Saberwing40k

Eurobricks Counts
  • Content count

    1640
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Saberwing40k

  • Rank
    Technic catch of the day

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Tabgha Lunar Base
  • Interests
    Lego, obviously. Giant Robots, Science Fiction, Catgirls.

Extra

  • Country
    Luna
  1. Sariel is evidently getting them, but for some reason, Lego dropped the ball. Maybe they're trying to stall the bootleggers? While the bootleggers might use a speed build for reverse engineering, would they?
  2. I have not tried boost, but in general I am not fond of vehicles that have an integrated chassis. But then, maybe Lego is going on the idea that kids might not be willing or able to do relatively complex gear assembly. Or maybe it is just faster to build overall, which kids like. However, I'd say that it would be cheaper for Lego to develop a new receiver, rather than a new chassis piece. I say this because the last integrated PF chassis was only used in two sets. Also, for any new PF equipment, like the supposed new train motors, I don't think Lego would use the Boost connectors. Why would they? Most PF applications have no need for the integrated tachometers the Boost motors have, and several PF applications need more than one device per port, so the lack of stackability is a major disadvantage. Like I've said before, Boost is far more likely to be the future of Mindstorms vs. Power Functions.
  3. Non IR remote control? Good. Non IR control in a Big Ugly Motor Piece(BUMP)? Not so good. If it's a new receiver, I'm all for it. But if it's a new kind of BUMP, I'm not as much. That dramatically reduces the coolness of a set, with a single use part. Best case, we get a Lego Bluetooth receiver. Worst case, we get a solid brick of electronics with a few pieces stuck to it, not very like Lego.
  4. I looked at the batmobile, and it is pretty fugly.. It does not look like any Batmobile I've ever seen, instead looking more like something a kid would make. I'm willing to bet it uses the boost hub, and is thus skid steer. It's rather dumb.
  5. Liebherr LR 11000

    I'd say the price of such an item, if released as a set, could easily clear the $3000 mark. Multiple programmable bricks, plus like 20,000+ parts adds up fast. There might be a market for this, but it would be small. Also, I find your statement about Lego being run by incompetent morons kind of misinformed. Lego would be stupid NOT to release a UCS Millennium Falcon. Star Wars is one of the, if not the biggest movie franchises of all time, and the Falcon is one of the most iconic ships from that series. What that means is that Lego has a huge potential fanbase for an item like that, including Star Wars fans who might not ordinarily be in to Lego. Also, nothing? All of the sets Lego has on the shelf now, and you think that nothing is good? Not liking anything on the shelf is one thing, but I find it to be jumping to conclusions without further analysis. Most Lego sets are good, for people into that thing. I don't like city sets, but several of them are good. And, Technic set 42078 is pretty spiffy. Not to say that Lego is perfect, and that they don't occasionally make stupid decisions, because they do, but it is still rather harsh to say that nothing is good.
  6. Nope, not even a bit. Lego hubs suck, and the Porsche wheels only work with their tires. Also, portal axles will not work with deep hubs, I dunno if Lego would make two different kinds. What would be really cool is if Lego made a rim with swappable spokes.
  7. I don't see Lego using the PF 2.0 connectors for the trains. Why would they? It would be an expensive retooling effort that would be actively bad for the purposes of Technic. Say goodbye to using more than one motor per channel. I think that the WeDo and Boost point to the next evolution of Mindstorms, not Power Functions. It would be stupid of Lego make a change to the PF connectors that would be actively detrimental to the use of said system. Robotics systems need the additional wires for communication, and need to be a single connector to avoid confusing the processor. No such requirements exist for Power Functions. Also, I think the image on the box is a logo, and not the new receiver itself, as it has no visible connectors of any kind, and it would be rather stupid to have a receiver that looks like a 1x2 brick. It is an awkward shape, and out of system. With any luck, the Remote control Batmobile from a couple pages back will have the same receiver, as will 42083. This follows the precedent of the rollout of OG Power Functions, where System sets had the receivers before they showed up in Technic. I could be wrong though, but I'm hoping.
  8. Sets are a lot more interesting when they have new parts, and useful recolors. For a builder like me, that's really why I buy/am interested in set.
  9. Aesthetics and Technics

    I can be annoyed by what provokes discussion. for instance, I make an interesting creation that has pictures and a write up, and it gets 2 replies. Somebody posts a topic about an S tank with no pictures of information, and they have like two pages of discussion. Just my two cents, but I feel like a lot of builders have moved away from technical diagrams, which I love to see, and have more focus on glamor shots. Now, I do like a good looking model, but I also like to see how it functions. Jennifer Clarke's website is something I really like, and I don't feel is done enough anymore. Or, maybe my problem is that I'm trying to participate in this forum, and I feel like I am kind of ignored, and I alienate people, whether through words or actions.
  10. Have you not read any of this thread? It would not be a Volvo like that. For the eleventy zillionth time, we know literally nothing about 42083 aside from the number. Milan might get involved if somebody else asks "Will 42083 be X?" I'm a little bit tired of people asking this question. If we knew, it would be posted.
  11. Based on what evidence? We currently have no evidence for what 42083 is. It could be a 6x6 Honda for all we know. I highly suspect it's not any sort of current production car, as then there would be no reason for secrecy. I think it might be a Toyota Supra, the new, massively hyped one, but any guess, without a source, is empty speculation. If we go into speculation, it will degenerate into a wish list topic, and that makes it harder to read. Also, I for one am extremely disappointed that Lego is not allowing photography at the Toy Fair, but what takes that right into stupid territory is not allowing write ups. So, what's the point of inviting journalists if they can not tell people what they've seen? Why even go to a toy show at all? But, I'm taking that with a grain of salt. Maybe something was communicated badly, or we have something not translated right. It would be a risky move for Lego, and once again, a rule meant to stop miscreants ends up just making life hard for everyone else. Those bootleg makers will get images out, one way or another, as they'd be the kind of people to use spy cameras, and then Lego risks their relationship with blogs and fan sites, by not allowing photographs or write ups. We shall see.
  12. It's because we know it's a Batmobile, and it is RC. For 42083, we literally know the set number, and that's it. It might be a Helicarrier, for all we know. We're discussing whether or not the Batmobile would have a useful controller or not. Also, @degenerate, have you seen a picture, or no?
  13. Oh come on, I think a Batmobile would be a great subject for a Technic set. You have all the standard supercar functions, plus things like deployable weapons, ejector seat, an interesting canopy, and other nifty functions. The Batmobile in Arkham Knight, in particular, You have a variable wheelbase, an interesting suspension and steering system, and a retractable turret system. Plus, a deployable rear seat, and front ejector seat. I would nerdgasm if Lego made one of these with full functionality. I just really freaking hope that Lego goes for an actual Technic chassis with standard motors, and just have the receiver be a new part. It would be extremely disappointing to have Lego make a new receiver and motor set that is entirely one part. It would be just as much so to have them just reuse the Boost hub. I really question Lego's decision on that part. But, I don't think they'd do it. I'd think they'd either have a separate receiver and use an AAA battery box, or they'd come out with a rechargeable battery with included receiver, along the lines of a BuWizz. Why? It would give them much more freedom to design the Batmobile around a number of separate parts rather than one large block. But, I'm not getting my hopes up, it's only a 442 piece set, and it costs like 100 euro. Although, that is to be expected, given that it is a licensed and remote control set. Although, it would be kind of silly for Lego to design a new receiver and motor block. Such a thing would be rather expensive to design and build, and would have extremely limited reuse potential. Boost is kind of an exception to that, but I think programable bricks are thought of somewhat differently. Lego would probably want to kill two birds with one stone when it comes to a new electronic part. As an aside, I can not believe that Lego has not come out with a new, better control scheme for Power Functions. 2.4ghz is stupid cheap now, and I see plenty of companies do worldwide distribution, and have no problems with regulations. Since you can get a cheap 2.4ghz drone for $20, I refuse to believe that Lego could not make a 2.4ghz receiver for the same cost. I'd argue 2.4ghz is arguably superior to Bluetooth in this application, given that it is far more plug and play, which would be very advantageous to Lego. Oh well, at least we the fans have options, even if they aren't made by Lego.
  14. Future Set Wishes and Speculation

    Honestly, if Lego were doing new Mindstorms, they would have probably debuted it at CES in Las Vegas. I have not heard anything, so there probably isn't anything. EV3 is still fairly new, and Mindstorms overall still enjoys strong sales, so I don't see Lego changing it much.
  15. I've looked closer at 42080, and I can kind of see the new valves. I though the valves were on the back, but that looks to not be the case. (There is only one hose crossing the articulation point.) Also, there are some nice dark bley small panels under the cab, which while not new are welcome.