Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, AVCampos said:

Because people would complain that it's too simple, just one motor per function, like they do with the 42100. Whatever option TLG takes, somebody will complain that they should have chosen the opposite.

Then it'd better have a 8043 or 42070 gearbox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, AVCampos said:

Because people would complain that it's too simple, just one motor per function, like they do with the 42100. Whatever option TLG takes, somebody will complain that they should have chosen the opposite.

Never read a truer comment here to be honest. If TLG makes a 42100 it’s to simple with one motor per function as you said. If they make a model with 1 motor and distribution gearbox, the first thing people do is to motorize each function seperately and make it rc. 
 

If it’s a high piece count model there are too many pieces. If it’s fewer pieces it’s not detailed enough. 

Lets not even talk about the wide spread sticker hate going on.
 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 42100 is fun to play with but it isn't the most interesting to build (the gears are only here to increase torque).
If this set is fully RC with a gearbox to switch between functions (as the Volvo truck), it could be a good mix.

With 4 motors, I guess that it will be 2 motors for tracks, 1 motor for powering the functions, 1 motor for selecting the functions.

Almost 7000 pieces seems to be a lot. Didn't they say that 4000 was about the max possible. That it would be too heavy with more pieces?

Share this post


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

Because people would complain that it's too simple, just one motor per function, like they do with the 42100. Whatever option TLG takes, somebody will complain that they should have chosen the opposite.

The art to please everyone is one that nobody can master.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Akbalder said:

. That it would be too heavy with more pieces?

That high part count  may be caused by higly detailed blade, with more curves  like this one:
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Maaboo35 said:

No it doesn't.

Two for the drivetrain, two for the front and two for the back.

8 hours ago, falkn said:

Never read a truer comment here to be honest. If TLG makes a 42100 it’s to simple with one motor per function as you said. If they make a model with 1 motor and distribution gearbox, the first thing people do is to motorize each function seperately and make it rc. 
 

If it’s a high piece count model there are too many pieces. If it’s fewer pieces it’s not detailed enough. 

Lets not even talk about the wide spread sticker hate going on.

You sound as though you’re surprised that there are competing interests in this forum. It’s a fairly useless statement imo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Bartybum said:

You sound as though you’re surprised that there are competing interests in this forum. It’s a fairly useless statement imo

Spot-on. I'm of the camp that RC is interesting, but we haven't had a technically interesting (and cheaper...) manual model, like the Arocs, for quite awhile. The rough terrain crane wasn't extremely complicated, but it did work pretty well, but since then, we haven't had a manual flagship, or even a manual semi-flagship (due to the cancelled plane).

The Arocs did well with 2793 parts, and the RTC did well with 4056. I'd be fine with either sort of set, but I've personally had enough RC sets for a couple years, at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I believe that the Cat D11T Bulldozer 42131 will come with 2 control+ hubs as well as 8 motors. 2 motors for driving each track (4 total for driving to increase torque) and it may have 1 motor for raising and lowering of the blade, one motor for the tilt of the blade, one motor for raising and lowering the ripper, one motor for tilting the ripper.

The upcoming bulldozer has a little less pieces than the 42100, but it is priced the same as that excavator, so in order to compensate for the fewer number of pieces, I believe that there will be one more motor than the 42100.

Here are some of my wishlist functionalities.

1) Dual Differential Tank Drive. This would be the very first lego technic set with a dual differential tank drive! It would use 2 motors for driving and 2 motors for turning, so that it has the same torque while driving as other similar lego technic sets, like the 42100 excavator, which also uses 2 motors for driving.

2) Tank Suspension for the two tracks on either side. This would be the very first set to introduce track suspension. This set has about the same number of pieces as the 42100 excavator. However, most of the pieces of the 42100 go into the top superstructure. So the vast majority of the pieces from the upcoming bulldozer would go into the chassis itself. The two tracks on either side of this new bulldozer would be abnormally large for a lego technic set, so there will be plenty of room to include track suspension. This would be incredible!

I believe that if this upcoming set includes either a dual differential tank drive, track suspension, or even both of these mechanisms together, then the new bulldozer will be one of the greatest LEGO Technic sets ever! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Unbrickme I guess you're more of an optimist than I. Reading rumours that the Zetros isn't actually going to have any pneumatics brings the cynic out in me regarding this bulldozer.

Share this post


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

1) Dual Differential Tank Drive. This would be the very first lego technic set with a dual differential tank drive! It would use 2 motors for driving and 2 motors for turning, so that it has the same torque while driving as other similar lego technic sets, like the 42100 excavator, which also uses 2 motors for driving. 

 

I don't understand why people are so obsessed with a differential tracked steering? It may have been useful in the PF era where you couldn't control motors in an analog fashion, but nowadays it makes no sense. It only adds more useless gearing and friction losses and most of the time half the motors are not even working even furthermore reducing the effficiency. Finally most modern real machines do not use such systems so it's not even realistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Zerobricks I was just about to write the same. Plus it uses up plug position in the control+ box which could be used for more usefull functions. I think this will be a set with 1 smarthub, 1 motor for each track, 1 motor for blade lifting and 1 motor for ripper. Maybe we again get 100+ pieces for pushing around, same as the 42100 with 102 of these: 3941.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Zerobricks said:

I don't understand why people are so obsessed with a differential tracked steering? It may have been useful in the PF era where you couldn't control motors in an analog fashion

It's also useful for robotics, to be 100% sure the model moves in a straight line: no two motors run at the exact same speed without active sensor monitoring.

Share this post


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

It's also useful for robotics, to be 100% sure the model moves in a straight line: no two motors run at the exact same speed without active sensor monitoring.

Which PU has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Zerobricks said:

Which PU has.

Yeah exactly lol. No need for precise mechanical speed control when encoders do it for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Bartybum said:

You sound as though you’re surprised that there are competing interests in this forum. It’s a fairly useless statement imo

Not me.  I love the comment.  Packaging complaints as "interests" is sneaky, though I don't think that many will fall for it.  

There are many who read of an official Lego model, think, "well, this is not for me, I am not in their target group" and don't complain about it although they fully recognize it does not meet their interests.  

I share the poster's sentiments; the amount of complaining regarding what a set does and does not offer is rather amusing.  Especially given that many on this forum hold advanced engineering or other STEM-related training.   Especially for a forum audience who self-proclaims themselves to be "builders".   

The whole idea of deconstructing and rebuilding to one's specific please seems like a far-fetched idea to many.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, nerdsforprez said:

Packaging complaints as "interests" is sneaky, though I don't think that many will fall for it.  

How is it sneaky? It’s a 100% reasonable explanation as to why there seems to be constant complaining in this sub. Different people are interested in and want/expect different things from a set. When what they want isn’t realised, they’ll leave a comment complaining/discussing it.

6 hours ago, nerdsforprez said:

I share the poster's sentiments; the amount of complaining regarding what a set does and does not offer is rather amusing.  Especially given that many on this forum hold advanced engineering or other STEM-related training.   Especially for a forum audience who self-proclaims themselves to be "builders".   

That’s... that’s entirely not what falkn or I were talking about. I was calling him out for very clearly treating the AFOL Technic community as a single mind and having a Pikachu face at the fact that different people have different interests.

Edited by Bartybum

Share this post


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

When what they want isn’t realised, they’ll leave a comment complaining/discussing it.

Admittedly, complaining/discussing is the operative phrase here... but read your statement again.  I don't want to sound snarky.  I really don't.  But when you read your statement I don't think it is much of a defense to your position.  I won't say it, but it does not appear it reflects the type of age demographic EB is supposed to have as its members.   

Or..... they do what I mentioned.  They understand that Lego is a kid's toy, or at least a toy for worldwide consumption, and that there is no way possible to appease everyone, so if there are aspects or elements that don't fit their needs they recognize ITS LEGO and they can modify or change anything they want to.  Peace of mind settles in, and they sleep well at night.  

Its okay... not worth getting angry or anything over.  I'm not.  I admit it can be amusing though. But I am also of the opinion that "reviewing" Technic sets that are about 10 bucks (USD) and less than 200 pieces (even more clearly meant for children) is even more amusing.   Why an adult would ever do this truly baffles me (unless it is just for YT views).  Which clearly makes me the anomaly here because we are seeing an increasing  number of folks doing it.  But I recognize I am the minority here.  I would never, ever get on one of the threads reviewing these sets and voice my thoughts even though I could simply package it as an "alternative voice."  You see, it is quite possible to have a different opinion or interest in something, yet not feel the need to express it.  

 

1 hour ago, Bartybum said:

That’s... that’s entirely not what falkn or I were talking about. I was calling him out for very clearly treating the AFOL Technic community as a single mind and having a Pikachu face at the fact that different people have different interests.

Having a different interest or thought means you have to voice it on every single occasion it does not.      

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@nerdsforprez when you say "they understand Lego is a kids toy and move on" you are the one being sneaky. 

Firstly you presuppose the notion "Lego is a kids toy" as if it's a fact that applies to every Lego product (Lego do make more than one product) regardless of its age rating, price, complexity or intended appeal. But this is certainly not true for sets like the grand piano or the bonsai tree. They are not kids toys. They are toys for mostly adult collectors. Then you say this "fact" is something to simply be understood and move on, which implies anyone who disagrees with the "fact", which is not a fact, is somehow impaired in their capacities of reason and understanding. 

I think you need to understand, and are perfectly capable of understanding, that people do have different wants and expectations, and that it is perfectly reasonable for fans to want a set that costs £400 that's the flagship of arguably one of the most adult orientated themes to not cater ONLY to kids. This set should also appeal to adult collectors and builders and MOCcers alike, and I feel the opinion that TLG haven't really even tried if this set turns out to be just another overpriced repackaging of the same old unrealistic mechanics we've had too many times already is valid. Some may like it, and that's great, but if the AFOL crowd is as small as some like to say, then they really should try to appeal to as many of them as they can with these very large and expensive sets that mostly only adults can afford. Of course you can disagree, but to expect everyone to pretend that such a set is just a kids toy and move on, and then do a purposely poor job of hiding your appearance of intellectual superiority over those that don't do as you suggest, that's not a good way to win an argument, and to use your words, is sneaky, and no one is falling for it.

I could say a lot more on this but I've edited this comment enough already and it's time we moved on.

Edited by allanp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/3/2021 at 9:44 AM, nerdsforprez said:

Having a different interest or thought means you have to voice it on every single occasion it does not.

Why not? Whenever we complain here, we always spell out what we're annoyed at (assuming someone else hasn't spelled it out yet). As adult consumers, we have money we want to throw at TLG. We want them to produce sets we'll want to buy. The only way for that to happen is for us to voice ourselves to get our wishes heard. If it bothers you, falkn and AV that much (and we know it does, otherwise this conversation wouldn't be happening) then... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Share this post


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

it's time we moved on.

Agreed.
While this somewhat goes under "Set discussion", it would be better if we open a new topic specifically about the discussion you guys are having, while we keep this topic primarily for set discussion.

Thanks all :thumbup:

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.