Ngoc Nguyen

42115 - Lamborghini Sian FKP 37

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, agrof said:

Yes, it is stolen 1:1. Ali is full with it, beside the longer version you mention.

True there's copies out there. Considering even original Danish cogs and U joints struggle with the gearbox there's no way I'd buy a copy of the landy. 

Just making the point that MouldKing didn't take Lego's design directly, rather they took a moc that was (very!) closely based on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bartelas said:

They desperately try to compete with the stunning MOCs we see here and on rebrickable, but they keep on failing

Are they trying to compete? I'm not so sure... they're providing the tools and some inspiration, but i'm not sure TLG see's its role as competing with moc's. 

I know its a popular pastime to hate official sets and the designers competence*, but moc-ers are not operating within the same constraints as the designers at TLG, so to compare the total freedom of members of this forum to the corporate constraints of a global (and very successful) company shows a lack of understanding at a very basic level... naive to say the least. When you build a moc do you consider cost/margin/GP's? No. Do you consider its appeal globally to varied demographics? No.

*(although their job is designing sets for TLG, our job isn't so maybe they're not actually that bad at it..?)

Constructive criticism is valuable, no doubt, but some of the negative rants get my goat! I love technic but still dislike some of the sets, i don't feel the need to call them pathetic or failures though... 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, TeamThrifty said:

Are they trying to compete? I'm not so sure... they're providing the tools and some inspiration, but i'm not sure TLG see's its role as competing with moc's. 

I know its a popular pastime to hate official sets and the designers competence*, but moc-ers are not operating within the same constraints as the designers at TLG, so to compare the total freedom of members of this forum to the corporate constraints of a global (and very successful) company shows a lack of understanding at a very basic level... naive to say the least. When you build a moc do you consider cost/margin/GP's? No. Do you consider its appeal globally to varied demographics? No.

*(although their job is designing sets for TLG, our job isn't so maybe they're not actually that bad at it..?)

Constructive criticism is valuable, no doubt, but some of the negative rants get my goat! I love technic but still dislike some of the sets, i don't feel the need to call them pathetic or failures though... 

 

 

100% agree. 

 

Competing with MOCs makes no sense because MOCs require a much bigger investment and I'm sure they(TLG) know that. Not many people have the budget to build a MOC, forget the logistics of getting the parts. I don't think they compete at all but they do share some of the same demographic...with tons of overlap. Most of the people here do both anyways so it doesn't affect anything. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as the designers would love to be given the chance to compete with the best MOCs I don't think the decision makers at TLG are that interested in letting them do that. It seems that colour coding of parts, unrealistic mechanisms that can be built from existing parts and other things we don't really care for helps keep a healthy profit margin. Having said that, sets like the Arocs hold far more appeal to me than any MOC ever could. And there are many MOCs widely praised, that if they was released as an official set, would be torn apart by the same community that praises it as a MOC. But at the end of the day, MOC designers and set designers do what they do under completely different conditions. A MOCcer has no release schedule, no angey customers calling into call centers, budgets or marketing suits telling them what to build to worry about. On the other hand a set designer isn't necessarily restricted by the current parts selection, as they can design a new part and have it be an official Lego part, which is precisely why the Arocs was able to be more appealing to me than any MOC. But because of these different conditions they can never be in competition, making drawing comparisons between the two rarely that useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2020 at 2:57 AM, TeamThrifty said:

Are they trying to compete? I'm not so sure... they're providing the tools and some inspiration, but i'm not sure TLG see's its role as competing with moc's. 

I know its a popular pastime to hate official sets and the designers competence*, but moc-ers are not operating within the same constraints as the designers at TLG, so to compare the total freedom of members of this forum to the corporate constraints of a global (and very successful) company shows a lack of understanding at a very basic level... naive to say the least. When you build a moc do you consider cost/margin/GP's? No. Do you consider its appeal globally to varied demographics? No.

*(although their job is designing sets for TLG, our job isn't so maybe they're not actually that bad at it..?)

Constructive criticism is valuable, no doubt, but some of the negative rants get my goat! I love technic but still dislike some of the sets, i don't feel the need to call them pathetic or failures though... 

Totally agree.

I see a lot of MOCs and I think they are fantastic but then I see the cost of putting one together and my jaw hits the floor. If TLG competed on the same level as the MOC-ers out there I'd only be able to afford about 3 sets before I was broke :)

I have no doubt that TLG designers would be capable of going toe-to-toe with just about any MOC-er out there if they were not bound to cost and part restrictions. I'm thankful for what we've got and I will continue to look at MOCs with envy and indulge in the odd alternate build of some sets.

Anyway back to the Lambo, here's hoping we have something new to talk about soon. Looks like they've done a pretty good job of hiding details and pics......unfortunately :)

Edited by MarkyMark42

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MarkyMark42 said:

Totally agree.

I see a lot of MOCs and I think they are fantastic but then I see the cost of putting one together and my jaw hits the floor. 

As you say though, TLG isn't bound by rare parts being expensive. For us, unimog shocks are 15€ a piece while soft motorbike shocks are 2.50€. they cost the same for TLG to make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/1/2020 at 8:21 PM, allanp said:

Having said that, sets like the Arocs hold far more appeal to me than any MOC ever could. And there are many MOCs widely praised, that if they was released as an official set, would be torn apart by the same community that praises it as a MOC

Totally agree... and that duplicity is infuriating! 

 

2 hours ago, MarkyMark42 said:

I have no doubt that TLG designers would be capable of going toe-to-toe with just about any MOC-er out there

Absolutely... for a forum thats for people that love lego, lego get a lot a negativity. Far too much, it can't be pleasant for them to read some of the comments... we should be cheerleaders for everything Lego provide us with! I love lego.. simple as that! :pir-love:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, TeamThrifty said:

we should be cheerleaders for everything Lego provide us with! I love lego.. simple as that! :pir-love:

Oh yeah lets collect some donations too :oh3: They have to raise their prices every year just to keep the company afloat, TLGs profit margins must be so small... :def_shrug:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Frequenzberater said:

You seem to forget, that they want us to buy their stuff for a lot of money. 

No.. but i try to take all aspects into account. The constraints they're working under etc. And on balance i think TLG do an amazing job. If there's criticism, it should be discussed, they're not perfect by any stretch, but we live in a world where if something is not to our taste then its the end of the world, or if someone's opinion differs then they should be hated - snowflakes basically. This is what prompted my initial message, they were called 'pathetic' and 'failures' which is a total over reaction and very childish.

I think we should definitely discuss the issues, whether its a function that works poorly or a price tag thats too high, but terms used by some are extreme and the hate levels are too high.. i just think we should be kinder in how we discuss TLG sets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@TeamThrifty I agree, i am absolutely not a lego apologist, and i pretty much refuse to buy anything at lego list price these days (and ive sworn off the SW line for pretty much that reason), but the amount of negativity here can be pretty insane, to the point where i feel like reading too much on here is affecting my enjoyment of the hobby. I also feel like people set themselves up for disappointment wayyyy too much. I know the lambo is going to have flaws, just like the porsche and bugatti before it, and if the bugatti shows us anything, it is that lego will try to fix some flaws, and end up creating more problems on the way, so i dont even expect the lambo to do all the things the bugatti does flawlessly.

 

what i do know, is that the lambo will be another terrific looking car, on a level i could only dream of as a kid, and that will look insanely awesome on the shelf next to the porsche and bugatti, and while the internals might not be up to what we all expect from a $400 technic set as AFOLs, but as AFOLs, we can just fix that, which is part of the fun imho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, vectormatic said:

@TeamThrifty *cut*

what i do know, is that the lambo will be another terrific looking car, on a level i could only dream of as a kid, and that will look insanely awesome on the shelf next to the porsche and bugatti, and while the internals might not be up to what we all expect from a $400 technic set as AFOLs, but as AFOLs, we can just fix that, which is part of the fun imho

Agreed, you can always change and improve thingsyou don't like. For me personally, I dont even care what the car looks like, I just want some cool new pieces for my MOCs :tongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/1/2020 at 4:31 PM, Bartelas said:

They desperately try to compete with the stunning MOCs we see here and on rebrickable, but they keep on failing. 

I know for a fact that the Technic designers at TLG are perfectly able to compete with MOCers. But making a MOC is different than making an official model.

It makes me sad to hear people say things like "they keep on failing". While you are entitled to your opinion, there are a handful of AFOLs who think the Porsche and Bugatti are failures. Millions of people think otherwise and the sales numbers are there to prove it. The Porsche was in TLG's Top 10 a couple of years ago. Nuff said. And the funny thing is; most of the people who think it's a failure take pride in owning one. Or they can't afford one and that's why they say it's a failure. 

So the Porsche and Bugatti are perfect sets?! No, of course they are not. But let's be happy that TLG releases these kind of sets. And if you really don't like them, simply fork out 500-1500 euro for a MOC on Rebrickable and start complaining directly to the designer.

11 minutes ago, vectormatic said:

@TeamThrifty I agree, i am absolutely not a lego apologist, and i pretty much refuse to buy anything at lego list price these days (and ive sworn off the SW line for pretty much that reason), but the amount of negativity here can be pretty insane, to the point where i feel like reading too much on here is affecting my enjoyment of the hobby. I also feel like people set themselves up for disappointment wayyyy too much. I know the lambo is going to have flaws, just like the porsche and bugatti before it, and if the bugatti shows us anything, it is that lego will try to fix some flaws, and end up creating more problems on the way, so i dont even expect the lambo to do all the things the bugatti does flawlessly.

what i do know, is that the lambo will be another terrific looking car, on a level i could only dream of as a kid, and that will look insanely awesome on the shelf next to the porsche and bugatti, and while the internals might not be up to what we all expect from a $400 technic set as AFOLs, but as AFOLs, we can just fix that, which is part of the fun imho

Amen :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Gray Gear said:

I don't even care what the car looks like, I just want some cool new pieces for my MOCs :tongue:

This :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jim said:

I know for a fact that the Technic designers at TLG are perfectly able to compete with MOCers.

100%.. as i said in my original post, those guys are good enough to be employed by TLG - That suggests they're pretty good at it!! And for them to spend months of their working lives creating a model that is not only a great model, but also fits the tight constraints of cost prices, target RRP's, global customer base preferences...imagine achieving that only for it to be branded pathetic or a failure? It must break their heart some days, those guys love what they do...

4 hours ago, vectormatic said:

I also feel like people set themselves up for disappointment wayyyy too much

 

4 hours ago, vectormatic said:

on a level i could only dream of as a kid

Exactly, there's a bunch on unrealistic expectation followed by hate. In 1980 when i had 850 and 851, this modern stuff would have blown my mind!!

The hate makes me cross which is why i replied a few messages ago, but my love of Lego and my appreciation of what TLG provide us with is undiminished. Building a model is an adventure, (official set or a moc), and that adventure doesn't end on the last page of the instructions... thats where it starts. And a moc is never ever finished! There's always one more modification... i hope i'll be trying to fit that one last modification in as i draw my last breath!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and...

If some people doesnt like the official sets, the basic principe of the lego brick is that they just can do better (to their opinion)….by themself :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that seems to be often forgotten in comparing MOCs to official sets is that the designers at TLG have to adhere to strict rules in how to build the model. Legal vs. illegal connections is one aspect that MOC makers can just ignore as they can make the decision to sacrifice certain parts in order to make their model better (case in point: using axles as twisting springs), while TLG designers don't have that option. Another point is that the models have to be buildable within the same framefork of legal connections, there can be no bending or twisting parts in a manner that risks breaking them, even during assembly so they have to design around that. Of course a number of illegal connections in models have made it to production over the years, but apparently today QA is much stricter regarding legal connections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LvdH said:

This seems interesting. Lamborghini back to producing cars with a new one to be revealed next week. 

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/lamborghini-restart-production-and-reveal-new-model-next-week

Ooooh, this is where things get interesting. I know autocar expect a new variant of some existing car (probably a Huracan SV or whatever), but given that the aventador is 8 years old by now...

I would totally love for them to come up with the aventadors succesor, and have that be the lego set. It would make sense for it to include Sian styling elements as well. Bonus points for some reeeeeaaally lamborghini colour like Verde Mantis.

EDIT: one could argue that when the 911 GT3RS launched the porsche range topper was that car, but the 918 Spyder (although it ended production in 2015, and probably sold out waaaay before then), meaning that some hardcore GT3/GTE version of the Huracan (which could well be the new introduction next week) wouldnt be entirely out of left field either, although the Sian styled lights in the teaser dont match up with that.

 

Anyway, Lambo HYPE (both for the set and new pretty pictures for my desktop)

Edited by vectormatic

Share this post


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

Ooooh, this is where things get interesting.

Indeed, it does!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Jim said:

I know for a fact that the Technic designers at TLG are perfectly able to compete with MOCers. But making a MOC is different than making an official model.

Spot on Jim. People see great looking MOCS and just assume that the people behind them are better designers than the people working for Lego when the reality is that there is only a very small handful of Technic MOCS that could ever make it as a set without completely overhauling the model to meet Lego's standards. I have bought a fair amount of instructions from AFOL and I had so many "Oh God" moments during some of the builds that I just stopped the build and moved on to something else. The casual Lego fans have a tendency to overlook things like bending axles or numerous connections being made "illegally".

Edited by Meatman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course TLG needs to take into account all kinds of requirements which are less important to MOC designers. And some MOC designers use parts in a way LEGO would never regard acceptable. However, when it comes to following a few simple guidelines that ensure a smooth running drivetrain, TLG designers are building blunder on blunder consistently. Look at 42056, 42083 and 42110, all models with completely flawed drivetrains. If you look at how straightforward jb70 could redesign the Defender's transmission, taking out all flaws and bad smells, it's a shame it wasn't like that in the first place. They seem to not know the characteristic of their own modeling language called Technic. And this bad design practice is not because they had to meet other requirements, like ease of build or parts count. It is plain incapability.

One would expect some kind of progressive insight or gradually emerging best practices amongst TLG designers, but apparently there is no such thing. I have therefore also no expectations with respect to the drivetrain of the upcoming Lamborghini.

Edited by Didumos69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a great conversation about MOC vs. official Technic sets almost exactly this time last year.  Perhaps we should direct our comments regarding MOC and TLG official set quality there. 

I will post mine there right now.   For what it is worth the thread is a bit disjointed because it arose out of kinda the same process.  42099 was being released and folk's were complaining big time.  They were comparing 42099 with MOCs and their respective climbing quality.  I suspect similar arguments/complaints will arise year after year on official set threads; perhaps when they do they should be directed to the thread above. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lambo hype! Waiting to see what TLG will bring to us.

And about comparing official models to MOC's - we should critize TLG for every failure in a basic functions, vide Bugatti suspension. This is not rocket sience, this is not a matter of taste (bodywork), but a basic function. Porshe was much, much better than Bugatti in terms of mechanics.

What I personally expect from UCS technic cars which costs 400 euro, is a correct and as much as possible, like in real car. Appealing look and one or two interesting features. And more printed parts :D (why not :P). It can have small gaps, we can fill them, it can be "overcomplicated" or simplified in some parts, but basics should be correct, always... Lego should prioritize Technic "DNA" more than anything, if they are selling that beasts as UCS Lego Technic Car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Didumos69 said:

Of course TLG needs to take into account all kinds of requirements which are less important to MOC designers. And some MOC designers use parts in a way LEGO would never regard acceptable. However, when it comes to following a few simple guidelines that ensure a smooth running drivetrain, TLG designers are building blunder on blunder consistently. Look at 42056, 42083 and 42110, all models with completely flawed drivetrains. If you look at how straightforward jb70 could redesign the Defender's transmission, taking out all flaws and bad smells, it's a shame it wasn't like that in the first place. They seem to not know the characteristic of their own modeling language called Technic. And this bad design practice is not because they had to meet other requirements, like ease of build or parts count. It is plain incapability.

One would expect some kind of progressive insight or gradually emerging best practices amongst TLG designers, but apparently there is no such thing. I have therefore also no expectations with respect to the drivetrain of the upcoming Lamborghini.

This is a fantastic comment dude, I love it. I think you should post it in the MOCs vs sets thread.

There is no excuse for bad suspension or a poorly designed drivetrain, especially in a premium luxury product, other than inexperience and a lack of understanding. It’s nothing to do with compromise.

I’m definitely incapable of designing a good gearbox myself, but I know well enough that what is currently being sold needs to, and can be, seriously improved.

Edited by Bartybum

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.