CM4Sci

Technic 2017 Set Discussion

Recommended Posts

I wouldn't buy the car chassis as a set, it isn't really appealing. I think it's fine as a combination model. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Cumulonimbus said:

I'm really getting tired of the negative vibe on some of the topics and reactions here. Despite the best efforts of Jim, with each wave of (Technic) sets the same routine is followed: unrealistic wishlists, continuous "are we there yet" type of questions about leaked pictures, overhyped expectations based on these preliminary pictures and wishes and then the whining and rants about the inevitable disappointment.

In my opinion TLG never listened better to AFOLs or did more to cater to our needs and wishes than it does the last years. Many of us have experienced the Technic Dark Ages and what a contrast to that era it is now: 2016 was one of the best years ever for Technic and we are spoiled with extras such as the Porsche and this chassis. Be a bit more grateful, that would be a nice gesture from the community for a change.

I think I will take a break from Eurobricks for a while, there is enough negativity in the world as it is.

That's one of the reasons I'm not really active as I use to be too... I for one like the truck, even though it only has pendular suspension in the back, it will be a great parts pack for offroading and its a spiritual ancestor of 9398.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every great band is allowed a bad album. After the last two great years TLG is allowed a bad year, but that doesn't mean we can't keep the designers on their toes :grin: . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Cumulonimbus said:

I'm really getting tired of the negative vibe on some of the topics and reactions here. Despite the best efforts of Jim, with each wave of (Technic) sets the same routine is followed: unrealistic wishlists, continuous "are we there yet" type of questions about leaked pictures, overhyped expectations based on these preliminary pictures and wishes and then the whining and rants about the inevitable disappointment.

In my opinion TLG never listened better to AFOLs or did more to cater to our needs and wishes than it does the last years. Many of us have experienced the Technic Dark Ages and what a contrast to that era it is now: 2016 was one of the best years ever for Technic and we are spoiled with extras such as the Porsche and this chassis. Be a bit more grateful, that would be a nice gesture from the community for a change.

I agree with you words! There is no need to negativity.

Edited by evortigosa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LXF said:

I wouldn't buy the car chassis as a set, it isn't really appealing. I think it's fine as a combination model. 

I think it would have been awesome if Lego made a special 40th anniversary set of one of the classic models using new parts. That 3 set combination model doesn't seem very appealing to me. The seats are especially goofy looking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was also sort of let (or maybe I was expecting too much) down by H2 sets for 2017 (although I really like the fire truck, with note, that I was hoping for different kind of firetruck with telescopic ladder - as I said before "red pneumatic 42009"), and neither 42069 nor 42070 are according my taste, but declining whole season as "bad" or so, is unfair to LEGO. Especially when nobody has even seen properly H2 2017 sets yet. 

They can't cater for everyone all the time (I personally do not care much about cars - but most of you do) but there is variety like never before (from recent years, from top of my head,includes mining machines, agriculture machines, trucks, planes, ship, construction machines, racing cars, cranes, anything you can think of (maybe railroad stuff is missing).

"40y merge" car is offered for free (correct me if I am wrong) - what was the last time you got something for free (why should you)? Isn't that kind of generous? (hint: it is) Prices are steep (IMO) and trend is rising (IMO), but with little bit of patience, one can usually find good deal later. Plus profit is not a dirty word. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cumulonimbus said:

I think I will take a break from Eurobricks for a while, there is enough negativity in the world as it is.

I did that for a while a few years ago.  It seemed like every thread was a whine about PF and LAs.  A break was good.  But...Eurobricks is mostly great, easily the best Lego forum IMHO (unless you really like the sledging on Flickr AFOL groups) :grin:  But annual rumours thread reliably attracts...quite special behaviour :classic: 

Edited by andythenorth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I wasn't expecting anything particular for this year, but the sets don't appeal me. Last years BWE and Porsche didn't either. The only two sets that grabbed me attention ⚠ where the Claas Xerion and Volvo EW160E, this is because they are agricultural and construction equipment, that's what makes me tick. So this year I'll maybe get the Volvo and further build my Backhoe. So I'm not saying this year's sets are bad, they just don't interest me.

Edited by Dafgek81

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is, releasing too many new parts detracts hat Technic and indeed LEGO is about, its about building a part of a modem, or of parts. and sometimes with large models its about building a part of a part of a modem, out of parts. Sometimes they release specical parts when something is perhaps too small, finley detailed or too specialized of purpose to be done using pre-existing parts. This sometimes means the model is larger than yu were planning because a certain function needs more parts rather than fewer more specicalised parts so that is a good reason to request newer parts, as long as they actually are needed and not just wanted.

I also know that the new sets are not as advanced as say the Arocs, or bucket wheel excavator but maybe we've been spoiled and now they sort of need to make simpler new sets to reduce their costs for a little while.

The sets are not that bad for 2017 though, I don't even think I've fully made use of the newer [arts as it is!, which is another important reasn why its good not to have too many new parts - Because it doesnt teach you t think in a geometric way, which is what LEGO is about.

Can anyone give any insight to if that purple tracked truck has front suspention and/or inner-tracks sprinfgs as the main shock

absorbers..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/2/2017 at 0:59 PM, kbalage said:

Might be a noob question, but what are those shock absorber-like parts under the wheel arches? Definitely not the regular size of the usual ones.. are they imitations or placeholders?

this part in metallic silver  http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemIn.asp?P=55981&colorID=67&in=A

55981.jpg

or this part in flat silver: http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemIn.asp?P=55982&colorID=95&in=A

 

55982.jpg?1

Edited by Richard Dower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Coughs* Hi kid's,I somehow missed the entire discussion and release of  the 2017 line....upon seeing these photos of the winter sets I think I needn't of bothered joining the

discussion at this late stage. :cry_sad:                 

The tow truck sounds good but it does not live up too expectation once seen in the photos.I am disappointed too see that Lego have not used the new pneumatic

elements  again, *While making monkey face* I am sure Allanp is thrilled to see the continued use of those "grey mechanical alternatives". :laugh:

Of the entire 2017 line I think the small telehandler (42061),construction crew (42060),Container yard (42062) and the research boat (42064)  looks the most appealing and

they are already out,I say roll on 2018....

Edited by Alasdair Ryan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, nguyengiangoc said:

Or maybe we can just wait until 2018 when there are a successor for the Porsche and a non-RC flagship with a higher part count, a lower price, and a more functionally complex design. I don't know what you guys think but I've always thought that the successor of the Porsche will not be 1 year right behind it.

I'd be surprised if the new "proper" Technic supercar launches before the Porsche goes EOL. It's still selling like hotcakes, why potentially split the buyers into choosing one or the other when you can spread them out a bit more and tempt them into buying both?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one don't believe that any complaints are unfair to Lego. When I complain, I am merely using my right as a consumer to give Lego feedback about their products. Now, granted there is some whining, but in this case, I find the complaints to be justified. There really wasn't much hype about 42070, and it's not just that it doesn't live up to the expectations of the fans. In my mind, 42070 doesn't live up to the other flagship sets. Lego has proven that they can do large, RC vehicles with correct suspension, fully RC functions, whether with individual motors, or a remote controlled gearbox,  or sets that are fantastically complex, but not RC. But no, it awkwardly splits the difference. What's the point of having an RC model if the function selector has to be worked manually? Why not make it a fully manual model with all the complexity that entails? Why can't it have good suspension like 8110, or 9398, or 42043? Why can't it have a remote control gearbox to switch functions like 8043? These are not inflated expectations, these are precedents set by Lego themselves. And, I don't think it's up to Lego's flagship standards. 42069 is not that good either. It's kind of like that red pickup truck 42029, and with roughly the same functions. Ironically, I think 42069, as it is a tracked vehicle, would work better as an RC set than 42070. If that were the case, then both sets would be much better. Than, 42070 could have the complexity a flagship deserves, and 42069 would be RC, and more fun to use, since it doesn't have to be that complex anyway.

As a closing though, where/what is 42067? If Lego canceled that set, why not just move all of the sets above it a number down? That would put minds at ease, and stuff. Or, maybe it's a super pack, of the sets needed to build the car chassis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Saberwing40k said:

As a closing though, where/what is 42067? If Lego canceled that set, why not just move all of the sets above it a number down? That would put minds at ease, and stuff. Or, maybe it's a super pack, of the sets needed to build the car chassis.

They may use a PDM system which is more trouble than it is worth to change all the information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I strongly dislike the Claas, BWE, Volvo Ew160, Arocs...

I love the 2 new pullbacks ( 42058, 42059), the jet (42066), the tracked racer (42065) the fire truck(42068), and 42070. 

The point is, one man's poison is another man's pleasure. So yes, I do think complaining is wrong as it's all subjective. This year is better than last year IMHO.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that Lego does not want to cannibalise the sales of the great 2016 2H sets, that is why the 2017 2H are targetting a different younger audience. Time and sales figures will tell if this strategy works out. I'm pretty sure we will see the worthy successor of the Claas in 2018 2H. 

I do not think some discussion/criticism hurts. A forum with only fanboys would be rather boring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Jim said:

Amen brother. We have been getting new awesome parts, parts in new colors, new tires, etc, etc, etc. The only "mistake" TLG made is making 2016 freakishly awesome. That's hard to top. I must admit that I find the 2017 sets underwhelming myself, but that doesn't mean that I need to be negative over and over again. I agree that our stance towards TLG should definitely be more positive. 

That was the point I was trying to get to several pages ago...TLG burned all their powder in 2016 and set up 2017 for a let down.  They should have traded out one or two of the 2016 2H sets with one or two of 2017 2H sets.  Would have leveled out the expectations / let down issue going from 2016 to 2017.  In the bigger scheme of things, its not a big deal.  I just need to exercise self restraint and hold out on opening up my 42056 and 42053 sets until this summer so that I will have something new to build.  Longer term though, I would like to see some of these larger, AFOL sets have a formal option from LEGO on 31313 integration.  It seams that Mindstorms is off on its own little island once its released despite being mostly compatible with Technic...official support for PF would be nice though.  Mindstorms is fun to explore and tinker with but sometimes its nice to just check your brain at the door and follow some instructions which result in a cool creation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, WvG_853 said:

I do not think some discussion/criticism hurts. A forum with only fanboys would be rather boring.

I completely agree. Nothing wrong with criticism. But for me, critiscism means arguments to backup an opinion. Not just posting that something "sucks". 

At the moment I am not too fond of the Truck either, but what if you are a 10 year old kid and you get it for your birthday? You would be thrilled, right?! Besides that, a 6x6 Truck with big tyres is something totally different than yet another construction vehicle. So put things into perspective and appreciate what TLG is doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, WvG_853 said:

I suspect that Lego does not want to cannibalise the sales of the great 2016 2H sets, that is why the 2017 2H are targetting a different younger audience.

That is a really good point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as criticism is opinion based, not spoken like fact. I'm 50, not a 10 year-old, and I love this year's sets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And good for you, but you're saying that nobody can complain about these sets. Just as you have every right to like the sets you do, I have every right to dislike the sets I do, and discuss it on the forums. Also, who here as said their opinions as statements of fact? I'm not one of them.

 

Also, I don't think "But the kids will like it!" is any sort of justification for poor design. Putting more emphasis on playability, or other things, that's aiming at kids I can agree with. But if a set has compromised functionality, or slapped together design, there isn't an excuse for that. Also, why do people feel the need to defend Lego if somebody says "I don't like this." If I don't like a set, I won't pay my money for it, simple as that. It's not like Lego is a charity or anything. On the other hand, some people are a little bit out of touch with their expectations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HA!...the price of the Red #3 connectors are DROPPING!

http://www.ebay.ie/itm/262834722132?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

 

I really hope they release this part in Red as seen in the display model, but as others pointed out...the box art shows it as LBG, that part could be rather useful for modding and colour matching parts to parts etc.

14720.png

If anyone else spotted new parts or recolours...please post in the General Part Discussion thread.

Edited by Richard Dower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the parts will be red, as those are injection molded parts. Also, I've seen some high res photos via Barry Bosman's (aka Barman) Flickr stream. One of them is of the box for 42070, and in the center of the box is a small label that reads "Switch should be facing down", which indicates to me that the box art is still very much work in progress. 42069 is the same way, a part on the hood is yellow in the box art, but black on the model. Also, 42068 has some minor differences to 42051. In 42068, the seat are blue, instead of white, and the wheels have covers that 42051 lacks. Finally, I've noticed something very interesting about 42069. In a picture of it, I spy a U joint going to the front track. This means that it has actual four wheel drive, about time. So, is this set a sleeper hit, or still too simple? Unlike 42070, I think it's too early to tell.

Here are the pictures:

42070, and the lurking 42069:

32274670160_858d5c4e36.jpg42070-2 6x6 All Terrain Tow Truck by Barry Bosman, on Flickr

42070 box art:

31811097854_9dcda66f44.jpg42070-1 6x6 All Terrain Tow Truck by Barry Bosman, on Flickr

Bear has an eyepatch. :pir-sweet:

42069 box art:

32274670250_6556670e14.jpg42069-1 Extreme Adventure Vehicle by Barry Bosman, on Flickr

By the front left track, I spy the bottom of a shock absorber, meaning this model has both real and fake ones. Unlike 42038, it looks like the hubs will not be suited to mounting wheels, at least not right out of the box.

42068:

32613407106_69ba110b95.jpg42068-2 Airport Rescue Vehicle by Barry Bosman, on Flickr

42068 box art:

31811098134_220ffe6afb.jpg42068-1 Airport Rescue Vehicle by Barry Bosman, on Flickr

There we go, keep a look out, there might be new pieces lurking.

Edit:

I just found some pics on Promobricks, of 42069 with the doors open. All I can say is, wow:

lego-technic-42069_2.jpg

I fully did not expect the doors to open in that manner, with the butterfly upper segment, and a drop down lower segment ala 8466. I also see the 3x5 curved panel, behind the door. I also see a shock absorber, although I am not certain what kind. I think with the rim parts on either side of the shock, Lego is trying to evoke remote reservoir shocks, which would make sense for a vehicle of this kind. There is also a mystery gear lever, although what this does is not immediately clear. It looks offset to one side, so is it a gearbox? I dunno, I really want to see in the back. Things still don't quite add up, with the functionality of this set, but it might be a supercar in disguise.

Edited by Saberwing40k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.