Technic 2020 Set Discussion

[jorgeopesi]

12 minutes ago, Cumulonimbus said:

 

I would not say it better even in my spanish.

[Vectormatic]

@Cumulonimbus

And if i may add a fifth point, i think that while technic used to be not only creative, but also educational, recently i feel like lego is straying from technical accuracy in some cases to the point where the mechanisms in the set no longer demonstrate the working principal of the real machine, case in point, the mini fake engine. The traditional fake engine was always a bit lacking as it doesnt introduce concepts such as valves/cams, and the crank configuration rules out accurate boxers, or anything beyond a flat plane crank, but at least it gets the basic concept of a cylinder, piston and crank assembly correct, and allows a kid to get a feeling for how a combustion engine works. A set like 42075 teaches a kid the basics of a car, it has an engine, a diff, suspension with a u-joint and steering.

Then take a set like 42093, yes, it still has steering, but in a much less accurate way. It doesnt have suspension, and while it does have a diff, the engine is just plain wrong. It doesnt teach the concept of how a piston/crank assembly generates power, the whole half-bush on axle assembly is quite sensitive to miss-tuning (move the half-bush a mm up or down and see how the engine runs...), so it's a) not kid-assembly friendly and b) teaches nothing, or even worse, the wrong thing.

And for what benefit? supposedly 93 looks like a real life sportscar...

As both an AFOL/petrolhead and a parent, i think 75 is far superior, it would teach my kid more, and as a big red firetruck with suspension speaks to the imagination more for play, and for myself, the corvette gets the looks wrong enough to stick out like a sore thumb, and throws technical accuracy under the buss in ways that simply arent fixable in the scale.

 

That said, i do appreciate some of the newer bigger sets, 42082 might be debatable, as it suffers from its large scale in some ways, and the concept could be easily expressed in a smaller scale, but 83 for instance couldnt have been made as impressive in a smaller scale, and while it sometimes feels like "parts for the sake of more parts", it has an impressive density, and doesnt feel like an empty shell like 77 and 96 do.

 

Personally i hope they keep the licensed sets to the larger stuff, it works well for something 2500+ parts (porsche, chiron and landrover), but under that you start to compromise on technical complexity for the sake of looks, which in turn cant be nailed due to the small scale. (another example is 42063 and 42036, the BMW is much more expensive but in its scale looks crude, which 36 looks smooth and with some mods looks absolutely stunning)

[Timorzelorzworz]

I wonder where the C+ goes in 2020. Imagine a remote controlled car with tracks like 42095 or with simple drive/steering, there is for both cases just a need for two motors. I think not that we will see the 4-port-hub in every "remote" set, unless the set only needs two motors to control. The 1H lineup is more designed for younger customers, so I think we will a) see an new 2-port-hub in Technic for C+ or b) we get the 2-port-train hub in Technic. The upcoming 42109 "remote" set for kids makes more sense and is better playable with a physical remote, so it is very possible that we get remote-controlled Technic-sets with new train remote, but with only 2-port-hub and maybe the new motors connected to it. A simple car 42109 that only drives and makes fun like 42095 does not either need a smartphone nor a 4-port-hub.

[Cumulonimbus]

33 minutes ago, vectormatic said:

...  And if i may add a fifth point, i think that while technic used to be not only creative, but also educational,...

Yes, good point. I was considering this educational layer as well, but to me it is not that clear cut that it has become worse over the years for several reasons: 

- Lego bricks were always limiting how realistic real mechanisms can be modeled. The material and, more crucially, the scale of the parts will always limit how accurately complex systems like gearboxes and engines can be built in Lego sets. Which is why we have never seen a representation of a camshaft or valves in an official set. This is an inherent limitation of this medium which can only be solved by choosing a really huge scale like that massive V8 engine MOC (sorry, I forgot the name of the original builder). So to really understanding how something works, LEGO bricks are not the best way to go. On the other hand, I must say that I learned a lot about technology while researching source material as input for my MODs and MOCs.

- The Control+ and Boost interface allows for some "light programmming", which in itself is an educational aspect, just not in the field of mechanical engineering.

- Some crucial new parts have allowed for a increasingly compact mechanisms over the years and as a result some sets have packed functions in a volume which was previously unheard of. The suspension in the Arocs for example was a real eye-opener for me, both in showing how a real truck suspension works as well as amazing me about the accurate representation made with Technic bricks. So for engines you're right, but for other mechanisms they tend to get more realistic on the whole (for unmotorised sets).

Edited September 27, 2019 by Cumulonimbus

[Vectormatic]

@Cumulonimbus

Correct, lego is inherently limited in technical accuracy by the scale and material properties of the bricks, but it still provides a decent base understanding (technic is the reason i knew how a diff worked at age ~10) of the main principals of mechanical engineering.

And indeed, the more advanced eletronics (mindstorms, C+, Boost) do provide an entry into programming/IT, but given how old the mindstorms concept is (or even the barcode truck before it), i dont feel like from an educational standpoint we've seen anything revolutionary (or even evolutionary) in the last decade, just more userfriendly and mainstream with the advent of smartphones etc..

You are absolutely right about the new parts though, while i dont know enough about exotic real life gearboxes to know if there is an analog to the bugatti wave-catch (i suspect there isnt), the addition of an extra clutch gear with a different ratio opens up a lot of options, and the bugatti hubs with the brake discs, eventhough purely cosmetic, are a cool new part. I havent taken a look at the Arocs in any detail though, maybe i should :)

 

You make a good point all in all about the educational factors, im very much focussed on cars myself, which is only one sub-theme within technic, so my gripes about mini-fake engines could be entirely wrong in a general sense.

[aol000xw]

All these years after 8880 I perceived some kind of resistance that makes very hard for them to take a design direction that better reflects real mechanisms.

For example, there have been lots of hubs after 8880 and most if not all of them are worse in reflecting how real cars work.

Not having yet a complete collection of gears from the smallest suitable size to the biggest with cross/pin hole/ clutch is a bit baffling at this point. This is Technic after all, those parts aren't specialized, could be used and reused in tons of sets.

 

 

[Jundis]

1 hour ago, Cumulonimbus said:

3. The dependency of a smartphone and app is a no-go for me.  It goes against the principles of a timeless building system: It was once the intention that new bricks should always be compatible with bricks from the sixties and seventies. For physical bricks, this is still largely true but in my opinion, electric and electronic components should obey this rule as well, which they did up to now. The new Control + system means that from now on these bricks are inevitably bound to the world of smartphones and apps, which evolve and age at a much, much faster rate. I think it’s inevitable that at some point in the future, there will come a point where your expensive Liebherr model will become an inert statue because there is no longer any supported app or phone to control it. Read this article about the McLaren F1 car for an illustration of what I mean: https://www.theverge.com/2016/5/3/11576032/mclaren-f1-compaq-laptop-maintenance.

I partially disagree with this point. You are right as the electronics/informatics progressed way faster than any other field like mechanical engineering/building solutions. But this is a good thing as I surely wouldn't return to a cable-bound (80s/90s) or an IR-remote (2000+) if we can have a bluetooth-connection. Even bluetooth is around for about 20 years, it's still used (and will be used for quite some time as it seems right now) because it works quite well and independently from any progress in smartphone technology. This surely is the way to go.

Just for comparison to a handheld controller:

A handheld BT-controller (Analog buttons are a must for steering etc.!) would surely cost about 50€, everybody would complain how pricy this thing is. This controller (without a display) would be way more limited than a free programmable app, where there are endless possibilities for simple or more complex and even multiple functions, tasks to complete, informations about technical stuff etc. I mean just look at the R9800-video from Sariel. And this is just the second model using this app. You could connect sensors just like mindstorms with the hub or maybe connect a camera which can be built directly into some models, download and share new modules and templates for mocs. Just give them some time, as we all know, TLG don't rush new developments and never were the fastest to adopt new technologies.

The inconsistency I complain about is the connection plugs for the motors and the hub. This seems way more worriing than the App to me.

For the last point, thats exactly what happens to a limited and very specialized system what McLaren settled for. No possibilities to adopt, bound to one platform (Compaq with DOS). BT on the other hand is way more universal, the app runs on IOS and Android and surely will adopt if new smartphone softwares emerge.

[Maaboo the Witch]

1 hour ago, vectormatic said:

 

which is only one sub-theme within technic, so my gripes about mini-fake engines could be entirely wrong in a general sense.

Cars the only subtheme? Hmm.

I think the Tech Play and Tech Build distinction still exists in all but name. Sets like 42095 and the pullbacks are clearly Tech Play, while 42094 and 42098 are Tech Build. Not to mention the forestry theme, which started with 42054 and has continued with 42080 and 42094. There's all kinds of subthemes kicking.

[Vectormatic]

21 minutes ago, Maaboo35 said:

Cars the only subtheme? Hmm. 

I think the Tech Play and Tech Build distinction still exists in all but name. Sets like 42095 and the pullbacks are clearly Tech Play, while 42094 and 42098 are Tech Build. Not to mention the forestry theme, which started with 42054 and has continued with 42080 and 42094. There's all kinds of subthemes kicking. 

No, i meant that Cars is one of many subthemes (only one Vs the only one)

I tend to focus nearly 100% on cars and bikes, so the trends i see might not cover technic as a whole, i cant really offer an opinion on the evulotion of technic cranes, trucks or construction equipment for instance.

[Maaboo the Witch]

Just now, vectormatic said:

No, i meant that Cars is one of many subthemes (only one Vs the only one)

I tend to focus nearly 100% on cars and bikes, so the trends i see might not cover technic as a whole, i cant really offer an opinion on the evulotion of technic cranes, trucks or construction equipment for instance.

Yep, just re-read your comment and it's clear what you meant.

Going back to the 2020 lineup, does anyone think that the Mobile Crane might be pneumatic? TLG has had success with that concept before.

[aol000xw]

Pneumatics aren't really good holding a boom. Perhaps for the outriggers...

[Ngoc Nguyen]

33 minutes ago, aol000xw said:

Pneumatics aren't really good holding a boom. 

42053 and 42080 would like to have a word with you sir 

[aol000xw]

Those are not comparable to a mobile crane, i remember 8421 having some issues.

[Maaboo the Witch]

4 hours ago, aol000xw said:

Those are not comparable to a mobile crane, i remember 8421 having some issues.

That was because it used an inadequate solution. Double up the rams on the boom and you're golden.

[Ngoc Nguyen]

Deleted

Edited September 28, 2019 by Ngoc Nguyen

[Timorzelorzworz]

42111 Entertainer: Something similar to Creator Fairground Mixer. A foldable thing to transport. Colorful.

42112 Air: Helicopter similar 9397 in functions, all operated manually. White and dark azure. Mudguards are used for housing the rear Rotor

42113 Truck: Something like Cherry Picker, matches 42098 wheels and scale. Classic gearbox to control 4 functions with one motor. Green cabin, white arm

42114: Yellow Backhoe all pneumatic. Xerion wheels in front and back with steering mode. Motor to drive pump and maybe other functions

42115 Ultimate: unknown license but wingdoors and red. Price, scale and piece count similar Bugatti

[1gor]

@Timorzelorzworz interesting info...

42115 could be new Lamborghini (Lamborghini belongs to VW group).

42114 could be inspired by @Sariel's JCB wastemaster 5CX...

42112 white and dark azure could be very very nice combo. 

 

 

[Jockos]

Omg.omg.omg... Technic makes me broke every year

[Timorzelorzworz]

Infos from somebody who knows one that knows one. Don't know if all matches. Same Procedure as every year

[Ngoc Nguyen]

55 minutes ago, Timorzelorzworz said:

Mudguards are used for housing the rear Rotor

I knew this design would appear someday!!

And Backhoe!! YES flagship pneumatic backhoe!!!!!

Goddammit TLG why do I always have to spend a bunch of money on those your irresistible 2H sets every year...

Edited September 28, 2019 by Ngoc Nguyen

[1gor]

16 minutes ago, Timorzelorzworz said:

Infos from somebody who knows one that knows one. Don't know if all matches. Same Procedure as every year

That is plausible; I was just speculating based on your post 

[Maaboo the Witch]

Woo! Backhoe! Been going on seven years since the last. Can the B-model please be a combine harvester like 8862? 

[Ngoc Nguyen]

2 minutes ago, Maaboo35 said:

Woo! Backhoe! Been going on seven years since the last. Can the B-model please be a combine harvester like 8862? 

How bout no B model 

[Maaboo the Witch]

5 minutes ago, Ngoc Nguyen said:

How bout no B model 

Tch... that's probably the case. 

[allanp]

A flagship pneumatic backhoe? Oh I hope this is true! And also a big helicopter? Yes please! These rumours, when it comes to future set discussions in this forum, usually turn out to be true. Must.....surpess......expec.....tations.......AAAARRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!!!

Edited September 28, 2019 by allanp