Bensch55

I really can't wrap my head around the decision to make special parts (again) for the wishbones but also cut the cost by supplying four tires with the same width - the Merc, RB and Ferrari all look like they skipped leg day. But credit where credit is due, they really made an effort to catch all the small details of each car. If you look closely, the RB has pull rod suspension in the front and push rods in the back, like the real thing, the Ferrari vice-versa.

With the way the ball joints are usually mounted, this will mostly cause the hub to pop out once you really hit a bump. That is the reason why Lego couples the upper and lower wishbone on their suspension when the springs are mounted on the lower wishbone (mostly using some kind of liftarms)

It's amazing how people complain about the looks of a technic set for 10 pages when the actual technic part of it is the issue. Don't get me wrong, I like that new wishbone piece, it's just kinda useless without the proper steering links.

In this specific case, it won't be too much of an issue. My gripe with those new parts is that they will eventually land in some kind of moc, and the set basically teaches you the wrong way to design suspension setups. In other words...

The steering links are shorter than the suspension wishbones.. which means the wheels will turn in/out during suspension travel. The last time they made that mistake was 8880 I believe. What a joke for 450€

You are right, I misunderstood you in the previous comment. It looks like they offset it just for ease of assembly, as it would be more difficult to have the horizontal pivot axis intersect the vertical pivot axis.

Not really something new, that is a way to achieve Ackermann steering geometry, even present in your real car. It's often easy to implement in MOC's too, but for some reason Lego fears advanced suspension/steering setups.

Yeah, and Lego released the W14 - so what is your point here?

Rear axle is pullrod instead of pushrod this time

I can only second that. My P1S is a reliable tool to use, not another project in itself.

Often done to adjust the stiffness as the bar itself is rather short. Sometimes it's also just a case of avoiding any other components of the cars' environment.

Yes, the real W14 has pullrods in the rear, so does the LEGO model. The only disappointing thing is that LEGO still uses rocker arms acting on traditional springs instead of something like the x928cx1 piece to mimic the torsion bars like the real thing has. Also, with this amount of space an anti roll bar and a heave spring aren't too much to ask for. The W14 model does a lot better than the McLaren, but compared to the CaDa Alfa Romeo it still feels a lot cheaper.

I don't think so, from this picture you can see the chassis side rockers tilted to an angle. This hints to some springs acting on them inside the chassis:

To be honest, the whole car, especially the rear wing look a bit too much like a MOC. Also, it seems the launch version of the W14 was the prototype: Also really shows how the rear wheels are way too small on the Lego version.

So, from the image it looks like the W14 (sidepods). The good: Finally slick tires Accuracy: Sidepods, wings and suspension (pushrods in the front, pullrods in the back) seem like the prototype HOG The Bad: Front and rear tires seem to have same width Wings above front wheels still solid mounted / don't move with the front hubs I would say it's an improvement from the bodge job McLaren (that was a 2022 car with 2021 livery which never existed). Yet the CaDa Alfa Romeo Sauber has the wider rear tires and used more system bricks. Will be interesting how Lego implements the wheelcovers.

Exactly. I really hope they will follow this concept with the next supercar models, with all the new gears we have it should be an easy thing to slim down the currently used gearboxes (or even make a totally real H pattern box?).

Yep: https://tf-engineering.at/diffcase/ Printed in SLA to have an injection-mould like surface finish.

I might have something for you: https://tf-engineering.at/flangebearing/

@Murdoch17 I more or less run exactly this configuration in my ÖBB 399.04, also with 2x L Motors only connected by the siderods. Until now I ran into 0 issues while pulling up to 5 LGB cars around the garden layout. Also, the rods I'm using are 3D printed, so even a bit more brittle than the Lego ABS.

So, to summarize all of this: After the debacle about the big scale HogEx Lego knew, whatever train they will release, it has to work on their standard track. They knew how fans felt, yet they agreed on an ideas project that would never be able to accomplish this without a big amount of modifications. They also agree to do this with a licence partner that wants to be very involved with the set, limiting the design choices even more. And what came out of it? A fictional locomotive that wouldn't be motorized due to Lego's standards, two fancy looking coaches that look really odd when rolling through the tight R40 curves and to add insult to injury, a markup on the prize for what is essentially a big marketing exercise of the licence holder. At the same time, some other manufacturer managed to get close to the original design from Lego Ideas and finally even provided track with bigger radii. The argument about the "very small amount of train enthusiasts" also perishes when you take a look on the portfolio of certain german retailers that have been successfully in business for years. You still like the set? Good, go buy it and have fun. But be aware that praising every set TLG puts on the table and defending them for every design choice they make is just turning a blind eye on the situation and will never encourage them to do better. And that's my final contribution to this discussion.

Well, if you compare it to the rods they managed to make in the 12V era.. the new ones do stink a bit in comparison. Austria. And as glamorous as the OE might be, I still can’t believe that the percentage of people that are interested in it outnumbers the amount of people who have a general interest in any kind of train (and/or Lego-trains). The provided links are also mostly from trip/holiday advisors that put out articles about any kind of attraction, so it doesn‘t really proof a point of its popularity.

To be honest, in the 24 years I got to live on this world now I never heard anyone mention this train once. I barely knew of its existance before the Lego set. So please forgive me but before you can back this statement with any numbers, I highly doubt it (the outcry about the set also implies that most supporters were backing the locomotive, rather than the concept of the OE) This is mostly about the new connection rod pieces, they are pretty thick and weirdly shaped, similar to some duplo pieces.

Why does it have to be adult-targeted? How do you come to that conclusion? I'm not saying Lego can't have licences, I said that in this case the licence produced an objectively worse set that is too expensive for what it is. I really don't want to encourage Lego to drop more "trains" without motorization for that amount of money.

So there are more OE enthusiasts in the world than people who like Lego trains? I beg to differ. Exactly this is the problem with licenced models.

Then just rename it. Or decline it, like all the other train mocs that got into the review phase.