[REVIEW] 42111 Dom's Dodge Charger

[kaelthas]

Hello, I'm here again presenting my 36th review in Eurobricks. Let's have a look at Dom's Dodge Charger!

Before that, I want to thank LEGO for providing us with this set for review.

Overview

Name: 42111 Dom's Dodge Charger
Theme: LEGO Technic
Pieces: 1077 pieces 
Minifigures: 0
Price: £89.99 / $99.99 / 99.99€

Box

Square boxes are quite uncommon in LEGO. However, this is actually my first technic set in my life so let's move into it and I'll let you know what's inside.

Like usual, the back of the box shows us the play features in the set and we get to see the actual car picture at the top corner.

At the side, we can see the actual size of the tyre.

The Content

 

We get four numbered bags with smaller same numbered bags so there are 8 bags in total.

The instruction booklet is sealed in a plastic bag together with the sticker sheet. The frame and the tyres are not sealed inside the plastics. I've scanned the sticker sheet here in high resolution.

The comparison photo of the actual car and a dog. This is found at the back of the instruction booklet and LEGO is trying to tell you they are rebuilding the world. 

Different version of Dom's Dodge Charger. 

The parts list. This is quite clear and you can zoom in to see the parts numbers by clicking at the picture and zoom in.

This is an 11x15 frame in dark bluish grey with the part number of 6265646. I suppose it is new and currently exclusive to the set. It is still not catalogued in bricklink yet. 

Tire 56 x 28 ZR Street. 6035364 is a tyre produced in 2001 as seen in the left one. 

Technic, Shock Absorber 6.5L - Hard Spring. 6027566 is an old part but it is considered a new piece to me as this is my first technic set. It contributes to the suspension of the car making it bouncy.

After finish bag one, you will get a set of bones like this. It feels fascinating building technic for the first time. I feel like building a car. (What am I talking about? IT IS A FREAKING CAR!)

There is a sticker underneath the frame. I suppose the license is a serious issue here.

Technic, Engine Cylinder without Side Slots, 4234251. Going towards bag 2, this appears as the engine part. It is released since 2009 and it is new to me here, haha.

Technic, Engine Piston Round, 4112203. This is even older and it comes in blue too since 1990. 

Okay, 6276854. This one is new and currently exclusive to the set. Quite a nice and versatile piece for some Star Wars ships I think. 

As I said, this is new to me and I find these pistons build very interesting.

After building the second bag, you'll notice the 'steering wheel' is at the back of the vehicle and the pistons of the engine at the front are controlling the rear wheels. 

Technic, Steering Wheel Large, 4125213. Since 1988. This wheel is useless in the vehicle and it controls nothing. Haha.

Technic, Panel Fairing # 2 Small Smooth Short, Side B 4566249 and Technic, Panel Fairing # 1 Small Smooth Short, Side A 4566251. This is an interesting part to me as LEGO is very considerate in putting numbers at the parts so that we won't be confused of the right and left side of the piece. I love this kind of small details LEGO put in.

Bag 3 is actually wrapping the front part of the skeleton. 

I really love the trans clear boat studs coupled with that sticker with the word Charger. The front of the car really looks gorgeous.

Bag 4 completes the whole build and this is the rear view of the vehicle. The white California 2JRI424 License Plate is produced as seen on the 1970 Dodge Charger driven by Dominic Toretto. More info.

Side view of the Car. I wonder why the technic pin is not 'finished' sticking out the rims. Hmm...

It is quite hard to pull the lever inside the car after the hood is installed. It is too narrow inside.

The grey technic part at the middle is the lever.

Easier when it is still the skeleton phase.

The front hood can be opened to reveal the engine inside. I love the look of the engine but imagine if we get chromed parts for this! Okay wake up.

The bonnet is filled with 2 bottles of Nitrous Oxide can.

I am Groot.

*Groot is not included in the set.*

Review summary

Playability: 6/10 - Yes you can play with the car and as the steering wheel is at the bonnet of the car, it is quite convenient to control the front wheel. 
Design / Building Experience: 6/10 - The design is very nice at the front and back but please don't view from the top. You'll only see a black rectangle. 
Minifigures:  -/10 - At least give us a minifigure without any hairpiece.
Price / Value for money: 6/10 - It is a nice display set for a Fast and Furious fan. Don't display it inside a Koi fish pond (If you know what I mean). Haha
Overall: 6/10 - I think this set is only targetted for Fast and Furious fans as normal LEGO fan would only see this as a black car. However building this makes me feels like I'm a real mechanic especially when you build the spring part.

Thanks for reading! I hope you like this review. Do share your thoughts in the comments below! 

My reviews in Eurobricks.

1. Review: 76060 Doctor Strange's Sanctum Sanctorum
2. Review: 60134 Fun in the park - City People Pack
3. Review: 70911 The Penguin™ Arctic Roller
4. Review: 70818 Double-Decker Couch
5. REVIEW: LEGO 76051 SUPER HERO AIRPORT BATTLE
6. REVIEW: Short comparison of various sized Antman.
7. Review: 9469 Gandalf Arrives
8. Review: 31015 Emerald Express & 31054 Blue Express
9. Review: 79018 The Lonely Mountain
10. Review: 9474 The Battle of Helm's Deep
11. Review: 21029 The Buckingham Palace
12. [Review] 30611 R2-D2 Polybag
13. Review: 9473 The Mines of Moria
14. Review: 41103 Pop Star Recording Studio
15. Review of City of Wonders Gift Sets in Malaysia.
16. Review: 75030 Millennium Falcon
17. Review of 76084 The Ultimate Battle for Asgard and 76088 Thor vs Hulk: Arena Clash
18. Review of 76099 Rhino Face-Off by the Mine and 76100 Royal Talon Fighter Attack.
19. Review of 76031 The Hulk Buster Smash and 76104 The Hulkbuster Smash Up
20. Review: 75230 Porg
21. [REVIEW] 5005254 - Harry Potter Minifigures (Bricktober 2018)
22. [REVIEW] 5005255 - Jurassic World Minifigures (Bricktober 2018)
23. [REVIEW] 5005257 - NINJAGO Minifigures (Bricktober 2018)
24. [REVIEW] 5005256 - Marvel Infinity War Minifigures (Bricktober 2018)
25. Review: 76105 The Hulkbuster: Ultron Edition
26. Review: 70841 Benny's Space Squad
27. Review of 76039 Ant-man Final Battle and 76109 Quantum Realm Explorers
28. Review: 79003 An Unexpected Gathering
29. The Fellowship of the Ring Collection.
30. Review: 30452 Iron Man and Dum-E Polybag
31. [REVIEW] 76048 Iron Skull Sub Attack
32. [REVIEW] 40343 Spider-Man and the Museum Break-In
33. [REVIEW] Four SDCC minifigures
34. [REVIEW] 76144 Avengers Hulk Helicopter Rescue
35. [REVIEW] 21313 Ship in a Bottle

[kbalage]

Nice photos, thanks for the review! A small remark, the rims are not really new, they were actually used in quite a few sets.

[kaelthas]

3 minutes ago, kbalage said:

Nice photos, thanks for the review! A small remark, the rims are not really new, they were actually used in quite a few sets.

Thanks for the kind words! I can't find 6276854 in bricklink so I made that assumption. Thanks for the remark @kbalage. 

LEGO Medium Stone Gray Wheel 43.2mm D. x 26mm Technic Racing Small with 6 Pinholes (51488 / 56908). 

ps. I like your facebook page and youtube channel!

[Jim]

These photo's or so cool!!

I rembember the days when the old dude used to post boring pics in his review. This is something else! 

[thekoRngear]

1 minute ago, Jim said:

These photo's or so cool!!

I rembember the days when the old dude used to post boring pics in his review. This is something else! 

Your pics are NEVER EVER boring. But yes, these pics are cool too.

Edited May 12, 2020 by thekoRngear

[LEGO Train 12 Volts]

Perfect review ...great pictures!

[Mechbuilds]

Amazing photo quality on the review and the structure is okay.
But for constructive criticism you should keep working on your English skills. 

As a set it's more of a display piece. 
Sure it's somewhat functional but it can't really be made RC because of steering related issues. 

[Vectormatic]

These are some very good pictures, but in terms of review, im not sure reveiwing your first technic set ever is a smart move, you are bound to miss nuances and details which the more experienced technic crowd is interested in. Personally im rather curious about the rear axle, and how the springs connect to it.

(Also, i really dont like the "please subscribe" self promotion of your youtube channel in a review)

[Erik Leppen]

I have to side with @vectormatic here. I'm not so sure what the idea is behind doing a review of a Technic set as someone not used to Technic building (whoever made the decision to let you do it). I mean, what's the purpose of the review? I'd say a review should inform our buying decisions. Personally, I'd say a good Technic review covers

• a comparison of the set to reasonable expectations and similar previous sets
• how the functions work, how well the functions perform, how complex they are, or how easy or hard it would have been to add a working steering wheel
• how strong or soft or bouncy the suspension is, how the suspension is set up (live axle? independent?), how the rear axle unit is connected and whether that's good
• whether the wheeliebar is an interesting function, why it's sticking out the bottom so much, and whether that's a problem
• the play value for the target audience, including durability of the model
• interesting sections of the build from a technic perspective
• possible original part usage
• any novelties from a technic perspective, parts-wise or technique-wise
• quality of the part inventory

We get relatively little of that here, so I'm afraid that the text doesn't help me decide whether it's a good set worth buying. Instead, we get a story about how interesting the piston elements are that are designed, apparently, in 1990. Yes, we know those parts as Technic builders (in fact, I have never owned the parts that came before it). (Now, I won't buy the set anyway, but I would have liked to know whether it's a good Technic set).

So yeah. I'll probably be accused of ranting on goodwilling writers now :), but I'm not really sure what people calling this a "perfect review" actually want/expect from a review. But whatever.

The experience of building a Technic set as a non-Technichead is surely interesting to read, but I wouldn't call it a review per se. In any case, thanks for the good read, a nicely written outsider's perspective, and of course the great photos (which are really very good!), and of course the photo of the parts inventory in the instruction book. :)

[kaelthas]

8 hours ago, Jim said:

These photo's or so cool!!

I rembember the days when the old dude used to post boring pics in his review. This is something else! 

Thanks, @Jim! Your pics are never boring and your reviews are top-notch!

8 hours ago, thekoRngear said:

Your pics are NEVER EVER boring. But yes, these pics are cool too.

Thanks, @thekoRngear! I agree with you that Jim's reviews are amazing and very detailed!

7 hours ago, LEGO Train 12 Volts said:

Perfect review ...great pictures!

Thank you @LEGO Train 12 Volts!

5 hours ago, Mechbuilds said:

Amazing photo quality on the review and the structure is okay.
But for constructive criticism you should keep working on your English skills. 

As a set it's more of a display piece. 
Sure it's somewhat functional but it can't really be made RC because of steering related issues. 

Thanks, @Mechbuilds! I will work on that and try better in my next review!

4 hours ago, vectormatic said:

These are some very good pictures, but in terms of review, im not sure reveiwing your first technic set ever is a smart move, you are bound to miss nuances and details which the more experienced technic crowd is interested in. Personally im rather curious about the rear axle, and how the springs connect to it.

(Also, i really dont like the "please subscribe" self promotion of your youtube channel in a review)

Thanks for the kind words and constructive comment, @vectormatic (I've deleted the subscribe button). Sorry about that.

2 hours ago, Erik Leppen said:

I have to side with @vectormatic here. I'm not so sure what the idea is behind doing a review of a Technic set as someone not used to Technic building (whoever made the decision to let you do it). I mean, what's the purpose of the review? I'd say a review should inform our buying decisions. Personally, I'd say a good Technic review covers

• a comparison of the set to reasonable expectations and similar previous sets
• how the functions work, how well the functions perform, how complex they are, or how easy or hard it would have been to add a working steering wheel
• how strong or soft or bouncy the suspension is, how the suspension is set up (live axle? independent?), how the rear axle unit is connected and whether that's good
• whether the wheeliebar is an interesting function, why it's sticking out the bottom so much, and whether that's a problem
• the play value for the target audience, including durability of the model
• interesting sections of the build from a technic perspective
• possible original part usage
• any novelties from a technic perspective, parts-wise or technique-wise
• quality of the part inventory

We get relatively little of that here, so I'm afraid that the text doesn't help me decide whether it's a good set worth buying. Instead, we get a story about how interesting the piston elements are that are designed, apparently, in 1990. Yes, we know those parts as Technic builders (in fact, I have never owned the parts that came before it). (Now, I won't buy the set anyway, but I would have liked to know whether it's a good Technic set).

So yeah. I'll probably be accused of ranting on goodwilling writers now :), but I'm not really sure what people calling this a "perfect review" actually want/expect from a review. But whatever.

The experience of building a Technic set as a non-Technichead is surely interesting to read, but I wouldn't call it a review per se. In any case, thanks for the good read, a nicely written outsider's perspective, and of course the great photos (which are really very good!), and of course the photo of the parts inventory in the instruction book. :)

Thank you very much for the list for improvement, @Erik Leppen! I've screenshot this and I will try to include these points in my next review! I know I'm a first-timer in technic and I'm sure I'll lack in the review so I put a lot of effort in photography to spice up the review so that at least readers can have a better visual of the set. I'm sure this is not a rant but a constructive criticism for me to become a better reviewer in the future! Thanks again, my friend! 

[brickless_kiwi]

The photos are good and crisp the addition of tools and a wood background suit.

The technical side of the review is ? I'm picking the way it reads your the opposite sex as that's what my missus would say working on cars .

The set only appeals to fans of the franchise. Me I think lego dropped the ball not making a ucs or flagship set.

However practice make perfect and I look forward to other technics review. 

[MangaNOID]

Oh man, that window trim misalignment and that awful panel work make it look like its been hail damaged. ugliest set ever IMO!

[Dylan M]

The "Review " is better for those who really understand the THEME....

 

Edited May 13, 2020 by Dylan M

[Vectormatic]

5 hours ago, brickless_kiwi said:

 

The set only appeals to fans of the franchise

I disagree with that. I appreciate the movies for what they are, but if i wanted to buy a car as a F&F merch thing, id want a riced out skyline or something similar.

 

This set though, is a pretty decent base for all kinds of modded/tuned charger builds, it is pretty easy to make a stock charger out of it, or go nuts and make it a pro-mod street drag-racer. And i think it has more appeal in that sense then as a F&F thing, because honestly, the franchise isnt about muscle cars, its just that one guy who consistently has them, the rest is exotica

[Jurss]

I bought ir for parts. OK, I gave it to my son to build it.

[Merlict]

Just the wheels alone are a massive fail. They look NOTHING like actual production wheels, just the same old grey crud from the 90s. 

I'm surprised both Dodge and the F and F producers signed off on this ugly set!

[agrof]

The photos are fantastic, and love the themed backdrop! 

[jodawill]

I think this photo explains my opinion of this set better than I could ever put into words:

 

 

They've made my points so well, comparing this thing to the real car, with a depiction to the right of what this model looks like (the brown stuff in the shovel).

Edited May 14, 2020 by jodawill

[TechnicRCRacer]

Just finished building the set today, IMO I don’t think it’s that bad. Great parts pack and if you don’t watch the movies I think it’s quite a fun set.

[kaelthas]

On 5/13/2020 at 9:12 AM, brickless_kiwi said:

The photos are good and crisp the addition of tools and a wood background suit.

The technical side of the review is ? I'm picking the way it reads your the opposite sex as that's what my missus would say working on cars .

The set only appeals to fans of the franchise. Me I think lego dropped the ball not making a ucs or flagship set.

However practice make perfect and I look forward to other technics review. 

Thanks, @brickless_kiwi! I'm not sure that I will pick another Technic set after this. 

On 5/13/2020 at 9:30 AM, MangaNOID said:

Oh man, that window trim misalignment and that awful panel work make it look like its been hail damaged. ugliest set ever IMO!

It does look unfinished at some point but it has its aesthetically pleasing views too. Particularly the front view with the Charger wording. 

 

On 5/13/2020 at 1:17 PM, Dylan M said:

 

 

 

 

On 5/13/2020 at 1:17 PM, Dylan M said:

The "Review " is better for those who really understand the THEME...

I'll try better next time. 

On 5/13/2020 at 7:12 PM, Jurss said:

I bought ir for parts. OK, I gave it to my son to build it.

The completed build is quite durable except for the light bluish grey plates and tiles in front of the headlights. 

On 5/14/2020 at 5:17 PM, Merlict said:

Just the wheels alone are a massive fail. They look NOTHING like actual production wheels, just the same old grey crud from the 90s. 

I'm surprised both Dodge and the F and F producers signed off on this ugly set!

Agreed on the wheels. 

On 5/14/2020 at 6:00 PM, agrof said:

The photos are fantastic, and love the themed backdrop! 

Thanks, @agrof! I used the wooden pellet found in my in law's balcony. Haha.

 

 

1

On 5/15/2020 at 3:05 AM, jodawill said:

On 5/15/2020 at 3:05 AM, jodawill said:

I think this photo explains my opinion of this set better than I could ever put into words:

They've made my points so well, comparing this thing to the real car, with a depiction to the right of what this model looks like (the brown stuff in the shovel).

Hmm... The wheels look different from the real car though. 

On 5/15/2020 at 12:03 PM, TechnicRCRacer said:

Just finished building the set today, IMO I don’t think it’s that bad. Great parts pack and if you don’t watch the movies I think it’s quite a fun set.

I enjoyed building it as a first timer in LEGO Technic!

[kaelthas]

1

[kaelthas]

I've found these interesting post in Eurobricks for your reference if you want to modify the car!

42111 Dom's Dodge Charger MODs and Improvements

This video by @kbalage is great too!

[Pato Sentado]

 It is something between scale modelling and true Technic. Things such as the lift bar, the fake steering wheel, the fake compressor... The alternate MOC pick-up is much better.