howitzer]

I believe vast majority of these motors are sold in complete sets, not separately. Only AFOLs and similar hobbyist ever think of buying separate motors and they are a small minority of all buyers (and even most AFOLs never use any sort of motors in their builds). So I guess the question comes down to which company has the biggest market share in Lego-like construction toys and there I believe TLG still firmly holds the lead - though competitors have been gaining ground, especially in east Asia. Of course TLG no longer produces PF-motors so we're only dealing with aftermarket stuff currently, enabling competitors to gain some ground but there is a huge number of PF-era electronics still out there (you can still buy new PF L motors in BL only for 20-25€ and used ones for a lot less) so I don't think competitors are going to overshadow that anytime soon.

[1963maniac]

I'm over 60 years building, playing and buying Lego. I now have twice as much PF as all previous (none that are newer) motor systems from TLG. I now rebuild my own 9 volt and PF cables. I'm currently displaying at a Lego show with GBCs. I would be much better for me to be able to still buy these products from TLG!!

[M_longer]

It's hard to say if LEGO managers have any regrets - the market has changed, lots of car sets show that people want just something to put on shelf. Having Control+, where each motor can work as servo and propulsion motor skyrocketed the prices of motors itself. Only thing PF needed was bluetooth control, yet they made completely new, overpriced  and weaker range of motors. Not to mention that system now requires two large HUBs if you want, for example 5 motors used, not 3 small IR receivers/two Sbricks.

[Lok24]

13 hours ago, shroomzofdoom said:

While we think killing PF form factor was a mistake, do you think Lego has regrets?

I don't think so, there's are lot of different motors, all of them (except train) offer much more features to move , the complete PU universe offers  a lot of greatly expanded possibilities.
So why should LEGO regret this?

[M_longer]

3 hours ago, Lok24 said:

So why should LEGO regret this?

well, prices?

[Sokolov Edward]

In my humble opinion, Chinese-made PF electronics are more than sufficient for Lego Technic. In recent years, they've added compact micromotors and steam generators, as well as 6-channel control units with smooth control. Remote control units from Chinese manufacturers are often incompatible. But this is actually a plus – in one model that used two 4-channel units, I used the incompatible units, and I didn't have to do any additional work to decouple the units. At 2-5 euros per motor, they're in high demand and will remain relevant for a long time.

[gyenesvi]

Interesting questions, but I also have the feeling that we are not informed enough to answer this properly, especially the size of the chinese market. I agree that probably most original Lego PF electronics was sold in sets, but that may not be true for 3rd party stuff, which is probably experiencing a sales boom after PF was discontinued, and that's ongoing, so time is on its side.

6 hours ago, Lok24 said:

I don't think so, there's are lot of different motors, all of them (except train) offer much more features to move , the complete PU universe offers  a lot of greatly expanded possibilities.

Unfortunately, much of that potential was not really taken advantage of, at least not in Technic. It's a good question whether PU just made it somewhat more complicated to design technic sets without having much advantage besides the better communication. For example whether having fancy controls of construction machinery is worth it against calibration complexities.

6 hours ago, Lok24 said:

So why should LEGO regret this?

I think they created a software hell for themselves, underestimating the complexities of software and its support compared to making plastic parts and distributing them, I would not be surprised if they had regretted that one. I think a configurable communication with a physical remote could have been a simpler and cheaper solution on the long run than app control wrt maintenance (at least for Technic, but they shot down Mindstorms anyways, so that's probably a regret too).

[JopieK]

10 hours ago, Lok24 said:

I don't think so, there's are lot of different motors, all of them (except train) offer much more features to move , the complete PU universe offers  a lot of greatly expanded possibilities.
So why should LEGO regret this?

I was just looking for motors at LEGO.COM, only the train motor 88011 and 88013 (Large Technic motor) are available. So sad. I'm sure they could sell much more if the keep a better assortment.

[Aleh]

On 9/27/2025 at 9:28 PM, shroomzofdoom said:

1. While we think killing PF form factor was a mistake, do you think Lego has regrets?

 

Who we? I do not think that refusing from the obsolete ancient IR technilogy was a mistake, imo. The mistake is that the replacement in the face of PU requeres smartphone, can not be adjustable by default etc

[Stormyy]

When talking about PF, I still hoped for something like MK does (dumb battery for e.g. engine builds, Bluetooth controlled battery box for remote controlled modely). Controllable from both smartphone and physical remote. 

[Sokolov Edward]

13 hours ago, Aleh said:

I do not think that refusing from the obsolete ancient IR technilogy was a mistake, imo. The mistake is that the replacement in the face of PU requeres smartphone, can not be adjustable by default etc

The Chinese didn't even bother with IR control—they went straight to Bluetooth radio, allowing control from both a remote control and a phone. At 10 euros for a set consisting of a 4-channel control unit, a remote control, two L-motors, and one servo motor, it would be difficult to offer anything more competitive. I'm not sure Lego Technic needs anything more complex for most users.

[Aleh]

4 hours ago, Sokolov Edward said:

The Chinese didn't even bother with IR control—they went straight to Bluetooth radio, allowing control from both a remote control and a phone. At 10 euros for a set consisting of a 4-channel control unit, a remote control, two L-motors, and one servo motor, it would be difficult to offer anything more competitive. I'm not sure Lego Technic needs anything more complex for most users.

Well, I'd avoid 10 Euro no-name set of components. But more or less known chinese brands also cost something. Luckily, less than TLG ones.

[shroomzofdoom]

On 9/28/2025 at 4:25 PM, Aleh said:

Who we? I do not think that refusing from the obsolete ancient IR technilogy was a mistake, imo. The mistake is that the replacement in the face of PU requeres smartphone, can not be adjustable by default etc

Point taken. Proportional controls, adding servo/encoder functions to PU were a leap forward, losing physical remote was not great. But PF XL motors and RC motors seem to still be desired by MOC builders, despite their clearly suboptimal physical form factors.

Hell, even the 3P guys replaced IR on PF remotes with 2.4GHz. 

I still feel that minor, incremental changes were needed to put PF on a better trajectory. Evolutionary change, not revolutionary change might've been better. 

Could be that Lego saw increasing demand for PF, took one look at the their PU offering and realized it was time to produce the garbage pile that is the closed, all in one motor. Are there any fans of this thing?

[1gor]

24 minutes ago, shroomzofdoom said:

Point taken. Proportional controls, adding servo/encoder functions to PU were a leap forward, losing physical remote was not great. But PF XL motors and RC motors seem to still be desired by MOC builders, despite their clearly suboptimal physical form factors.

When discussing with friends that bought Zetros , 42099 and Audi to their kids, it seems like PF large motor was a bit better than large and XL PU motors. Yes PF XL and buggy are much better; buggy motor is even better solution than coupled XL motors. And as time goes by more and more people lack simple physical controller - to connect wires and play (not plug & play with your nerves)

[msk6003]

On 9/28/2025 at 5:30 PM, M_longer said:

they made completely new, overpriced  and weaker range of motors.

I recently found out while building something that the PU L motor has much better specs than the PF L motor in every aspect except price and size.

[gyenesvi]

15 hours ago, msk6003 said:

I recently found out while building something that the PU L motor has much better specs than the PF L motor in every aspect except price and size.

I know PU L motors are about 15% more powerful than PF ones, but what other specs do you mean? For example, they are also slower by 25% which may be undesirable, especially when used in conjunction with planetary wheel hubs and/or high ratio diffs (red ones). The Zetros is a good counterexample here (too slow, unnecessary torque).

[dr_spock]

I used to have all LEGO PF but lately I've been replacing bad motors with 3rd party. I noticed some of the 3rd party draw twice as much current than LEGO. Some seem to run a tad faster too. Before 3rd party, I had a batch of electric toy motors to rebuild burned out PF M motors.  Pressing pinion gear on to replacement motor shaft is a pain.  Buying 3rd party is much easier and cheaper than the new brass pinion gears and motors and labour.

[msk6003]

On 10/3/2025 at 12:44 AM, gyenesvi said:

I know PU L motors are about 15% more powerful than PF ones, but what other specs do you mean? For example, they are also slower by 25% which may be undesirable, especially when used in conjunction with planetary wheel hubs and/or high ratio diffs (red ones). The Zetros is a good counterexample here (too slow, unnecessary torque).

Oh I forget.

[Plumber]

I'm firmly in the simple motor club, I have motors from 4.5/12V through 9V and on to PF. I do have some PU as I received 42100 as a gift.

Since TLG stopped PF I have purchased from 3P motors of Chinese and German origin now totalling over 50 mostly PF XL clones but also 12 Cada micromotors. TLG micro motors were great in their day (I have 3  still functional) but once mounting clips and power connector are attached they're not so micro.

Anyway by way of contributing to the topic about 20 pre PF Lego motors, 30 PF family Lego motors against 50 3P (30ish PF clone) motors and counting.

No plans to buy any more TLG motors with possible exception of 2 Large Angular PU which I will convert to PF connectors.