Smaller UCS Sets?

[Faramir]

I've been thinking about all of the UCS Star Wars sets, how all of them look really great to me but I never have the money to buy them after everything else.

That got me thinking about the ideas of smaller UCS sets-- not to change the scale, as thats what it's all about, but if TLC made some sets of smaller vehicles that would cost, say, about $30-$50. Maybe a speeder bike, or a JSF?

Tell me what you think, just curious.

[Justin2224]

The UCS sets are ment to be big and expensive. The Y-wing is the smallest set I can thing of.

[Derek]

Well what about that special edition Naboo Fighter? That was UCS and was only like $30...

dp

[Walter Kovacs]

The Special Edition Naboo Starfighter was a UCS set, and it sold for $40.

I know other AFOLs have produced smaller UCS scale models, including the aforementioned Speeder Bike, some include instructions. Here is one that I know of off the top of my head.

BTW, his Speeder Bike design would cost ~$10 USD at Bricklink, not including Shipping.

EDIT: Darthperson beat me to the punch. Darn my verifying facts.

Edited July 22, 2008 by Walter Kovacs

[Dovchenko]

The UCS sets are ment to be big and expensive. The Y-wing is the smallest set I can thing of.

Your smallest UCS set would be the Naboo Fighter at 40$.

Your largest UCS set would be the Millennium Falcon at 500$.

Great thinking as usual, Faramir. We SHOULD have some small, small UCS sets. Things that can accompany the larger ones. Maybe at the largest, an 800 piece Tie Fighter to go with the Tie Advanced and all? At the smallest? I'm thinking a 250 piece Darth Maul Speeder Bike. Maybe a Trade Federation Droid Tank, at 700 pieces or so? Maybe they could combine multiple ships, like the Obi-Wan Jedi Starfighter and Anakin's Jedi Starfighter. Maybe a Delta or ETA with about 600 pieces. A UCS Landspeeder would be awesome.

Besides, I can't afford a 100$ ship everytime I want a quality set!

[Faramir]

Forgot I made this for a while, (sorry!) So I'll get to some responses now.

Well what about that special edition Naboo Fighter? That was UCS and was only like $30...

dp

True, but if you look at it, the only really "UCS" thing about it was the stand and card. Not any extra amount of detail, and about the same size, if not smaller, than the 2007 version.

I know other AFOLs have produced smaller UCS scale models, including the aforementioned Speeder Bike, some include instructions. Here is one that I know of off the top of my head.

BTW, his Speeder Bike design would cost ~$10 USD at Bricklink, not including Shipping.

Maybe $10 could be a bit too small. No offense to the builder of course, but TLG could probably put together a larger, $30 bike with greebles, detail, and about 300 pieces. That sounds fair to me.

Your smallest UCS set would be the Naboo Fighter at 40$.

Your largest UCS set would be the Millennium Falcon at 500$.

Great thinking as usual, Faramir. We SHOULD have some small, small UCS sets. Things that can accompany the larger ones. Maybe at the largest, an 800 piece Tie Fighter to go with the Tie Advanced and all? At the smallest? I'm thinking a 250 piece Darth Maul Speeder Bike. Maybe a Trade Federation Droid Tank, at 700 pieces or so? Maybe they could combine multiple ships, like the Obi-Wan Jedi Starfighter and Anakin's Jedi Starfighter. Maybe a Delta or ETA with about 600 pieces. A UCS Landspeeder would be awesome.

Besides, I can't afford a 100$ ship everytime I want a quality set!

Lots of other good ideas there that I hadn't even considered! I'd love to see how Lego could make darth Maul's bike

Edited August 3, 2008 by Faramir

[Oky]

There is a guy called Gareth over at FBTB who made a whole bunch of excellent UCS models. Most of them are quite small and would make great, affordable sets! Check them out in Gareth's Model Shop.

[Captain Green Hair]

There is a guy called Gareth over at FBTB who made a whole bunch of excellent UCS models. Most of them are quite small and would make great, affordable sets! Check them out in Gareth's Model Shop.

Definitly some nice ones in there, especially that hotrod speeder, yeah me likes hotrods!

Thanks for sharing that Oky!

[ptdapen]

At first I was going to say that they were meant to be expensive, but judging from this, I think smaller vehicles should be included too. I would enjoy a cool Imperial Shuttle to store my troops inside. One thing I do disagree with is making huge TIE Fighters and such. Maybe bigger, but I don't want one without a pilot.

[Faramir]

Well this topic kinda died about a month ago, but I had another idea so I decided to add it onto here instead of posting a new topic... what about UCS lightsabers?

You know, it could be just the hilt, maybe on a display stand, they can make different ones for different characters,maybe about $20 each. Any thoughts, or are you going to let my thread just die... again?

[Matteo Kenobi]

Well I for one would LOVE smaller UCS sets, in fact I almost brought myself to buy the UCS At-st but i came to my senses and realized there were better options for me and if I was gonna spend $50 I would rather get the Hoth Rebel base (which I did and ended up building my beloved echo base diorama out of) so I mean a $50-$70 UCS set would be AMAZING in my opionon, I'd like a UCS Jedi Starfighter (maybe like CW obi wans, that would be a GREAT thing for the CW legos series thus a smart move on TLGs part). I for one love this idea and hope TLG hears us

EDIT: I don't know about the UCS lightsaber, it would just seem...akward.

Edited August 26, 2008 by Matteo Kenobi

[darkrebellion]

The UCS lightsabers hilts ideas sound cool and if you put to think, who doesn

Edited August 26, 2008 by darkrebellion

[KimT]

Making a 20 USD lightsabre isn't really an UCS sets, is it?

Ultimate Collector's Millenium Falcon - the name implies big and awesome.

Not small and pesky.

When TLG introduced the UCS Naboo Fighter a lot of fans got mad. It was too small and had nothing to do with the idea of UCS. Smaller sets are..well, just smaller sets.

UCS needs that shining light and angelic chorus feeling in order to be special. There's nothing ultimate in buying a smaller UCS set for 20 USD. You have to be serious to buy the sets.

So no, I don't see any small UCS sets - EVER.

[Zzz]

UCS needs that shining light and angelic chorus feeling in order to be special. There's nothing ultimate in buying a smaller UCS set for 20 USD. You have to be serious to buy the sets.

So no, I don't see any small UCS sets - EVER.

I may add something... I guess the "problem" is also, that the "system" sets raised in quality so much that they ARE actually the wanted smaller UCS sets already. Just look at the newer Y-Wing or N-1. Compared to the 1999 models, these are outstanding and marvelous! And it is obvious that in 1999 we wanted UCS cause the system models were not advanced and nice loking at all.

[Fallenangel]

Making a 20 USD lightsabre isn't really an UCS sets, is it?

Ultimate Collector's Millenium Falcon - the name implies big and awesome.

Not small and pesky.

When TLG introduced the UCS Naboo Fighter a lot of fans got mad. It was too small and had nothing to do with the idea of UCS. Smaller sets are..well, just smaller sets.

UCS needs that shining light and angelic chorus feeling in order to be special. There's nothing ultimate in buying a smaller UCS set for 20 USD. You have to be serious to buy the sets.

So no, I don't see any small UCS sets - EVER.

Indeed, with the 10129 UCS snowspeeder LEGO actually had an opportunity to make a really small but nice UCS set (if it had been in 1/24 scale like 7191 and 7181)but instead it looks like they opted for studio scale (which is obviously a lot larger) since there was more of a chance to be "big and awesome" (and, of course, pricey).

I think that at this point UCS pretty much connotes a sort of grandeur rather than any sort of scale - which is why 10179 is pretty much the epitome of LEGO UCS (minute inaccuracies aside) despite the fact that it is scaled to minifigures. That's also probably why when we saw the price tag and piece count for 10215 people were so upset (since 676 pieces at $100 is unheard of unless it's an Architecture set). Also keep in mind that LEGO is always trying to make money so with UCS they are tapping into an AFOL fanbase who would actually be willing to pay these enormous sums - which would require them to keep making big UCS sets.

Another factor - UCS sets are set apart from regular sets by their size; if UCS sets are smaller they can't be as detailed or accurate. In this aspect 10026 suffers greatly, since at that size there were certain proportions and angles (curves?) it was unable to adhere to. What if LEGO had released 7191 in 1/48 scale? (It would be smaller than 4502.) Imagine how much greeble and fancy gears they would have had to exclude to fit it to that scale. At that point, it wouldn't be much different from a System set.

Sure, smaller UCS sets are possible. There was a small model of the Millennium Falcon used for filming (around 30in I think it was) in addition to the 5-ft. studio model, and the starwars.com Databank mentions that there were 13" TIE Interceptor studio models. And the Imperator-II Star Destroyers used in scenes with the Executor were around the same size as the new 8099 midi-scale set. But UCS renditions at such small scales wouldn't allow for neither the awesome detail and grandeur nor the insane price tag we have come to associate UCS sets with.

I may add something... I guess the "problem" is also, that the "system" sets raised in quality so much that they ARE actually the wanted smaller UCS sets already. Just look at the newer Y-Wing or N-1. Compared to the 1999 models, these are outstanding and marvelous! And it is obvious that in 1999 we wanted UCS cause the system models were not advanced and nice loking at all.

Nah. LEGO does try with their System sets but for the most part the proportions are terrible and there exist numerous flaws as a result of bizarre building techniques (for example, those random huge gaps we've been seeing in every Technic-System Star Wars set ever released).

Edited November 5, 2010 by fallenangel327

[Anio]

IMO, UCS is nothing more than details/realism. It has definitely nothing to do with scale, part number, size, etc.

So, I think that 10026 is a great set.

And I challenge anyone to build a better looking Naboo N-1 starfighter than the 10026.

[Big Cam]

Seems opinions go both ways. I personally love the bigger grander sets, but then again I don't own any due to the price.

Cheaper sets would be more accesable, but was that TLG intent? I don't think so. A UCS lightsaber does make sense, but to make it lifesize, it would take a massive amount of bricks, and I fear would actually end up costing hundreds. Just in the shear number of bricks. Of course if they don't go lifesize, it would be much more affordable.

I think the UCS sets are fine the way they are, the regular SW line is getting so good they rival the UCS sets at time I think.

[StoutFiles]

UCS is Ultimate Collector for a reason. They need to be more detailed, and with the extra detail means a higher price.

That said, a large majority of the ships still look great without the UCS label.