Jump to content

Saberwing40k

Eurobricks Counts
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,936

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Saberwing40k

  1. Saberwing40k
    The book isn't being laid flat. That fan on the back of the engine can not possibly be OSHA compliant....
  2. Saberwing40k
    I for one do not like the color vomit, and I find it wholly unneeded. It does not appear in any other Lego line, and Lego for whatever reason thinks that Lego Technic fans can not handle similarly colored parts. On the other hand, it's good to have some connectors in new colors like blue and orange. The new clutch is an about time thing, but why does it have to be blue? Why not make it gray to differentiate from the axle hole variant? Other than that, I'm liking what I'm seeing so far. I look forward to the full reveal.
  3. Saberwing40k
    PvDB also has hidden paddles. You could have that in the dashboard. Technically speaking, the Chiron has an automated manual transmission. Most of the components are the same as a standard manual transmission, but the clutch and shifting are controlled via computer. This is entirely different from an automatic transmission. However, a sequential transmission can be controlled mechanically, as done in a motorcycle and some race cars. I hope Lego does it better this time.
  4. Saberwing40k
    You're on the right track. Sadly, I don't think there have really been any other Lego creations of aggregate machines, but you're on the right track.
  5. Saberwing40k
    Yes, another good example would be 42009 and @Erik Leppen's 5 axle crane. Jeroen's build is an example of an expando ray, and Erik's is an example of a shrink ray.
  6. Saberwing40k
    Has anyone noticed that Lego has used standard pistons instead of doing anything accurate with the engine? I'm slightly disappointed by that. However, that's a minor gripe. I'm hoping for a nice gearbox, but that'll be on June 1st.
  7. Saberwing40k
    Exactly. shrink or expand the scale of a model.
  8. Saberwing40k
    No no no, I mean build at a different scale.
  9. Saberwing40k
    What if as a contest we had a Supersize vs. Miniaturize contest? It would work like this, a contest with two categories, with the following criteria: Category A is Supersize. You take a set, and revamp it, at least doubling the amount of parts used in the set. I initially wanted to have a maximum part count threshold for this, but if someone wanted to enter a 42055 doubled in size, I'm all for that. Category B is Miniaturize. You take a set, and shrink it, at least cutting the part count in half. I also wanted a limit, but if you can cut the number of parts in a small set in half, I'm all for that to. Having two categories would allow for a lot of freedom for builder choice, but allow for some more definition, versus the last couple of contests. What do y'all think?
  10. Saberwing40k
    I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't like it when fully paneled sets have little gaps. It's annoying and inconsistent, like either have an open model, or have a fully closed one, don't try and do both. It's the consistency, or lack thereof, that annoys people. I'm waiting to see what kind of functions this set has before I say whether it is good or not. I'm hoping for the best, but I'm also prepared to be disappointed.
  11. Saberwing40k
    I do not share that opinion. Lego is doing a bright color scheme badly. Also, this does NOT show up in any other Lego theme. Or, for that matter, any other toy line. (I worked in a toy store, trust me.) Most Technic fans have actually outgrown City, and having Technic sets dumbed down is insulting to them, and us. A kid will say that anything is cool. So, I do not buy your argument. You can be okay with the color scheme, but do not attempt to justify it. No, what we want is more parts available in different colors, not a set with colors selected at random. Also, they still have not addressed what we really want, which is a set with a wide variety of parts in a new color. Also, @Erik Leppen, I could not agree with you more. Make like 42053, and put the additional budget into making the set better. Now, I'm wondering, why did Lego decide to have only two pneumatic functions?
  12. Saberwing40k
    Yeah, the front looks a little flat, but I'm waiting for pictures. It looks good, but I don't buy Technic sets to display them, so I'm on the fence until we know what kind of functions this car has. Also, I hope the trim that is silver on the real car is at least pearl silver. A special edition set deserves that. I just had a bad thought: What if Lego, hearing the backlash over the Porsche's terrible gearbox, decides to not include one in the Chiron at all?
  13. Saberwing40k
    You know, I think this set is kind of a waste. It's too big for what it is. I think this set and 42080 should have been switched in size. The robot loader would work much better as a ~1000 piece set, and would benefit from having PF. The forest machine would have worked much better at the ~1800 part size, with more than two pneumatic functions, and a manual pump.
  14. Saberwing40k
    This is really cool, the wireframe vs. filled in side is really neat, and nicely splits the difference between the two approaches.
  15. Saberwing40k
    I'll do you one better, the pump is connected to an external bar that looks like part of the machine, but is connected to the pump, like 8455.
  16. Saberwing40k
    I feel the same way. PF parts needlessly inflate the price, and add nothing, especially for only 2 functions. PF should have been optional, like 42053. Also, why is Lego so resistant to having pneumatics parts in sets? Why is Lego trying to make Technic look like City? Oh wait, this is worse than City. You don't see City sets with this kind of color vomit and sloppy design. Why does Lego feel the need to have any piece that is remotely similar in shape a different color? Why are the 2L pins with axles red? Ugh, this set is everything wrong with Lego Technic nowadays.
  17. Saberwing40k
    It would be on ReBrick, not Rebrickable, but it is possible. I'd say wait. 42083 will be available for a while, so I'd try winning it first.
  18. Saberwing40k
    I'd say it depends on your model. If you have something complex like an excavator or a crane, with more than four channels SBrick is better. If you want a high performance model, with fewer than four channels, BuWizz is better.
  19. Saberwing40k
    I didn't even think of that, you're right. In one of the pictures, we see a mystery shaft going to the rear axle. I dunno if that's a steering axle, because if it is, it is in a really awkward position, given that the rear axle has variable height. Might this set have some kind of fake engine after all? Even if it is for a fake engine, that shaft would have to have some kind of telescopic connection to accommodate the moving rear axle. Here's the picture in question. On second thought, it is actually in an okay position, as the rear axle is actually on a parallelogram linkage. The remaining question is, what's the knob on the back of the counterweight for? I think it might be to open the counterweight to access the drivetrain inside. Either that, or it moves the counterweight forward and backward. Hey @dokludi, are you going to reverse engineer this?
  20. Saberwing40k
    It's actually a roller bearing, using small wheels mounted on some Nexo Knights ball with stick. I think this is discussed in the main 2018 thread.
  21. Saberwing40k
    It looks like there is some kind of detail in the counterweight, it can be just barely seen between the panels on the moveable counterweight. Whether this will do anything is unknown. It's probably just a detail. I can't help but think that this set would have been much better pneumatic. Linear actuators are just so tedious to operate by hand.
  22. Saberwing40k
    Let's hope it is cheaper. 800 fewer parts and no PF at the same price as 42054 is probably a bridge too far for Lego. There are a lot of black frames all throughout this model, actually. Sadly, I echo your sentiments about looks and functions. This set seems to be rather empty, rather a lot like some other sets this year. Let's hope this is a one time thing.
  23. Saberwing40k
    Zooming way in on the pictures, 42082 definitely has two gear rack circles being used as a slew bearing. It also looks like some kind of ball joints or something else is being used in there as a bearing piece, but it's hard to say. I'm really surprised that Lego chose this solution, over 42055's simpler design, but this is more authentic, without being overly fiddly, like @shineyu 's design using 1x1 tiles.
  24. Saberwing40k
    Now that we've seen the model from both sides, I'm kind of wondering what the other lever controls. The left lever is outriggers in and out, but what's the one on the right side? I can't tell from the other pictures, but I can think of a couple of things it could be. It could be for driving forward and back, like 42042, or, far more likely, slewing the superstructure. I dunno, but I'm so happy pics are starting to come out.
  25. Saberwing40k
    Not true, 8284 had the tractor as the B model, and the buggy as the A model, at least in the US. Which is truly baffling, as the buggy is a bad B model. So, there is a chance. However, it is far more likely that both the A and B model will look like the B model will look like the B model of something cooler, like some sets have. (I'm glaring at you, 42037.) I've seen a number of bad B models, but I've also seen lots of good ones. 42078, in particular could be the A model of a set. Sadly, in relation to 42054, which was superlative, this set just does not stack up. How can this set be the same price, when it has no PF and lower complexity?
×
×
  • Create New...