andythenorth

As well as to defend parts, the clutch gear is also used for child safety - for example when there is something like a winch, for which the string could easily strangle a child. Off-topic, just mentioning it here because it might be worth something to someone. (Unrelated to the clutch gear, I've also found one of my kids wrapping a 2m string from a non-motorised lego winch around themselves, I now hide away the models with long strings to avoid this). @Seaside, skid steer with 6 wheels is harder than skid steer with 4 wheels imho. You have more tyre scrub to contend with (4 of the 6 wheels have to be dragged sideaways if counter-rotating). But it could be done. It works with Big Trak because the wheels are relatively low-friction, and Big Trak is also better used on low-friction surfaces (deep carpet is bad for Big Trak performance). Boop boop beep. Also Big Trak Is Back http://www.bigtrakxtr.co.uk How have you got it set up? All you need is two motors, one driving the wheels on each side. Which tyres are you using? You do need a strong axle design, the skid steer will tend to pull the wheels off the axles, but you can figure that out once you have the basic drive-steer function worked out.

Eh, why _are_ you all in such a rush? Inevitably, the only thing you're going to feel when you see the images is disappointment. The set will be too big and also too small. It will contain pneumatics which are not long enough, but also not complex enough. It will have too much PF and not enough. The price will be far more than you'd ever pay but not as much as a flagship should be. Whatever colour it is, it's certainly wrong. In short, all the pictures will do is ruin your day. So why such hurry to punch yourselves in your faces?

Because Lego have managed to lock down on this one so far? Which they're probably attending to a bit more competently than some years, because (1) licensed set, there are possibly contractual provisions with MB about exactly how and when this is announced publicly (2) the photo leaks of 42039 went oh so brilliantly (for non-English speakers, that's sarcasm ). The backlash against the changes to 42039 preliminary model have likely reinforced a culture of product secrecy at TLG that had been getting a bit leakier in recent years imo.

The 60052 cargo train is outstanding. Chipping in for balance, because there are always people who think yesterday is better. 7939 is also outstanding, you wouldn't regret buying either or both. But I bought two 60052 sets on pre-christmas discount (thinking fewer arguments for my 2 kids, who actually in the end put them together in one big circuit and collaborated quite nicely, they are 3 and 5 so this was a bit surprising). I considered buying two 7939 sets, but somehow, for the price it never seemed worth it. Good set though. All the PF elements are on the same plugs and protocols. The PF lights fit some of the trains by default, others you'll have to be creative with some extra bricks. The train remote will also act as a variable (7 speed) controller for your technic PF models. The IR receiver is the same. You can also control trains with the bang-bang (two-stick) PF remote, but the resulting zero-top speed transition is...not good The AAA battery box is useful in some technic models too.

Yeah, but you're not 12 and....but OMG LOOK AT ALL THE RED PANELS, WHAT AN AWESOME PARTS PACK! (/me just bought a load of those red panels on Bricklink)

Yair maybe, but every time the new range is announced here a bunch of posters pile in whining providing valuable customer feedback about any gaps in the model that aren't filled with panels. So eh, what are TLG going to do?

Yair I totally agree. No actually, wait, eh what? Which Technic sets are getting simpler? The large sets can push ABS parts beyond the point where they perform well. Too much friction, high bending moments, the need for excessive reinforcement, and where PF is used, stressing gears and other parts to the point where they break trivially (case in point: my 42009 B model just chewed threw a 24T gear in the middle of the boom gearbox). Bigger is not automatically better

That sounds more likely. I don't actually remember very well, it was...1987. Brickset shows the hand-built shocks version. But maybe 8860 went to market with the grey pre-assembled shocks as new parts? The hand-built shocks would have been weak.

@DrJB yair, the most complex set I built was the 8860 Car Chassis http://brickset.com/...0-1/Car-Chassis then again, I was 9, and it had for example - turntable plate steering that came apart easily - hand-built shocks - a fiddly engine set up using the old pistons, which had to be aligned correctly using the X holes in 24t gears - fiddly elastic bands for the seat adjustments (Many) years later, 8258 was quite a simple build for me, mindlessly putting one gear in after another, and locking it all in with liftarms and pins. The complexity comes with that set in trying to operate the functions, the controls on gearbox sets are non-obvious imo. Will we end up concluding "it's all relative"? Eh, I have no point, just talking on the internets.

+1 to Erik's point about confusing complexity and interest. Whilst I feel very sad about being the one to bring dictionary or wiki semantics to a forum discussion (can indicate the poster is an idiot, oops)....complexity is often used to describes systems with a high degree of interconnectedness or coupling, sometimes with many modes of behaviour which can be hard to predict. http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Complexity So gearbox sets with a single motor are at the higher end of Technic complexity. Pneumatic sets with a large number of pumps and valves are at the higher end of Technic complexity. 42008 Tow Truck perhaps does not have very connected systems, but has hard to predict behaviour. Is that complex? (I just enjoy disliking that set ) 8110 is barely complex at all. It's just a big frame with modular components on it. The only complex thing is not putting the centre diff in the wrong way round

Building mindless gearboxes is boring. Gear, gear, dog clutch, driving ring, gear gear gear. There's no real sense of what you're building, or the mechanical principles involved. Maybe I'm too rooted in old school (1980s) technic thinking though 8109 Flatbed Truck was interesting, because the mechanism is intricate and pleasing. 8043 is a good use of gearboxes to multiply functions, and shows routing two functions through the turntable. 8110 is mindlessly boring, too big, badly performing, but the portal axles, torque tubes, compressor are all interesting technical components.

You may have very high friction on the trailer axles, technic axles make for poor bearing surfaces. Adding more axles might help reduce the binding if that's a problem. But it might not be. Also, adding a very tiny amount of olive oil to the bearing surface of technic axles can make a big difference. Olive oil is safe on plastic, except it can collect dust over time and make sludge (so don't add much). A lot of sets perform better with olive oil. Bricklink lists 42030 at around 3.5kg. With similar axles, and 4 L motors I clocked about 1.8km / hr with a 7.2kg load. But that was testing with the trailer from a kid's ride on toy, which has easy-rolling 30cm wheels on metal axles What does your trailer weigh? Are you on carpet or solid floor? Carpet sucks for PF performance.

Same in UK afaict. Pay more for getting it in one box.

Losing the battle, or watching a stronger PF ecosystem develop, whilst not taking the risk on capital, nor tying up resources in product dev, nor tying up resources in supporting increasingly complex software and electronic hardware? I don't think it's any kind of battle at all, I think it's strategy.

Eh? What's Junior about it? It was a City train. Juniors doesn't have trains afaik.

Out of interest, are they selling the same items you are waiting for?

Eh? Lego never name the set for the trains that inspired it (if any), because the foamers would be bouncing up and down counting out how many rivets were out of scale. So forget about Novelty being the name. Novelty is a retail term, so it's probably a small polybag set, something like http://shop.lego.com...Listing=listing Or it is a new Creator train set, mis-categorised. Probably one like this http://shop.lego.com...Listing=listing

What does the RL Arocs have as stock suspension? Walking beam rears? Air ride?

+1 to what davidmull says Also if it really is €200, with no RC and only one motor, it can't be skimping on the details Longer pneumatic cylinders alone aren't worth that kind of retail price (except to a select few here).

@philo I'm going to defer to you on that My electrical physics goes about as far as V = IR. Weight tends not to be a problem in the things I build, they're mostly heavy trucks. Weight aids traction. I'm actually splitting motors across multiple battery boxes and IR receivers, so using 12 NiMH batteries where 8 might be sufficient. But then again....by splitting I also reduce the current limit issues. @Doc, yair, useful info cheers. I prefer rechargeables myself, but for other people those Energizers sound like a top tip.

The current blue cargo train is awesome imo. For context, I have a 5 year old and a 3 year old, and they got one each for christmas (on discount for £105 each instead of £140). You may have other needs. The blue engine is well built with some nice touches, and the colour scheme is striking. The wagons are super-simple, but effective. The office and crane work well. There's nothing that feels like it was tossed into the box with no thought, or just to push up the retail price. The play value is high. Creator trains are what they are, high-end collectables for collectors, but the trade-off is they have almost zero play value. You can't crash them. Emerald Night barely functions without modding, Maersk looks great, but the porches and steps fall off, and the containers fit with nothing else. Horizon Express loses the front fairing constantly. Different horse for different course, but I like Lego trains that you can be crashed. Otherwise might as well get proper toy trains with DCC, kadees, sound chips, smoke generators etc.

Eh, that's a good point. If I was using alkalines I'd keep running them until they were useless (because of cost & waste). With the NiMH I swap them out for a fresh-charged set as soon as they show signs of fading. So conclusion....everyone here is 'meh' about an 8x AA option?

Thanks Mark. The other issue with the switch (other than space) is that it is quite low friction (which is nice if actuating it mechanically). When the kids crash the trains, or in Technic vehicles on rough terrain, the switch can jog back to centre (off). This can be easily missed, for example on a twin-motored train with PF train motors, a powered motor will drive through another one that is accidentally unpowered on the same unit. L motors will do the same in Technic. The £0.02 solution is probably to tape the switch in position.

Ha ha, oops. I fixed that typo So if max input is 10.8v, someone who connects 8x 1.5v alkalines lets the magic smoke out? "Just don't do that" is one answer. Is it simple to cap voltage? (I studied electrical physics in school, but am not good at it).

So I use 1.2v NiMH batteries with PF. 6x 1.2v gives 7.2v. (6x 1.5v alkaline gives 9v, but alkalines are expensive and I don't like the waste). Philo's page shows that some PF motors deliver significantly less mechanical power at 7.2v than at 9v Makes sense. http://www.philohome...ec/pfcurves.htm TJ Avery figured out a PF hack using commodity 3rd party battery box for 8x AA with a PF plug, providing ~9.6v. http://texbrick.com/tjab/?p=127 3rd party battery holders for 8x AA are cheap and easy to obtain. Like this one: http://www.conrad-el...x-29-mm-x-59-mm That one fits in the same dimensioned volume as the battery compartment of the current Lego PF AA battery box, which is 64mm x 32mm x 56mm (but 64mm including the volume occupied by the switch, so the 3rd part part fits). This volume usefully doesn't include the pin connection structures (BI points) on the Lego part. A 3rd party battery box part for integrating 8 AA batteries would be awesome. For bonus points, it would integrate a switch (use a commercial toggle switch, no BI point). A voltage limiter to 9v might also be a bonus (in case 8x 1.5v Alkalines are added, I don't know if PF parts have over-voltage protection, or if the magic smoke will escape at ~12v...). Shapeways? Kickstarter? Efferman?