zoo

I do not own the set. But I did consider buying it when it was on sale a couple of weeks ago. In the end I decided against it and a big reason for this is because of the fact that I would be paying a lot of money for these big pieces that I feel will have little use in other constructions I would like to build, which is in my view the point of LEGO. While the 3x19 frames are very useful and a very important addition to the LEGO technic piece pallet, I don't know where I would use 26 yellow ones. And the many other frame parts included I would have rather seen being regular brick-built constructions instead, for re-useability purposes. The counterweight pieces have very limited use as well. But like you said, it would probably be a not so fun building experience building the crane sections if these large specialized pieces weren't introduced. And the strucural regidity would probably not be good enough, especially with the extra weight brick-built crane sections would add.

Would be wild if they release a McLaren F1 and a McLaren Formula 1 car of same scale in the same year. :)

Very well done! I think that new front made wonders to the profile shot. Before it was almost like the front and back looked the same in your profile picture. Now the front end looks a lot more destinct. The wing at the rear problably helps the new look even further. The side skirts look a bit incoherent with the mix of black and orange pieces if I am to nitpick. :) Regarding the colour, it would be interesting seing it in white with red wheels or vice versa, or maybe black with pearl gold wheels.

Your suspension design differs a bit from the real car when it comes to placement of the arms, but it is very interesting non the less. Inspiring work, well done!

If LEGO produce cars because they sell well, it could mean that in time, Technic will be split into one part car sets and one part other sets, leadning to more Technic sets developed in total. However, I would be worried if instead the increase in amount of car sets produced is due to non-car sets selling poorly. But without sales data, one can only speculate, and that I feel is quite pointless.

Well done with the model. I understand that it is very difficult to replicate the car in this relatively small scale using LEGO Technic. Your profile picture looks a bit off but it is hard to pinpoint why exactly. Part of it has to do with the camera being very close to the car for the photo, which hides a bit of the front and rear. But as you already pointed out, the front is a bit square and should be more pointy so to speak. The rear I think also could have been a stud or so longer, and I also think the front axle should be moved one stud further forward (to make more space between a-pillar and wheel). Another thing is that it looks a bit weird seing the cylinders of the boxer engine so high up in the engine bay when they in reality are the lowest parts of the whole engine. But I understand that it had to be made this way just to be able to fit the front axle at all. :) Still cool to see a scale model of the GT86 in Technic and I agree that there should be more of them judging by how popular they are in the stance/tuner crowd and the fact that japanese cars in general are all the rage nowdays.

Ah, I see. Thanks.

So, do we know what kind of turntable this uses? The small gear rack sections or the regular turntable part or something else? I haven't seen any pictures showing this.

Every review I have read/seen have pointed out this light being in the way. To me it seems that it is a less than ideal positioning, no matter how you view it.

Looks like a fun set to both build and play with. I do wish the bucket was a bit bigger though. Not sure what to pair this with now. The density is quite impressive but it could have been made a bit less dense and larger in scale.

Embargoception.

Since I do not own a copy of 8043 I am quite happy with how this model looks. Don't mind the Volvo license either.

I think it is mostly the mix of technic and system elements that I do not care for. I do not mind a few gaps here and there as long as the design in general feels coherent. I would like to think I have few if any points of principle when it comes to lego builds. You do you if you will. Just a matter of personal taste for me.

I strongly disagree. The Chiron is my least favourite out of the 1:8 cars precisely for the fact that it uses a lot of system elements in the bodywork.

Different companies. Not sure if Volvo Cars will have any exciting enough products out for TLG to licence them. Polestar maybe.

Not sure what could differ regarding the zoom function. I tried it out and looks to behave the same for me as for you in the video. So I guess it's working as intended? I didn't take different screen resolutions into account before, but I realize that it affects the way the forums are displayed. Though again, it looks like some amount of gaps and "textless" areas, for lack of a better word, could be reduced no matter the screen resolution the site is viewed in. If that makes sense? :) Yes, those gaps in the picture is what I am refering to. I understand that it might take quite a bit of tinkering plus trial and error to get things close to 100% and that there might be more updates and features you want to add at a later stage that unintentinally could affect other parts of the site. But it sounds like you recognize the problem I was trying to describe, so all good then. :) I also have some concerns with the lack of contrast between borders/frames and posts in the forum threads, as well as background colour of read and unread thread titles in the topics table. The very subtle blue hue is too close to white in my opinion. But I have also noticed that this is less of a problem for me on my work computer, so it might in part just be a screen deficiency rather than a Eurobricks deficiency. :)

Sorry for the late reply. Desktop view. I am using Edge browser. What I mean is that if text and other features on the site grow further apart, while size of text and features remain unchanged, I believe it affects readability in a negative way. The only thing it does is to force additional eye movement of the viewer in order to register the same information. I think the hight of each row in the topics table could be decreased quite a bit. I am no developer but I believe it is an easy adjustment that would increase readability a lot.

Hehe I'm getting there. But more space doesn't realy help readability if the text stays the same size. :) Sorry, just realized that there aren't many buttons around these forums. I guess what I mean is features in general. If more space is added between features without the features themselves getting larger and text resized, it makes everything feel less coherent in my eyes. But not many seem to agree with my concerns so I guess it isn't too bad. :)

Alright, thank you. I understand. I just wanted to express my impressions of the new design as other here did. It is meant as constructive criticism and I hope it got across as just that.

To be honest, I do not think the update looks great. It probably could with some small adjustments though. Why are there no borders separating avatars with the message box for example? The border between posts could use some more contrast as well. As is now, there might as well be no borders at all. I'm finding it harder to read than the old board, which I guess is the oposite to what you want? But maybe it's just me. Also, the list of topics suffers from the same problem all "modernized" websites suffers from today in that there is a lot of space added between titles and buttons for no reason which just makes it a pain to read.

Are we sure it will not be the 1989 Batmobile tires?

Where there realy tons though? I remember the late 80s and early 90s with great fondness, but I am not so sure there were a greater quantity of complex high end sets released back then compared to today.

Aeroplanes are cool and this also looks like a sweet parts pack. I like it a lot.

Looks like an ok set, even if it might be a step back from the Koenigsegg. But the price is a bit steep for my liking. And I'm sorry, but can we please make these new "official lego set"-topics uniform with the older ones? I fear they will get lost in the feed otherwise.

Is this accurate? I mean the price could be accurate but with 42171 having 1643 pieces compared to 1434 for 42141, is it realistic for the next model in the series to lose almost 300 pieces?