nerdsforprez

I know I, for one, would love to see them....

Yea... mine was really only a 2D "exploded" view from wall. I really like the vertical presentation as well, or one that adds another dimension. Presenting in real Lego would be difficult though. Don't know how to do it unless you used transclear liftarms or other elements, which, from a distance wouldn't really even be noticeable.

Aren't we all?? Ain't that the truth. Yea, 100%. I love the modular building, but by now stretch of the imagination is it a quick and easy process. Still, viewers can still see how the gearbox fits with the module behind it, folks can see how the axles align, etc.... Its not like it happens a lot, but occasionally folks do come over and my wife, to my chagrin, says something to the tune of "have you seen *****'s Lego room?" WHen showing things off.... it is fun to show each module of a build like this. Yea, I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I remember as far back as I can remember, when I was a kid, seeing pictures, models, etc. in museums, etc. of machines in a cross-sectional or exploded view and thinking "that is real beauty right there." I didn't even have words for it then, but I was mesmerized by such displays. Also, I have quite a few displayed models in my Lego room but I try to come up with innovative ways to display them all. Cross-section, exploded, on stands, not on stands. The variety almost adds a museum-like quality to the room (kinda theatrical descriptor, but I think it gets the sentiment across). I, by no means, am not into "shelf-queens" and I love building more than anything else, but it is fun for me to build surrounded by what I feel is some pretty cool stuff. Btw... I have your P1, fully intact, in my room in a custom table I built.... Great idea but already did! Its in around minute 1:36 in the video.....

Oh cool - I will have to take a look at it. I have not seen it.

Hey Everyone – Not sure this deserves its own thread but, but because this is a generalized post just exemplified by @T Lego's LaFerrari build I guess it is applicable to create its own thread. Obviously one can display any modular build in this way. 2D of course, 3D would be more difficult. Anyways, I like to display my Technic models in unique ways. I really think it adds a sense of dimensional value to displaying sets. I have neighbors, kids, friends, etc. come over all the time and it is fun to show-off Technic builds in a more “hands-on” way. With modular sets/MOCs one can display in an “exploded” view, where you can see the individual components of a build. I like cross-section views, and have done this before with several builds but the problem of cross-section views is although one can see certain functions you are limited in demonstrating those functions because the models really can’t be taken apart. In an exploded view, at least how I demonstrate it in this video, one can take each module and show its functions, how it fits with the rest of the model, etc. in an easy fashion. I can assemble the entire model, anytime I want, then take it apart as well and have somewhere to display the different modules. @T Lego's LaFerrari is a perfect set for this! See the video for details and how I did it. The spacing may seem a little off, but that is due to lens distortion. Unfortunately the wall display is in a tight space in my Lego room (I am running out of space) and therefore I had to use a large lens to capture all of it.

I for one appreciate the comparisons. I have several models, and just finished the LaFerrari. I think the builds are actually far superior that Lego now. Not so much for piece quality, but for the complexity of the build, lack of color vomit, and challenge. Because many of their advanced builder series (or whatever they are called) are done by AFOLs and don't have the restrictions of a multi-billion, international company just the models themselves are better builds period. I think they allow their builders so much more freedom. There are so many techniques or connections that would never be allowed on an official Lego model. Also, your comment about CADA producing what seems more unique pieces. I agree. I wonder if it challenges the old adage that new, unique models are incredibly expensive to produce.

I am actually. Here in the states. Unfortunately I don't get much time to participate in events, and also, I don't think there is a big Technic representation, just more system type stuff, so I don't make a huge effort in attending. But I do have a good time watching and communicating with folks in my local chapter.

Perhaps not, but looks like I was too literal in my interpretation of everything! And that is on me! Glad you guys had fun in the endeavor - at the end of the day that is what it is all about.

In order to not distract anymore from the original purpose of the thread, I propose we heed @icm's question -

ALso, I think you misinterpreted what I said. I said "meaningless". And I used that term in the context of "lacking competition". GBWR records may be "pointless" to you but I don't know what you mean by this. Is it because they are frivolous? Or the records don't carry a function? Because if that is the case then perhaps, perhaps that is correct. But that is not why we value records. The value in records lies in the fact that they have not been done before, which again, is all about competition. Which, I would argue that GBWR nearly always have a competitive base. Growing the longest fingernails in the world is meaningless or most of us "normal" folks because it serves no purpose. But if there are thousands and thousands of people who try it (which, as a medical professional I can assure you there are) then as a record it is indeed, meaningful. lol.... unless perhaps one of us starts to steer in another direction. Which I think is me

I don't think that 90% of records in the GBWR have a competitive base of 1. I call false equivalence here. But, your word "pointless" i.e. like I said, meaningless. Which, looks like we agree upon. And if that is what the OP is after, then, yup, you are right. Sorry, I don't want to deter from folks having fun. After all this is just a hobby. My point was just to point out that it really is not a record, per se, or at least in the traditional sense or not of anything meaningful. But, if the OP and their group had fun, then that is a whole different type of "meaning" - so, good for them....

I would agree with both of you if it was shared as just a fun event. And yes, the build is quite an achievement! That is what Lego is all about! But this was shared as a R-E-C-O-R-D. Records without a competitive base are meaningless. Records with a competitive base are meaningful. If I get down on the floor of my office and crank out 20 or 30 pushups I've probably just set a world record for most push-ups in my office. Not because I am strong, but because no one has done it before (likely) on the basis they haven't even tried (i.e. no competition). I am not trying to be rude or "mean" - its just that is how records work. I thought that was self-evident.

Which I would promptly abandon. Claiming this could be viewed as an embarrassment. ".... with more wheels or longer in length"?? How specialized!!! So, if I create a model pulling a trailer with the most Lego flower elements I can claim a world record too?? Awesome!!! Not that it would mean anything. Obviously what one is going for in pulling records is WEIGHT or MASS (or friction). Length of wheels or whatever may indirectly measure this, but by no means is it a direct measurement of anything useful. Kinda a silly post if you ask me.

Yes. That is my understanding as well. No instructions, other than what can be derived from LDD and other files. But they should point you in the right direction. As you can see above i recreated the model from the pics and files and I am sure you can as well. If you have specific questions feel free to ask. I still have the model assembled and have it displayed in my Lego room with the cross-section view visible (see my YT video above) and therefore it is easy for me to look at the actual model to help out if needed. And sorry @GerritvdG just seeing this response! No, I didn't do any updates to the file, sadly.

I don't mean this to be rude but it looks like you have some more work to do on answering your own questions. There are ample resources online on how to use LDD. I don't know this for sure, but I can't recommend to use it on a phone. There is also a stud.io file - again, something you would have to do your own research on how to use. Just like everything else, there are ample online resources on how to do this. With a little more effort you will also see there are dozens and dozens of photos to at least get you a starting point...

This thread literally has everything you need. Just read the entire thing, especially the beginning. I recreated it (see above) from the pics and LDD file

I have. I simply no longer believe TLG produces the superior product anymore. Superior elements, yes, but the margin is small IMO. But the sets are actually becoming lackluster. I recently purchased and built the CADA LaFerrari (designed by @T Lego). IMO it is a far superior product than any of TLG's Ultimate CS hypercars. And I say that knowing TLG elements are mildly superior. But the color vomit, poor design, dummied-down instructions, and lackluster building methods, crappy gearboxes, etc. make the overall product inferior to CADA and other sets IMO. I will never purchase another UCS Technic set from TLG. That does not even consider the price. To the argument that TLG produces superior elements.... I agree with this. But the ratio of superior elements to the price they ask is off. The example I would draw from is the mattress industry here in the US (I don't know what it is like in other countries). But there are mattress companies (Sleep Number, Tempur-pedic, etc.) that are asking $5-10,000 for a King sized mattress in the US. Their marketing is genius. They have professional athletes advertising them, research consortiums citing the benefits of sleep, etc. Folks I know in my income bracket all have these beds. I think they are crazy. Although I can afford these types of mattresses, I sleep on a simple, yet not cheap, good-quality mattress. But fairly run-of-the mill mattress. I think it cost me like 5-600 bucks (USD). Sure, I have tried out a Sleep Number or Tempur-Pedic mattress, and I think I noticed a difference, but it was BARELY noticeable, if noticeable at all. Certainly not anything I would pay 10-20x the amount I paid for the mattress I now have. If I were to pay that, I would expect something 2-4x better (10-20x better would not be fair. One, I don't think that is quantifiable, 2, I am sure the relationship is not linear). I could not even say lying on either of those other mattresses is TWICE as comfortable, let alone 2-4x better. I think my friends are crazy for spending that much $$ on a product that has no quantifiable evidence of being worth that much more than the competition (in their defense many of my buddies say they buy the mattress to appease their spouses. Their argument is then.... that the mattresses are worth it. Which I have no comeback for ) Here in the states we will not see such prices for quite some time, if at all (or at least not until the very end of its production run). The argument for waiting until Lego products lower in price really does not hold water for us. Not to mention, part of the fun and therefore value of a set (only part.... keep your pants on critics ) is to get it, build it, improve it, while it is popular. THe Zetros set is finally a more affordable price here in the states... but it is such old news now it has taken a lot of the fun out of it to try and build, modify, etc....

Congrats to the winners and awesome job to everyone. Truly one of my favorite contests to date.

Anyone know of a reasonable time frame to expect the new elements from this set to become available on B&P?

Been a while since I have seen @Bublehead on here, his posts look like the same old song and dance? Not much has changed and I don't think that is a good thing... No.. sorry... that was a bit harsh. But seriously, what do you hope to accomplish with this post? Disappear forever, then return with a post that only criticizes things with no other commentary? Take a lesson from the animal kingdom. The seagull, specifically. All they do is fly down, squawk about, sh*% everywhere, then fly away. Do everyone a favor. Don't be them. @Maaboo35 - you're welcome. I hope you are enjoying the show.

I am also joining the chorus here. Agreed this has been a fantastic contest. Glad that I don't have to be the one voting, though it is kinda a shame at the same time because I paid more attention to all the submissions than I have before - the quality of the submissions was that good! Thxs to @Jim and @Milan and others... GL in the judging...

looks like it is out of stock at the moment. But the listing price looks like it was 166$. Sites that list a deal too good to be true usually are just that... buyer beware...

My build is done. CADA version, but with different wheels. Usually I don't take to spray painting elements, but I feel for this car it was appropriate (just the wheel rims and brake disks). For the rims I used a simple matte black, and they turned out wonderful. The rotors appear a little glittery in the photos, but that is a photo effect. They look very realistic, metallic-like in real life. Obviously, I also drilled the rotors for a more realistic look. So much to enjoy about this car, and it was a really enjoyable build. One reason for this is the modularity. For me, I enjoy building all the modules first, them putting it all together in one cohesive whole. Even if something doesn't work straightaway, I don't mind (which, luckily, I did not make any mistakes and everything worked fine.). I have not applied stickers... IMO they are not needed (are they ever?) Can't wait to display it, I have some ideas

@SaperPL - every heard of the phrase "paralysis by analysis"? I think that is where you are at right now......

I still doubt it. Which, at this point, the issue is moot given the comment I was referring to from another member ("10,000+ hours") was admittedly stated in error. But still, its fun to speculate 10,000 hours would more or less be five years of full-time (40 hr/week) work. So, even if a project took 5 years, I highly doubt full-time work was dedicated to it (who has that type of time??). Even if it took 10 years, that is more or less 20hours a week, more or less, for that whole time span - which again, I don't know folks with that amount of time. Even the OP for the Star Destroyer thread (which undoubtedly is the larger of the two projects you referred to) stated at the beginning how much estimated time he/she had spent on their project. Roughly one tenth of the required dedication to qualify for the topic being debated (1,000 hours versus 10,000 hours). Another problem to consider if someone were to actually spend 10,000+ hours on a MOC is the speed at which Lego elements evolve and new ones are released. It someone took 10 years to build a MOC, I am sure the process would be frustrating but perhaps no more than for the reason that the element palette one would start with at year 1 would be completely different than the element palette by year 10. One would have to keep building and rebuilding the MOC if they wanted their MOC to resemble contemporary building techniques and pieces. Again, let that sink in. In a ten year history, not just are elements evolving but entirely new building techniques are evolving when using such a liberal time span. As is being shown in the Technic subforum, with all it's wonderful contests being managed by our wonderful Admin folks (plug for @Jim and @Milan) what was possible in 2013 is very different from what is possible in 2023. Especially in the "looks" category with the ever-evolving palette of panels in the Technic genre. At least for Technic builds, we have also underwent complete transformations of not just elements, but element groups (drive train elements, gears, etc., electronic and control systems, etc.).