Musikfreak

I think 42082 might be a good option. It can be bought with a significant discount and has lots of parts and functions from different technical areas (gearbox, motor, differential etc.). It is quite big and challenging for a first introduction to technic but since you specifically asked for a bigger set it should fit.

I'm looking forward to it even if it has some flaws. These UCS cars are still a joy to build and rebuild afterwards. Maybe there will be a positive surprise like a pushrod suspension (which the real car has) which could also solve the suspension issues they had with the Chiron. Let's see and enjoy either the magnificent mechanics or the extensive modding thread!

@labevr: Also make sure that the forward, backwards selector is actually engaged in the center of the transmission tunnel. To the front for the gearbox and towards the back of the car for the single reverse gear.

So many details to love: The side fins and the slight slope upwards from the doors to the rear wheel arches. That detail is spot on. Also the engine cover looks excellent from above. Thanks for showing it and congratulations on this model!

@Cumulonimbus: Thank you for your view on the topic. If it did sound like I meant an industrial designer will look at appearance first in general than I was misunderstood and have to apologize. I basically have to agree with what you said. I also think that for Bugatti it was very important to not dilute their brand DNA and that's why I believe the look in this particular product was of higher priority compared to other models during the development process. Also one has to remember that the people here in the forum are the core enthusiasts of Lego Technic which will not represent the full audience TLG wants to address with this product. For the most people just the fact that springs are there will be marvellous. Still, in the past the products where more engineering driven in my view, e.g. the box design with blueprints or very bare and exposed functions. Whether this is better or worse I don't know. I love the old and the new models for different reasons.

As far as I understood from the interviews so far Bugatti was really strong with their feedback. Which not just means that the Lego team got a lot but also that they had some details which where important to them and where Bugatti did not budge - so they probably argued and had to find new solutions. Most of these discussions seem to have been about the design so I can imagine that design was prioritised over functions when 2 possible solutions where available. Additionally the Lego Team itself is mostly industry designers now, fewer people with engineering background. If you have two possible solutions I just think an engineer would try to fight for the technically superior solution wholeheartedly during internal milestones because it is close to his heart, while I'm not sure that is of the same priority towards someone with a designer background and or a higher board member. While I don't welcome this I think it could be part of the shift towards more "designed" looking models with partly compromised technical solutions.

The thing is that non lego people don't know what to expect. The Bugatti designer said in one of the videos he was just amazed that the pistons all move. So it could be quite possible that the average person not familiar with technic (even those who know non technic lego quite well) will think it's cool that a suspension is there and reproduced in lego and does not question the performance due to not having seen it better. I think in this regard kids are actually more demanding and would question why front and back do not behave similarly.

I don't know if the Mercedes cooperation so far was only done with the utility vehicle group but an AMG Projekt One would be a manageable shape for lego and price wise it's in Chiron territory. However I don't know of the engineering beauty of this car could be interesting for lego functions. What I would also love would be an offroad vehicle like a G-Wagon, Defender or similar. You could introduce diff locks, proper suspension, possible brakes and the shape would be great for lego. However I don't think that will happen. If you want to keep the current scale (which TLG stated) than such a car would be extremely heavy just because of the exterior size - esp. a 6x6.

I find it funny that the reaction to the Lego Chiron is similar to real supercars: They are too expensive, they are not functional/practical cars, they look too extreme. They are bad because this or that piece is wobbly and so on and so on. Regarding the german video: Rants on brand new products (especially expensive ones) go really well on youtube. If you put in a catchy clickbait title it's even better. So why not do it to enlarge ones audience. He also rants of a few other sets and I think it's just his style. Although I think it is authentic. However, I personally really like these new models. Just gears and styling and no PF. It's a good counterpart to something like a BWE. And even when I was a kid I mostly admired the gears and and suspension in the 8865. I did not have to see it working or drive the car around but was just fascinated by how it was implemented. Is the Chiron perfect? Certainly not. Is it an impressive Lego model? In my eyes for sure. Is it too expensive? Maybe. But whatever you think of it: It's still just an "offer" from TLG to everyone as an audience. Everyone can decide if they take TLG up on that offer and buy it or decide it's not for them (either because of technical limitations or because of the price).

I really like the idea behind this set and the combination of functions with a very high quality aesthetic "cover". Personally I love the pump house especially. However I do have a question about the controller. In the video you say controls for each stick is up, down & twist (hoch, runter und drehen). Does that mean you can twist the stick to control all three valves connected to one stick instead of 2/1 or do you mean the effect on the platform? I think the limitation with lego is the partly control of air flow to the cylinders so you could control some pumps to receive just half the air of others to make the intermediate movements. However I'm really impressed with the movements that could still be achieved in this setup! Congratulations!

First of all: Thank you for your coverage of the event. I actually could not see it live due to being in the Lego Shop. While I appreciate being able to immediately buy it when it is revealed, it's a timing problem. One quick comment about the 16+R speed in the video: The gearbox layout is actually sequentially going through 16 different configurations (4 on the first clutch and 4 on the second clutch which is moving every 4th time you advance a gear. However the gear ratios of the second clutch are doubled. This means that on the second clutch you are going through position 1 (ratio 1) then position two (ratio 2) then position 3 (ratio 1 again) and finally position 4 with ratio 2 again. So the 2nd clutch is just switching between the two axles (the wave selector is engaging the axle "to the side" or the axle "underneath" but the axle itself is always going at the same speed regardless which of the two clutches on one axis is engaged. So this should explain the confusion between 8 speed vs. 16 speed. One question I have: How about the resistance of the whole drivetrain in all the gears for the two models you have build so far? I have some problems in some of the gears where the W16 actually stalls and the slip gear has to engage.

@Didumos69: If I'm also allowed to answer: It's to prevent gears breaking due to the friction of the engine. It's actually located directly before the engine. The gearbox is always running in the selected gear, but it's output is only connected to the W16 when drive is selected. If Reverse is selected the whole box is circumevented and a constant ratio is going to the engine. The thing I found so far (currently I have a "rolling chassis" shortly after the marriage) in my build: The gear change works nicely most of the time. When the engine is disconnected the gearbox has very little resistance. When the engine is connected however, the resistance can get so high, that the slip gear actually engages and the engine does not move. There is also a huge backlash in a few gears. You would have to push the car almost a meter after a gear change to get the engine to move. The sequence actually looks ok to me. I have not measured it precisely, but I see a constant change in speed until you reach the big jump from first to last gear. I'm currently trying to optimise the performance. The engine itself is running smoothly but I guess the sheer amount of gears and clutches (the power has to go through both clutches at any time) is causing this behaviour. I have to say that I'm very diligent when building my models and check every bit while building for minimum friction and so on (e.g. my porsche was running completely smooth after build) but still have problems here. The marriage process, while cool considering how the real car is made, is not helping this. Because the way it's build it's hard to actually check all the functions beforehand and then once it's all together it's already hard to reach the parts in the center. However even with these limitations I'm quite impressed with gearbox and it's density.

@nerdsforprez: While I can completely follow your logic and it's pretty obvious why TLG called it the Ultimate, the complaint by a part of the community is still valid. It is "just" a comment on the practice that was chosen, similar to a political comment. Technic should be about making real functions a buildable experience in a toy format - at least that is how it started. And while I really do enjoy the new more realistic styling of the new models, I would still like amazing functions underneath. So while I can understand that TLG is following the money trail and all in all esp. Technic made a change towards amazing models in the recent years which undoubtedly has to do with it's (financial) success, a "Ultimate" label on a possibly (I'm waiting to see for myself) flawed model would be a slight step down. As a family owned company I think they can be a bit more "free" with how they market their products and can take risks (which the BWE could actually be - I don't think it's an accident that such a model comes at the same time as the porsche). However, seeing e.g. the advanced model line which started with the 10187 VW Bug, which was very different from all following models, or the difference between the 8421 mobile crane and the 42009 mk2 I'm very sure TLG can improve in the future. And if technic models at such price point will be a success I'm confident we are in for a few treats soon enough.

Which they could have overcome/replicated by linking it to the gearbox. Introducing a feature from a smaller model into the flagship has been done before quite a few times and would have fit perfectly here. Maybe it's too complicated but it would have elevated the mechanics of the model (which quite a few people are a bit disappointed about at the moment) to the next level.

I don't think so. While we here are a core target for this type of set, we are still a very minor group of Lego buyers. I think the average kid / parent that is deciding between a BWE and porsche will not do so by comparing the functions - the types of these two sets are so inherently different: Awesome work machine against stylish sportscar. Also I don't think the average buyer will look into unique parts or realistic geometry (although it would be a major thing for lot of people here, myself included). Most people buy a Lego set as a play or sometimes display toy and not as parts donor for MOCs. I really like the idea of a big flagship car without pf - probably because these were the sets I dreamed about as a kid the most and they are faster ready to play with than something where you have to insert batteries first. I'm really looking forward to it. Let's see what they did come up with.