Will Control+ make SBrick obsolete? What to invest in?

[mugwump]

Hi everybody!

I currently own a couple of Technic sets with old power functions and I will probably buy one or two more PF-sets. I really want to get into RC modding soon but am hesitant when it comes to buying an SBrick for the few PF-motors that I own. My general question is: Will Control+ make SBrick obsolete for most use cases? As far as I can tell, I have two possibilities:

1) Buy an SBrick and get a good amount of PF-motors. This should be the cheapest option since PF-motors, both original and counterfeit, are all over the place.

2) Buy the new Technic Control+ Hub and new Powered Up motors OR get 42099 and hope that Lego will soon introduce a generic mode for the Control+ app and possibly an adapter cable for the old PF-motors.

 

I should also take into account that most instructions for RC-mods are made for classic PF. 

 

What do you think?

- Will Control+ soon make SBrick and Buwizz obsolete?

- Is it still worth investing into old PF plus SBrick or Buwizz?

 

[coinoperator]

Just now, mugwump said:

SBrick and Buwizz obsolete

I bet these will come quite fast with the new motor connectors.
OR/AND adapters from/to PF
 

[Mechbuilds]

Another option is to cut the wire and solder a PF connector to it for buwizz use. 
I bet the chinese counterfeit motors will have an option to have it on control+ or pf connector. 

I personally like the PF connector more. It's more "lego-y". The new control+ connectors kind of look like internet cables..

 

[johnnym]

49 minutes ago, mugwump said:

What do you think?

Can't speak for SBrick, but recently purchased a BuWizz and using this with PF (L and Servo so far) motors feels genuinely like "cheating" compared to PF equipment alone. The fast mode alone already feels like a boost compared to a AAA battery box with fresh batteries and V2 IR receiver. I can't tell, what an SBrick is capable of, but assume this is in the range of a V2 IR receiver (though with 4 outputs) or better and hence suspect that the current limit of the battery boxes will be the limit in this case and according to @Philo's research these are limited to 750 mA, though I'm unsure how fast this limit kicks in. The BuWizz specs promise more.

49 minutes ago, mugwump said:

- Is it still worth investing into old PF plus SBrick or Buwizz?

For me, I'd definitely say yes. Of course a BuWizz isn't cheap, but compared to what I invested into AAA battery boxes and a V2 IR receiver and what I got out of them compared to the BuWizz, this is not that much more and you have more power (according to specs) and more outputs available and the required amount of space is less than with PF alone or PF w/SBrick. There's also a price comparison available at the BuWizz site, but you should do the math with the current prices at shop.lego.com yourself.

If you can gather a few people and buy multiple units at once (2 or 4), you can also save some money (e.g. when buying four units the per-unit discount is enough for either 2 M, or 1 L, or 1 Train motor or nearly 2 XL motors or nearly one Servo motor). Even more, if there's a discount already active - e.g. there was one in the summer IIRC which was in the range of the VAT which comes on top.

[Bartybum]

There's some key steps needed for C+ to make both SBrick and BuWizz obsolete imo:

1. Custom control profiles - pretty sure they're already coming, but I did hear something about the PU app being the place for that, so I'm not sure what to think yet.
2. A much smaller hub - a large draw towards SBrick is its compact size and easy integration into PF. It allows you to use the LiPo/train battery box, which is pretty much universally loved by AFOLs. Once C+ has been going for long enough that MOCcers have moved on from PF (yes yes I'm aware a bunch of you won't), then I think we'll see it beginning to kill SBrick. BuWizz is even better because it's more compact than even the SBrick/LiPo combination. The generally unwieldy size of the C+ hub makes it unsuitable for smaller MOCs. I've heard they want to introduce a smaller hub in the future though, so this could be on the horizon.
3. More accessible C+ motors, through smaller motorised sets - done with a much smaller hub and/or a dumb battery box.

C+ will likely never make BuWizz obsolete though, solely because BuWizz has different power output levels, some of which are very high. Lego likely won't go this way, since higher power and speeds introduce more part wear.

Edited October 5, 2019 by Bartybum

[shadow_elenter]

There's a lot of pros and cons going on, for the moment I'd reccomend waiting it out and see what the next few months bring if your not in a hurry.

If you are, go with what you know works and what is cheap.?

 

[johnnym]

34 minutes ago, Bartybum said:

There's some key steps needed for C+ to make both SBrick and BuWizz obsolete imo:

[...]

I'd add that the PU L and XL motors are also slightly bigger (i.e. 1 or 2 studs longer respectively) than the respective PF ones. Though this most likely won't change until the switch to something different in the future and is also not strictly to topic, it's something to consider.

Sure, their shape and mechanical connectivity could allow to integrate PU motors more easily as structural parts into creations, for PF motors I could imagine that one sometimes needs even more space to attach them firmly to a creation, but I could also imagine, that some compact motorized designs are no longer possible with PU L and XL motors - even more without compact battery boxes, though a simple car with a motor for steering and one for propulsion should be doable with that small PU battery box (Hub) and requires less space for the power supply and remote control than PF alone or PF w/SBrick. E.g. for my motorized Palomino with PF L and Servo motors and BuWizz the +1 stud in length of the PU L motor would have been already 1 stud too long for the simplest application - i.e. driver gear directly above first idler gear at the rear. With 2 PU L motors the room to put the power supply would shrink by 2 studs in length.

BTW, can the PU L and XL motors already be purchased separately? I think the pricing will also be a relevant factor for a decision and if you take the PU Hub as example, it's more expensive than a PF setup (AAA battery box ca. 14 EUR, IR Receiver ca. 17 EUR, IR remote ca. 11 EUR ATM, so 42 EUR total, compared to ca. 50 EUR for the PU Hub alone in Germany) and that even if you already have a smartphone (of course not an argument when using SBrick or BuWizz).

[AFOoLish]

I don't think it is in the commercial interest of TLG to sell the new motors or other components outright (other that replacements) or to release a generic application for Control+. I think the best we can expect from TLG is new sets with Control+ which introduce new elements eg. lights. From what I recently read hereI believe that the third party application which is available today will become the "de-facto" generic controller but without the hardware - the connector is TLG copyright. The phasing out of PF motors is a vital step to eliminate the "competition". 

[johnnym]

15 hours ago, AFOoLish said:

I don't think it is in the commercial interest of TLG to sell the new motors or other components outright (other that replacements) or to release a generic application for Control+.

Why's that? Can you please elaborate a little more on that?

15 hours ago, AFOoLish said:

The phasing out of PF motors is a vital step to eliminate the "competition". 

Say, has this phasing out already started? Because last time I checked shop.lego.com PF XL motors were (already) out of stock and I thought there'd be a little more time.

[Bartybum]

17 hours ago, johnnym said:

Why's that? Can you please elaborate a little more on that? 

Selling the motors individually would mean less profit for TLC, because some people won't be buying the thousand+ part sets that the motors would otherwise come with. If you want to make money, don't sell something individually if you can force anyone who wants it to buy something they otherwise wouldn't get. Personally, for me this isn't an issue as I'll be be getting 42100 in the near future, so I'll have a large supply of hubs and motors for the future, as well as my current PF collection.

However, for people who want a smart hub, but can't afford 42099 or 42100 it'd be an especially dick move on TLC's behalf to not sell these C+ components individually.

Regarding the generic application, it would be free and wouldn't be profitable.

[johnnym]

4 minutes ago, Bartybum said:

Selling the motors individually would mean less profit for TLC, because some people won't be buying the thousand+ part sets that the motors would otherwise come with. If you want to make money, don't sell something individually if you can force anyone who wants it to buy something they otherwise wouldn't get.

Ok that could be a reason, but for PF, Lego just didn't want to make money? Or was the situation similar when PF came out years ago (i.e. equipment not available separately)? Well, maybe there wasn't even a shop.lego.com at that time - I don't know as I wasn't interested in Lego at that time.

For example look at 42095: it contains 2 PF L (2 x ca. 15 EUR) , 1 AA battery box (ca. 8 EUR), 1 IR receiver (ca. 17 EUR) and 1 IR remote (ca. 11 EUR) - so ca. 66 EUR in total when bought at shop.lego.com in Germany compared to usually below 60 EUR for the whole 42095. I once even saw it for below 50 EUR, but already had bought four at that time so thought that was enough.

Generally I'd assume that PU equipment in the sets would be less expensive then when bought separately. But what do I know? Well, right, that wouldn't help, if you just want a singular item though.

[kbalage]

On 10/6/2019 at 12:39 AM, AFOoLish said:

I don't think it is in the commercial interest of TLG to sell the new motors or other components outright (other that replacements) or to release a generic application for Control+. 

TLG has a slow and gradual approach with the shift to Powered Up. Boost came in 2017, Batmobile & trains in 2018, first Technic sets in 2019. Since Power Functions will be available until the end of 2020 they don't need to rush. All components of the 2017-2018 batch are available now separately, hubs, motors etc. I'm sure we'll be also able to buy the Technic hub and motors separately soon, it's just not happening immediately after the release of the sets. I guess production focuses first to provide enough supplies for the sets, the individual components only come afterwards.

About the apps their development approach is also gradual and (unfortunate for us) pretty slow. The "City" theme only got the set-specific controls first in the Powered Up app, it took quite some time to get the free coding area and the customisable two slider-3 button interface. The Technic sets also got the app-specific controls first with Control+, the next step will be the upgrade of the Powered Up app to support the Technic hub and motors properly. This upgrade is expected to happen this year. I don't think anything is withheld by TLG on purpose, their schedule is simply slower than we'd expect it to be.

 

[M_longer]

On 10/5/2019 at 4:01 PM, johnnym said:

I'd add that the PU L and XL motors are also slightly bigger (i.e. 1 or 2 studs longer respectively)

https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/topic/171851-42099-4x4-x-treme-off-roader/&do=findComment&comment=3155581

[AFOoLish]

20 hours ago, johnnym said:

Why's that? Can you please elaborate a little more on that?

TLG aims to provide play experiences for its fans by releasing predefined sets. Releasing only Control+ elements "into the wild" does not meet that aim. The key feature of Control+ is the predefined application. I expect that TLG will gradually release new sets incorporating additional motors/lights/sensors into the applications. TLG may still release a couple of sets with PF as a low cost way of "seeding" the market. The message from TLG for me is very clear that the PF platform has been declared to be obsolete with no chance of any future investment in it. I do not expect that TLG will produce any connectors between the existing PF range and the new Control+. I think fans will continue to use PF in their creations for quite some time. It is possible that fans will incorporate both systems into their hybrid creations. The future existence of third-party products depends entirely on the size of this potential market.

 

[Bartybum]

39 minutes ago, AFOoLish said:

TLG aims to provide play experiences for its fans by releasing predefined sets. Releasing only Control+ elements "into the wild" does not meet that aim.

I'm not sure I agree here, since this conflicts with PF having been released as individual components.

[suffocation]

What he means is that first they provide play experiences; then, once a sufficiently profitable market has been created for certain components, they start selling them individually.

Edited October 7, 2019 by suffocation

[Bartybum]

Ah, I see

 

 

 

carry on then 

[AFOoLish]

My understanding is that for example the 8293 PF Motor set was introduced specifically to fulfill the packaged aftermarket need in so called PF compatible sets (8049,8265, 8294 and 95). Parents often bought these items together at the store. If the fan liked playing with the set they then bought PF extensions by themselves to extend the play-ability leading them to eventually building a MOC. The introduction of larger motors became necessary as the part count/weight of sets increased which in turn lead to new battery packs etc etc. Other elements which were recently introduced were an attempt to keep PF alive until the release of Control+. Construction of the PF range in this way meant that the entry price was kept low.

[suffocation]

@Bartybum To your point, though (if I understood correctly), there are new and highly sought-after components that are (relatively) easy to integrate into existing or WIP builds, and TLG capitalises on them ana... uh, brilliantly by making them immediately available at extortionate prices. Think of the 20T clutch gear and the new driving ring extension when they came out, or the new XL actuator which sells for €10 a piece.

Edited October 7, 2019 by suffocation
monsters cant spel

[johnnym]

1 hour ago, suffocation said:

@Bartybum To your point, though (if I understood correctly), there are new and highly sought-after components that are (relatively) easy to integrate into existing or WIP builds, and TLG capitalises on them ana... uh, brilliantly by making them immediately available at extortionate prices. Think of the 20T clutch gear and the new driving ring extension when they came out, or the new XL actuator which sells for €10 a piece.

The situation differs a little for the PF equipment, as the PF motors, battery boxes, LEDs and receiver are available as sets from shop.lego.com and not (only if at all) as replacement parts. E.g. as replacement parts for 42095 the PF parts are either out of stock or not for sale (though battery box and remote have a unit price tag between 35 and 37 EUR there). I assume it's like @kbalage phrased it, it will just take a little longer until the new PU equipment will be available separately.

[kbalage]

Just now, johnnym said:

The situation differs a little for the PF equipment, as the PF motors, battery boxes, LEDs and receiver are available as sets from shop.lego.com and not (only if at all) as replacement parts.

Did you check this page? :)

[johnnym]

Just now, kbalage said:

Did you check this page? :)

I know that some PU parts (or better part sets) are already available separately, I just wanted to emphasize the difference between the (PF part) sets and replacement parts.

[suffocation]

Only the M motor is (was?) available as part of a PF-only set.

[johnnym]

Just now, suffocation said:

Only the M motor is (was?) available as part of a PF-only set.

Maybe I'm nitpicking here, but the PF parts you can buy from shop.lego.com are also sets. They have a set number but just contain a single part.

[suffocation]

Yeah, it's the kind of nitpicking the Dutch have a nice name for. I believe it involves ants.