howitzer

Oh, right, I thought that was your photo and you had the part in hand which would imply a part that's released and in circulation.

Are you sure it's Lego and not of some other brand? I couldn't find a wheel like that in Bricklink or Rebrickable as it's definitely not 39367pb02 or 49295pb02.

That was a System build though, Technic builds have inherently more parts due to pins. But its true that RC cars are entirely possible even with small amount of parts and 719 is more than enough, especially with the all-in-one hub.

Care to elaborate?

While remote with proper physical controls would of course be better, I think with this particular set the smartphone control isn't that bad. Sure it still requires an expensive third party device (which everyone who can afford the set itself has) and there's no haptic feedback, but it's not that big of a problem when controlling something big and slow moving like the crane. For controlling cars the smartphone-remote control truly sucks and it's very problematic that TLG still hasn't addressed this issue. You're exactly right about the trusses, and not only because they're easier and nicer to build but also because the large pieces make it much stronger and also better looking than any truss would be if built from standard beams and pins. I don't think it's particularly expensive for what you get, even if Control Center style remote would be a great addition. But of course it's really expensive for a toy, no matter how well the price is justified by contents.

This thing has been sitting on my shelf since I finished building it, only be taken out occasionally for some play demonstrations. I haven't modded it in any way, not even to fix the small building mistake I made originally (routing one of the cables wrong way, not a practical problem but aesthetic one). After all this time my fondness of the set has only grown and here's some thoughts on why. Most importantly, it feels properly Technic, same as the old great sets like 8868 or 8880. The functionality is interesting, complex and plainly visible - not being hidden inside closed exterior. The functionality is also (mostly) quite accurate and true to real machine with the only real problem in that sense being the silly rollers under the counterweight. The educational value is unparalleled in modern Technic. I remember it being a great building experience, feeling challenging and rewarding at the same time with no moments of asking myself "what am I doing, what's this thing supposed to be?" unlike with many other large sets I've built over the years. I had to take it slow and concentrate to get it right, but it still didn't feel annoying or tedious at any point, which I can imagine is the case for some adult-oriented sets such as the Botanicals. It also works great. Even after all this time collecting dust in the shelf I can take it out and unless batteries need replacing, it can be played with and there's no jams or clicking gears or any problems whatsoever. The same cannot be said for many other sets, with Land Rover Defender being the most notorious, but I also noticed while ago that the gearbox of my Ferrari Daytona SP3 doesn't work anymore, it jams at one point of the shifting sequence. Sure I guess I should store them behind glass or packed away somewhere safe from dust, but the same problem doesn't seem to affect the Liebherr crane, instead it works as well as when it was just assembled. Sure, the proportions are all wrong, but have you seen photos of the real thing? There's no way it could be ever replicated in a Lego set with it still being at least somewhat playable and strong enough to hold together. Some concessions have to be made and within the realities of scale modeling and ABS I think TLG has after all done quite nice job.

Lately I've been losing interest in Technic as everything seems to be repeating the same old cars and nothing else of interest, and these rumours just confirm it. I feel that the Liebherr crane was the last large properly Technic set.

That's a cool idea, but I wonder if the parts stay together or tend to separate over time when the switch snaps to on and off. Though I'm sure it stays together well enough when using 26287 but while using 18948 it might separate.

Cool Lego-setup but I immediately noticed the Babylon 5 box! Best TV-show ever!

In this photo there is definitely a mismatch, but I'm not really seeing it (maybe, MAYBE a very slight mismatch if I really squint) in the video capture. If I were to speculate why the studio photo has such a clear colour mismatch, I'd guess that the bright studio lighting reflects/refracts somehow differently in the thin liftarms, though I'm not seeing it elsewhere. I wouldn't be surprised if the thin liftarms were also made from somewhat different plastic composition, like pins with pinhole are.

Here's my place as it is currently. I recently started building more System so that led me to get the organizers and the shelf to the right (some parts are still unsorted below the table), my Technic parts are in the drawers and boxes at the back of the table. Built models are displayed elsewhere in the house.

Price per gram is more accurate way to compare value of the sets, especially when it comes to Technic because, as said above, pins make for a significant part of the total part count while being small and essentially useless for someone who has a large collection of parted out sets.

Is that the weight of the model or total weight of the model along with instructions, packaging and all that? I believe Brickset lists the weight as an unopened box, rather than the weight of the model itself. That model does have large-ish wheels for its size too, so those push the total weight up - which might be problematic as either the weight limit is too low and no large wheels can be used, or the weight limit is too high and model with no large wheels can push the size out of proportion otherwise. The problem is similar to having part count limit for entries with tracks or chains where I proposed counting each run of chain as 1 piece rather than every link separately. I guess something like that could be done with large wheels, such as weighing the entry without tyres so that only rims are counted into the weight limit.

It seems that Technic designers have really become skilled at making shapes that are aligned outside the grid, with even the small cars getting constantly better sculpted bodywork. This is commendable but at the same time I can't help to feel the sadness of lacking functionality - sets tend to look great but don't do much.

That's why I don't think weight limit would be a good way to limit scale of builds when we're making two models in A/B-model style of old Lego sets. But even considering this limitation, you could still build two distinct models with different sets of parts and have them together meet the total weight limit - they would just be much smaller and probably less functional than two models built using mostly the same parts. Weight limit might work better if we were considering a single model contest. If there's no interest within the community to check each other's work in adhering the rules, I don't think there's no point in having those rules in the first place. But when it's small sets with limited number of parts, the checking isn't a large amount of work, especially if it's required to provide either digital model or photos to help dissecting the models along with the entry. Yes, this is somewhat more work for everyone involved, but I don't think it's more than building a large functional model.

I guess this could be remedied with a requirement to post a complete parts list along with the entry, this would also enable other people to check that the weight limit really is met if there is a doubt of manipulating the scale as it's easy to just pile the listed parts on a scale. Whether the limit is part count or weight, I would include requirement to post parts list either way.

I'd keep it lower, at least not much more than 150 parts because anything more would make judging hard, and also push the build time longer as contestants have to keep track of their inventory and so on. Yes, some of the entries will be basic but others might be surprisingly complex and functional. Pullback motors on the other hand are kind of problematic, as there has been a pullback contest before, and allowing them quickly becomes a requirement, if not formally, then practically considering you can do quite a bit of cool things with pullback motor that you can't otherwise. Require one of the following: a) a digital file b) building instructions c) good photos paired with a complete list of parts --- One problem about parts limit is that it makes for a very hard incorporation of chains/tracks as those involve large amount of small parts. So perhaps an exception could be made regarding them: any chain unit regardless of length could be counted as 1 part, so 42148 snow groomer tracks would count as 2 parts while 42132 motorcycle's drive chain would count as 1 part.

That's a great point about laser cut plywood kits, the complex ones aren't that cheap either though probably still not as expensive as an equivalent Lego set would be. But the same is true for most other toys too as they don't have the part reusability of Lego, so I don't think would be a problem at all. I hope TLG explores this direction more with more complex mechanisms.

About time we get a Technic-compatible nut to match the screw part. It's really annoying to build otherwise studless Technic but have to use bricks to connect to the System-style nut...

When keeping the maximum number of parts small, I wouldn't say that's a problem, people at this forum reverse engineer much larger sets all the time. There could also be a requirement to make a complete list of parts for the entry to be eligible so other people could build the entries to see if they comply.

I don't think there's much point in having a bounding box restriction at polybag scale, considering the builds would be pretty small anyway. I mean, sure you can put a dozen 1x15 liftarms in a row and call it an entry but who would vote for such a thing in this kind of contest? Anyway, I like the idea of a requirement to build two models from the same set of parts (150 or so max total) because it's much more of a challenge than just a single polybag model.

I love the colours! Hopefully this is an opening to introduce more Technic sets in the pink-purple-magenta region of colours.

Not sure yet if this is worth a buy, but it's much more so than any other sets announced for the next year so far. Definitely a step in the right direction.

This sounds fun, though I'd reframe it as "Small set contest" with rules requiring a limited number of parts (such as 150 total) and requirement to present 2 different models made of those parts (not required to use every part in each model). Also electronics, pneumatics and linear actuators forbidden and no Model Team style of building.

As uninteresting as the sets themselves are, it appears that they are constantly providing new cool parts such as this one.