Never Ending Struggle?

[Porty]

I have a few questions... First of all, are there any MOC's which are completely realistic in authenticity and functionality, or sets even? Because it seems like even the best of the best (like Sariel in his book) say that basically 'perfection isn't possible'. Or am I reading wrong? Secondly, I have a phobia about batteries losing their charge. How long (about) would it take for a 8878, Nxt Rechargeable battery, or EV3 rechargeable battery to get to where it cannot hold a charge very well?

[vmln8r]

Forget the little things.

'perfection isn't possible'

Trying to get close is the fun part, right?

How long (about) would it take for a 8878, Nxt Rechargeable battery, or EV3 rechargeable battery to get to where it cannot hold a charge very well?

I've had my 8878's for almost two years. I use them -all the time- and they're still going strong.

[Rishab N]

i think that perfection is impossible as there is always something wrong with a MOC like "it has HOG", "it doesn't look realistic, etc.

It just depends on who is looking at it

Some people can admire a MOC while others can completely hate it?

But yes trying to get close is the best part

[allanp]

It all depends where you draw the line. Right off the bat you are building with plastic which is not authentic. There are no proper bearings or working combustion engines so nothing made from lego can be completely realistic. Compromises have to be made. I think the MOCs with some of the least compromises made would be those made by nicjasno. However to achieve that he has cut and glued parts all over the place, don't look if you are a purist. As for sets, I think the closest would probably be the unimog. It's one of my top 4 all time favorite sets however there are somethings that are not realistic, excluding such things needed to make it an affordable toy like being made of plastic and using compressed air instead of oil. These include things like the outriggers and the turntable being linkage and 100% gear driven respectively, and having no gear shifting transmission. It may be a never ending struggle for perfection, but you can get alot closer to it than even the unimog and you'll learn enough along the way to make it always worth trying.

As for losing charge, you would be best to contact Lego for that information, normally batteries can have about 500-1000 charge cycles in them before being useless, but they can vary quite alot.

Edited February 6, 2013 by allanp

[dhc6twinotter]

I think the definition of "perfection" varies between each builder. Each builder seems to have their own rules that they follow, and their own idea of what makes a perfect moc. My idea of a perfect moc is one that looks good, is built well, and has realistic functions. To answer your question, I think it is possible to build a perfect moc, but a moc that is perfect to me may not be perfect to somebody else.

IMHO, the Unimog is about the closest LEGO has been to creating a perfect Technic set. The only thing missing is pneumatic stabilizers. But, there are many other sets and mocs that I would consider to be realistic in authenticity and functionality. Would these be considered perfect? Some probably would be.

Edited February 6, 2013 by dhc6twinotter

[Porty]

Thanks guys, VERY good answers... Ok, makes me feel a lot better about my Lego addiction...

[Paul202]

As the others said, it's hard to reach perfection in lego. However, the point is trying to reach it.

[Porty]

As a side note, what made me think this is Allanp's post about 42009:

"Real cranes? Real cranes don't have LAs either, the mechanisms were clearly NOT inspired by real cranes. Comparing 42009 to real cranes? What a joke Oh, but maybe I missed your point, maybe you meant that only it's appearence were inspired by real cranes, I forgot that technic is now only concerned with looking authentic as opposed to actually being authentic.

Ah, remember when tehnic had those three core pricipals?

Authenticity, Functionality, and Challenging building

Let's look at 42009.

Authenticity, the first and foremost core pricipal. If it's intentions were to just look like a crane then, maybe. I don't think real cranes have colour coded bolts and gears and drive shafts which does spoil what authentic appearence it has slighty, but they did get the shape of the thing (apart from the arm pivot being too far forward) and angle of the wheels when steered right. But this is not model team, it's technic, technic is about mechanisms and working models. The only authentic mechanisms on this crane are the ones made of bits of string. Not one mechanism that's not made of string is true to life. So is it authentic? NO.

Functionality? It does have some good functionality. Nothing is manual apart from most likely the slewing maybe, didn't look geared in the video. All the controls are in more cetralised places away from the functions. So, YES.

Challenging building? Too early to tell, but with the current trend of colour coding all axles and gears and pins to make it look awful and having 5 or 6 manuals for one model and learning from past experience everything points to NO.

So, comparing it to real cranes is a joke, and now it seems it's a joke compared to Legos own set standard having scored only 1 out of 3."

I like what Lipko said in reply:

"It can be a toy, it can be an exact replica* or it can be art. I prefer the art, and that the overall model should be good. Perfectly balanced in terms of function, look, building style and building experience. Stuffing as much stuff as you can, or being as authentic as you can (abuse Lego) won't make a good model for me."

[rumpletump]

Every year more people are building better looking MOCs with smoother lines, more functions and better solutions. It is this ability to improve and re-create the concepts that make Lego building what it is to us fans..

If every model and MOC ever built were considered to be perfect by all there wouldn't be any point in trying to make other versions of the same thing.

Just imagine.. Every official set ever released and not a single MOD to be made by anyone

For me It is the lack of unanimous perfection that makes this hobby so perfect for so many people to enjoy..

Edited February 6, 2013 by rumpletump

[dhc6twinotter]

For me It is the lack of unanimous perfection that makes this hobby so perfect for so many people to enjoy..

Well said.

[Lipko]

Wow, thanks for quoting me.

For the struggling part: it is struggling for me. Struggling struggling satisfaction struggling struggling desperation struggling struggling jettisoning then the thrill.

Sometimes I just want to give it up, but then I dream about it, I think about all about it in my workplace.

For the building experience thing: I don't think that the actual building for the book itself makes up the experience. Making the building harder by squeezing some steps together and not using color coding won't (at least for me) make the build more interesting. It is the evolving model that's interesting (and in that regard, I like the random-like color fashion of the of the models), what parts are build in what fashion (modular build vs non modular building. In what sequence? Gearbox first or structural parts? Similar or repeated/mirrored sub-assemblies are built after each other or there are more steps between them?).

Making instructions is an art by itself. Some great MOCs and official sets have dull building, and some not-so interesting or maybe ugly MOCs and official sets have interesting and fun building. Maybe designing models and designing instructions are two very different talents.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Lipko

[PlaneCrazy]

Perfection is objective.

To me I compare all Lego sets against 8880 and 8480.

For me I consider those two sets as the 'perfect' compromise of technical qualities vs playability vs appearance vs construction difficulty. But that is just me.

The people that collect Model Team sets strive for more accuracy in appearance over function so perfection for them is different (including similar MOC style building).

I guess that is why I like collecting Technic Lego, everyone that looks at my collection is able to see somthing different and say 'That is my favorite because........;

[efferman]

perfection? do you searching for a omega molecule?

my answer of this question is simple: is the builder satisfied from his model, then it is perfect.

btw to the guys who think 8110 is most realistic. wrong chassis, attachments must be controlled direct on the attachment and the design of the cab is nearly rubbish. it is a great set and partspack, but where is the realism?

[jorgeopesi]

I am never satisfied with my models, once finished, I always see flaws and possible improvements. I guess the fun is in making fewer mistakes and the bad thing is that the more you know more errors you are able to see . Perfection is when you know you can do differently but end to start another .

[Pvdb]

This is an interesting topic for me. Rather than churn out hundreds of new models on a rolling basis (I don’t have time) I actually more enjoy reworking the few that I have made, take for example my helicopter which is now on its 5^th iteration, each version including certain improvements.

For me the aesthetics of the model are very important and the challenge is in getting the functionality in, and more importantly working well. My current version of Demag AC50 Crane, was the result of wanting to add more/different functionality and different looks onto the inspirational model by Jennifer Clark, but I know for sure that I am going to re-visit my model in the next few years – to take out or improve the crab/normal steer functionality I designed because although it works, it heavily reduces playability and has the tendency to go wrong, I also want to take out the non-lego actuators somehow and spring the suspension.

Currently working on a large Koenigsegg CCX, maybe it will be finished in the next few months if I force myself along (started parts of it at least 2 if not more years ago), but I already have to stop myself re-designing the chassis slightly, Must finish the first version first!!!!!!!

I think I am like many others though, i.e. all those who love modding and improving original lego technic offerings – I just prefer to start from my own base models in most cases.

[Alasdair Ryan]

Just wait to you see what I am building.....

Every builder has a different style,I would say I am a stud-less builder who tries to get the most authentic looking model will lots of functions.Building mocs take alot of trail and error,I mean it took me a week to build this red tractor.

[timslegos]

Just wait to you see what I am building.....

I mean it took me a week to build this red tractor.

It takes me months to build a large scale MOC. The building process and striving for the best compromise between form and function is the most fun for me.

tim

[Edwin Korstanje]

For one off the first time i am agree whit Alasdair Ryan.

I want give mine moc's olso authentic model team look but build the most in it studless.

The moc that i now building have the perfect looks, but the scale i am working in it a can't make the crane's full PF working

It's eververy time a compromise.

Edited February 6, 2013 by VFracingteam

[Paul202]

^Regardless, that's beautiful.