Generic Contest Discussion

[howitzer]

2 hours ago, JoKo said:

OK, it looks like there is a consensus about a small set with B model. 

I would personally push the max piece count to 250 pieces to allow for more diverse functions. I'm afraid we'll end with very basic entries  if we only have 150 pieces to play with. I would also suggest to allow one pull-back motor because they are widely available in quite cheap sets. And it would give us a power source that can be used in creative ways!

So, what do you think? what is the ideal piece count to make this contest simple, accessible and interesting?

I'd keep it lower, at least not much more than 150 parts because anything more would make judging hard, and also push the build time longer as contestants have to keep track of their inventory and so on. Yes, some of the entries will be basic but others might be surprisingly complex and functional. Pullback motors on the other hand are kind of problematic, as there has been a pullback contest before, and allowing them quickly becomes a requirement, if not formally, then practically considering you can do quite a bit of cool things with pullback motor that you can't otherwise.

2 hours ago, Jim said:

How do you keep track of the piece count while building? And how do we judge entries?

Require one of the following: a) a digital file b) building instructions c) good photos paired with a complete list of parts

---

One problem about parts limit is that it makes for a very hard incorporation of chains/tracks as those involve large amount of small parts. So perhaps an exception could be made regarding them: any chain unit regardless of length could be counted as 1 part, so 42148 snow groomer tracks would count as 2 parts while 42132 motorcycle's drive chain would count as 1 part.

[Aurorasaurus]

How about weight limit instead of part limit? Kitchen scales should be common enough.

[Jim]

4 minutes ago, Aurorasaurus said:

How about weight limit instead of part limit? Kitchen scales should be common enough.

That was my thought exactly. 

[JoKo]

34 minutes ago, howitzer said:

Pullback motors on the other hand are kind of problematic, as there has been a pullback contest before, and allowing them quickly becomes a requirement, if not formally, then practically considering you can do quite a bit of cool things with pullback motor that you can't otherwise.

 

I get you point! I won't be sad if pull-back is not allowed. But who don't have one hiding somewhere?

10 minutes ago, Aurorasaurus said:

How about weight limit instead of part limit? Kitchen scales should be common enough.

Interesting idea! Tires could be a heavy handicap and pull-back too if allowed. But why not?

[Saruzeufel]

14 hours ago, JoKo said:

could it discourage people that are not familiar with studio?  

Absolutely. I would consider entering a contest for small models. If it would require me to build it digitally as well I wouldn't bother.

[Jim]

1 hour ago, Saruzeufel said:

Absolutely. I would consider entering a contest for small models. If it would require me to build it digitally as well I wouldn't bother.

I agree that a digital component should not be mandatory. 

[Jundis]

I'm ok with that.

Considering the fact that from leaked pics many small official models have been digitalized within 1 day from the community. Also in this community, I'm sure we can rely on the parts count people give. When really in doubt, Admins may ask for pics from the builing process to count all the parts?

[Ngoc Nguyen]

1 minute ago, Jundis said:

When really in doubt, Admins may ask for pics from the builing process to count all the parts?

I'd say let's just drop the piece count requirement altogether. Use weight/size requirement instead.

[gyenesvi]

19 hours ago, Aurorasaurus said:

How about weight limit instead of part limit? Kitchen scales should be common enough.

19 hours ago, Jim said:

That was my thought exactly. 

Although I like the idea of a weight limit for a contest, as it is easy to prove with a photo on a kitchen scale, but then how would the B model requirement from roughly the same parts work? It's not enough to say that both models are under the weight limit, because that can be achieved with entirely different parts as well. The B model requirement only makes sense if parts are.

 

 

Edited December 5, 2025 by gyenesvi

[howitzer]

On 12/5/2025 at 1:19 PM, gyenesvi said:

Although I like the idea of a weight limit for a contest, as it is easy to prove with a photo on a kitchen scale, but then how would the B model requirement from roughly the same parts work? It's not enough to say that both models are under the weight limit, because that can be achieved with entirely different parts as well. The B model requirement only makes sense if parts are.

 

 

I guess this could be remedied with a requirement to post a complete parts list along with the entry, this would also enable other people to check that the weight limit really is met if there is a doubt of manipulating the scale as it's easy to just pile the listed parts on a scale.

Whether the limit is part count or weight, I would include requirement to post parts list either way.

[gyenesvi]

On 12/6/2025 at 1:24 PM, howitzer said:

I guess this could be remedied with a requirement to post a complete parts list along with the entry,

But what's the requirement on those parts if there is no part limit? We cannot require both models to use exactly the same parts, so we need to allow some discrepancy, but how much? Because too much can lead to two very distinct models, and defeats the purpose of the original A/B model competition.

On 12/6/2025 at 1:24 PM, howitzer said:

this would also enable other people to check that the weight limit really is met if there is a doubt of manipulating the scale as it's easy to just pile the listed parts on a scale.

In theory yes, but of course in practice nobody would actually go ahead and check it..

On 12/6/2025 at 1:24 PM, howitzer said:

Whether the limit is part count or weight, I would include requirement to post parts list either way.

If somebody is not building digitally, that can also be quite cumbersome.

[howitzer]

10 minutes ago, gyenesvi said:

But what's the requirement on those parts if there is no part limit? We cannot require both models to use exactly the same parts, so we need to allow some discrepancy, but how much? Because too much can lead to two very distinct models, and defeats the purpose of the original A/B model competition.

In theory yes, but of course in practice nobody would actually go ahead and check it..

If somebody is not building digitally, that can also be quite cumbersome.

That's why I don't think weight limit would be a good way to limit scale of builds when we're making two models in A/B-model style of old Lego sets. But even considering this limitation, you could still build two distinct models with different sets of parts and have them together meet the total weight limit - they would just be much smaller and probably less functional than two models built using mostly the same parts. Weight limit might work better if we were considering a single model contest.

If there's no interest within the community to check each other's work in adhering the rules, I don't think there's no point in having those rules in the first place. But when it's small sets with limited number of parts, the checking isn't a large amount of work, especially if it's required to provide either digital model or photos to help dissecting the models along with the entry. Yes, this is somewhat more work for everyone involved, but I don't think it's more than building a large functional model.

[JoKo]

About the pieces used for A and B model I would say that B model must be built with A model pieces only. That's the way I see a B model. So model A have weight limit, and B must be built from A  

 

About that weight limit, Does someone have a 10€ set on the shelf and a scale on hand ? So we can have an idea of what it could be

Edited December 7, 2025 by JoKo

[gyenesvi]

45 minutes ago, JoKo said:

About the pieces used for A and B model I would say that B model must be built with A model pieces only. That's the way I see a B model. So model A have weight limit, and B must be built from A  

Actually I like that, it's a simple enough rule, and fairly easy to check also based on photos. Of course it can lead to some parts only being used in order to facilitate the B model, but that's within the spirit of the contest, and the weight limit can put a cap on the use of such spurious parts.

1 hour ago, howitzer said:

But when it's small sets with limited number of parts, the checking isn't a large amount of work, especially if it's required to provide either digital model or photos to help dissecting the models along with the entry. Yes, this is somewhat more work for everyone involved, but I don't think it's more than building a large functional model.

I agree, this can work for small models.

[JoKo]

2 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

Of course it can lead to some parts only being used in order to facilitate the B model

  Looking forward to see some creative ways to use weird pieces for two different functions or look!

[Paul B Technic]

The weight limit for the A model and using those parts for a B model sounds great to me.

[bruh]

I think the weight limit makes sense. I guess that also eliminates potential electronics use for those who would try to fit that in.

[JoKo]

13 hours ago, Paul B Technic said:

The weight limit for the A model and using those parts for a B model sounds great to me.

 

13 hours ago, bruh said:

I think the weight limit makes sense. I guess that also eliminates potential electronics use for those who would try to fit that in.

 

OK fine, now about the weight: I took as exemple the 42218 wheel harvester. I used @Kostq file , weight is 98g in studio (I checked IRL, got 95g). So 100g could be a nice round target or maybe we can push it to 150 to be a bit more comfortable.

[gyenesvi]

3 minutes ago, JoKo said:

So 100g could be a nice round target or maybe we can push it to 150 to be a bit more comfortable.

I'd vote for pushing it out a bit more.

[Jundis]

20 minutes ago, JoKo said:

So 100g could be a nice round target or maybe we can push it to 150 to be a bit more comfortable.

100 g is way to low in my opinion. Especially if we want some more variety in tires and not only the smalles ones.

Again an example: According to Brickset, 8066 weighs 280 g with only 141 pieces.

[gyenesvi]

22 minutes ago, Jundis said:

100 g is way to low in my opinion. Especially if we want some more variety in tires and not only the smalles ones.

Again an example: According to Brickset, 8066 weighs 280 g with only 141 pieces.

I agree, that is exactly the scale I'd prefer to build on, though it's not exactly 10 Eur range, but I think to build interesting A/B models from the same parts, we need to allow more than 42218.

[JoKo]

1 hour ago, Jundis said:

Again an example: According to Brickset, 8066 weighs 280 g with only 141 pieces.

I didn't expect such a difference, That's indeed a better exemple, so 300g would be a better target

[howitzer]

2 hours ago, Jundis said:

100 g is way to low in my opinion. Especially if we want some more variety in tires and not only the smalles ones.

Again an example: According to Brickset, 8066 weighs 280 g with only 141 pieces.

 

Is that the weight of the model or total weight of the model along with instructions, packaging and all that? I believe Brickset lists the weight as an unopened box, rather than the weight of the model itself.

That model does have large-ish wheels for its size too, so those push the total weight up - which might be problematic as either the weight limit is too low and no large wheels can be used, or the weight limit is too high and model with no large wheels can push the size out of proportion otherwise.

The problem is similar to having part count limit for entries with tracks or chains where I proposed counting each run of chain as 1 piece rather than every link separately. I guess something like that could be done with large wheels, such as weighing the entry without tyres so that only rims are counted into the weight limit.

[JoKo]

2 hours ago, howitzer said:

Is that the weight of the model or total weight of the model along with instructions, packaging and all that?

Good point. That would make more sense.

2 hours ago, howitzer said:

such as weighing the entry without tyres

I like that idea! 

 

I had a look at other small models weight (found on rebrickable )

• 42164 buggy recolor  219 pieces   200g ( 4 medium tires  40g)
• 42198 alt hovercraft   285 pieces   215g ( 2 small tires  12g)

What about 200g with or without tires? 

[JoKo]

Soooo, holiday are getting closer. What about that contest?