Blakbird

Sure they would. System sets do it all the time. I'll take that bet!

Note that those stickers are from the "regular" 8461 set and not from the rare BMW Dealer Edition. All of the 8461 sets had the stickers pictured (although they often disintegrated).

I don't see any chance that those "mini LA's" are actually linear actuators. First of all, the big ones already have trouble with load, and those are simply too small for any internal mechanism. Secondly, there's no way a backhoe with gear systems for 4 LA functions as well as 4 LA themselves would come in at this price point. Therefore, I assume they are simply parts which look like actuators, but actually have no function at all. If true, this would mean that the functions need to be moved manually and the only geared function is the steering. This would be consistent with the price. Another possibility is that the tan bevel gear simply rotates the entire "actuator" about the lower mount, and the extension only happens as a side effect. If you look closely at the excavator boom, it also looks like there are some new dark tan axle pins with stop. The new 4L axle pins with stop from last year had no stud on the old like the old ones, instead just a flat stop. I think I see some flat stops in dark tan, so these may be a different length, perhaps 3L. It also looks like the Fiorino wheel cover is the tail rotor of the helicopter. The heli is VERY similar in size, color, and function to 8063. It looks more like a Coast Guard rescue helicopter though.

Sacrilege!!

No, these are the only yellow 7L liftarms in the set. Making them 6L would not have added more part types to the BOM. Of course I know that more part types = more expense. However, it would seem that this would be a very common part in a common color.

As we all know, some Technic parts are far more rare than others. Unique items like the Code Pilot or a Spybotics brick you would expect to be rare. But other part/color combination are rare for no explicable reason. For example, consider the "Technic Beam, 6 x 0.5", part number 32063 shown below. This is quite a common Technic part which appears in 84 sets (as of 2009) and is quite useful simply based on the fact that it the only even length beam (the 4L is a liftarm, not a beam). Now let's consider the yellow version of this part. It only comes in one set, the 8457 Power Puller, and is therefore one of the most rare Technic parts there is. Why? Yellow is the most popular Technic color. Almost every part comes in yellow. Now consider the photo below from the brand new 8043 excavator. You can see a pair of 5L yellow beams on the left and a pair of 7L yellow beams on the right. You can also see that these should be 6L, but they substituted 7L instead with useless extra length. Why? Why keep us from getting more 6L yellow beams? It's not like the 6L beam is out of production. It came in other colors last year (black in 3 sets and bley in 2 sets). This was a perfect opportunity to give us more of these parts but instead we got something else. There must be some reason for this that I am missing. Incidentally, the green, lime, brown, orange, pearl gray, and tan versions of this part also only come in one set each, but that is not so surprising since these are rare colors in the first place. A look at the prices on Bricklink will reveal that these parts are not in very demand for MOCing, but the yellow is.

Yes, the rear axle is free floating. It does not support any weight. You could add some springs and change that though.

Since it came out in 1997, you'll be able to read about it in Technicopedia soon enough! The Code Pilot is basically a precursor to the RCX. It is a computer control with one connection for a touch sensor (switch) and one motor output. It holds 6 AA batteries (9V). There is no computer input for programming, instead you program it using a large sheet of bar codes. There are motor directions, durations, sounds, and other things on this sheet. The Code Pilot has a red light and sensor which it uses to read the bar codes. The sensor also "watches" a gear wheel driven by the differential so that the engine sound changes with the vehicle speed (3 speeds total). The brake sounds and "hydraulic" sounds of the engine going faster are part of the preprogrammed option for the dump truck. They are activated when you move the switch to engage the claw or the dumping bed; they are not automatic with speed.

With older sets, I often find that the battery box itself is the problem. First, check inside the battery box and make sure none of the contacts are corroded. Even if not, sometimes I have had to take apart the lower half of the battery box and clean the contacts on the switch. If the switch doesn't work, you get no power even if the motor is connected directly to the box. If you have an electrical tester, check for 9V right at the battery box with the switch on. If you don't get 9V, follow through those cleaning steps.

The first one of the gears is almost certainly a render. The others look like photographs mostly because they are out of focus. It is possible to do focal blur on a render (and I have done it a few times), but this would be very hard to reproduce and why bother? But look really closely at the second picture. The first two parts are existing Technic parts and the third is something new. Look at the left hand edge of the first part. It looks faceted like the LDraw model, not a smooth curve. That suggests to me that these are renders that someone took a lot of time on.

Thanks! That's quite a compliment. I don't have any of the stickers in the model since they don't exist in LDraw. That includes the "Code Pilot" sticker on the top, the headlights, tail lights, and instrument panels. That was it! There is no Code Pilot model in LDraw so I had to use the Mindstorms Scout. You don't notice the difference much from this angle, but it definitely wrong. Luckily for me, Philo is in the process of making a model for the real Code Pilot right now! True, I didn't do the electrical wires. The wire running down to the touch sensor on the claw isn't there either. I actually hadn't noticed that. Thanks for pointing it out. I'll fix it. Edit: I went back and checked and my model is actually correct. That suggests that either the instructions are not accurate or the LDraw model of the motor is not accurate. Since my model is not built right now, to figure it out I checked Brickshelf. The image below suggests that there really is a gap above the motor and therefore the instructions are wrong. On the other hand, if you look closely, you'll see that this guy installed his Code Pilot upside down!!

As many of you know, I am trying to add as many LDraw models of Technic sets as possible to my Technicopedia. To date, I have included files for about 90% of the sets from 1977-1995. The LDraw files are useful for making computer renders, for making revolving animations, and for making images to demonstrate the functions. Some of these files were found on the Internet, some were donated to me by various helpful people, and some I've created myself. My Technic Brickshelf folder shows renders of all the sets which have LDraw files so far, almost 200 renders of over 100 models. I was lucky enough to find models for some of the larger iconic sets like 8880 and 8480, but the really big sets are a huge challenge to build virtually and not many have attempted it. The first large model I tackled was 8862 followed by 8868. Now I've moved on to an even bigger challenge, the dump truck from set 8479. I managed to build it over the course of 2 arduous days, and I thought I would share some of my steps here. Each of the renders you see took between 1 and 6 hours to run. You can find larger versions of all of them on my Brickshelf account (once moderated). I started with the last part of the instructions for some reason, the dumping bed. I decided that this was a large chunk of structure which I could do fairly quickly and would easily identify the set. It is made of 4 submodels: the base, the front panel, the side panels, and the tail gate. I only made one side panel and mirrored the other one using a transformation matrix. The next picture shows the beginning of the chassis. The differential is in along with the gears that lead to the optional motor (top of image). The other set of gears leading to a bevel will go to the Code Pilot to tell it how fast the wheels are turning. This speed will change the pitch of the engine sound the Code Pilot makes. You can also see the steering arms. Now you can see the steering rack and the links which give the steering Ackerman correction. The gearbox up front allows the steering wheel in the cabin to follow along with the HOG steering. The levers on either side are used BOTH to move the cam which actuates the touch sensor AND to move the pole reverser which will switch the transmission simultaneously. Big changes here. The rear pendular axle has been added. Interestingly, the rear axles floats freely longitudinally and, since there are no springs, it doesn't support any of the chassis weight at all. You can see the driving gears for the transmission and the many spur gears which lead back to the link which drives the bed. All of the gears are clocked so the teeth line up correctly. I hate it when virtual models have the teeth interfering. I make each axle assembly a submodel so I can rotate it as a group. There are over 50 total submodels in this file. You can also now see the front wheel wells. On the back end, notice how there are 3L axles with stud sticking out of the liftarms. These will support the bed. They are grouped with the liftarms so they will be rotated into the correct orientation to fit in the axle holes. This is the same as the above render but I've included the bed which I built earlier just to see how it all looks. Now I've added another layer of structure including the rear wheel wells and the gearing which leads to the front lifting arm mechanism. The structure looks pretty solid at this point. At this point I realized that I had completed all the mechanical functions, so I decided to strip away the structure and only show the gear submodels. This makes a pretty cool picture, but I screwed up the aspect ratio of the render so it is slightly squished vertically. Amazing how complete it looks when you add the wheels. As with all my models, always show the front wheels slightly turned. The model looks much more realistic and less like a computer model when everything is not perfectly square. Here I've added the vertical assemblies which will support the Code Pilot, the wheels, and the steering wheel. I hid the wheels and bed since they make it hard to see what I'm working on. The cabin is almost half done now. The angles on the front end were done with submodels. The angled sections are rotated about a custom rotation center coincident with the hinges. I rotate them until they line up with the front piece which I centered. I use 0.25 degree increments to get it just right. When the angled section was just right, I tried to mirror it on the other side but it didn't work because the hinge pieces are different left and right. This meant that rather than mirroring I needed to use the same submodel but rotated into an opposite angle. Almost done. The funny angles of the window posts were a challenge. The exhaust stacks are identical and mirrored. At first glance it looks done until you realize the whole lifting arm is missing. The lifting arm is the hardest part because of all the angle connectors. MLCAD does not line things up automatically, which means I have to do it all manually. The method I've developed for doing this involves first assembling everything in a single plane as shown in the image. The parts downstream of each angle connector are in separate building steps. I start by putting the rotation center at the middle of the first #3 angle connector. Then I select every step downstream of that and rotate 22.5 degrees in the X axis. This makes things line up perfectly. I continue the same procedure for each subsequent connector. When that process is done, I have this. It looks much better! I also added LSynth flexible hoses. I didn't bother putting flex cables inside since you can't see them and they consume a lot of file space. Getting the flexible parts just right takes a lot of time, but I think you'll agree that the result is worth it. Here's the completed lifting arm. I mirrored the arm side you saw above. The "claw head" is another submodel. Each individual claw is a submodel of that, and they are also mirrored. The ball connector had to be rotated to a very precise compound angle to point at the flex tube. I synthesized the end of the flex cable only (the visible portion). I couldn't bring myself to spend the time to synthesize the electrical wires though. Perhaps someone else has that kind of patience. 1300 pieces later, and here's the current final image. I haven't placed a background or floor in it yet. You can see that I even included the spare tires in the bed. As usual, I put them at interesting "random" angles. All the tires use the rubber color (256) instead of black (0) because it looks better rendered. I think it turned out pretty well, but there is one major flaw in the model still. Can you tell what it is? After all that, I'd be happy to answer any questions. And no, I don't know which model I'm going to do next.

The Bughatti very much reminds me of the fanciful version driven by Cruella de Vil in "101 Dalmations", although of course that was a Cadillac.

My username goes back to circa 1988. The name is based on the SR-71 Blackbird spy plane which was one of the inspirations for me getting into aerospace engineering. I was getting my first account on a UNIX system at that time, and decided to name myself after my favorite plane. However, usernames were limited to 8 characters, so I had to drop a character. It was the easiest to get rid of the "c", because "blakbird" is still phonetically correct. I have retained the name on virtually every system since then. Obviously I could spell it correctly now if I wanted to, but I choose to honor the old spelling. To this day, my two keychains are a small (1 inch) cast SR-71 model and a 2x4 gold chromed LEGO brick!

I've made my thoughts on this matter apparent before. I'm a technical person, and I like technical functions. I actually don't do a whole lot of "playing" with the sets, but I do a lot of building and a lot of figuring out how stuff works. That's why I'm going to build the loader from Five Star Brick even though I've been told it doesn't work right. The process of figuring out the mechanisms from the LDraw file was so intriguing to me that I know the build will be satisfying as well. I'll look at the gears as it goes together and see if I can figure out how to fix its problems. While I don't mind technical functions for their own sake, I do prefer realism. For example, a supercar with a working sequential gearbox is perfect. It doesn't matter that it will hardly react any torque and you can't really drive the car through the gearbox (motorized), the point for me is that is depicts how a real car works which is something children (and adults) can learn from the model. For models that actually do something but not necessarily like real life, use Mindstorms. This is why 8043 is better than 8275 in my opinion. 8043 would be almost as good to me if it didn't have any motors at all, but all functions were switchable from that single gearbox. 8880 doesn't have any motors and still ranks as one of the best sets ever. With that chain, the drive train will hardly carry any load at all. 8480 has only one motor but lots of functions. With all that being said, motorized MOCs are pretty fun too. I'm still planning to build Jurgen's Little Devil and I have plenty of other motorized MOCs. "All things in balance" I guess.

I'm not sure if it has been mentioned already, but there is a post on the official LEGO Technic blog about the linear actuators and the upcoming fix. It sounds like all LA's will be different from now on.

This is an interesting thread. It certainly reveals the disparity of people's opinions. Several of the sets quoted as the "worst" are sets which I like very much. But there is general agreement in some areas. I used to feel this way as well. For a long time I did not own any of the Competition sets and did not plan to even include them on Technicopedia. They do not represent real vehicles or machinery and are therefore somewhat apart from standard Technic. However, I did finally get them and they are the favorite Technic sets of my wife and kids, even though they are not my favorite. The play value is very high. So while this is not typically why I buy Technic, I still appreciate that the Competition sets bring in interest from people and age groups that would otherwise not be interested in Technic. And some of the mechanisms are pretty cool! The same goes for the Speed Slammers. Not very technically interesting, but it turns out they are super fun to play with. I agree that 8454 is not too good. I think a lot of people didn't actually even know what it was supposed to be, but if you are in or around the aircraft industry you recognize this type of fire truck from airports. The opening back and side panels don't really make any sense. They are kind of pointless details. I like the steering though. I like the 8289 quite a lot. Sure it is ugly, but beautiful models was never really the point of Technic for me. I enjoy the lift mechanism especially. It is mechanically simple, but it is very solidly built and realistic so, if nothing else, it is a great platform from which to add more complexity. The 8872 is large but technically uninteresting, sadly quite like the new 8049 forest tractor. I love the return of pneumatics, but this set doesn't do all that much for its piece count. Speaking of pneumatics, I agree on the linear actuators. They are a cool idea in principle. I like the absolute positioning ability and the ability to stay fixed at a certain length. I also like the mechanisms which must be created to drive them. But they stink to play with. So much cranking gets old really fast. In every single case of a set with linear actuators, I have added a motor to make it playable. They are actually quite fun with a motor, but adding a motor to every set really drives the price up. This was my first reaction and what I was going to post. Roboriders/Slizers/Throwbots were just awful and nothing about them was Technic. They were a precursor to Bionicle which is of course a totally different path with different fans. The other sets which do nothing for me were the Micro Technic sets. I guess they offer the possibility of getting into Technic for younger people at a lower price point, but they have almost no functions and are not even vaguely good looking. Other sets which I always thought were weak: 8414 Mountain Rambler: What is this thing supposed to be? 3057 Create -n- Race: Many tiny uniteresting models 8433 Cool Movers: Lots of instructions but no functions 8244 Convertables: Cool modular idea, but the modules don't combine in any interesting ways 8252, 8253, 8255 modular vehicles: They are supposed to combine in different ways, but all of those ways are lame.

The picture based list is output by LPub automatically, so it doesn't require any extra work for him to make it. A text based list would be a lot of effort on Jurgen's part. If you want more detail, I recommend downloading the LDraw file and exporting your own parts list from either MLCAD or LDView. Both will have part numbers attached, although these part numbers do not always match the numbers in Bricklink.

That wouldn't really be a surprise.

Personally, I doubt we'll see any Power Functions. Models with gearboxes are typically not well suited to motorization. The usual reason is that the gear ratios are chosen for the engine to be driven by wheels (engine turns when you push the model around), not vice versa. This is true of 8466 which people have tried to motorize and run into this problem. There is too much resistance and inertia in the wheels to turn them at a high ratio. Sheepo's Veyron is motorized with a motorized sequential gearbox, but I'm not sure it can drive in any gear. I've only seen a video of it running through the gears while up on a stand with the wheels off the ground.

This brings up a nice bit of trivia that Roland Melkert and I discovered while making the video below in his LD4D Studio. It turns out that a careful look at the LDraw file (which you can get from Technicopedia) reveals that the vertical beams which support the forks do NOT line up with the holes at the top and bottom. If you count the height of the stackup, it does not come out to an even division of holes. When you build the model, you'd never notice because there is enough compliance to get the parts to line up over that length, but you can tell in the computer. The result is that the entire vertical frame has to be tilted very slightly in the actual model to get the upper axle with the pinion gears on it to go through. The following two pictures show the problem:

Not as good as the original but a very nice model. Too bad the original designer isn't the one doing the sale. If this guy went to all the trouble of making step by step instructions, why is he only selling one copy? Seems suspicious. I wonder if he'll sell just the instructions later. I wouldn't buy the whole model, but I'd be interested in seeing the instructions. If Firas actually made and sold instructions of his original models, I think he would make a fortune.

I don't own any of them but want several. I especially wanted "Virtual LEGO" when I got started with LDraw, but ended up figuring out most of it myself. With all the changes in MLCAD, LDView, LSynth, and LPub since the book was written, I'm guessing that it is significantly out of date. Holly-Wood has some great free tutorials though.

I also needed more than one answer, including one that isn't on the list. I have not had much problem with my 8043, but I ordered the service pack anyway to see what's in it. The 8043 is sitting on my shelf but will be upgraded when the new parts arrive. My second 8043 is built into the B model which is also sitting on my shelf. It works great.

You are right, it is the same issue. I don't think the 3L blue pin in the 8043 will ever suffer any ill effects from the deformation either. But there ARE certain parts in old Technic sets which can have such a problem. Especially the old friction pins which did not have a slot tended to have problems over time. I have also fractured quite a few of these: and several of these right at the cross axle from just sitting on the shelf: