Bublehead

Just finished Box 1. Not sure why people are having any issues following the gear box instructions, but my building experience probably makes a big difference. So far, no major new construction techniques or innovations have presented themselves, but I did learn one new thing- a towball with pin will accept a light saber bar. I though the frictionless pin and half pin were the only pins that would do this.

Thanks for the Australian viewpoint... @mocbuild101 and @MangaNOID and the Canadians @BusterHaus. So prizes are like icing on a cake eh? Don't really need it if the cake is good. The job comment was hilarious by the way @MangaNOID And seeing the cost of Lego in the down the under, you have my deepest sympathies.

Nice review, thanks @JopieK. Every time I see a new review for the 2018 trains, I am hoping someone splurged and bought 2 sets so we could get some idea of the PU interaction between multiple recievers and controllers. ☹ Anybody done that yet?

@Erik Leppen, yes, it was rhetorical, however, I was glad you commented. Let me ask a few general follow up questions to everyone. 1. Would the value of the prizes offered make you more likely or less likely to compete in a competition with a complex set of rules? 2. What kind of prize would make you consider entering such a contest? 3. If a contest had some form of entrants fee in the form of purchasing a specific set or part in order to compete, how likely are you to spend money in order to compete? Think having to buy a Buwizz or SBrick in order to have a chance at a Chiron like the last competition. 4. And finally, would you like to see older retired sets as prizes or would you rather have a chance at winning the newest sets available? Would you rather have a misb 42030 or a 41999 or would you be more interested in a Rough Terrain Crane or a Chiron?

The problem with too many rules is it tends to stifle creativity, but then again, it sets an even playing field to allow true competition. People are concerned that a part count limit would make us all have to worry about keeping track of the number of elements we use and that would over complicate the build process, or make us have to fib when asked how many parts did we use. And to be honest, I couldn’t tell you how many pieces are in my last MOC, I estimated based on weight and the average piece count per Kg of all the last 20 flagship sets, throwing out the high and low outliers. I think we need to have limits on a building contest just to make it fair to those whose collection is either in its infancy or limited by means. Not everyone has as enxtensive a collection to draw from as some of us do. Which is why we must have rules on the types and number of PF or pneumatics elements that can be used, total,piece count, or some other methods, such as limiting your available parts to a strict list of certain sets, or like a C model competition or a combination of set A and set B etc... Theme is important for a contest, especially if it takes us out of comfort zones. I wouldn’t want to compete with some of the supercar builders in a supercar building competition, but if we all had to come up with a non vehicle model, that would really push a lot of people out of their comfort zone, mine included. Goals are also important. Meeting the spirit of the theme but failing to include the required functionality of the rules should not be rewarded during judging, no matter how cool or crazy an idea is. You must satisfy the goals established by the rules, else risk disqualification. That is just the way it is. So within all these limitations, one might ask why even compete? Well, who doesn’t like getting a nice prize for all their hard work?

@Jim, @Milan, I like #3 motorized but then it begs the second question, purist or heretic? (TLG PF only, or 3rd party electronics allowed)

@z3_2drive, can you attach a hose between all the pneumatic cylinders or is it better to just plug them and let them act on each wheel independently?

What surprised me was the actual size of the part. It looked so much smaller in the instruction pictures but it is a big as a 20z clutch gear, which I found out when I opened Box 1.

@Ngoc Nguyen, as in you mean it destroys Lego?

Mine too, @Doug72

Don’t we not get enough GBC from the fans, fairs, festivals, expos, and conventions? Not saying that TLG developed modules wouldn’t be cool, but I think the AFOLs do a better job at it, really. And isn’t GBC kind of a rebel of sorts? It does destroy Lego, which to some is heresy, but not sure if TLG would care because it helps to sell more Lego. With the exception that their whole philosophy is it must hold up under use, be able to be taken apart and reused, and no official TLG set will use an element that causes it to be placed under stress, causing it to become unusable at a later date. You could see how GBC modules kind of put a harsh on that mellow, even under the loosest interpretations. Also, isn’t there GBC modules on the Ideas platform? I seem to remember they were not screaming to 10k votes very fast. So, as these things go, I would say the likelihood is just about zip, zilch, nada. At least that is my prediction.

With my golden streak of procrastination, the tortoise just might beat the hare

I just got this set today in the post. @grohl would be proud. Managed to get it misb for $78 off eBay with free shipping. Sure beat the $99 price tag at Xmas. In your case, getting it as a gift, even better

@BusterHaus, not a bad idea... @technic_addict, I need permission of the photo copyright owner, but permission of the original designer would not legally be needed but would be appreciated because it could raise some issues.

Thank you for those who PMed me. @Jim and @Milan are the moderators and run and control the contests. I am just a sponsor. They will announce any upcoming contests as schedules permit.

This design will be shipping from the knockoffs within days of getting their hands on the first set, which, if they have a spy inside TLG (which is more than likely), that was days ago. Now TLG may hide behind reasons of IP security and not wanting to aid the competition by not posting them too soon, but I think it would be better PR to post them as soon as they are available in the real set. Because the knockoffs CAN afford to send someone to a Lego Store and buy one, you know they have done so already. And they need to reverse engineer the new parts and build molds, so that will take some time, not much but still a factor. So dragging their heals on releasing instructions really is a way of limiting people building the set from parts and pushes them to purchasing it IMO. I just want to keep my instructions from getting dog-eared.

Has Lego put the instructions up anywhere yet? They are not available on the customer service instructions page or via the Technic theme instructions link... I guess they want people to use the real instructions for now, and not the pdf’s which lets me keep the originals more pristine. Bad TLG... No need to keep them secret unless you are trying to get people to buy the set and not just build it from parts, but that really can’t be done because of the new parts being integral to the sets functions. And we are not worried about keeping the IP from the Chinese knockoffs anymore because they only have to walk into a Lego store and buy one now. Anybody else second the motion to make TLG put the instructions online?

298,431 parts according to google

You mean it wasn’t form locked? Wow!

Purple... need we say more?

+1 @grum64

I think what people are getting at is not that the complaints are unwarranted, but that we keep hearing them over and over, and not that “we” want people to not express their opinions, but that “we” get it, it has flaws, TLG has let “us” down, and “we” should all pick up torches and rakes and implements of destruction and march on the gates of Billund. Tensions are high, expectations were higher, and the disappointment and let down has made many people more vocal about what direction the hobby is taking, that Pretty trumps Working, Sexy is better than gaps, Coke is better than Pepsi, and on and on we circle through this messy leak ridden release. Here is the list of complaints as I have heard so far: Poor front suspension Poor steering Poor integration of rear spoiler with key to operate (some like this, most don’t) Flimsy doors Three crankshafts 16 gears to get 8 continually cycling gearbox Stickers (especially to complete C on door) Poor color choices Bad paddle shifter design Non opening rear deck Too wide Panel styling too patchworked to fill gaps Not enough gaps to see working functions Too many system parts Not enough flawlessly working functions No Power Functions Horseshoe sticks out too far Front hood doesn’t match real contours No working brakes New brake disk hub unusable due to reversed pin connector Too expensive Have I missed any? Can we just say see the list now and talk about what we are doing to fix all these flaws (that “we” can?) because just constantly ratcheting “our” jaws on what is wrong will do nothing for “us”.

I get it, order was plain wrong, and we put them in the right order and told TLG and they said “we meant to do that”... yeah, that was some serious egg on their face, but that didn’t tick me off as bad as the tuning required to get it to shift well.

It worked for me, but only after messing with it for a couple of hours making sure every element was centered, adjusted, not too tight, not too loose, had just the right amount of friction to prevent backlash, etc.. etc.. Did it work flawlessly after that? No... but it worked 8 out of 10 shifts if you didn’t look at it harshly. The design hinged on having just enough friction, but not too much, which is hard to get right with the tolerances they are working with.

Seeing this for first time. I learned to 3D model in Solidworks by modeling all the parts to build the 8412 Nighthawk. Still have the parts on a CD. It was very similar to your model. Great job.