XenoRad

If the functions are smooth and easy to operate and plenty, then this could be interesting. Otherwise, at 72 cm long, it's way too big for the inaccuracies in proportions, and the sides look like a mess of beams. Both 9396 and 42052, despite being smaller and with less parts, look like more cohesive designs.

My local authorized Lego distributor is only since today listing the set as available and not on pre-order and no mention of the book. Guess it's just on lego . com where it sold out in mere minutes. At this point, and remembering what happened with the Osprey, any "limited edition" run is simply going to fuel online scalping. There really needs to be a better way to achieve the desired "exclusivity" without creating these market distortions.

@kbalage Thank you for the review. Looking at the parts list I see 50 of the new red half-pins with friction ridges and pretty much the new "filled in" pins all around. Can you confirm that indeed, it's exclusively the new style pins that are used for this? Also, it doesn't look like it, but is there any color inconsistency with the parts?

Yes, but you can open a new line of credit at your preferred Swiss bank and be able to afford this. 5 years later, over 200 euros in interest fees alone, and you're all settled up. I kid, but all in all, while I would have preferred the set and the book to be slightly cheaper, I kind of understand it. Ferrari wants to be "the" hyper-sports-car brand, Lego wants to also take advantage of this - it is what it is. I actually really like it, price aside. And I'm sure our very dedicated and talented community can pimp up this Ferrari to something truly spectacular. @jb70, @Didumos69 where you at, guys?

The fact that the "updated" design is still outdated could be explained by Lego's process and overhead on making changes to already released sets or about to release sets (if the change was decided upon before the launch of the set), but considering the size of that plate and sticker compared to the tire itself, I find it strange that they went from representing a tire print on a smaller radius than the actual tire, to representing a rim print on a bigger radius than the actual rim. Neither really work if you know the source material. Had they drawn both tire and rim on that sticker, even if inaccurate, would have been much better than drawing either, having it too small or too big respectively and rather devoid of detail overall. Though I guess the way it is now, it's easier to "manually apply" the correct tire print with the right brush and paint, if you really want an accurate model. And for the money this set costs, why shouldn't you?

There are two types of those black round bricks. Some have a round hole on their side but no axle hole on top, others have the axle hole on top but not the hole on the side. https://brickset.com/parts/design-17485 https://brickset.com/parts/design-6143 From what I remember both types are present in the bags when building this part of the dozer so you need to make sure you've used the correct one for each step.

Let's also not forget that the CAT is an 18+ set which I think it really means it's 18% more expensive, considering some of the prices for such labelled sets.

It would still occupy less space than two 4 port hubs.

All of this discussion with individual functions and gearboxes makes me think whether long term it might be better for Lego to release a 6 port hub. It would occupy less space than 2 hubs and still have enough ports to run functions without the need for a gearbox.

I've watched both reviews. Leaving any discussion on price aside I do like it, but for its scale I think it has three main issues: 1. Not all functions are operable (ripper tilt), motorized or not. 2. Any attempt to change or mod the blade movement speed or the path drive from the motors needs to take to action upon it is going to be limited by the Control+ app which has preset gear ratios to track position of the blade 3. Has quite a few gaps, especially on the sides (this is easily observable in the side-by-side portion of Sariel's review). For me I think the third would be the biggest. I get it that it's properly robust and that it's a more "purely" technic build. But if you search around there are smaller examples (albeit in system) that are way more accurate. Just look at Sariel's side by side comparison: the lower sprockets are higher,everything between the sprockets and the bogies has a different shape, the hood is flat while IRL it's slightly tilted downwards, the area beneath the cabin is one flat line instead of having a cutout for the top sprocket. I was even going to mention the ripper carrier but I see picture where it has the same overall shape as the Lego version so that's a pass. All in all this set could have really benefited from a few more parts, even system to increase the accuracy and reduce gaps.

On the one hand I kinda like it. On the other, excluding the price which I feel not many will pay without a significant discount, the function to motor/gearbox distribution looks less than ideal. I wasn't very pleased initially to know that blade raise and tilt are handled via a gearbox, but it might not be such a big problem since I doubt both will need frequent and simultaneous adjustment during operation. However, it would have been much better to have manual actuators for the top of the ripper instead of the fake ones. This is a significant miss if you ask me, especially since we do have manual adjustment of the track tension. The motorized ladder looks gimmicky, but I'm sure that's why it was put there. So you could deploy it with the model not moving and wow your guests at house parties. Personally I would have left the ladder manually operated and used the slot on the HUB to have some LEDs instead. The model already has fake lights above the blade and around the cabin. Certainly, lighting some of those up would have been much more impactful and ultimately useful, instead of the ladder. So all in all, I don't know... Even excluding the price, I think more could have been done in terms of functions, also considering the size. I think many would accept fewer motors and HUBs if instead we get many, smaller manual functions that would make operation more involved.

The main problem for me is that if you remove the stickers you're not left with much in terms of recognizable features. Yes, there are still a few, namely the window/front door kink and the wheel arches, but otherwise, considering the size and number of parts, there's really not much to tell you it's a Raptor. The second problem would be that even with the stickers, it's still not plenty accurate. Those three orange beams beneath the "grill" really shouldn't be that tall. It would have been better to put some stickers there as well to make them slimmer. The rear could have also benefited from a couple of stickers above and below the black part of the tailgate. Instead, they used four extra stickers for the door handles when they had perfectly fine panel holes one stud lower to fill with 1x1 tiles and save those four stickers for something that truly mattered. I think inaccurate door handle positions would have been an acceptable tradeoff for more accuracy somewhere else.

Not sure whether this is still relevant considering the original date of the post but the sagging of that part has been recognized in certain reviews and I also came across it, though to a much less degree. The solution was extra bracing. You can attach a couple of 3L beams to the sides of that yellow H-shaped liftarm and then run a couple of 5 (or 7) length beams right down and attach them similarly to the 9L black ones in front. Or any other combination that might work for you with the pieces you have.

Great review! I don't mind the box but I would agree that a black background with just a faint touch of color is a bit boring. Something more like the Chiron box with a stronger background color would probably be better. I had a bigger problem with the instructions, but not by much. The black background sometimes made it difficult to distinguish between white and light bluish gray pieces, not to mention it looks like a waste of black ink. however, my biggest problem with the set is regarding the colors used for the front and rear axles as well as those dark orange pieces throughout the chassis. If it's an 18+ branded set there should be no need to have some many colors and incompatible colors at that next to each other. I'm generally not bothered by color coding but here I feel they went a bit overboard. Other than that it's a great set and I'm very happy to have gotten it. On a side note I'm starting to think whether (former) Creator Expert vehicles such as this one should start using more and more Technic parts. Granted, for accuracy system would still be better, but to have a chassis with a differential and working engine, or even some suspension would be great.

Actually, taking a look here - https://brickset.com/sets/containing-part-6276974 shows that that part appears in plenty of current sets in yellow. But seeing how in that 42121 set we already had 4 in LBG it was likely cheaper to add one more in the same color rather than add a new color. Also, there's the B model where parts would be arranged differently so that could also have something to do with it. But with an uneven number of that part I'm sure they could have had one a different color and not look bad. EDIT: Ah, beaten to that reply.