42096 Porsche 911 RSR

[jorgeopesi]

I like this car, I'm really afraid of becoming a collector  .

[efferman]

Is this a 1x6 thick liftarm on the front mudguards or two 0,5x6 liftarms.looks like a thick one

[1gor]

Looks like 2 thin 0.5 X 6 liftarms, or it is bent liftarms, but it has this in white. And this one could be in black.

Edited November 20, 2018 by I_Igor

[zoo]

In my view, there is a slight problem with just shortening the 42056 fender panel (I believe length is the only difference) in that there might be increasingly difficult to create a low hoodline when building in a smaller scale.

[Yevhen]

Could the car have functions, that aren't shown on the rear side of the box?

Someone said the car has suspension, even though the feature is not present on the pictures.

Edited November 20, 2018 by Yevhen

[Frequenzberater]

Are those motorblocks new molds? Is it me or are they looking unusual? 

[Vectormatic]

17 minutes ago, Frequenzberater said:

Are those motorblocks new molds? Is it me or are they looking unusual? 

Good eye!

I checked two of my cylinders, the older one (Ferrari enzo, so ~10 years) has a slit in the gallery for the pins, the newer one (go kart, i think 42048) has a solid gallery but a slit in the cylinder skirt under the gallery (42077, my most recent set has the same skirt slit), the pics of this porsche have neither, so solid gallery and solid cylinder wall

I always thought this part was the same from almost 30 years ago, turns out i was wrong, and indeed we are getting a new mold next year

 

EDIT: checked the porsche pic again, they have the same cylinder wall slit... so could be the same mold as recent technic sets

Edited November 20, 2018 by vectormatic

[1gor]

It looks a bit unusual from below

Edited November 20, 2018 by I_Igor

[pleegwat]

2 hours ago, Jurss said:

I think those are stickers, as I can see edge of the sticker

Is this even the same arch piece we're familiar with? The one I've got fits an 11 hole beam between the two pinholes at the top. The photo is hard to estimate but I'm pretty sure it's 9.

If this is a smaller piece it may well also be shaped to allow stickering.

[Thirdwigg]

@pleegwat see page one. It seems it is new.

[Erik Leppen]

Nice set. But not Technic.

I can imagine the disappointed parents that bought their children a really cool-looking car with a Technic logo on it for their child, expecting him to really like to learn a bit on how a supercar works, and when they ask their child to show all the functions it can only say "er, it rolls and the pistons move...", that'll probably be their last Technic set for a while.

I'd actually go as far to say a Technic set with no functions damages the Technic brand. I mean, if it's not functions, what else is Technic's unique selling point? I always view(ed) the Technic buliding system purely as a super efficient way to build light, strong, functional models, but apparently, studless building can be, according to TLC, a goal by itself...

As for the set itself, I like the looks, it looks very agressive, which I like. I particularly like the lower rear end,. The nose seems a bit long, but I think I actually like it too. Also, the color scheme looks cool too. I would hope the wheel arches are printed, that would make them more useful.

But yeah. All I wish for this set is to be rebranded as Racers. Then, it's a very nice good looking car.

[rm8]

2 hours ago, Yevhen said:

This is rather a Lego Creator set made of technic parts, than a pure Technic supercar.

I am kinda glad the h1 sets are so weak. Now I can use my limited budget on a red crane.

Can’t agree with you. One loves functions, another Technic design, third prefer base for own mods. 

And what is LEGO creator? you better go and watch creator sets first. This is pure modern Technic set with look over finctions, and without “stupid WOW"  functions 

[efferman]

It isnt a bent liftarm, and i see no border line between two half liftarms

.

Edited November 21, 2018 by efferman

[Vectormatic]

2 hours ago, Yevhen said:

Could the car have functions, that aren't shown on the rear side of the box?

Someone said the car has suspension, even though the feature is not present on the pictures.

The description text mentions independent suspension

 

I wouldnt expect too much otherwise, this is a licensed set after all, and it can eclipse the gt3rs at half price

[Shiva]

I do like the looks of this set.

For those that want more functions.... Add them yourselves. Ain't that part of the fun?

[Bartybum]

5 hours ago, Erik Leppen said:

 

Nice set. But not Technic.

I can imagine the disappointed parents that bought their children a really cool-looking car with a Technic logo on it for their child, expecting him to really like to learn a bit on how a supercar works, and when they ask their child to show all the functions it can only say "er, it rolls and the pistons move...", that'll probably be their last Technic set for a while.

 

Eh I think you’re pushing it quite a bit there. The kid will be happy they have a big race car and that’s the extent to which I think the parent will care.

[Saberwing40k]

1 hour ago, Bartybum said:

Eh I think you’re pushing it quite a bit there. The kid will be happy they have a big race car and that’s the extent to which I think the parent will care.

No, Erik got it right. Anybody who wants a big racecar would be disappointed by the looks, and any kid who would want a Technic set would be disappointed by the lack of complexity. It needed to be a Racers set.

 

This thing makes me mad. Lego seems to have forgotten what Technic is all about. This thing has no functions, and does not look that good. It feels sloppy and unfinished.

I'm also tired of people trotting out the old "It's for kids, they won't care." What is your opinion? Also, whatever happened to Lego saying that only the best is good enough? This set does not fit into that ethos at all.

[Bartybum]

52 minutes ago, Saberwing40k said:

I'm also tired of people trotting out the old "It's for kids, they won't care." What is your opinion?

My opinion is that saying the average parent is going to be disappointed by the lack of a gearbox is unfounded.

The main selling point of this set is that it’s a race car, i.e. massive spoiler, body kit, cool colour scheme, looks fast, Porsche. Most parents who buy their kids this are gonna look at it and think “hell yes my kid will love this, he/she likes race cars.” They’re not gonna go “oh god damn it doesn’t have a gearbox what the hell Timmy isn’t gonna be happy with this.”

There’s a bit of nuance here. I’m NOT excusing the lack of a gearbox with “the kids won’t care”. In fact I also think this set should have come with a gearbox, and I think it would have been cool to have a gearbox in a set that kids might get. However, I cannot accept the logic that the average parent will be disappointed by the lack of a gearbox. I think the group of parents that will are VERY few in number, and so arguing that many parents will be disappointed is - as far as I'm concerned - simply untrue.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Bartybum

[Paul Boratko]

I guess that I am in the minority here in that I am pretty impressed what Lego managed to pull off with the amount of parts that they did... I also don't see how this would be considered a Racers set... Nathanael's 8674 Ferrari F1 got tagged with that label(even though I felt that was about as Technic as it gets) but what other Racers set had suspension and a working steering wheel..? How many functions does a model need to have to make it considered to be Technic..? When we first heard about this set coming out and that it was only $150, did anyone expect it to have a gearbox..? I certainly didn't... I expected pretty much exactly what we got... A 1:10 scale model with the usual functions...

If I was a kid and got this set as a gift, I would be stoked...

Edited November 21, 2018 by Paul Boratko

[Yevhen]

1 hour ago, Paul Boratko said:

When we first heard about this set coming out and that it was only $150, did anyone expect it to have a gearbox..?

Yes, I did expect it would have at least two additional functions alongside steering, suspension and the fake engine.

I can't believe, why are so many people here justifying the fact, that the [super]car is so unfinished?

Why did Claas have 10 functions and electric motor for the same price?

My opinion: they should have set a simple 4 gear box and it would be enough. 

Edited November 21, 2018 by Yevhen

[Jurss]

16 hours ago, Ngoc Nguyen said:

This collectible toy

... from official description

[Void_S]

9 hours ago, pleegwat said:

If this is a smaller piece it may well also be shaped to allow stickering.

 Bingo! I rolled the same thing in my mind looking at 42093 Corvette ZR-1's new arches - they are very flat and I can't say that they are bi-curved, more single curved like normal curved panels but with a hole for a wheel. So, if we do have a new arch here (that it 99% proven), it could be done in the same manner - single curved, and the stickers could be applied with no any troubles.

[Jurss]

I looked on pictures form back, and also started to think, that those are indeed printed :( , that edge what I thought is not form sticker, it is from mold. 

[Paul Boratko]

44 minutes ago, Yevhen said:

Yes, I did expect it would have at least two additional functions alongside steering, suspension and the fake engine.

I can't believe, why are so many people here justifying the fact, that the [super]car is so unfinished?

Why did Claas have 10 functions and electric motor for the same price?

My opinion: they should have set a simple 4 gear box and it would be enough. 

The Class was more expensive, not to mention, had 400 more parts... It also had no real body style to worry about, so the functions were easier to Incorporate...

IMO, a 4 speed gearbox in this set would not have been enough because after the Bugatti, a 4 speed in a car that traditionally has more than 4 speeds is going backwards....

And what do you mean by it is "unfinished" ? And  who has named this a "Supercar" ? This is just a $150 1:10 scale set...

[WvG_853]

No B Model!