My (troubled) first studless building experience

[Soluzar]

Its almost impossible to determine which angle connector and which axle length is meant for some older instructions, which makes building them very frustrating.

Yep. Well... at least you can get some idea by consulting the list of parts, but it will always be a problem. I want to try building the 8868 one day. I have a growing pool of parts to work with, and can bricklink the rest. The main problem will be that the quality of the instruction scans is awful. I think it would certainly be cheaper for me to build it from individual parts, but I guess I'll have to factor a copy of the instructions into that.

[MadMax1998]

Thanks for the helpful advice about colors and I'm also glad to see that I'm not alone with my troubles. I hope I can get the hang of building like this given time because it seems really intriguing mechanically. Still, I'm also looking forward to building more old, studded models the way I fondly remember.

[Soluzar]

Thanks for the helpful advice about colors and I'm also glad to see that I'm not alone with my troubles. I hope I can get the hang of building like this given time because it seems really intriguing mechanically. Still, I'm also looking forward to building more old, studded models the way I fondly remember.

To some extent, I felt the same way you do until recently. I also chose the 9396 as my first modern Technic set to build. I didn't have quite as many problems with it as you seem to have, but I did have to retrace my steps back to discover my mistake a couple of times. I think what helped me was sorting the parts thoroughly before starting to build. Since then I've built other modern Technic sets and some of them have bags which are numbered to correspond to phases of the build process. This helps a lot. You open bag #1 and it has all the parts you need for the first several steps. Then you move on to bag 2. It's an improvement.

[Strikeman]

Yep. Well... at least you can get some idea by consulting the list of parts, but it will always be a problem. I want to try building the 8868 one day. I have a growing pool of parts to work with, and can bricklink the rest. The main problem will be that the quality of the instruction scans is awful. I think it would certainly be cheaper for me to build it from individual parts, but I guess I'll have to factor a copy of the instructions into that.

I think you should give peeron a try when trying to recreate older sets. They have scanned instruction for most of the old models. These scans are made by users from the original instruction booklets.

They have decent scans for the 8868 for example. I prefer the user-scanned instructions on peeron over the official LEGO PDF instructions if they're available.

[BeO]

I've also recently returned to the wonderful world of Lego Technics, and I recognise much of what you said in your first post.

During the autumn last year I got the Supercar, 8070, and I was impressed with what you can do with these new parts. But at the same time I felt like such a newbie. Last time I got a new Technics set was somewhere around '85 or '86, quite a few years ago :)

I agree on the colours, grey and black are hard to tell apart from each other. I think black was more black in the old instructions (like the 8860). And I wouldn't mind at all if all axles were the same colour. After 25+ years in The Dark Ages, I still had no problem picking out an 8L, 10L or a 12L axle just by sight. Besides, on every page in the new instructions where you have an axle or a beam they also print a comparison picture. Back then they only had one picture for the axles, on the front page :)

I really love building these new models, but so far I haven't really gotten around to making my own models. It's a new way of thinking that I have to get used to. But I've got plenty of practice ahead of me, so far I've also purchased 8043, 8110, 8258, 9394, 9396, 9398 and 42007. Many hours of wonderful building ahead of me :D

Oh btw, it wasn't a Technics set that brought me out of the Dark Ages. It was a ... VW :) I highly recommend the 10220 set, so much fun building and a wonderful piece to put on a shelf somewhere.

The 9396 that you're building was my second set of the 'new' Technics age, and it was a really fun but also frustrating build. I managed to flip an axle and a cog for the rotor. Took me half an hour to fix without having to take apart the whole thing :)

Good luck, and keep building!

[Soluzar]

As small a complaint as it might be, I'd rather all axles were the same colour too. Then again, I'd rather all pins / bushes / etc of a given type were the same colour, too. They are only small connecting elements, I don't see the need for colour variation. It just adds an extra complication for me when mixing old and new parts. It already irritates me that I've got an old and a new shade of both 'light grey' and 'dark grey' to contend with. I want to freely intermingle my LEGO by element type, but the old grey looks so out of place next to the new.

[grohl]

Think of the children. They want to build Technic as well. Therefore the colour variety to make the elements easier to distinguish.

[MadMax1998]

Alright, thought I would complete this thread with my experience finishing the build...

The total build time, from looking at the wall clock when starting and finishing each stint, was eight hours. That is by far the longest I ever had; not even the 8868 Claw Rig when I was a kid took that long (well, maybe it did... but considering I'm 28 now, I'd do it in half that time!) - of course the first hour was spent getting acquainted with the new pieces and building style, which was more frustrating than enjoyable. The complex chassis with the moving beams was difficult to understand while building and once the instructions got to the exterior and finally the gears and rotor, I was beginning to enjoy it a lot more. I was also getting faster and putting together the parts much quicker. Sorting them out from the bags was also faster as I had memorized which bag held what.

I did the build in four nights (one week in total) while my girl was asleep. I just finished the model tonight, so let's recap how it went... after the second night, building for 90 minutes, this was the result. I was much more confident at this point that studless construction had something going for it.

Then on the third night I spent another two hours on the meat and potatoes of the helicopter with the transmission and main rotor. I can't remember any studded Technic models from the 90s having gearboxes to drive several functions from one axle (except the Space Shuttle, which I still want). It became apparent that with the compact build design a construction like this rotor would never have been possible 20 years ago.

And tonight, while I completed the machine, I even spotted an instruction error on step 131...!

I'm really glad this model includes such a detailed gearbox because I'm usually more interested in vehicles (cars) and building transmissions is a very interesting prospect to me. I always wanted to know how they really work without just looking at pictures on Wikipedia, and I think the new Technic sets can give me that. Of course I noticed pretty quickly that there was no way to drive the rotors *and* any of the other functions together, which is the only serious lack of this otherwise beautifully engineered helicopter!

And another two and a half hours later... done. It's the biggest Lego model I've ever built.

After this, I've become more confident about studless construction and I like some new parts a lot, especially the gears which seem to move a lot smoother than the old ones. I can only imagine what a great model I could construct by combining my old studded parts and the new stuff. The helicopter gives me a lot of nice new parts to start with.

However, my next build will be the 8460 Crane Truck I shot off eBay for a good price, so it's back to the good old days of Technic for now. I wonder which studless model to get next...

[Lipko]

You have two independent levers to operate the gearbox, that means two functions at a time. It's another question why those functions together. Rotor turning NOT with the landing gear is kind of awkward.

[Soluzar]

You have two independent levers to operate the gearbox, that means two functions at a time. It's another question why those functions together. Rotor turning NOT with the landing gear is kind of awkward.

It's also really quite awkward that you must locate the opposite lever in the neutral position or nothing works.

[Jim]

It's also really quite awkward that you must locate the opposite lever in the neutral position or nothing works.

True! Although this is one of my favorite sets all time, the gear box could and should have been better. Some combinations result in total failure, or the rotor doesn't turn anymore.

I am working on a modified motorized version, so I got rid of the gear box altogether.