dhc6twinotter

Looking really good there, efferman!

So, regarding the new front loader, I've been wondering if we will see a stronger u-joint introduced. I'm pretty certain the front loader is 4wd (would be a major fail if not), and with a single XL motor driving the wheels, there needs to be a u-joint at the articulation point. This model is large and heavy, and with a XL motor driving the wheels, there is a lot of torque being put on the u-joint. Could LEGO use the existing u-joint, or perhaps LEGO has a new type of u-joint included in this set? Probably wishful thinking on my part, but it would be nice to see.

I might have to come up with something for this. I was planing to build a P-38 sometime anyways, so I might be able to have it done in time for this.

I actually don't mind that LEGO is doing another front loader, or that another piece of construction equipment is this years flagship. If LEGO is going to keep to the ~200usd price for flagship models, I don't see them offering much more than 4 motors in a RC set. This means a max of 6 functions, which doesn't leave TLG with many options. People on here expect LEGO to build super complex model, like Sheepo's Land Rover, but most people won't pay $500+ for a set. I know I won't. I think we need to be a bit more realistic with our expectations. Regarding the front loader, I probably won't buy it because I don't need the motors or a bunch more yellow liftarms. However, if I were just getting back into LEGO, I'd jump all over this set. All the motors would come in handy. Just my $.02.

I'll hold off on final judgement until I see the set, but from what I've heard so far, I think I'll pass. That being said though, I could use more Unimog tires, and it's nice to finally see yellow rims in this size.

So, the info we have so far: -An "unexpected" licensed model -Unimog wheels -Large model -Large box -1626 pieces -Same price as Mobile Crane MKII -Package weight of 3.3kg Assuming all this is correct info, my guesses are the following: -Scraper. RC, 4 Unimog tires, 4 motors (drive, steer, raise/lower scraper, scraper dump) -Front-end loader. RC, 4 Unimog tires, 4 motors (drive, steer, raise/lower loader, dump loader) -Off-road dump truck. RC, 6 Unimog tires, 4 motors (drive, steer, dump, gate open/close) My wild-card guesses are below. IMHO, these are more doubtful, but could be possibilities. -Forwarder. RC, 6 or 8 Unimog tires, 4 motors operating 6 functions through gearbox (drive, steer, rotate boom, boom up/down, stick up/down, grapple open/close, gearbox.) This is doubtful because Unimog tires would be the wrong type of tire to use. -Telehandler. RC, 4 Unimog tires, 4 motors operating 6 functions through gearbox (drive, steer, boom up/down, boom extend, forks, stabilizers, gearbox) This is doubtful because the Unimog tires seem to be too large. Smaller balloon tires would fit better, imho. -Road Grader. RC, 6 unimog tires, 6 motors operating 10 functions through gearbox. This is doubtful because there are too many PF components, and it would be difficult to fit everything in the model. -Mars Rover. RC, 6 Unimog tires, 4 motors (drive, steer, and 2 arm functions). This is a bit off-the-wall though, and kinda doubtful. And, one more guess: - A non-RC road grader with heavy use of pneumatic parts. 6 unimog wheels, motorized compressor, 5 large pneumatic cylinders, 3 small pneumatic cylinders. The large number of pneumatic parts could account for the increased price, although the price does seem steep, even for all the pneumatic parts. I would love to see this more than any of the other models. As for the "unexpected" license, Cat, John Deere, or NASA would fit the above. I don't think we will see Sheepos Land Rover happen. As great as it is, I doubt LEGO would sell it because It's too heavy, too complex, and has too many motors. A simplified version may work, but then it's too similar to the off-road models we've seen the past two years.

4. majorna - 2 27. Galaktek - 1 28. Simon_S - 2

Thanks! With that price and part count, it does sound like it may be RC. It could also have a large use of pneumatics. I'm kinda curious what 42029 might be. It sounds like another vehicle in the same size category as the service truck.

Looks like 2L axles are once again being made in black:

Looks like some great project people are working on! My plans, should I settle back down this year: -Finish my forwarder -Maybe build a feller buncher to go along with forwarder -Build another airplane, either a P-38 or Avenger (already have bits for the Avenger built) -Maybe build a Sikorsky Super Stallion (already have rotor assembly partially built) -Maybe build a HD tow truck (looking at two different models) -Build a road grader once the forwarder is taken apart (probably in 2015) -Maybe scrap all these ideas and build something else off my long list of things I want to build. Of course, at the rate I build, I may only finish the forwarder and feller buncher.

Add a working rudder.

Merry Christmas you all!

Sorry, I should have included more info. The only name for the part I've seen is LEGO Plate A-Frame 45° (15706). There are two or three 2014 Ninjago sets that have the part, and I'm sure more to follow. BrickOwl has a few for sale: http://brickowl.com/catalog/lego-plate-a-frame-45-15706

There's also this new part:

Pretty cool looking bike! The steering pivot is in the center of the hub, and the rim is shaped like a donut to fit round the hub. The grey steering linkage you see in the picture acts like a push/pull rod which appears to be connected to some kind of steering box or other linkages beneath the fuel tank. I'm not sure how the steering gets connected from the handle bars to the gearbox, but I assume there's a few more linkages under the fuel tank. Also, according to the article I've posted below, the rear wheel also steers, but it is not connected to the handle bars. It's a self-steering wheel and relies on a dampener to keep it centered. This would be neat to build out of LEGO, but I'm not sure how you would go about building the front and rear hubs. You would not be able to use a regular LEGO rim inside the tires. Off the top of my head, the only thing that I think may work would be to use a couple of large turntables for the rims/hubs and figure out how to mount a tire around the turntables. I don't ride bikes, nor do I know much about their handling characteristics. However, I see several major flaws with the design. First, there is no suspension on either the front or mid axles. Both axles do have pivot points for the swing arms, but no springs. Second, the engine is placed backwards with the transmission in front. The power is now going the wrong way, which would essentially give multiple reverse gears and one, slower forward gear. The article I posted below says, "with the engine reversed, the drive sprocket is itself driven by a belt and pulley, to get the correct drive direction back." I think most of the people here in the Technic section know that adding a belt to something doesn't reverse the direction. The bike would need a couple gears meshing together instead. If I were to buy a bike with a pushrod type steering like that, I would would want some form of redundancy. A single linkage connecting the front wheel to the handlebars offers no redundancy. If the linkage, the knuckle, or whatever else under the fuel tank fails, I'd be dead. If that bike were to ever make it to production (doubtful), it would need steering linkages on both sides. The guy who designed it looks like a great designer, and knows enough about engineering to make a compelling design. There are some pretty major engineering flaws though. I found an article about the bike: http://www.motorcycl...etter-than-two/ That sure would be a cool Technic project though!

Nice!

Cool! Toyota dealer sounds great! I drive a Toyota too! Awesome barber shop too!

Depends what you want to do with your sets. If you buy to display on a shelf, then either will be fine. They're both great in their own way. If you buy based on playability, then the RC components make 8043 funner to play with. If you like to build mocs and you are looking for a good parts pack, then I would buy 8258 for the parts and whatever PF elements you want from the LEGO website.

I'm thinking the same. The things I've built so far are not things that LEGO would consider building. Far too expensive and complex. I plan on building some simpler mocs, similar in style to an official LEGO model.

I don't know if LEGO is looking specifically for B model type stuff, but I'm sure whatever you can put in a portfolio is beneficial.

They have job postings on their website every now and then. I would not be surprised, though, if some people were contacted from LEGO directly. Grohl used to post here in the Technic section. He is a talented builder and did a lot of "C" model mocs. He started working for LEGO a year or two ago. From what I understand, he was turned down initialy after filing out an application, but was later contacted for the position. I believe he designed the new helicopter set.

Hard to say. Sometimes the sets will go to the sale section, but sometimes they don't. The only Technic sets I recall seeing in the sale section were the 8258 Crane Truck, 8043 Excavator, and 8041 Race Truck. All of those sets sold out quick once they hit the sale page. IIRC, the Crane Truck and Excavator were only available for about 1/2 day once they hit the sale page. If you really want a set, I'd suggest you just go ahead and buy it. Waiting for a sale that you could easily miss isn't worth it, especially if it's a set you really want. All the sets you mentioned are good sets too. Just my $.02.

And to make things even more interesting, there are actually two different lengths of 5.5 axles. Older ones are slightly longer than newer ones (or maybe it was the other way around…can't remember). In addition to the other axles that Milan mentioned, there is also a 3 with stud, 4 with stop, 4 with center stop, 5 with stop (new), and 8 with stop. If you are using M motors, you could mount them by using a 1x4 technic brick on the front with a couple of pins. L and XL motors could be done the same way, but addition side bracing would probably be a good idea. Mounting it that way would eliminate any 1/2 offset. Alasdair Ryan posted a good way of mounting it. Other methods to solve the 1/2 offset could be by using a 8 and 16 or 16 and 24 tooth combinations. That would give you an extra 1/2 stuff offset. You would have to use one of the following bricks if you did this:

I used to be the same way. Before my "dark ages", I never really cared if my models looked like any real thing. All I cared about was proper functions. I built trucks, forklifts, tractors etc that were, to be honest, quite ugly. They all had proper functions though! The only model I built that was based off of the real thing was an F14. It didn't look too bad, but the flight controls weren't accurate. However, once I got back into LEGO, I was much older and found myself trying to build more realistic things. Once I discovered bricklink and the ability to get whatever piece I needed, I realized I could build something as realistic as my skills, or lack thereof, would allow. Regarding both questions above, I think it is really up to the builder. I build mainly heavy machinery and aircraft, and I like the additional challenge of recreating a real object as closely as possible. Some people, particularly those who build truck trial vehicles, care more about performance than authenticity. Both ways are perfectly fine, and like I mentioned, it's really up to the builder how they want to execute a project. In the end, it is really up to you how you want to build something. The forum has people of different ages, different skills, and different backgrounds, all of which contribute to each person having a unique build style. You can build something however you want, and that is the beauty of LEGO.

Congrats to the winners! Awesome entries! Thanks to Jim for doing the work for this, and thanks also for the very detailed results.