Eurobricks Dukes
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by allanp

  1. allanp

    Why no snow groomers?

    I don't know, but my guess it that a bulldozer offers a lot of the same possibilities (a snow groomer being basically a bulldozer for snow). Could it be that bulldozers are seen as the "cooler" option? (oh the irony!). It could have some new to official Technic functions, like suspension on a tracked vehicle like you suggested. I am curious to know what new pieces would your dream snow groomer from TLG have. Maybe wider tread links?
  2. Lego tyres are generally too wide compared to their diameter making duallys difficult. They just about managed it with the Arocs but even those tyres are too wide for scale.
  3. It will be interesting to see what valve travel limiters can be made with the new valves.
  4. You wouldn't necessarily lose unlimited rotations if you have an axle running through the turn table which powers a second pump in the base. By separating the air circuits in this way you also have the benefit of not losing pressure when another function is activated. But if your going to that level of modding, may as well go one step further with 2 stage pneumatic outriggers. But powering 4 cyclinders at once? Make sure use have multiple pumps going at a decent speed to get the full benefit.
  5. So something like sheepos land rover would need 24 batteries, and that's without any controllers! If they are to incorporate the motor outputs into the battery box (not good, but I guess it's cheaper to produce than separate units) they should have AT LEAST 4 outputs (though 8 would be better) and 6 AA batteries, not puny AAA batteries. Having 6 batteries for every 2 motors is not good enough. Geez! Third party options looked to be better than PF, and PF looks to be better than PU! And will we see motors with buggy motor levels of power and speed, or un geared motors like we had in the late 80s to mid 90s, or micro motors? It's surely no longer due to nostalgia to say the stuff we had in the past was objectively more fun!
  6. This is kinda what I've been saying. It doesn't matter if it's another car or crane or whatever, so long as it brings something new to that price point. 42077 might have had a transverse engine with 4wd and McPherson strut suspension and 4 speed gearbox. If it had those features, far from people complaining that it's yet another car, we'd be tripping over ourselves to buy it!
  7. Mini LAs have a small amount of internal friction even without any load applied to them. Maybe driving 4 of them simultaneously through a long, twisting gear train (including 2 gearboxes) at a higher speed would be a bit too much stress on the L motor, like in 42009? I haven't built 42082 so don't know if that's true. I guess its better (but still not great) to have them move slower than the growth of stalagmites and stalactites but reliably for everyone regardless of battery type used than slow for some and not at all for others.
  8. If they did release a JCB 3CX backhoe with a decent flagship sized grader as a B model I wonder how many would buy two sets?! Edit: Ummmm, can't find a JCB grader. But they make the most iconic back hoe! This begs the question, does a B model of a liscenced set HAVE to be a model of something from the same liscence, or can it be generic? Volvo do make graders however, and there's bound to be another Volvo set in the future (hopefully NOT a back hoe, like ketchup has to be Heinz, back hoe has to be JCB of the 3CX variety!). So there's the possibility of a grader there!
  9. Grader could be a good B model to a JCB 3CX back hoe. Is a grader recognisable and cool enough to be an A model though?
  10. Not sure weather to start new topic for this, but here's an interesting video on price per piece Vs weight
  11. The forest harvester 42080 comes motorised for the pneumatic functions.
  12. Well I love this set overall (no surprise there!). Yeah the colour choices are.....questionable, but the design is fairly clean, it doesnt have the Swiss cheese effect of 42082 as pointed out by sariel in the comments of his 42082 video review post on Eurobricks. Of course I would say that it mimics the way real life machines work better than any other summer set this year, because it does, which is what I like about it most, but I also find it fun to play with as the motorised functions work with decent speed (42082 take note) and the controls aren't directly connect to the function being operated (42081 take note!) and are fairly responsive. I also found the build to be excellent. Very quickly you are building the front pendular steered axle, the swiftly on to the next interesting bit and so on. There's never a moment where you feel like you're endlessly just joining pins and connectors as it's relatively low piece count is used very efficiently. Your not building, or paying for parts just for the sake of building/paying for parts. The build really reminded me of the old school approach of having a more skeletal frame, as opposed to the condensed mess of asymetrical uglyness as seen in the base of 42082. For all the weird colour choices 42080 has, at least you know what's what. The chassis is clearly regular green and most of the parts used there are that colour, so it looks nice and clean. Looking on the inside of 42082, it's an ugly mess, what is chassis, what is gearbox, what colour is it even supposed to be, and is so much convolution really necessary? So if you feel 42082 has too many parts for what it does, if you feel it could have been done with far less, then 42080 is the kind of design and build you're after. I can't argue that 42082 isn't good value, it's fantastic value for money, IF you are looking to expand your collection. However if you have a fair amount of Technic already, well it's still fantastic value who am I kidding! However I would argue that 42080 is not too bad value either. I've always said that price per piece is a terrible measure of value. Is 2000 connector pegs for £50 100 times better value than 20 buggy motors for £50? 42080 has 2 large cyclinders, 1 small cylinder, several pneumatic t pieces and connectors, the new improved valves, pneumatic hoses, 2 large turntables, L motor, pneumatic motor pump, studded beams in white (lord knows how our old 8480s could do with some new beams!), lots of those new technic macaroni pieces (or whatever they are called) in pearl dark grey, 8 wheels in pearl dark grey and panels in colours that are either hard to find or new to this set. Ide take that over a set with twice the number of parts but only half the good stuff any day.
  13. well it's not unheard of for windmills to have small cranes on them
  14. In my personal opinion I think a windmill would be better as a creator expert set. Imagine how detailed and ornate it could be, but the top rotates on a 42082 style bearing connected to the small rear propeller thingy via lots of gearing down.
  15. I think a worthwhile remake of 8480 would have to be a little bigger than 8480 so the arm could have more degrees of movement, a satellite with more complex unfolding wings, control surfaces in the tail, steerable front wheels, fully retractable wheels that fit inside the fully panelled wings and so on. And even then, when 8480 was released it was a milestone in complexity and was the first to introduce the drive ring based function switching gearbox, which made it amazing. Now it's done to death, so I don't know that a even a new bigger better shuttle would be as thrilling to me personally as the original was UNLESS it brought something new that I haven't thought of or didn't know I wanted, because to be quite honest, I didn't want a Technic space shuttle until I saw 8480.
  16. If going by past trends then next year indeed might not be so great. However we have had two great years back to back in 2015/2016 before and the new pneumatic valves allow many to be packed together in a smaller space, and I doubt they would have created those new valves just for the forest harvester. So I'm predicting a pneumatic flagship with lots of pneumatics. And because the new valves have already been developed and released my guess is that it's a highly complex and ambitious design taking longer than usual to get right. So yeah, could be just wishful thinking, but that leads me to think it's a backhoe. With all the things a backhoe can do they are nightmarish to get right, and to make one big enough to match the size and complexity of our current flagships and to TLGs standards I have to think would take longer than pretty much any other set to design. Alternatively, as almost every other year seems to be RC, 2019 flagship could be a huge RC pneumatic forklift, with its new parts being a small PU servo to control the valves and reeeeaaaaalllly long pneumatics to get a good lift height on the forks, at least 40cms of lift, which for me would be the first RC flagship done right!
  17. It does look kinda stop/start in the video, but not as bad as the BWE bucket wheel (which was due to long axles under high torque, being also driven by a chain and the fact that the teeth on the ends of the quarter ring gears are spaced just slightly too far apart). The carousel turns quite smooth as it's gear reduction is done close to the ring gear itself (so no long axles under high torque, long axles spinning fast under low torque is ok). The ring gear of the carousel is also mated/driven by a 36t double bevel gear which I suspect helps to smooth out the slightly off spacing between gear teeth where the quarter ring gear segments meet. But weirdly, it appears (though I could be wrong) that the superstructure of 42082 isn't turned via the teeth of the ring gear at all, but via the teeth of the turntable used to hold the superstructure to the base. Will that make a difference even with the lovely proper bearing? I don't know, but I think the main issue is the torturous path the power from the motor must take to get to the function of turning the superstructure. It has to go from the motor, to a upper/lower function selector gearbox, through a right angle down through a turn table, through a bidirectional function switch gearbox and back up again to turn the upper superstructure where the power from the motor started from in the first place. I like complexity but not this pointless kind of complexity which only leads to problems. Why not just have the power go from the motor, through a gearbox and then down to the turntable, like 42042? BTW I don't think backlash is an inherent cause of jerkyness, as once the backlash is taken up it should run smooth all else being well.
  18. Sorry I gotta ask, did you just quote meatloaf?!
  19. Well I did just that and unfortunately..... my wallet is now the cost of one 42080 lighter All 2nd half sets (except the Chiron) are there.
  20. Oooooh, might have to check out my local Smyths. Can't see them on the website yet.
  21. You could always dump all the parts out at once regardless of if the bags are numbered.
  22. allanp

    42080 Forest Harvester

    Surely the purpose of a seat is to give the driver somewhere to sit, and not just to be in the cab. You could also ask why bother putting wings on Technic planes if they can't fly?! The reason Technic planes have wings is because real planes have wings. The reason this Technic forest harvester has a big circular blade is because real forest harvesters have them.
  23. allanp

    42080 Forest Harvester

    You could ask why include a seat when there's no driver I guess. Glad they changed it to grey. The red saw was just colour vomit AND made it look like it just chopped through a herd of cattle!