howitzer

Also, considering much of the "premium" is tied into the packaging and first-time building experience, the resale value drops a lot if it's built, as the set is just not the same anymore. This of course applies to almost any set, but to much lesser extent as they don't have such a premium. I also have a very organized parts collection so I could also build the Chiron mostly, I'm not sure I have all the panels (at least not in matching colours) and I'm missing the wheels and brake discs, but I think I have all the other parts. Haven't checked though.

I'm sure you could repurpose springs for coils, and at least in the 90's some (non-Technic) sets included magnets... Though I'm not sure their shapes would be that great for a transformer? Jokes aside, vehicle transforming into a mech or whatever could be pretty challenging but also interesting topic for a contest.

I'm not a supercar enthusiast by any means, but I'd like to build one at some point, just for the novelty of the building experience. My problem here is that I have no interest in keeping it built (in a shelf collecting dust), and the colours aren't that great for MOC making so I'd end up with piles and piles of parts that are next to useless to me. I don't think the resale value of a used one is that great either. If they at some point release a supercar in more usable colour, I might consider getting it, though the premium price is off-putting as where I live they are never sold with big enough discount to truly offset the premium. In that sense getting a CaDA set might actually be a good option. But then, there are huge amount of other, more interesting sets to buy and very limited funds so, no supercars for me in the foreseeable future...

I was thinking more of using PU motors with RI hub.

That would work if the balls are all the same weight, but if you mix Lego and third-party balls, you're still screwed.

I'm not a CS student but I once aspired to be one, so I went to a MOOC which could've earned me a position as a university CS student, but I had to drop the course about halfway in, which is approximately equivalent to an introductory class in Java. Anyway, several friends have recommended Python for me if I want to get coding and I would have a lot of support there with skilled friends who I can ask for advice, so coding-wise either Mindstorms set works for me. Your comment on the release cycle of Mindstorms is spot on though, which puts me in sort of a difficult position, as EV3 isn't compatible with other Lego electronics but Robot Innovator is so there is a choice between compatibility and versatility. But as others noted, one would have to dive pretty deep into computer science to fully appreciate the potential of EV3 so I think RI is the way to go for a beginner like me.

Yeah, I thought about picking up a secondhand EV3, which actually seem to be surprisingly common in the market. Right now there's one set for sale in a local sales forum, described as "once assembled and then put in a cupboard" for 200€, which is pretty decent price I think. There's also a few more slightly more expensive ones, so I think getting a secondhand EV3 won't be a problem if and when RI starts to feel like too limited.

Also, interior (which is more interesting in front, with steering wheel and all) is better visible when there's no window panel. Even the transparent ones block some visibility so no panel makes it more interesting to view.

Well, for too heavy balls it matters in that it reduces the throughput, so if you include this in a chain of GBC modules, it's important that every module can handle enough balls. Though from the video it seems that it's anyway slower than the usual 1 ball per second throughput required for GBC chains in events and such.

Am I correct that the lifter gets triggered by weight of the balls? If that's the case, I assume only genuine Lego balls can be used, because various third party balls are probably too light or too heavy.

Labour cost is more than wage though. The company has to arrange working environment, like office, furniture, etc. and tools (probably computers & such in this case). Then there's insurances, and depending on country, maybe some other tax-like fees that the company has to pay. Buying from an independent designer avoids all these costs, as it's the designer who pays for them. Total labour cost varies heavily depending on profession, but it can be twice or even triple the wage per employee. One must also remember that TLG's designers work in Denmark, which is a country with high income tax and the designers are still quite a well paid. Also, I've come to understand that TLG supercars generally take something like two years to design, and multiple professional designers are employed on it (three I think?) so the hired designer cost is not insignificant. Detailed calculation is impossible due to the huge number of variables and unknowns, but if we assume that total labour cost is twice the salary and in Denmark a designer gets paid about 3500€/month (after income tax deduction), the monthly total cost would be 7000€/month/designer. So three designer and two years would make up about 500 000€ in labour cost of design for Sian. In a set's price there's of course production and logistics costs, and various taxes, duties and such when you considers international trade, plus marketing and all that so if a set costs 380€ in TLG's own webstore (Finland's price) I'd guess something like 80% of that is production, logistics, marketing and taxes, which leaves 76€. 500 000€/76€ make about 6579 sold units to cover the designer cost before the product starts turning profit. This seems to be quite a big amount, considering it's definitely a very expensive thing for an average person to buy. My calculation might of course be off in many places, I'm not sure if the three designers work full time for two years on this project, they might work on other projects too. The wage estimate is something that a university trained engineer might be paid here in Finland, but it could also be higher or lower. Other labour costs are even harder to estimate, maybe they are significantly lower for an office-worker like TLG's designers, who knows. The biggest uncertainty is of course in the complete guesswork involved in estimating other costs, so it might be off the mark a lot. I also have no idea what's the expected sales amount worldwide before the set is retired. Maybe it's tens of thousands, which makes the design cost significant, maybe it's in the millions which would dwarf the design cost to a rounding error.

Ok then, I thought MK was a successor to Lepin, which was known as a complete ripoff company so I'd expect their successor to be of similar, at least as far as quality is concerned. But maybe I was wrong to assume that. Part design requires more than knowledge of CAD though, the designer has to be familiar with Lego (or whatever) and know how the elements connect, where the stress points are and so on, so I don't think it could be done with just some 3D-modeling experience. Not to say that the Chinese couldn't do it, just that it takes some effort and knowledge, and whoever hires the designer has to commit into finding someone skilled enough to do it properly - if they want high quality parts.

Let us speculate then! Employing full-time designers is no doubt more expensive than buying single design from an outsider, though it's hard to say how much that affects the final price. I also have to wonder how this works out in longer term? New designs are be needed constantly, and also at some point the really skilled independent designers will probably notice and start to ask for higher prices. Professional designers hired for long term can also probably squeeze the production cost lower, which isn't a big deal when producing small batches, but for an industry giant like TLG cost-effectiveness of a design is a huge factor in the bottom line. License adds to cost, and UCS cars are definitely marketed as a luxury product with luxury price, even among their other products (and all of Lego can be considered a premium product too) so it's no wonder that Sian is much more expensive than for example Rough Terrain Crane though the latter has more parts and even electronics. The pricing policy has baffled me to no end, vast majority of sets are much more expensive in TLG's own online store, and that applies to most specialized stores and supermarkets too (which often have discounts but also much more limited selection). Then there's some stores which sell Lego for 20-30% less without any special discounts, so why would I buy anything from elsewhere? Also TLG seems to value their electronics ridiculously high, which is probably why the CaDA model isn't that expensive though it's fully RC. About the new elements, I believe MouldKing's Lambo was unlicensed, and of much poorer quality than Lego, so naturally it was also much cheaper. New panels aren't free of course, but new Lego parts are usually very carefully designed and of course high quality, so that has to cost a lot. Lego doesn't seem to like making one-use parts, and the new moulds for Sian were very much reusable in other models too. They only create one-use parts when it's unavoidable, like the cement mixing drum part. I think most of Lego parts are manufactured in Europe (Denmark and Hungary I believe) and America (Mexico I believe), only some in China, so labour cost is probably much higher than competitors with Chinese manufacturers. I also believe that there are different kinds of work environments in China, so if TLG used Chinese manufacturers, one might imagine they'd choose the better ones. As for the premium products... Lego is such in itself, and maybe they think they can sell similar product for higher price, out of reputation, brand loyalty and such. Time will tell how the new competitors change the market and the value customers feel they get from Lego as compared to others. And yeah, all of this is just me as a random guy in the Internet speculating about stuff. So no real answers here, just speculation.

Thanks a lot for the insightful answer, I'll take this into consideration! My answer here is probably: yes, I want to eat the cake and keep it too, so I guess I should get both? :D (No I won't.) Anyway, as I'm a beginner with no in-depth knowledge of computers, I guess Robot Innovator is better for me right now. Perhaps it'll have a more advanced successor in a few years, which would enable everything that EV3 does and by then I might also have the skill to make more advanced stuff. And then there's the backwards compatibility issue, which makes Robot Innovator much more attractive option.

Sustainability and labour rights are one reason I'm sticking to Lego for now. I consider building blocks in any form more a luxury product than anything essential, and when I'm shopping for luxury product, I want to support the more ethical company over those of dubious practices or outright unethical ones. Now, I'm not accusing CaDA of anything here, it's just that they are an unknown company to me and I have no idea how they conduct their business. One should of course also ask, why is the CaDA model less expensive than Lego model? That price difference has to come from somewhere. I have no answer though, and I'd rather not speculate too much.

Setting up a Bricklink store and managing the orders can be a lot of hassle but that's the way to go if you want to get the best price for your parts. If you don't have to maximize selling price, you should just put them up in Ebay or whatever as a single lot, someone will buy it and it's much, much less work than bricklinking them.

I don't have a very clear picture in mind, and that's probably part of the reason why I'm asking here. Here's some ideas though: Learning to code on basic level with would be the general aim at least initially. As for the actual robots, maybe some GBC-style stuff, like some sort of pneumatically actuated ball-mover? Walking (4-6 legs) robot would be pretty nifty. And of course making RC-controlled Technic-style machinery, maybe with custom interface for smartphone.

How is it more advanced? Is there something that can be done with EV3 that can't be done with Robot Inventor?

Thanks! So EV3 can not be controlled with a smartphone/game controller?

Hi, I've been curious about the Mindstorms for a long time and now that the new incarnation has been released, I'm wondering which would you recommend, EV3 or Mindstorms Robot Inventor? I have read Jim's review of the 51515 set and still unsure if I should go there or get the older set, as it is apparently somehow more limited than EV3? EV3 on the other hand is apparently incompatible with all the new electronics, so will it become obsolete soon? The EV3 set can be bought for much for cheaper though, so that's one consideration too. I have minimal programming skill (equivalent of an introductory course in university for Java) but I'm interested in learning more, especially Python. Meanwhile, I'd like to have an easy way to quickly make simple programs, I've come to understand that Scratch or equivalent language can be used? Another thing, I'm wondering if either of the hubs could be used as an equivalent of the Technic PU hub for remote controlling my Technic models with a smartphone. Or even using a gaming controller and BrickController 2 app for for remote control, Is something like that feasible with either of them, or should I just go for the PU hub instead?

The old turntable simply has a higher friction, as in turning it takes more force, especially if there's a high load on it. With slack I mean how much play there is between the top and bottom half. Slack allows the halves to go out of alignment and can lead to higher friction if the load is unbalanced. In your build though, I'd guess that neither of these is a significant problem.

Yes, the old turntable would work too, perhaps even better, because as you say, it has studs for connection points and it is also designed for even-sized constructs rather than odd. It probably has more friction and slack than 18938/18939 turntable though.

I'd also recommend using large Technic turntables here, like NathanR suggested. They are easily strong enough to support even much larger builds so you'll have no problem if you just connect the turntable properly. The only challenge here might arise from the fact that Technic parts are made for odd-sized constructs while System is built mainly for even-sized ones, but even that should be easy enough to overcome.

Is parts list even a thing that is covered by copyright law? I mean, in order for something to be covered by copyright law, it must be some kind of a creative work, and I'm not at all sure if a parts list could be considered that. Building instructions are definitely covered and this would include reprints of the instructions pages with parts list but if I obtained the instructions and entered all the parts into, say, Bricklink wishlist and then shared that list as an xml file, would I be infringing on someone's copyright?

Wow, this is genius! I love the novel part use.