[MOD] UCS Slave 1 (anti-droop/bend when on stand)

[Pedilego]

Today I took them on their first journey to the photo room:

Neat! I'm happy you made a Jango mod, and thankful to you for sharing it with us.

[Frike]

My Slave I can only fit in my display cabinet in the landing position so I don't think this will be a problem for me. The modified one for Jango Fett looks absolutely amazing too!

What randomwalk suggested would be really cool. The pieces to transform it along with Jango Fett young Boba Fett figures in a modification kit sounds very nice. I'm not sure if modification kits like that have ever been released but I'm sure something like that would be in great demand.

[jasbury]

What randomwalk suggested would be really cool. The pieces to transform it along with Jango Fett young Boba Fett figures in a modification kit sounds very nice. I'm not sure if modification kits like that have ever been released but I'm sure something like that would be in great demand.

Hmmm, very narrow market though. They would only be in demand for those who purchased the actual set which is rather expensive. After that you have to assume the majority of UCS slave 1 owners are fine with their model being Bobas which is by far the more iconic and recognized color scheme.

[Frike]

Hmmm, very narrow market though. They would only be in demand for those who purchased the actual set which is rather expensive. After that you have to assume the majority of UCS slave 1 owners are fine with their model being Bobas which is by far the more iconic and recognized color scheme.

You're right, I should have written "in great demand by UCS owners" or something like that.

[BigEl]

To the actual matter at hand of this thread:

Did someone of the longer owners of the UCS Slave 1 notice anything regarding this possible bending/drop problem of the main hull structure?

I only had the Slave 1 for 2 months before I did the modification that was suggested by the original post.

At least that modification doesnt seem to negatively affect the structural pressure on the upper brick-built part of the hull, so I guess its just nice to do if you are worried regardless the controversial information we got in this thread.

The scenario that this bending problem can occur or not occur gives me the impression that it might has something to do with the production tolerances of the Lego parts that are crucial for the structural strength of the main hull.

Maybe if you are unlucky you get a set with slightly higher tolerances so the construction will start to bend in time even if built correctly/properly.

If the original construction had a very tight and precise calculation for the structurcal strength of the whole thing, I wouldnt even necessarily blame Lego for not realizing that in the development phase.

But then again I have no idea what prodecures and technology is avaliable for the designers to do so. Still, would be interesting to research the matter further and know for sure.

[olf999]

My Slave 1 does not have any splits or bendings at all. Got it Directly after releasé...

[JPN366]

I feel like we are getting contradictions from BrickCommander. He says that it shouldn't bend or droop if it's built based on the instructions. But then he says that if you do the MOD suggested, it will stress the brick built cockpit area. If it were to stress the cockpit, then that's acknowledging the stress that causes the bending/drooping. I got the UCS Slave I for my birthday and did all of the MOD's suggested by the original post while I was in the process of building. I think the MOD won't stress the cockpit at all, it may actually take some strain off the tail section and make the whole model stronger. I'm guessing either something was lost in translation from BrickCommander's tone or he didn't mean to contradict himself. Maybe his pride was hurt by someone discovering a potential minor flaw in the design, that's understandable. We all just don't want our $200 set to bend/droop/flex. I don't see how this MOD would stress the cockpit unless the tail section is actually pulling down, which would mean that it is prone to creating a gap. Regardless, it is a work of art and something BrickCommander should be proud of for designing. I thoroughly enjoyed building it and love looking at it on display. With that said, did anyone else add one of the extra yellow bushings to the other side of the Technic pin that holds the large dish piece on the bottom/back of the ship? When you put it through the hole all the way, then add the bushing on the other side. Other wise, you can just pull out the dish piece, there's nothing holding it from the other side except the friction from the pin and hole. I kept wondering while I was building when something would go there to hold it from the inside. Nothing did, so I took the top part of the cockpit off to access it and add the bushing. Page 121, step 53.

Edited February 21, 2016 by JPN366

[rollermonkey]

All I know is that mine has been on its display stand for over a year now, and shows no sign of droop or sag.

<shrugs>

[Bbafett]

Why is this set going for $350 on Lego.com? Still $200 on Amazon in US. Every time I looked it has been $200. Do you think it will come down for May the fourth.

Never mind. I did a different search and it changed. Wonder if I was at a different country page.

Edited February 21, 2016 by Bbafett

[JPN366]

All I know is that mine has been on its display stand for over a year now, and shows no sign of droop or sag.

<shrugs>

Just think it's odd that the designer says this shouldn't happen, but if you MOD it based on the original post, it will pull the cockpit apart.

[rollermonkey]

I did the mod with mixel joints that keeps the sides from flapping out, but that shouldn't have any effect on the droop OP was indicating. I'm going with builder error on this one.

Edited February 22, 2016 by rollermonkey

[Daedalus304]

I'm a bit surprised at the turn of the thread, to be honest. The mod is a well-designed one that definitely keeps things more rigid, but I can't help but feel that the extent of the gap problem has been overblown (Not necessarily by the OP). I had my Slave I sitting on the shelf for over a year, and the gap was pretty small. Even after I did the mod, the gap only closed by maybe a millimeter or two. The mod was very well designed and, at least to me, the connection seemed a perfect fit. I have never seen the gap as bad on mine as others have reported, and even with some gentle tugging I was never able to get the gap even close to as bad as what Anio reported.

This mod is great for adding some extra stability if you're the kind who likes to reinforce things, or if for whatever reason your copy of the model seems to be a little "gappier" than proper; but the average gap amount I've seen is not bad enough to say that the set has a 'serious design flaw'. This is probably one of my favorite UCS sets so far, and it's a bit of a shame to see so much consternation over what feels like making a mountain out of a molehill.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Daedalus304

[L E G O]

I'm a bit surprised at the turn of the thread, to be honest. The mod is a well-designed one that definitely keeps things more rigid, but I can't help but feel that the extent of the gap problem has been overblown (Not necessarily by the OP). I had my Slave I sitting on the shelf for over a year, and the gap was pretty small. Even after I did the mod, the gap only closed by maybe a millimeter or two. The mod was very well designed and, at least to me, the connection seemed a perfect fit. I have never seen the gap as bad on mine as others have reported, and even with some gentle tugging I was never able to get the gap even close to as bad as what Anio reported.

This mod is great for adding some extra stability if you're the kind who likes to reinforce things, or if for whatever reason your copy of the model seems to be a little "gappier" than proper; but the average gap amount I've seen is not bad enough to say that the set has a 'serious design flaw'. This is probably one of my favorite UCS sets so far, and it's a bit of a shame to see so much consternation over what feels like making a mountain out of a molehill.

I agree 100%. Mine has a small gap, but no big deal.

[ArchieNov]

I feel like we are getting contradictions from BrickCommander. He says that it shouldn't bend or droop if it's built based on the instructions. But then he says that if you do the MOD suggested, it will stress the brick built cockpit area. If it were to stress the cockpit, then that's acknowledging the stress that causes the bending/drooping. I got the UCS Slave I for my birthday and did all of the MOD's suggested by the original post while I was in the process of building. I think the MOD won't stress the cockpit at all, it may actually take some strain off the tail section and make the whole model stronger. I'm guessing either something was lost in translation from BrickCommander's tone or he didn't mean to contradict himself. Maybe his pride was hurt by someone discovering a potential minor flaw in the design, that's understandable. We all just don't want our $200 set to bend/droop/flex. I don't see how this MOD would stress the cockpit unless the tail section is actually pulling down, which would mean that it is prone to creating a gap. Regardless, it is a work of art and something BrickCommander should be proud of for designing. I thoroughly enjoyed building it and love looking at it on display.

Cool that you found the mod useful! :)

Well, I'm sure BrickCommander knows what he's talking about. But as for the mod, I can say that I've left my Slave 1 on the display stand from November and there has been zero change in the gap size since I placed the mod in, as well as no visible stress or brick separation on the cockpit area. I can now somewhat say with confidence that the mod shouldn't cause any issues at all, and will just further reinforce the structure.

[Blondie-Wan]

I feel like we are getting contradictions from BrickCommander. He says that it shouldn't bend or droop if it's built based on the instructions. But then he says that if you do the MOD suggested, it will stress the brick built cockpit area. If it were to stress the cockpit, then that's acknowledging the stress that causes the bending/drooping.

I don't think that's the case, actually. He's saying that if built according to instructions it won't be stressed, and if built a different way it will be. That's not contradictory.

[JPN366]

I don't think that's the case, actually. He's saying that if built according to instructions it won't be stressed, and if built a different way it will be. That's not contradictory.

Yeah, if you build is differently. But ArchieNov's MOD only adds two Technic beams to the structure where a potential gap could form. BrickCommander was saying that adding those beams would stress the cockpit build, but at the same time saying that there's nothing that would cause a gap to form due to stress/weight/pulling down if built based on the instructions. Why would the Technic beams cause stress if there's no existing stress to begin with? The Technic beams wouldn't potentially pull the cockpit apart if there's nothing pulling from the other side. That is contradictory. Like I said, it may be a pride thing. He's not going to admit he missed a stability connection point. He's going to defend his design, which is well within his rights. He may be right and we may all be wrong, but the MOD isn't going to make things worse. At worst, it may be unnecessary. But, I'll leave it on mine because I think it was obvious fix.

Edited February 26, 2016 by JPN366

[YavinBase]

I performed the modification with the mixel joints to correct the sides of the fuselage from moving inward and outward as referenced by rollermonkey. Performing the mixel mod will have no effect on narrowing the gap.

My gap does not seem to be an issue since it appears that it is similar in size from the day I finished building Slave I to now. However, I did perform the gap mod proposed by the OP and there was significant tension in the cockpit area which did not allow me to get the side walls of cockpit to fit back together. And yes, I used the correct pieces in the correct locations outlined by the OP, in case anyone suggests otherwise. I did not attempt to remove the mixel mod since it was tricky to get that mod to line up correctly, but I wonder if the mixel mod can exist with this mod.

[Blondie-Wan]

Yeah, if you build is differently. But ArchieNov's MOD only adds two Technic beams to the structure where a potential gap could form. BrickCommander was saying that adding those beams would stress the cockpit build, but at the same time saying that there's nothing that would cause a gap to form due to stress/weight/pulling down if built based on the instructions. Why would the Technic beams cause stress if there's no existing stress to begin with? The Technic beams wouldn't potentially pull the cockpit apart if there's nothing pulling from the other side. That is contradictory.

No, it's not; it could be that a lack of room for the beams could stress it by pressing it together rather than pulling it apart, for example. Or it could apply stresses in some other direction.

Mind you, I'm not saying it definitely would or would not stress the parts, or that he's definitely right about it stressing or you're not or whatever. But his statements are not automatically contradictory just from the wording.

[aaroncb]

Hey all, I'm admittedly more a lurker than a poster here but I figured I'd chime in. mine had the droop issue and after I (literally just) applied the mod it corrected it. that being said, it was put together correctly as I'm rather "thorough" to say the least. I purchased mine upon release last year, which was one of the first thousand or so made as it has the sticker error (that's going by what a Lego rep told me on the phone) and was built immediately after purchase, for anyone wondering batch/set age/how long it's been on display

anyway back to the point.

for those who are interested for doing it, I can speak for its effectiveness in correcting what it's supposed to. for me, it seemed a little more scary than it really was. bare In mind I'm not gutsy with performing surgery on loved display pieces such as this.

great mod, great set. cheers.

[JPN366]

No, it's not; it could be that a lack of room for the beams could stress it by pressing it together rather than pulling it apart, for example. Or it could apply stresses in some other direction.

Mind you, I'm not saying it definitely would or would not stress the parts, or that he's definitely right about it stressing or you're not or whatever. But his statements are not automatically contradictory just from the wording.

I understand what you're saying. I just think he's coming off as contradictory out of frustration. Based on his wording, he seemed passive-aggressively annoyed and insulted by the MOD idea. He seemed to respond poorly. A better response in my opinion would be to say, "Hey, that's an interesting idea! As the designer, I don't think it's necessary, but if it helps more power to you."

I performed the modification with the mixel joints to correct the sides of the fuselage from moving inward and outward as referenced by rollermonkey. Performing the mixel mod will have no effect on narrowing the gap.

My gap does not seem to be an issue since it appears that it is similar in size from the day I finished building Slave I to now. However, I did perform the gap mod proposed by the OP and there was significant tension in the cockpit area which did not allow me to get the side walls of cockpit to fit back together. And yes, I used the correct pieces in the correct locations outlined by the OP, in case anyone suggests otherwise. I did not attempt to remove the mixel mod since it was tricky to get that mod to line up correctly, but I wonder if the mixel mod can exist with this mod.

I did the MOD as I was building the set, maybe that made it easier to do? I added the Technic beams after I built the cockpit, then continued with the rest of the build. Try rebuilding the cockpit from the bottom up and then add the beams.

[firstofminifigs]

I have done both the anti-droop mod and the Mixel joint mod to hold down the SNOT side panels. They are compatible with no problems for me. I did notice a slight droop/increase in gap size in the 'flight' display stand mode that increased if I pulled down on the fuselage. The mod suggested here fixed it completely. The more annoying aspect of the finished model to me was the side panels moving and rattling too much when handled. The Mixel joint mod fixed it no problem. I spent about an hour of trying to find another spot to attach the SNOT panels to the frame with several methods without luck. Finally stumbled upon the Mixel joint mod on this site which worked great. Overall, love the set, my first UCS set because I really love minifigure scale and the last one I owned was the original Slave I when I was 12. I built them both to show my wife the difference. A good representation of what Lego was and what is has become.

[Cyanide-Tipped]

firstofminifigs, have the link to the Mixel joint mod, please?

[Flandy]

firstofminifigs, have the link to the Mixel joint mod, please?

I believe this is it:

ok, mod pictures as promised!

First i made this little assembly, the 2x4 slope is from your existing ramp, the 1x10 plate runs under it to add support for the ball joints later.

cross brace by kayjeb, on Flickr

(slightly out of focus) the cross brace assembly is placed in the ship using the 2x4 slope to position it

brace installed by kayjeb, on Flickr

The left side plate and a small stack up plates to mount the Mixel Ball Joints (leave the joints connected it will save a headache later)

side plate and assemebly by kayjeb, on Flickr

ball joints added to side plate (mirror this process for the Right side)

side plate asembled by kayjeb, on Flickr

connect the ball joint plate to the base on the raised section from the cross brace, and then reconnect the top Black tecnic hing.

mounted left side by kayjeb, on Flickr

and as you can see it aligns its self right back in place, go ahead and rebuild the left side to finish the mod, and repeat for the right side.

after mod alignment by kayjeb, on Flickr

simple little mod but no longer do i have annoying rattling side panels

*Edited for typos*

[rollermonkey]

That is indeed the 'mixel joint MOD' that I did to mine. Works like a charm.

[JPN366]

I'm going to do this MOD too. One question though, the dark gray Mixel joint piece, when you mount it to the 1 x 3 piece, is it closer to the front or closer to the back?