N-4K0

Eurobricks Counts
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    1405

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by N-4K0

  1. Posted

    Dune: Part Two on Wednesday.

    A good continuation of the events of part one, spoken as someone who's never seen Dune (1984) og read the book it's based on.
    It feels a bit slow in some parts, but overall a good movie and satisfying to see the conclusion to the events of part one.

  7. Posted

    The only options I can see for tree trunks fitting the size of this set would be

    - 98585 https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=98585#T=S&O={"iconly":0}
    - 6222 https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=6222#T=S&O={"iconly":0}

    The brick exists in brown, the connector only in dark orange as the closest.

    I checked with some of the 4x4 brick that I have and 4 bricks together are 5L long. Possible logs in adequate lengths made out of these would probably require a 16L axle with 16 connectors or 12-13 bricks, meaning 13-14 or 17 additional parts per log.

  8. Posted · Edited by N-4K0

    5 minutes ago, zoo said:

    I'm probably missing something obvious here but what are the light grey parts holding the upper cylinder fittings to the A-profile boom? Doesn't look like a regular pin end?

    If you mean what I think you mean, it's this, released in 2021:

    https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=77765#T=S&C=86&O={"color":86,"iconly":0}

  9. Posted

    14 hours ago, Jockos said:

    I'm afraid that wouldn't be possible in the near future regardless of the technology. My main concern is that it would either be milky (like in 42148), or a one-off piece, like the 1:8 supercar rims. And would block the accessibility of the interior. And last but no least it would break the consistency in looks of previous models

    For accessibility, I think the pinholes could be facing down so the windshield could be removed upwards if need be, to make it easier.

    For the 2 pieces I linked, I have some of the first one and I use 2x of the "pin with pinhole" part inserted in the windshield and then attached to a liftarm with a 3L pin.
    I don't use any studded bricks in the front to hold it closed and I've only used it for a few SW-inspired fighters, but I would like to have more options that could be attached with pins which I personally prefer.

    In regards to the plastic and how the trans-clear panel appears to be kinda frosted, I have no idea why they did it that way. The windshield parts, even the ones that have pinholes, are clear and I can only assume it's a different type of plastic, maybe for strength reasons?
    But the trans-clear/colored liftarms were all made with clear plastic AFAIK and they should be sturdy enough... but maybe it's different since they are made thicked due to being liftarms.

  10. Posted

    I wish TLG would update the mould of many of the windscreen pieces they've made and make more of them with pinholes to be "compatible" with technic pieces and models.

    As a fan of Star Wars and starships and a primary Technic builder I've gotten into doing starships with technic parts and although there are many windscreen/canopy type pieces, I feel like many more of them should be made with pinholes in the back, like these:

    https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=45705#T=C
    https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=41881#T=C

    Especially seeing as some of these bigger windshield pieces have a 1L thickness in the back regardless, I think they should be fitted with pinholes to make them more versatile.

  15. Posted · Edited by N-4K0

    17 hours ago, DrJB said:

    Interesting that you mention that. From my experience, the thin 2L lift arms have very strong clutching power, and after sitting for some time, they become very difficult to move.

    I just have to clarify that I was talking about the regular thick 2L axle/pinhole beams, not the thin ones, in case it wasn't clear :sweet:

    I have the same experience as you with the half beams although I generally feel like the axleholes in those, of all variants, tend to crack too easily.
    I appreciate the stronger clutching power, but I'd rather have weaker clutch if it means the parts won't crack, though the axlehole clutch in the thick 2L beams are way too weak IMO.

  16. Posted · Edited by N-4K0

    I too feel the difference in grip towards the weaker side in the pins as well as pins with pinhole, especially for the pin/pinhole parts it annoys me, but I've had these and the 3L blue pins crack over time and if this softer plastic can prevent cracking, I guess it's an aceptable trade-off even though I prefer stronger grip.

    I also feel the difference in grip depending on the liftarm color, the same pin can have noticeable difference in grip between e.g. LBG/DBG and black liftarms.
    The most annoying thing to me however is the significantly weaker grip in the axle holes of parts like the 2L axle/pinhole beams and the #1 connectors. The 2L beams feel like they'll almost slide off the axle...

  17. Posted

    Really nice looking ship you got there :pir-sweet:

    This might seem like nitpicking, but I have to ask - is the listed number of guns correct? You say there's 52 in total which seems to match, of which 28 are 18lb longguns which I assume are the ones on the lower gun deck, but I count 13 on each side meaning it's 2 off + the list has 32 guns, so there's 20 that aren't mentioned.

    Only curiousity from my side + a bit OCD I'm afraid :laugh: 

  18. Posted

    The option to the printed parts issue is including extra parts in the box so the customers can choose themselves whether to use the printed arches or not. It is a doable option cos I can't imagine wheel arches cost that much when they're mass produced that it would increase the set price.

    I'm eyeing this set for the new parts, I've developed a habit of rebuilding small car sets like this into Star Wars inspired starfighters and I can imagine some design details using the new small yellow panels.

  19. Posted

    Digital alteration of actors' appearance should be limited to only necessary cases, like if they cast someone old(er) and they do a flashback to their younger self and need to make them look younger, or if they make a movie with a familiar character portrayed by an actor who has since passed away, like Tarkin in Rogue One.

    I'm not a fan of the thought of using CGI to recreate dead actors to fill roles in new movies.
    I assume you may have heard the rumors of doing this with James Dean to make his "4th movie" or whatever, which is a foolish reasoning because the actor is dead, so no matter how good the CGI would look, it's never going to be HIM in the role, just a CGI rendering that looks and sounds incredibly realistic.

    No, cast new actors, it's better to let new people get a chance than reusing by CGI old/dead actors just because.

  20. Posted

    Didn't they use some kind of technology to digitally alter his voice in Obi-Wan Kenobi to make it sound like the OT? They should go back and do that for his voice in Rogue One cos it's really easy to hear his older age in his voice there. Although that would mean it'd have to be re-released.

  24. Posted

    11 hours ago, Maaboo35 said:

    1. The practical elimination of B-models and retirement of PF are definitely steps backward in my book. The serious focus on cars, cars, cars is also a problem.

    3. Moving all B-model manuals to digital only has sapped some of the fun out of building. Nothing is as satisfying as opening up a manual and getting started.

    Agreed, the B-models are sometimes even better than the A-models, at least for small/medium size sets.

    I also agree with the focus on cars as I'm not a huge car nut, especially not for supercars. I prefer cars the likes of Land Rover Defender and Mercedes Geländewagen, SUVs and similar.
    I don't buy very many sets though and few of the large ones, the last large one I bought was the 42055 BWE.

    That said, while I agree that it's nice to build from a physical paper manual, I understand why they cut out B-model manuals for the sake of the environment, although I don't know how much that does compared to the additional power usage of having to use a pc/tablet for the instructions or if this is a lot of power in the first place.