Review: 10134 UCS Y-Wing

[Fallenangel]

Excellent review, Rufus. Isn't it funny how LEGO neglected to fix the problem of elongated engines on the 2007 Y-wing? That always bothered me and that's the one thing I don't like about the set.

It's been three years since the last Rebel Y-wing... I believe a re-release (with shorter engines) is in order.

And Rufus it's not the Clone Wars Y-wing they took the plates off of. (The Clone Wars Y-wing was a useless fabrication like the Delta-7B.) There is another Y-wing featured in the Incredible Cross Sections with the plates on.

The detailing on this set is amazing!

[Corvus]

Thank you for your very thorough review! I'll be adding this to the list of sets I really should have gotten when I had the chance.

Although, the overly long engine pods are going to really bug me whenever I see it now.

[ipwnlego]

i remember getting this for a christmas present and it was the most fun i had building any lego set

[Rufus]

Thanks everyone.

::applause::

::bow::

So, if this set is the queen of greebles, which set is the king?

I said 'queen' because ships are usually referred to as female. Though, if I had to nominate any for the title of King, I'd say the UCS Star Destroyer - that's a pretty masculine ship. Or the suggestive nose of the X-wing ... but that isn't so heavily greebled.

Isn't it funny how LEGO neglected to fix the problem of elongated engines on the 2007 Y-wing?

And Rufus it's not the Clone Wars Y-wing they took the plates off of.

Thanks for the info. I don't think the 2007 System Y-wing's length is so bad.

Although, the overly long engine pods are going to really bug me whenever I see it now.

Sorry! It looks great despite the flaw.

[gotoAndLego]

Yes, I agree, 7658 is a great System rendition of the Y-wing.

I put together the used one I just bought and its a great set. I also like the new yellow one.

[Ratshot]

What a great set this was, the Lego Company certainly packed in the details with this one.

Thanks for the review

[drdavewatford]

Another awesome review, Rufus - well done !

This is one of my favourite sets, so it's wonderful to see it given such a loving and detailed review.

If anyone out there is wondering whether to pick this set up from eBay or Bricklink then wonder no more.....go buy it - you won't regret it !

Dr. D.

[fff]

Just one more time, brilliant review Rufus. Initially i did not like it since i found it so static... but my mind change fortunately

[Brickus]

I just bought this set after reading Rufus' review, and this is definitely an underrated set.

[DFOL]

First of all my respects for this outstanding review, this has got to be one of the most elaborate and well written reviews I've read so far. I enjoyed it thoroughly and hope to read many more from you!

I too own this set, and without a doubt I can say that it is the pride of my collection. After reading your remarks about how the proportions seem off, I compared the model to images of the real Y-Wing model and you were spot on, the engines do seem to be a bit too long and the cockpit too small in comparison. However, I took away the last section of each of the pylons and reattached the rear ends with the wheels with a handful of 2 stud-long technic axles, and... Well, do try it for yourself and tell me what you think of how it influences the overall proportions.

[Aeroeza]

Hey Rufus!

A great review again! It seems your work has reminded many of the wonders of the UCS line. Lets hope we've not seen the last of them....

[Cavannus]

Excellent review with a deep analysis (i.e. not only a description of the pictures shown, but a great reflection on all the aspects shown) and a lot of information. I've never bought this set because I'm not a fan a fan of SW, but you review helps me make an idea of its pros and cons. Thanks!

Edited April 6, 2010 by Cavannus

[thegurumb]

Great review just makes me want one more, but the prices are kiling me....

[StoutFiles]

This set always angers me, the whole point of UCS is supposed to be accuracy. Or so I thought. Yes, it looks better with longer engines, but it shouldn't be designed that way.

If I'm playing top dollar for a set, I demand at the very least an accurate scale.

[KimT]

This set always angers me, the whole point of UCS is supposed to be accuracy. Or so I thought. Yes, it looks better with longer engines, but it shouldn't be designed that way.

If I'm playing top dollar for a set, I demand at the very least an accurate scale.

So you want the Death Star to be accurate?

I disagree - this IS the best of the UCS sets in my opinion.

Ever since they released it, it's been my favorite.

[Anio]

This set always angers me, the whole point of UCS is supposed to be accuracy. Or so I thought. Yes, it looks better with longer engines, but it shouldn't be designed that way.

If I'm playing top dollar for a set, I demand at the very least an accurate scale.

When I was talking about "Lego adaptations"...

[StoutFiles]

So you want the Death Star to be accurate?

I disagree - this IS the best of the UCS sets in my opinion.

Ever since they released it, it's been my favorite.

Are you referring to the Death Star II? I think they did a pretty good job considering Lego by design is not sphere-friendly. The Death Star, if it even is UCS, is a playset so it doesn't need to be accurate.

We agree to disagree. If you can't play with the ship...if it's designed to be strictly a model...then it better be accurate. And it isn't. It's not something that would have difficult by design, they just chose to make it less accurate.

[Anio]

they just chose to make it less accurate.

I see you have not understood yet.

Is there a volonteer to explain ? (English is not my native language, it hard for me to explain that kind of nuance. ).

Edited March 27, 2011 by Anio

[Fallenangel]

This set always angers me, the whole point of UCS is supposed to be accuracy. Or so I thought. Yes, it looks better with longer engines, but it shouldn't be designed that way.

If I'm playing top dollar for a set, I demand at the very least an accurate scale.

Didn't you say, though...

That's only for personal preference. Not one person of the many people who have seen my sets has examined them for movie accuracy, or even cared. They're ships built out of Legos, that's the novelty. They look great on display either way, its up to you how much time/money you want to spend on accuracy, especially when 100% accuracy is impossible to obtain.

Besides, if the blatant inaccuracy in a UCS set is what bothers you, I really don't think 10134 is any worse than the others. In this case, I'm thinking it probably has to do with the fact that quite a few people don't seem to like the way the Y-wing studio miniature looks (i.e . they prefer this inaccurate yet sleeker version).

Don't get me wrong, it bothers me too, but then I never buy UCS sets.

Anio said:

A good MOCer has to understand that building things in Lego requires to build things differently from what they are in reality. Not because the builder lakes skills or whatever. But because the model looks better with small Lego adaptations.

And what is hard for a MOCer or a set designer (who is actually an official MOCer ) is precisely to find these adaptations.

And I agree.

(Anio, if you'd like to add, maybe you could just post in French and someone could translate...)

[StoutFiles]

Didn't you say, though...

I consider a set designed to be played with by kids with mini figures can not be compared to one that is much more expensive and forced to sit on a shelf. One should be fun, one should be accurate. This is my problem with some of the UCS sets. I'm paying extra for the accuracy, I should get it.

[Praiter Yed]

I've always admired this set from afar, the greebling is tremendous! Except, personally I feel all the colours don't quite gel - of course that's easily changed, and your excellent review has made this set all the more tempting. Now I'll just have to keep telling myself 'Save your money Praiter Yed. Save your money'.

[AndyC]

I consider a set designed to be played with by kids with mini figures can not be compared to one that is much more expensive and forced to sit on a shelf. One should be fun, one should be accurate. This is my problem with some of the UCS sets. I'm paying extra for the accuracy, I should get it.

Wheras I'd see it as paying for something that is going to look good, if i wanted something that looked exactly like a studio model I wouldn't be looking to Lego for it. Not that 'accuracy' really has much meaning when discussing something that doesn't really exist at all. Even the various studio models used in filming don't always entirely agree.

[Aeroeza]

I consider a set designed to be played with by kids with mini figures can not be compared to one that is much more expensive and forced to sit on a shelf. One should be fun, one should be accurate. This is my problem with some of the UCS sets. I'm paying extra for the accuracy, I should get it.

I'm not sure Lego ever advertised or admitted to a UCS' as being 'accurate'. I'd say you're paying extra for size and attention to detail rather than any claims to precision or accuracy. Instead terms such as 'larger and more detailed', realistic detail', incredibly detailed' and 'authentically detailed' are used in promotional material and product descriptions.

That being said there is obviously a nod to accuracy with these sets but certainly there remains a scope for artistic license as well (the brick demands this). Many UCS fans evaluate a particular builds success based on some definition of 'accuracy' but given the source material is often contradictory or simply unavailable then these definitions become rather idiosyncratic and therefore awkward to debate when applied to a particular build.

However, if all someone wants is accuracy above all else then there really isn't many Lego products out there for the proverbial Mr. 'Should be to Scale and Super Accurate' Pedantic Pants. A UCS tends to reflect a 'Near enough is good enough' approach but 'cool enough is near enough' also enters the equation and the UCS Y-Wing is a fine example of this ethos.

[drdavewatford]

Thanks for the superb review, Rufus ! The Y-Wing is one of my favourite UCS sets, and your review really does it justice.

Criticisms regarding accuracy are IMHO absurd - as if anybody needed telling, LEGO is not a medium which lends itself to the kind of precision you can get with snap-together models from the likes of Revell for a fraction of the price.

I hope and pray we get another couple of Star Wars UCS sets this year...... After the superb Imperial Shuttle and the so-so Jedi Starfighter last year, I wonder what's next ?

D.

[gogocar]

Rufus, you are really the best reviewer here. Plenty of sharp pictures, detailed step by step build, ...

I mean this, at-at, sonic boom,... Keep on!