REVIEW: 8265 Wheel Loader

[CP5670]

Technic went studless because it's a better construction system. To claim it's because they can sell more bushings is like conspiracy theories. *******

Technic is for kids, kids need more steps to follow the instructions and build correct. I find it boring too, to add a few elements in each step, but then I'm not a kid in the lower end of the target group.

Phneumatics, great but expensive. Hard to make a buisness on something that's too expensive.

Why is it a better construction system? I can think of numerous reasons to the contrary, and I would write a whole essay on it if anyone from the company's design group would read it. However, from the company's point of view, I can imagine that manufacturing costs for studless beams are lower than studded ones, since they can be made with two-sided molds instead of requiring four-sided ones.

The kids of 10 or 20 years ago seemed to do fine with a lot more parts per step. Either kids have gotten dumber over time, or it is only TLG's perception of kids that has changed. I find the latter much more likely.

Do you have any source for pneumatics being more expensive than LAs? The prices on the Lego Education site indicate the opposite. Pneumatic pistons can be bought at two for $10, while a single LA costs $15. For any models using more than one LA, pneumatics would seem to be more economical even when you take the cost of a pump and switches into account.

[Anio]

Why is it a better construction system? I can think of numerous reasons to the contrary, and I would write a whole essay on it if anyone from the company's design group would read it. However, from the company's point of view, I can imagine that manufacturing costs for studless beams are lower than studded ones, since they can be made with two-sided molds instead of requiring four-sided ones.

Studless is far away better than studful, excepted for very large models such as cranes which need rigidity.

Do you have any source for pneumatics being more expensive than LAs? The prices on the Lego Education site indicate the opposite. Pneumatic pistons can be bought at two for $10, while a single LA costs $15. For any models using more than one LA, pneumatics would seem to be more economical even when you take the cost of a pump and switches into account.

Call Lego Direct. Then, you will see that the pneumatics are twice as much expensive than the LA. ;)

And contrary to LA, pneumatics must be "airtight".

Edited September 19, 2009 by Anio

[Front]

Not sure if the ripped me off in the employee store, but I paid nearly the same for 9641 (Lego education, 16 tubes, 1 pump, 2 big pistons, 2 small pistons, 1 tank, 3 switches, 5 T-connectors) than I did for the set in this review. Offcourse price of education sets may be more expensive because of lower sales volume.

[CP5670]

Studless is far away better than studful, excepted for very large models such as cranes which need rigidity.

Of course it is, it's cheaper for the company.

Seriously though, both extremes are bad for different reasons. Many sets around 1996-2000 had a mix of both (some sets had mostly studded beams but used them like studless ones). Completely studded more accurately describes the Expert Builder sets in the early 1980s, while I consider sets from 2003 onward to be completely studless.

Call Lego Direct. Then, you will see that the pneumatics are twice as much expensive than the LA. ;)

And contrary to LA, pneumatics must be "airtight".

Interesting. What are the actual prices there? It makes sense to compare the lowest prices overall instead of looking at one source only.

I actually like many things about LAs and think they work very well in this model. I just want to know more about the production costs.

Not sure if the ripped me off in the employee store, but I paid nearly the same for 9641 (Lego education, 16 tubes, 1 pump, 2 big pistons, 2 small pistons, 1 tank, 3 switches, 5 T-connectors) than I did for the set in this review. Offcourse price of education sets may be more expensive because of lower sales volume.

Yes, 9641 is not such a good deal. It's cheaper than that in the US ($55), but it's still better to buy the Lego Education service packs like W970118. The only reason to get 9641 is for the pressure gauge, which you can't buy individually like the other parts.

[Anio]

Interesting. What are the actual prices there?

I don't know exactly, but : http://www.setechnic.com/Forum/topic921.html

Those price may have change a bit since we haven't updated them for several months.

Now, the pneumatics may cost about 7,5€.

The LA is still about 4€, I think.

[JunkstyleGio]

And to get back on topic.....

I'm ordering my copy tomorrow. for only

Edited September 25, 2009 by JunkstyleGio

[JunkstyleGio]

Bulding, taking pictures, making movies .

I've been building for two days. (Ofcourse not continiously...)

And now i'm finished, so here are my comments!

It is big and it's yellow; the former i like very much, the latter i don't. (I wish they made it in orange. or dark-red....)

Seriously:

It truely is a fun built with various interresting building techniques. I really like the "bending/folding" of the chassis.

The big bucket works great with the LA's. All the ladders, railings and other greebles give this model at bit of a model-team look.

(BTW The PF-set is a serious must on this model, so i think it's kind of strange they didn't add those into the model in the 1st place...)

I'm normally not that much into wheeloaders and machines like this but it works for me!

So: 9/10. (High points for the price i paid...)

PS: Has anybody got a idea on how to incorperate the PF pole-reverser into the model on a less prominent place?

Edited September 25, 2009 by JunkstyleGio

[CloneCommanderDelta7]

Technic went studless because it's a better construction system...

Technic is for kids, kids need more steps to follow the instructions and build correct. I find it boring too, to add a few elements in each step, but then I'm not a kid in the lower end of the target group...

Studless sets are smooth and generally look better too.

If you find it boring, then skip some of the steps...

[astra]

I've bought mine yesterday also for 39,00 euro. Now if I could only find the time to build it...

[Jetro]

I've bought mine yesterday also for 39,00 euro. Now if I could only find the time to build it...

€39 and you bought only one??

[astra]

yeah... only one...

Problem is, the stores that have that sale use that to get you in the store, so that you woudl buy more. But stocks are very low, usually one or two per shop, and they won't restock it when they're sold out. That particular sale started yesterday at 17.00h, when I got there at 17.01 I already had the last one...

[JunkstyleGio]

yeah... only one...

Problem is, the stores that have that sale use that to get you in the store, so that you woudl buy more. But stocks are very low, usually one or two per shop, and they won't restock it when they're sold out. That particular sale started yesterday at 17.00h, when I got there at 17.01 I already had the last one...

My store had more than 10 sets available... But who cares. I got my copy and you got yours!!

[Blakbird]

I've had some requests for a look at the way I modified the pole reverser position on my 8265, so here you go. I didn't make a big change, but moving it down and forward does a lot to help hide it and make it less conspicuous. Since there are no studs to attach it to here, the second picture shows how I used an axle through the center of the switch to retain it. It works well though you can no longer open the rear hatch with it configured this way.

Edited June 6, 2012 by Blakbird

[CloneCommanderDelta7]

...you can no longer open the rear hatch with it configured this way.

OH NOOO!

But it does look good, I guess even that it doesn't close anymore, the view of the engine and the spinning blade isn't lost either.

[CP5670]

It works well though you can no longer open the rear hatch with it configured this way.

I locked the hatch in place on the other side just for stability. The entire rear section is otherwise only held up by the beams on the bottom, and it creates some unnecessary friction in the axle leading to the manual knob.

[JunkstyleGio]

OMG, that was too easy. Guess i forgot that the Pf-switch had a axelhole.....

Looks better anyway!

[Mortymore]

I just finish motorizing my 8265 Front Loader according to Attila's instructions:

http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=399314

I found that the way Attila installs the motor in front of the Loader, makes some stress to some parts, so I did it in some slightly different way, as you can see at my BS folder:

http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=404546

I'm not quite happy with the results since somewhere at the final assembly steps I think I might have cause some sort of problem because my Loader gags a bit when it starts to move forward or backwards. So it still's a WIP.

Regards

Edited October 6, 2009 by Mortymore

[tomacwhite]

I've just finished building the 8265 model and it really is a lovely Technic set. I can't believe how many gears are in it, its mad! It's very complex and was a joy to build. Like others have said, the lifting really needs motorization so I'll pick up the motor kit at some point to get the most out of the model.

One slight downer was part my fault, part instructions, where I accidentally put in two black pieces instead of using grey ones. They were far deep into the model and it would have required a massive rebuild to fix, so I have left them there (I noticed this morning when building the cockpit, so was right at the end of construction). You can't really tell as they are two tiny two-hole parts, but its slightly annoying. I guess I should have checked the colours more carefully, but as there were black pieces in the original step too I assumed they were the correct ones to use. Lego really need to sort out their colour printing issues in the manuals, as its very hard to tell the difference between black and grey. Other than that, the manual was excellent as always.

I really love this model, and I hope that the 2010 Offroad Crane is just as complex to build! :)

[j3tang]

I've not attempted any mods yet, but plan on doing so. I've been doing some searching and came across this on BS: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?m=sarafiel

There seems to be 2 different mods, one for Worm Steering and the other for LA Steering.

It looks to me like they are both full RC mods, just that there are two choices for how you want the steering done, worm gear or linear actuator.

Lastly, how does this compare to the Attila mod that a few others have followed previously?

Edited March 10, 2010 by j3tang

[trekman]

I've not attempted any mods yet, but plan on doing so. I've been doing some searching and came across this on BS: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?m=sarafiel

There seems to be 2 different mods, one for Worm Steering and the other for LA Steering.

It looks to me like they are both full RC mods, just that there are two choices for how you want the steering done, worm gear or linear actuator.

Lastly, how does this compare to the Attila mod that a few others have followed previously?

I bought the 8265 set at Christmas and had already purchased an extra motor so that I could fully motorise the model. I opted to used Sarafiel's LA steering mod instructions. However when I was building it and then tested it, I discovered that the drive arrangement from the XL motor to the rear differential did not work very well. It needed to be geared down a bit more. I then had to relocate the XL motor horizontally, and adjust the drive to the LA for the steering. To keep the correct appearance I ended up shortening the V6 engine to a V4, but everything else looked ok. i would say that Sarafiel is to be commended for the work he did in creating the instructions, which were a great help to me in the construction of the 8265. Just bear in mind that you will have to do some tweeking here and there.

Despite 8265 not being a flagship set, it is one of the best sets for functionality and for parts that I have seen for a while.

[j3tang]

I bought the 8265 set at Christmas and had already purchased an extra motor so that I could fully motorise the model. I opted to used Sarafiel's LA steering mod instructions. However when I was building it and then tested it, I discovered that the drive arrangement from the XL motor to the rear differential did not work very well. It needed to be geared down a bit more. I then had to relocate the XL motor horizontally, and adjust the drive to the LA for the steering. To keep the correct appearance I ended up shortening the V6 engine to a V4, but everything else looked ok. i would say that Sarafiel is to be commended for the work he did in creating the instructions, which were a great help to me in the construction of the 8265. Just bear in mind that you will have to do some tweeking here and there.

Despite 8265 not being a flagship set, it is one of the best sets for functionality and for parts that I have seen for a while.

Wow, even those instructions required modifications? Has anyone attempted the worm gear version?

Are there any pros/cons to each of them? still trying to figure out which one to attempt and whether I should fork out for the LA :D

[Mortymore]

I used one Linear Actuator for steering my Loader

You can see on this video how it behaves

I never attempt using a worm on 8265, but I just finished the motorization of the Hauler 8264, and there I used a worm attached to the turntable, mainly because the turntable was already there, and because there's not much space to work on the Hauler in order to be possible to implement steering with a Linear Actuator.

Cumps

Edited June 5, 2010 by Mortymore

[Paul B Technic]

I have just purchased this set, I can't wait to build it.

Paul

[jantjeuh]

Just finished building the 8265.. it's a great set indeed :) Fun to build, and looks excellent as well. Now to motorize it..

Edited October 30, 2010 by jantjeuh

[DLuders]

@ jantjeuh: Here's a

outlining Sarafiel's instructions for motorizing the 8265 Wheel Loader: