Technic 2020 Set Discussion

[jonwil]

https://www.brickfanatics.com/design-flaw-did-not-influence-lego-technic-42113-bell-boeing-v-22-osprey-helicopter-decision/

That confirms that the design flaw was not the reason for cancelling the Osprey (and put to bed any suggestion that it might come back later with some fixes)

 

[Andman]

On 8/6/2020 at 3:19 AM, jonwil said:

https://www.brickfanatics.com/design-flaw-did-not-influence-lego-technic-42113-bell-boeing-v-22-osprey-helicopter-decision/

That confirms that the design flaw was not the reason for cancelling the Osprey (and put to bed any suggestion that it might come back later with some fixes)

 

I mean, what else should say write? "Uhm, we are sorry. The actual reason was a massive design flaw, but we used the protest as an excuse so we could cancel the set without having to admit that our QA process totally failed."?

According to a member (unfortunately only in german) of the protesters they started complaining in february and serveral times afterwards. No reaction from Lego at that point.of time according to them. It is of course possible that they canceled the set because the protest was made publicly and they feared bad PR. But then I'm questioning their own guidelines and their QA process. Do they follow them only as long as their is no bad PR appearing at the horizon? Do they even do QA? Some videos have shown that the gears were destroyed within half an hour. Has nobody at Lego played with this set? has no one tested it?

 

Edited August 7, 2020 by Andman

[howitzer]

7 hours ago, Andman said:

I mean, what else should say write? "Uhm, we are sorry. The actual reason was a massive design flaw, but we used the protest as an excuse so we could cancel the set without having to admit that our QA process totally failed."

According to a member (unfortunately only in german) of the protesters they started complaining in february and serveral times afterwards. No reaction from Lego at that point.of time according to them. It is of course possible that they canceled the set because the protest was made publicly and they feared bad PR. But then I'm questioning their own guidelines and their QA process. Do they follow them only as long as their is no bad PR appearing at the horizon? Do they even do QA? Some videos have shown that the gears were destroyed within half an hour. Has nobody at Lego played with this set? has no one tested it?

 

This is what I thought too when I heard about the design flaw. My guess is that the design flaw is what forced the withdrawal of the set but meanwhile they used their ethical guidelines as a public excuse to justify the withdrawal while hoping it would cast them in better light in the eyes of the public, as compared to situation where a recall would've had to been made due to the huge QA failure.

[Dylan M]

But why they let the store to sell the set that they have?if they're avoiding that flaws? 

Just asking ?

[Andman]

2 hours ago, Dylan M said:

But why they let the store to sell the set that they have?if they're avoiding that flaws? 

Just asking ?

Maybe the process of rolling back everything would have been too work- and cost-intensive? They don't have to avoid it. Because it was never officially released, they don't have to do anything about the design flaw. They can't be held for warranty, i assume.

But don't get me wrong. I'm not on a witch hunt. In the end it's sad but also concerning. Regardless which scenario is true. It always leaves a bad taste. Either regarding their own guidelines or their QA process.

Edited August 7, 2020 by Andman

[howitzer]

1 hour ago, Andman said:

Maybe the process of rolling back everything would have been too work- and cost-intensive? They don't have to avoid it. Because it was never officially released, they don't have to do anything about the design flaw. They can't be held for warranty, i assume.

But don't get me wrong. I'm not on witch hunt. In the end it's sad but also concerning. Regardless which scenario is true. It always leaves a bad taste. Either regarding their own guidelines or their QA process.

Funny thing, consumer protection of defective goods is still in effect, BUT I think it's the retailers who are going to be responsible for refunds. As the set was never officially released, it means the retailers sold whatever they sold without authorization from TLG and they could claim no responsibility for the flawed design.

But yeah, whatever the reason, TLG messed up big time here.

Of course probably no one will ask for a refund, considering most sets were apparently sold to AFOLs knowing what they were getting or people intending to make big money on secondary market.

[allanp]

How many sets have they released with design flaws due to mechanically unrealistic drive trains over the years (42009 outriggers, 8043 LAs, Sian gearbox)? They didn't cancel those. So I doubt the design flaw of the of 42113 was the reason for cancellation. 

[Jim]

4 hours ago, howitzer said:

Funny thing, consumer protection of defective goods is still in effect, BUT I think it's the retailers who are going to be responsible for refunds. As the set was never officially released, it means the retailers sold whatever they sold without authorization from TLG and they could claim no responsibility for the flawed design.

This is not correct. Retailers were allowed to sell the sets they received. And TLG will take responsibility when it comes to breaking parts etc.

2 hours ago, allanp said:

So I doubt the design flaw of the of 42113 was the reason for cancellation. 

Indeed, it was not. The sole reason for cancelling the set was the military reason (allegedly).

[AVCampos]

15 minutes ago, Jim said:

And TLG will take responsibility when it comes to breaking parts etc.

That means the Osprey-exclusive parts will have to be available to Customer Support, which in turn might mean they'll appear at BAP.

[Jim]

7 minutes ago, AVCampos said:

That means the Osprey-exclusive parts will have to be available to Customer Support, which in turn might mean they'll appear at BAP.

That would be great.

[Chmashdehjare]

Darn it about the Osprey.  It was the only 2H Technic set I had my eyes on.

Oh well, leaves me room in the budget to finally pick up 42082.  Haven't seen it at a reduced price in the USA so may have to bite the bullet on full price (assuming it comes back in stock at shop.lego.com).  Is it easily available outside USA?

 

Edited August 8, 2020 by Chmashdehjare

[konryd]

On 8/7/2020 at 1:17 PM, allanp said:

How many sets have they released with design flaws due to mechanically unrealistic drive trains over the years (42009 outriggers, 8043 LAs, Sian gearbox)? They didn't cancel those. So I doubt the design flaw of the of 42113 was the reason for cancellation. 

Wait, what's wrong with Sian's gearbox,?

[MarkyMark42]

On 8/7/2020 at 10:08 PM, AVCampos said:

That means the Osprey-exclusive parts will have to be available to Customer Support, which in turn might mean they'll appear at BAP.

Maybe, but at the end of the day I'm sure these parts will not remain "Osprey exclusive" and will appear in future sets. As soon as 1H 2021 would be my guess

[allanp]

5 hours ago, konryd said:

Wait, what's wrong with Sian's gearbox,?

There have been reports here of the gearbox having too much friction and even locking up/breaking gears in certain gears.

[AVCampos]

4 hours ago, MarkyMark42 said:

Maybe, but at the end of the day I'm sure these parts will not remain "Osprey exclusive" and will appear in future sets. As soon as 1H 2021 would be my guess

I'm not sure about the elements (design + colour), but I have no doubt at all that we'll see the designs used again: moulds for plastic injection are expensive and, once TLG make one, they'll want to make the most of it.

[Vectormatic]

21 hours ago, allanp said:

There have been reports here of the gearbox having too much friction and even locking up/breaking gears in certain gears. 

Wow, seriously? I can deal with stuff like inaccurate designs, wrong shift orders etc.. but to the point of breaking parts?

 

Looks like Lego is seriously screwing up with Technic lately, the porsche and bugatti were pushing the limit of what can be done with the medium, it seems sets like the Osprey and Sian are going well over that line, and then there are the weak designs prone to malfunctions when built without extreme care, such as the defender. Then there are sets like 42077 and 42096, which compared to their predecessors are all style and no substance.

I have to say, i think the Ducati was my last technic buy for a while, i dont care about a set leaving something to be desired, but if there are fundamental issues to the point where if my kid built it, they could/would end up with a non-functional or broken result, that is a hard pass for me.

[howitzer]

When I first read reviews and other experiences about Sian I got the impression that functionally it's essentially the same as Bugatti, except designed better, so I'm a bit surprised to see complaints about Sian's gearbox etc. now couple of months after release. I don't own either set nor I plan to as they are not interesting to me but both are meant to represent the pinnacle of Technic design so I do follow the commentary on their features and flaws. Land Rover on the other hand was from the start noted to have serious issues in its gearbox and the serious flaw in Osprey gearbox indicates there's something amiss in the Technic department of TLG. The concrete mixer appears to be pretty adequate average set with no obvious flaws, though it left something to desire in detailing. Volvo hauler seems to have some issues too, but it surprised with its innovative gearbox, though apparently the software could be better (calibration issues etc.) Ducati is almost universally praised even if it also has some minor flaws.

Hopefully next year we see something that's both innovative and well designed, like the Liebherr last year (the price tag prevented me from getting that one though.) I just bought me a Saturn V in misb condition and a second Arocs, both at bargain price, so I don't think I'm going to get any of the new Technic releases this year. I was going to get the Osprey, but we all know how well that went.

[Vectormatic]

1 hour ago, howitzer said:

 Ducati is almost universally praised even if it also has some minor flaws.

 

I think the reason for that is that the Ducati stays well within the possibilities of the medium, at that size/weight, no parts are going to end up with serious friction or load on them. The part count might be twice/thrice that or a motorcycle from technics early years, but it is still in the same ballpark of complexity, size and weight. Scale it all up to a 4000 part 4kg behemoth of a car with 20 gear meshes between wheel and engine, and everything falls apart rather badly.

Ever since sets like 42037, 42036, 42074 and the like ive been convinced that while the big sets like the porsche, the monstrous cranes etc.. are very cool, the best and most true technic sets are the €40-100 range, that is where the system still works, and we still get stuff like full suspension, gearboxes which demonstrate the principle etc.. Much like the sets which taught me mechanical stuff when i was a kid, plus the playability is often right on par, since there are no overloaded hand controls where you either have to crank enlessly to move something, or the mechanism cant really handle the strain.

[Jundis]

8 minutes ago, vectormatic said:

Ever since sets like 42037, 42036, 42074 and the like ive been convinced that while the big sets like the porsche, the monstrous cranes etc.. are very cool, the best and most true technic sets are the €40-100 range, that is where the system still works, and we still get stuff like full suspension, gearboxes which demonstrate the principle etc.

I second that, although the models with electric components are all above that price, beginning with like 120€. The PU dumb battery box really has potential for such sets with 1 or 2 motors. I also really hope they bring back the pneumatics in 2021.

[howitzer]

7 minutes ago, vectormatic said:

I think the reason for that is that the Ducati stays well within the possibilities of the medium, at that size/weight, no parts are going to end up with serious friction or load on them. The part count might be twice/thrice that or a motorcycle from technics early years, but it is still in the same ballpark of complexity, size and weight. Scale it all up to a 4000 part 4kg behemoth of a car with 20 gear meshes between wheel and engine, and everything falls apart rather badly.

Ever since sets like 42037, 42036, 42074 and the like ive been convinced that while the big sets like the porsche, the monstrous cranes etc.. are very cool, the best and most true technic sets are the €40-100 range, that is where the system still works, and we still get stuff like full suspension, gearboxes which demonstrate the principle etc.. Much like the sets which taught me mechanical stuff when i was a kid, plus the playability is often right on par, since there are no overloaded hand controls where you either have to crank enlessly to move something, or the mechanism cant really handle the strain.

It's not so black and white though if you look at the three biggest sets ever: 42082 works very well and I understand that 42100 is also very much functional and playable. 42055 is also a marvel of Technic engineering, even if it requires careful construction to work (and even then has its problems, but at least nothing breaks even if it jams). Then you have also 42043 which is widely regarded as one of the all-time best Technic sets and is also quite large. The technical problems seem to be concentrated on the largest car sets, while some of the mid-size car sets (like the 42077 and 42096 you mentioned) are functionally quite boring. 42111 on the other hand seems pretty good set even if the subtle curves would be better rendered in System. 42109 is apparently quite functional, though it is absurdly expensive and not that great looking. Everything you said about the Ducati is true though.

As for other machinery, it's not all roses in the mid-tier either, as operating the 42097 would also be endless knob-turning and the outriggers were a joke. 42108 is a bit underwhelming even if it's functionally adequate.

2 minutes ago, Jundis said:

I second that, although the models with electric components are all above that price, beginning with like 120€. The PU dumb battery box really has potential for such sets with 1 or 2 motors. I also really hope they bring back the pneumatics in 2021.

Yeah, pneumatics is where Technic really shines and the dumb battery box is needed badly. A set combining these with a compressor would be really great, and even greater if it included the 1x11 cylinder.

[Bartybum]

24 minutes ago, howitzer said:

Then you have also 42043 which is widely regarded as one of the all-time best Technic sets and is also quite large.

Careful with this one though, the turntable slewing is just flat out badly designed and picks up too much friction over time

[Maaboo the Witch]

42 minutes ago, howitzer said:

42108 is a bit underwhelming even if it's functionally adequate.

I only bought 42108 because I didn't already have a mobile crane. That, and I prefer the styling to previous versions.

2020, as with everything else, has been a lacklustre year for Technic. Roll on 1H2021...

...although based on the crappy trends we've seen recently, I'm not optimistic about it.

Edited August 10, 2020 by Maaboo35

[allanp]

8 hours ago, vectormatic said:

Wow, seriously? I can deal with stuff like inaccurate designs, wrong shift orders etc.. but to the point of breaking parts?

 

Looks like Lego is seriously screwing up with Technic lately, the porsche and bugatti were pushing the limit of what can be done with the medium, it seems sets like the Osprey and Sian are going well over that line, and then there are the weak designs prone to malfunctions when built without extreme care, such as the defender. Then there are sets like 42077 and 42096, which compared to their predecessors are all style and no substance.

I have to say, i think the Ducati was my last technic buy for a while, i dont care about a set leaving something to be desired, but if there are fundamental issues to the point where if my kid built it, they could/would end up with a non-functional or broken result, that is a hard pass for me.

Yeah in the Sian threads there are the complaints. However there are several Sian threads. There was a lengthy discussion somewhere about the cause of the issue but I can't find it now.

I think you are half correct when talking about the limits of the medium. They are pushing past the limits if we only consider the current parts assortment. However if we are allowed to think if new parts then we are nowhere near the limits. In this case an 8 speed gearbox can be done very easily, simply and reliably.

[howitzer]

12 hours ago, Bartybum said:

Careful with this one though, the turntable slewing is just flat out badly designed and picks up too much friction over time

Hmm, I never had any problems with it. Of course it's not exactly swift in turning and you have to be very careful with all the hosing, but that's what you get when you route 8 hoses through it. I'm not sure how it could be done better... As I understand, the Unimog had similar problem except much worse, and Arocs was praised on improving the slewing so it's actually usable?

[Bartybum]

@howitzer All I can say is that it used to slew, then it stopped slewing after sitting on a shelf. I've rebuilt it, and no matter how the hoses are organised, the slewing is not good.

As far as I can tell, the issue is that the turntable doesn't mesh well with the 12t gear at 90 degrees - it's something to do with the tolerances of the turntable's assembly. I'm trying to modify it at the moment to replace the two 12:20 gear sets with a worm gear