Eurobricks Knights
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Appie

  • Birthday 12/16/1982

Spam Prevention

  • What is favorite LEGO theme? (we need this info to prevent spam)
    <p> Technic 42070 </p>

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    My Lego room ;)


  • Country
    The Netherlands
  • Special Tags 1
  • Special Tags 2

Recent Profile Visitors

1837 profile views
  1. Thank you, I'm glad you liked seeing it in real life and also thanks for the chat
  2. Appie

    Limited Technic Reviews

    In today's world? Yes. The reviews that come first, get the views.
  3. Appie

    Limited Technic Reviews

    Sorry, that part of my comment was actually meant more in general to some replies in this topic, not you.
  4. Appie

    Limited Technic Reviews

    I took this fact into consideration when I made my comment, you even mention it yourself a few times after the apology I quoted from your reviews. Other reviewers that also had to deal with this fact, still had their reviews out faster. While the reviews are solid, sets with a MSRP of €450, €230 or whatever price add up for a company like Lego if the review is launched 2-8 weeks after the release of a set, it's simply part of a marketing budget. Eurobricks might not even be the only site to have lost review sets. Stuff adds up fast then. As for complaining about them maybe taking a business approach, we all know what happened when they pretty much operated as a charity in the late 90's and early 00's. Stuff like micro motors being sold in sets under the value of what it cost to make them. I don't think anybody here wants to go back to those nearly bankrupt days. Sariel and a few other reviewers don't shy away from harsh comments either. For example, I think alot of reviewers were expecting to never recieve review sets again from Lego after pretty much bashing the Porsche 42056 (and rightfully so). They still get sets to review to this day from Lego.
  5. Appie

    Limited Technic Reviews

    While Catalinanmb could have been a bit more civil, he does raise a valid point and not just for one review. I remember 1 or 2 years ago where Jim outsourced some of the sets he recieved from Lego for review to others, because he didn't have time. And while you can counter alot of the linked reviews except one from Catalinanmb, the linked reviews all show a pattern in the first sentence: Let me be clear, I really like Jim's reviews and he is very thorough with great photo's, but in my experience his reviews always came after the reviews of other people's like Sariel. And sure, Sariel's style of reviews is different, but he does all of them, does them well and does them fast at or before release. And Jim has valid reasons to need 1-2 weeks and also personal life is more important, but it could be that it is one of the reasons why Lego isn't sending sets atm. They are a business after all: if the same provided set can create more buzz at release elsewhere, they will send it elsewhere.
  6. The advice I read from experienced supercar builders is to start at the gearbox (if you want to add that to the model anyway) and work your way from there. Meanwhile, to keep the MOC in scale (and figure out where to place the gearbox for example) use Sariel's scale tool: Personally I can't work outside-in (body first then internals), but working from the inside out while having a general idea where the bodywork will go is much easier for me.
  7. Doesn't matter, they are using the Lego name to highlight their own products. That's not how copyright laws work. In order for a company to keep their copyright and trademarks, they need to maintain a zero-tolerance policy for people who wrongfully use their name. Lego doesn't need to ask first when stuff like this happens, this isn't their first time with copyright/trademark infringement and it won't be the last. Lego's legal division is doing exactly what it is obligated by law to do. And the reason why they have to use a zero-tolerance policy is also simple. Once a company stops protecting their trademarks, even on the smallest of matters, it leaves the door open for big players (Megablocks/Knex etc) on the market to use it against Lego in a lawsuit concerning Lego's trademarks. They will use it in the case to say: "but you allowed that website/shop or whatever to continue their business for weeks/years, you don't really care about your trademarks". A judge will weigh such situations very heavily and that won't help Lego.
  8. He can decide whatever title he wants, but there's a legal term for wrongly accusing somebody or a company of something they didn't do as well: slander. And personally I expect people to do some research before accusing people or companies of something. I personally wouldn't wish to wrongfully accuse somebody of something he/she/it didn't do. Held Der Steine didn't have a leg to stand on, Lego was defending their copyright, that simple, so of course he didn't go to court, he would have surely lost the case and money.
  9. Like I said in that same post (perhaps you missed it, since I edited 2mins before you replied) Efferman already mentioned it is related to the name and not the parts itself. And if you try to be sincere, again, the title of the topic should reflect that. You're now pointing a finger at Lego for something that at best is half true.
  10. Doesn't matter, plenty of reports in this topic alone to change the title to something that is actually true. Or instead of jumping the gun and making a topic with a title that at best is only half true: wait and see/investigate yourself why they actually took it down.
  11. This is all there is to this topic imo and the title of this topic should be adjusted to reflect that. Lego is not on a crusade against custom 3d printed parts, they are on a crusade to stop people from using their name to make sales, which they are obligated by copyright laws (and common sense) to do.
  12. Thanks, I actually scaled the MOC on the front tyres, also for width edit: sorry this was wrong, I forgot what I exactly did there and just checked again. The rears are about one stud too narrow and the fronts are about 1 stud too thick. As for the 42000 tyres, I forgot about those until the car was almost finished and then I just decided to leave it as this.
  13. Thanks all. These are from the BMW F1 car, set 8461.
  14. Thank you all. @Jeroen Ottens Perhaps these pictures show it better, poor lighting so I cranked up the images to see the black parts well. rearhub1 by Appie NL, on Flickr rearhub2 by Appie NL, on Flickr The balljoint pin at the hub is locked into place from the bottom, since of course it has a tendancy to pop out otherwise. I used a 3L axle with stop and a bush. This creates the right height for the balljoint pin to be locked into place while still functioning for the suspension. See picture below: rearhub3 by Appie NL, on Flickr Another goal I had with this car was to make hubs as flush with the (shallow) wheels as I could. So that's also a reason why it is build like this is and also why I don't have caster at the front suspension. At the front I couldn't figure out a way to mount balljoints from the hub to the wishbones without using suspension arm parts that are longer than I want. As for the red and yellow, I haven't actually, I thought these were pretty close to the real deal, but perhaps the yellow from the 42099 would fit a little better? I don't think we get a darker red for the Technic parts I used. Could switch to a brick solution for that of course, though that would cause problems at the front where the red liftarms are part of the structural integrity.
  15. Appie

    [APP] BrickController2

    Ah ok, thanks for the information. And wow such a camera feature would be awesome!