howitzer

Also the black mudguard extension.

The cost of the mold in itself is indeed a non-issue, but when producing a part (new or old), the mold is only a small piece of the whole production chain. The mold needs to be worked in an injection machine, which needs to be supplied with correct kind of plastic, the produced bricks need to be extracted, counted, stored and delivered to facilities where parts are bagged and then assembled into kits. While molds can probably be rather easily and cheaply be made, the whole logistics of the brick production cannot be switched from one element to other just like that, there's a lot of work involved changing every part of the production line. And while the production line is working on one type of part, it's not working on any other type of part, so every part produced must be justified by the economics of production. Part A won't be produced if there's more money to be made by producing part B, C or D. In the end there's a whole a lot of planning and forethought involved in managing an operation like this, which extends all the way to future years set lineups and the direction the company is heading with their product, and whatever is going to be produced must fit into this greater plan. So if I really wanted, I could spend few tens of thousands of euros to have the goat mold redesigned and manufactured and then do a production run of few thousand items, but managing the production of tens of thousands of different elements year after year is entirely different thing, where careful planning is the only way to keep the costs from getting completely out of hand. From the top of my head, I can't think of any other industry where the manufacturer has to produce similar number of different types (tens of thousands of combinations of shape/colour) of injection-molded parts, with similar tolerances (10 micrometres) and in similar numbers (millions or more of each). Almost any other toy is produced with much less parts, and much bigger tolerances. Same goes for example to most consumer electronics, even though they sometimes have tight tolerances, they never have hundreds or thousands of different parts (and the number of different colours in one product tends to be very small too).

Indeed. Compared to the empty shell Ferrari, I'd take this next to useless function over it any day.

Ok, so being that old it's actually made of cellulose acetate, rather than ABS, am I correct?

Whatever the issues with realism (or lack of thereof), I think the body is pretty nice looking, though the yellow accents seem a bit strange for a military vehicle. What I find a bit off-putting is the shaping of the cannon barrel. Being just a simple tube, it doesn't seem to follow the detailing of the rest of the vehicle, I'd say it needs a bit more shaping, like a larger diameter at the base and/or something like a flash suppressor at the muzzle.

The buggy motor was originally designed for a very specific kind of application (=RC buggy), even though it was used elsewhere too and became very popular among MOC makers. I don't think anything like that is on the works, as the buggy motor pushes other parts (gears, axles) to their limits and sometimes beyond. Of course there's no telling what the future holds but if you want more power than the current ones can deliver, I can only suggest using the Buwizz motor or some other third party solution.

This is the kind of pliers I was thinking of: https://www.ebay.com/itm/231333020817 Anyway, this is getting quite a bit off-topic...

The modern brick separator is completely useless for pushing axles or pins out, but if you could use that, you could use an axle too. I would never use teeth for anything Lego-related though as that damages parts. One way to pull pins out is to put a liftarm or something to the exposed pin, then a bar inside the pin (for those that fit one), then gently bend the bar to the side while pulling. Pliers work too, if they are of the correct kind.

I could see a part separator being useful in some situations even with Technic, especially if your job is to build these things, as taking them apart will really start hurting your fingers after a few hours. More so for the pliers, I've used those few times to pull out pins that are tight or otherwise hard to pull with fingers, and considering that the designer is not in danger of running out of parts to replace the possibly mutilated ones, I'm sure pliers will come handy.

Thanks! Yeah, I mixed the lights up for some reason and didn't notice before taking the photos. Maybe I'll just mirror the photos because it's annoying to take new ones

Few years ago I gave most of my childhood Lego to my kid, while concentrating myself on newer sets. Among them were some even older stuff, and recently when playing with my kid a particular brick caught my attention, so I was wondering if anyone could help me to estimate when it was made. Here's a couple of photos: As you can see, there's no embossed "LEGO" on the studs, but the logo is in the bottom side. Also there's no bottom tubes but two cross supports exist. It's also slightly warped.

The project sat unfinished for a long time but today I think I am finished with it. Here's how it looks now: And with the original (which I rebuilt specifically for this photo): Some things of note: - I decided to keep the original design of the windshield-thing, as changing it to something like curvy flex-axle-windshield would detract from the original design too much. - The propeller is the same part as in the original but in black, as there is simply no other propeller in the correct scale. It has never been released in any other colours than dark gray, black and brown, and the last black release was in 2008. So old-ish part but the best one available. - There's a 2 cylinder fake engine inside, though you can't see much of it. The original didn't have anything similar but I wanted to do something with the empty space behind the seat, and it's always nice to have functions. - I'm still not entirely satisfied with the tail, but I couldn't come up with anything better either. Everything seems to be either too flimsy or too bulky. - I added several aesthetic things, like the paneling around the engine and the tail lights, as having such things seems to be important nowdays, as opposed to the less aesthetically detailed style of the old days. Some more photos: And another comparison with the old and new hovercrafts in one photo:

Well, TLG doesn't run on charity, so of course it's a tactic to keep the income flowing. The product has to evolve to meet the evolving needs and wants of the customers, and adding new useful parts is a great way to keep people engaged. I don't think the new beams change the construction style that much, it's nothing like the transition from studful to studless. The new beams just allows more flexibility in design. Also, the new parts should soon be available in B&P, that's where I bought the new panels etc. Of course the real problem with the beams is that getting them in various lengths will probably take a long time, as TLG fills the gaps only as it suits their design needs. So for a while we're stuck with only few different kinds of the new beams.

Looks great, I hope you can finish this in time!

I don't think there's any single part type that is absolutely essential to Lego builds, but these alternating hole beams have been on the wishlist of many Technic builders for a long time. I'm predicting that they will become very common in the future, much like the pin with pinhole part, which was introduced only in 2015, but very soon you'd find them everywhere in Technic builds.

That's not directly compatible with the Zetros though, is it? I mean, I see value in the other smartphone stuff like indicator gauges and even the challenges but the challenges are not fun to do with smartphone, and I don't think you can finish them while using any other remote than the C+ app.

The way I see it, biggest drawback of PU right now compared to PF is the lack of a physical remote. Yes, you can use third party solutions, but it's not the same as official out-of-the box solution. The pricing isn't really an issue, the core problem is that the touchscreen controls are usable, but they are not fun. When playing with a model I don't want to look at my screen, I want to look at my model and not lose my grip of controls while doing so. I really hope some kind of physical remote is in the works, it would make sets like Zetros so much more appealing.

I love how the tyres make indentations in the sand, makes it somehow feel much more "real" than I expected. I assume that the gears were a complete mess after this exercise though? Can't imagine them taking very well all that sand and dirt that must have entered the drivetrain...

I feel that motorization would add a lot of not-so-necessary complications, as you'd need a motor, a battery box and a distribution gearbox to operate all the knob-functions and I'm not at all sure all those could be fitted inside without heavy reconstruction of the model. A motorized pump is of course always nice too, but I don't mind manual pumping either, as the pneumatic functions aren't operated constantly. Air tank would of course give more time after pumping for operation, but once exhausted you'd have to spend a lot of time manually pumping (not a problem with motorized pump of course). It would certainly fit this vehicle, but at this price point it's understandable that they didn't bring it back. That knob-turning is annoying for sure, I think I'm going to replace the knobs with cranks as soon as I'm finished building.

Indeed. Not every set, even in larger scale, needs to have tons of electronics.

Actually, you can get pretty close to the actual number by making a Fermi estimation. You simply fill the terms of your equation with numbers approximated to the nearest order of magnitude and do the calculation, and as long as there's no consistent bias the inconsistencies tend to cancel each other out and you'll get a number that is surprisingly close to the correct answer. All the better if you know at least some of the actual correct values of the terms. Some of the above calculations seem to produce very reasonable estimations, even if hard data on the matter is difficult or impossible to attain.

Sariel's video had a nice comparison, I suggest you check that out. And yes, the new tyre fits right in the middle of the Claas and Jeep tyres.

Now, I'd really like to see this kind of stuff for some of the more complex older sets like 42055 or the gearboxes of various supercars, where the workings of various functions are not that clear for a non-engineer. Of course we won't get that from TLG for old sets, but it's a pretty cool feature nevertheless, and hopefully utilized to its full potential in the future sets.

It appears that this set delivers on every expectation that I had. Going to buy as soon as it becomes available here. Thanks for the review, great photos as always!

Yeah, that's why the pulley wheel is probably the best option today, unless you want to use the original larger pulley wheel, which I think was discontinued years ago.