Ngoc Nguyen

42099 - 4x4 X-treme Off-Roader

Recommended Posts

I am currently travelling, so I can only answer from the top of my head. Like Igor said, hubs are already preassembled and lubricated, I have no idea what's inside, but my best guess is they are using same planetary gears as new motors use for gear reduction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gzynek2323 said:

Appreciate the guidance.  This is exactly what makes this forum so useful, it's the users that take their time. Thanks

You're welcome :classic:

regards

5 hours ago, Zerobricks said:

I am currently travelling, so I can only answer from the top of my head. Like Igor said, hubs are already preassembled and lubricated, I have no idea what's inside, but my best guess is they are using same planetary gears as new motors use for gear reduction.

Enjoy your trip :classic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bartybum said:

Such as?

Just read the forum, there are a few people that moan about everything.. negative, negative negative. Piece count, colour vomit, colour choice, poor function count, poor function operation etc etc... you'd think they'd get a different hobby as from their posts, they don't seem to like lego. Fortunately they're the minority.. and it doesn't influence my decisions, but, it does wear a bit thin. Its the curse of the entitled millennial

And a point i've made before, is that the moaners are always the loudest (on the forum and in real life..), and it must sometimes be very disheartening for the guys at Lego to do such an awesome job creating this amazing product and sets that are brilliant.. and all they see is the negativity. I don't love every set, and i find the price of the new sets a bit salty, but i still love what TLG are doing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
Just now, TeamThrifty said:

Just read the forum, there are a few people that moan about everything.. negative, negative negative. Piece count, colour vomit, colour choice, poor function count, poor function operation etc etc...

I know what you mean.

I only really moan if a part design could be better.

If theres a set I'm not interested in such as a pullback set (btw I'm buying all of the 2h and 3h technic sets this year so this is not a specific example) I simply just don't buy it, but I understand why they are there.

Part design is what makes Lego Lego though so yeah, the number one rule is compatability with other parts. That is the Lego system.

With the new CV joints it is not so bad because it still has a better type of axle hole on the female half,  So while they are not compatible with regular technic ball joints they are still fairly compabable and also stronger than the old CV joints.

I hope it is not too off topic to talk about the new parts in this thread. :wink:

 

Edited by SNIPE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, SNIPE said:

I hope it is not too off topic to talk about the new parts in this thread. :wink:

Not if they're part of the set, I'm thinking.

Share this post


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

And a point i've made before, is that the moaners are always the loudest (on the forum and in real life..), and it must sometimes be very disheartening for the guys at Lego to do such an awesome job creating this amazing product and sets that are brilliant.. and all they see is the negativity. I don't love every set, and i find the price of the new sets a bit salty, but i still love what TLG are doing. 

Amen to that:) Lad from the British Isles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, TeamThrifty said:

Just read the forum, there are a few people that moan about everything.. negative, negative negative. Piece count, colour vomit, colour choice, poor function count, poor function operation etc etc... you'd think they'd get a different hobby as from their posts, they don't seem to like lego. Fortunately they're the minority.. and it doesn't influence my decisions, but, it does wear a bit thin. Its the curse of the entitled millennial

Pump the brakes dude. If you're gonna go ahead and blanket-blame an ENTIRE generation, choose your arguments damn wisely. And then bring those arguments to the table - don't make me go look for them myself.

What you've just described above is perfectly valid criticism of a set. If a premium product doesn't function properly, has poor function counts and is thought to look ugly, why should people shut up about it? If they bother you, then you need to grow thicker skin pal. I haven't seen anything here that I'd call entitled complaining.

Am I entitled for having wanted this set to include live axle suspension, and then being disappointed that it didn't? Am I entitled for saying that I'm no longer gonna buy it? Stop being lazy and blaming generations, you only further fuel societal divide.

Edited by Bartybum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My main motivation is to add vocal support to what TLG are doing for technic. those of us that had 851 in 1979 could never have dreamed we'd have something this amazing - and that it would last and evolve for 40 years. Its a rare and beautiful thing, and we should say it more often - the loudest message shouldn't be the negative waves ((c) Oddball, kelly's heroes)

Here's a snippet of a post from a few pages back on this very thread..

"I didn't expect much from the start, but honestly it's just pathetic now....  another color/sticker barf... a brand new electrics system that not only hasn't improved anything except the control range, but now uses an unnecessarily big battery box and terrible connector."

Now, to me, this is a great example of none-constructive/objective moaning. Your description of wanting a live axle is typed and put  across very reasonably, the snippet above is the kind of thing i find frustrating to read.. its not even factually correct! i'm fairly sure control+ does bring new stuff to party!!

My reason for commenting on this kind of stuff isn't cos my skin isn't thick enough, believe me, to be blunt - i love lego and couldn't actually care less what others think!! - its because the negativity needs a counter-weight. If people blurt out unsubstantiated negative stuff, someone needs to 'pump their brakes' and say Lego is Brilliant! and say it as loudly as the detractors.

Reasoned debate is brilliant, and everyone has an equal right to put forward their opinion, and when the debate is logical i enjoy reading the conflicting sides - and often find myself agreeing with both! - but not the 'everythings crap, i could do better' rants

42082 was subject to massive negativity about its part count - several very vocal members of this forum were going to prove how TLG got it wrong and would build 2500 part version that was at least as good as the official set.... the very loud voices didn't produce a single moc to 'prove' anything, presumably they just wanted to moan loudly and achieve nothing. This is mentality that my comments are aimed at...

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, TeamThrifty said:

snip

In that comment's defense, the only unreasonable things they've said are that C+ brings nothing to the table, and that the battery box is unreasonably large. Colour/sticker vomit and bad connector systems are a valid concern. I'm happy to concede for now though, as long as you don't go blaming individual generations for this behaviour. All generations exhibit entitled behaviour, because there's shitty people everywhere.

Edited by Bartybum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Bartybum said:

there's shitty people everywhere

Very true... maybe the social media platforms make it seem worse recently, previous generations didn't have that 'luxury'! I will also concede that point :classic: - my intention was purely the defence of lego 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you."
Friedrich Nietzsche

:wink:

I don't really get this part of the discussion, I checked back some pages, and all I see: OPINIONS. I don't think any of the opinion should be hidden, and each are evenly valid and important as feedback - which is a worthy input for TLG and they do profit from this. I don't think TLG must be defended, they do what they think the best, the market evaluates afterwards - each one on his/her own. What about just tolerate different opinions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, agrof said:

I don't think TLG must be defended

I wasn't defending - see below..

 

1 hour ago, TeamThrifty said:

its because the negativity needs a counter-weight

in the interests of balance, i was putting forward the alternative to the loud negativity.. in all walks of life, forums, politics etc, the positive point of view is usually the quietest. I don't think thats a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, TeamThrifty said:

My main motivation is to add vocal support to what TLG are doing for technic. those of us that had 851 in 1979 could never have dreamed we'd have something this amazing - and that it would last and evolve for 40 years. Its a rare and beautiful thing, and we should say it more often - the loudest message shouldn't be the negative waves ((c) Oddball, kelly's heroes)

Exactly how I feel about it. Besides that; TLG is the #1 toy company, so they probably know a thing or two about producing and selling toys :classic:

While it’s a fascinating discussion, maybe it’s time to move the focus back to the actual set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, TeamThrifty said:

*snip*

I know perfectly that I'm a terrible person, but that is MY opinion. You can agree or not with it. I build MOCs in a different way than lego sets and haven't bought a new set in 3 years, only spare parts. having a hobby doesn't automatically mean liking everything everyone does, including "official stuff". I love BuWizz and overpowered motors (or something built very well to run off only m-motors without having bad performance) but not toys sold in the Technic line.

Pardon me @Jim , seen your comment posted.

In regards of the set after some cooling down and processing:

As a parts pack or starter set, not bad albeit looks to be expensive. Can't say much more about PU without the app (and hopefully, someday) a remote. Would've been nice to get some large hard springs as they're very expensive nowadays, but there is already a large new part selection in the set. The planetary reduction hubs probably mean that portal hubs will never make an appearance again ( unless required by vehicle type) as their reduction is the maximal that portals offered. The weird square (crackers?) liftarms are a nice addition, reminds me of Bionicle technic frames and have already proven useful in planetary hubs with "old" turntables. CV joint are a welcome improvement for large vehicles, specially the larger axle at the end of the female joint and 1 stud deep axle hole on male. 

Tbh I hope 2020 will continue the RC under 100$ trend but with a car this time, not just track steering - PU seems to allow easy return to center steering without bulky servo. Would be nice to see new parts implemented there or any other set to make them more accessible.

Edited by syclone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with this set for me extends to the whole Lego thing in general and Technic in particular. They try to cover different markets with a single line of products.

My inner children thinks is amazing, as an adult I value the reduction hubs but feel pretty unimpressed by C+ performance. No better than PF, no better than RC buggy motor.

Honestly I believe TLG does not know what to do with AFOLs, getting very confused about their identity as a toy maker, they wont commit to a truly AFOL series of parts or sets and in the end kind of equate AFOL= BIG while for example gimping on motor performance because the children.

The funny thing is that many people like me got no room for more sets hence becoming very critical cause anything below outstanding wastes space, and more interested on new parts (I was very expectant of C+... now not so much). 

I reckon they need to create a "Technic Pro" line so they can move the AFOL thing away from their regular line of sets. And how is possible that they still din't start a GBC line btw.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to mention about the overall performance on the vehicle. I think the heavy big tires are doing a big part for that little power. When I got the 42082 AT Crane I put those wheels on my buggy with the supersonic RC Setup. (2 Buggy Motors and RC Module)

With the normal wheels it had the buggy was very fast and accelerated quickly. But the wheels from the crane were so big and heavy that it was nearly impossible to get the buggy any headway.

 These where the original wheels:45982 which I replaced then with the crane wheels.

  250x250p.jpg?1561409209.734406 

And the Tires the crawler here has are also very heavy. Maybe if we put the tires from 9398 on it it will be much better. What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

i think the radius of the original tyre is about 81mm (?) and the 42082 tyre is 94.. thats roughly a 15% increase in the radius, and the radius is the length of lever the motor has to turn, so small wheels will always increase the motor's ability to accelerate it. Wheel weight will have an effect too, as its mass that needs to be accelerated, but i the radius is the biggest factor between those 2 wheels (rpm at the wheel is pretty low, so the effect of accelerating the mass will be negligible)

gear it down by an extra 15% and you'll have the same performance as the original, but with bigger tyres...

Don't gear it down by 15%... thats the radius, circumference is the relevant length! Use pi to get the correct percentage!!

 

Edited by TeamThrifty
clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Robin_IV said:

*snip*

The weight difference in between the two is 58 vs 81g which is roughly 90 gramms less in total, but a major problem as mentioned above is the diameter - 94.8 to 107mm or a difference of almost 2 studs, reducing the front height from 3 to just 2 studs. Only thing needed is a proper gear reduction - the model seems too fast for a crawler of that size.

Source for wheel data: http://wheels.sariel.pl/ 

Edited by syclone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey look, we have the official price, $250 USD. It's up for preorder on Lego.com. We also have the official part count, 958.

Wait, what?

Figuring 10 cents per part, this set would be roughly $100 on its own, leaving $150 for the PU components. Equivalent PF components would only cost $85 which means that the PU "Upgrade" costs us $65. Is PU worth the extra money? I honestly don't think so. Here's what you gain with Powered Up versus Power Functions:

  1. Bluetooth range and resistance to sunlight.

And here are the downsides of Powered Up

  1. No ability to stack motors.
  2. No backwards compatability
  3. More expensive parts
  4. Larger, bulkier motors, especially considering the fact that they also apparently have lower power.
  5. No physical controller.
  6. Bulkier receiver/control module
  7. Unneeded/unwanted extra features.

Okay, the last point is kind of debatable, but I do not think that Powered Up is a well though out system. For Mindstorms, Boost, et al, this system works just fine. But, as a replacement for Power Functions, it seems like a really stupid idea, and I just can not understand Lego's reasoning behind doing it this way. You would think it would be cheaper and easier to make a 2.4ghz or bluetooth controller and receiver for Power Functions, and leave Powered Up for robotics systems, but no, there can only be one ecosystem, even if it does not work well for certain applications. There was also, at least in my mind, not any community involvement, unlike Power functions, which saw Lego asking fans what they wanted out of Power Functions.

But, Most of my problems are with Powered Up, and the baffling decesions and higher cost that it brings, rather than the set itself.

With the set itself, it's... okay, I guess. I majorly dislike the fact that it has both pendular and independent front suspension, which seems to be an unneeded feature which just makes the set look worse. It would have been all too easy to give the set more suspension travel, using the same wishbone pieces as it already does, just by changing mounting points and using the longer 9.5l shock absorbers. That's another thing. I dislike the fact that Lego wasted a perfect oppertunity to put out more shock absorbers, because a lot of moccers need them, but they are rare and expensive.

Honestly, the set is okay, but I think that at a premium price, just okay is not enough. And that's not even touching the whole argument about RC sets in general.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Akbalder said:

230€ in France. We will have to wait for a really big sale before buying it. 

and in Poland it costs even more ~ 235€ (1000PLN) - just  great ;/

How I shuold not be pissed?

Data from december 2018:

Average month salary in France: 3137,34€ and 42099 cost 230€

Average month salary in Poland: 982,32€ and 42099 cost 235€

I know I know - "Go to better job and earn more" and believe me, I do, but still this prices pissing me off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

:roflmao: You can get a MISB 9398 AND still have at least 30$ left for this price. Or get a used 9398 and upgrade it w/ BuWizz lmao.

or for some more money get a limited edition 41999 of which there are ONLY 20000. 

Edited by syclone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Saberwing40k said:

Hey look, we have the official price, $250 USD. It's up for preorder on Lego.com. We also have the official part count, 958.

Wait, what?

Figuring 10 cents per part, this set would be roughly $100 on its own, leaving $150 for the PU components. Equivalent PF components would only cost $85 which means that the PU "Upgrade" costs us $65. Is PU worth the extra money? I honestly don't think so.

 

 

I am not a fan of the set but in efforts to be fair and balanced the whole price per piece argument really needs to die.  I have pointed this out, as well as others, that the correlation between a sets weight and price is much higher than a sets piece count and price.  The latter really is an outdated and inaccurate measurement of a sets cost.  Think overall amount of ABS (or, in this case, other material) not just piece count. Also, you really are extrapolating here.  You haven't even considered the new elements (aside from power up elements).  The new hubs, etc. are gonna be pricey people.  I don't work even remotely in the field and even I understand this one principle.  R & D is expensive folks.  For TLG, R & D is akin to coming out with a whole new power system.  Not to mention new elements.  I don't think it can be compared to old sets in any way that carries validity. 

On 7/9/2019 at 1:16 PM, syclone said:

The weight difference in between the two is 58 vs 81g which is roughly 90 gramms less in total, but a major problem as mentioned above is the diameter - 94.8 to 107mm or a difference of almost 2 studs, reducing the front height from 3 to just 2 studs. Only thing needed is a proper gear reduction - the model seems too fast for a crawler of that size.

Source for wheel data: http://wheels.sariel.pl/ 

Yes, my thoughts exactly.  I have built several crawlers, no need to repost them here.... but have used 2.2 RC tires.  2.2 tires are much bigger and heaviier than those on this set,

14751875851_DISPLAY.jpg

 

and with two XL motors my crawlers have performed just fine.  Outperformed 42099 big time.  But, the were also geared down much more.  Much slower (except for my PunkTaco NYC version, which was BuWizz powered).  

Edited by nerdsforprez

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oof, this price seems quite steep. Figuring about $0.16pp AUD for the parts alone (fairly standard), 958 parts without PF/C+ would cost ~$155, meaning there's $225 worth of electronics here. I'm really starting to worry that 42100 is gonna encroach on the $900+ mark *oh2*:cry_sad:, since it's got over twice as many electronics, and four times the parts. I'm straight up not prepared to fork out that much for a few extra play functions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Bartybum said:

Oof, this price seems quite steep. Figuring about $0.16pp AUD for the parts alone (fairly standard), 958 parts without PF/C+ would cost ~$155, meaning there's $225 worth of electronics here. I'm really starting to worry that 42100 is gonna encroach on the $900+ mark *oh2*:cry_sad:, since it's got over twice as many electronics, and four times the parts. I'm straight up not prepared to fork out that much for a few extra play functions.

If 42100 has the same exchange rate, it should be about $745 AUD.

 

42099 = 230€

42100 = 450€

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.