CP5670

This is not related to the new server, but speaking of flood control, can this be removed from the forum's search function at least for registered users? I find this annoying, as you often don't find what you are looking for on the first try. I can understand why you would want to have it for unregistered guests and bots, but I don't really see the point for normal users.

This is actually not that bad today, and is another example of something that was much harder in the 80s. The 8t gear and axle pin were both made of ABS back then and had a much stronger grip than modern ones. You can pull off Technic pins in general by putting a half-width liftarm on them and then sticking a 1x4 antenna into them, which holds the liftarm in place. This was the method I had in mind for the 80s friction pins, but it also works well in other situations. I've used it recently for removing this piece from stud pins, an assembly used in several SP3 sets. These would be nearly impossible to remove without using any "tools" like this.

I think this set actually has a struck a good balance on the level of detail. CC and GG always seemed over-detailed to me, which gave them a kind of old fashioned look that never appealed to me.

The annoying friction pins were used in the 1980s. TLG switched to the current design in 1990. There is actually a somewhat easier way to remove them, using a 1x4 antenna and a half-wide Technic liftarm, but they should still be avoided since they damage other pieces they're placed in over time. Any two large plates placed on top of each other are also tough to remove, especially plates from the late 80s which had a much stronger grip than modern ones do.

As always, excellent and funny review. I haven't been a big fan of the modular buildings in the past, but this is the first one I think I'm going to buy. It has a more modern look and feel than the previous modular sets and arguably has the best interior detail we've seen so far. A department store is also something that has never been done in any normal City set. Maybe they could use the security camera from the City Corner. I guess that sport equipment is more valuable than these fancy clothes.

To be fair, that model only uses two motors. The fiber optic emitters would increase the price but it may just fit into a $200 pricepoint, at least compared to modern sets. I was thinking more of the MOCs with 10+ motors and so on. As far as MOCs go they are wonderful, but TLG would likely cut down a lot on those elements if they were made into actual sets, even if geared towards AFOLs.

I don't know of any current clone that is actually superior to Lego, which is why my collection is still 99.999% Lego. What I'm saying is that it is possible for such a clone to exist in theory. It would not have been possible if Lego's tolerances had always been where they should be. Oxford is supposed to be one of the best clones, and although I haven't seen them in person, they may be at least comparable to Lego in this respect. Maybe someone who has those sets could tell us more.

The only major clone I've seen in person is Megabloks, which look highly translucent to me, but I'm picky. Some types of 2007-08 Lego are about the same. This all assumes that the dimensions of Lego pieces are held to tighter tolerances than any of the clones, which is not really true these days. It has been mentioned around here that some Lego pieces have their studs or stud receptacles offset to such an extent that the differences are visible to the naked eye. I have a number of 1-wide plates like this in my collection. You also have to separate Lego pieces in the right way, and if you don't do it right it is easy to permanently deform even pieces that are manufactured perfectly. In fact, the Lego brick separator makes this kind of deformation particularly common, as I described here.

I was actually thinking the same when I saw this thread. I would also much rather have new pieces that expand the functional possibilities of the Technic system, like the new types of gears I mentioned in that part wish thread. It would be nice to have an AFOL oriented Technic set, but if you think about it there are very few concepts that would be suitable for a set like this. I think just about any vehicle-type model TLG releases would either be only a slightly beefed up version of something they have already made, or would fit into their price points for standard Technic sets. Technic is a unique theme in the sense that the biggest Technic sets already go into price ranges that would be considered AFOL-targeted in any other theme. If this year's excavator is priced at $200 as reported, then anything up to that level is apparently fine for a standard set aimed at kids. Even if they did release an AFOL-focused Technic set, it would probably still be constrained in terms of fitting in with the look and style of the current, official Technic sets. People have referred to some MOCs with especially large quantities of motors or pneumatics that would result in a high price, but from what I've seen many of those models don't really need all those parts. The same functionality can be achieved with a lot fewer such elements if they were made into official sets.

8868, followed closely by 8455 and 8480. Out of the pneumatic sets, 8455 is more complex than 8868, but I would give 8868 the nod due to its compressor and great alternate model.

This picture is 3 or 4 years old now, but it gives the idea. Since then, I've been stacking the small boxes inside bigger ones, so the pile has become smaller even though I have more boxes in it. The majority of my collection still consists of 80s and 90s sets, when the boxes were nicer than what we get today. Only a few of the modern boxes are really worth keeping, and I have been doing it for reasons of continuity more than anything else. I keep them at my parents' house since my apartment doesn't have enough space for them, but I intend to collect them at some point when I move into a more permanent place.

I always did think that Aquazone was at least inspired by space. In fact, if TLG hadn't told us that the Aquazone sets were subs, many of them could easily pass for spacecraft.

It happens to me occasionally, and is usually just my own fault. I tend to do it more often with modern sets. The tiny instruction steps almost encourage you to try and do multiple steps at once to keep the build interesting, but that also makes it easier to mess up on something.

This is a good concept but not that well thought out. It would have been far more useful if it had Technic holes and let you measure diagonal distances, especially along triangle edges. I like that "minifig" too.

The models in the second picture look a lot like Aquaraiders (the first line, in 1997), at least in terms of the style and color scheme. The monorail seems like it's made up of two distinct themes. I like how it contains all those prototype pieces there that never made it into any actual set. The "Aqualock" text looks like the same font as the "9V" on the 6990 battery box.

I love the big trans-red quarter domes. That's the one classic transparent color that piece never appeared in. It must have been a test mold.

It may not be that easy to split up the models. The model I was referring to is the one here, which was done in 3 parts in MLCad, but the chassis already contained 1300-odd pieces and doing anything with it caused a 3 or 4 second delay. I do like MLCad's interface. SR3D Builder's interface is actually somewhat clumsy and the program definitely takes some getting used to, but it's so much more powerful and featured than MLCad that it's worth taking the time to learn it.

You don't necessarily need to "switch" though. You can just buy both, as long as you stick to Lego-compatible clones. As I said earlier, mixing Lego with good clone bricks is not really any different from mixing 90s Lego with modern Lego. Good point. There was a time when TLG pursued quality for its own sake, but the company's attitude towards that has changed. Today they will only do that if it helps their profits, and that will only happen if they face competition and consumers become more demanding about quality.

I've brought up this possibility several times around here before, and yes, I would buy anything that beats Lego in quality. I would certainly continue to buy Lego, as they have things like minifigs and Technic that the clones do not offer, but I would no longer remain exclusive to it. I think it is conceivable today than Lego's quality may be surpassed, whereas 7 or 8 years ago it would have been unthinkable. The reviews in the Community section have shown that certain clone brands have already outdone Lego in some specific respects, such as quantity of printed parts and even things like box designs. It may not be that long before some clone decides to step up their efforts and goes beyond Lego in every way. Some people talk of wanting to maintain a pure Lego collection that is not "contaminated" by clones, and I once had the same thoughts about it, but today I would say it's much more worthwhile to maintain, say, a pure 80s and 90s Lego collection. As I said in this thread, "pure Lego" simply doesn't mean what it used to anymore. I will also say that one reason the quality is relevant here is the high price of Lego. Lego is consistently priced much higher than any of the clones I know of, and in the past they could (rightly) justify it because of the unparalleled quality. Now that this is no longer the case, they need to bring down the prices to compensate.

MLCad will actually be even worse than LDD with big models because of its software renderer. I built a reasonably large model in it once and it can become very slow after about 2000 parts. SR3D Builder should work a lot better, as mentioned earlier.

Same here. After all, the main thing that is supposed to justify the higher price of Lego over clone brands is the quality. If we're dealing with any lesser quality here, then they better bring the price down from $20. Although the comments from people who have bought this are encouraging so far.

It's nice to see some women figs, but like all the previous packs there are only two or three I'm interested in here. If this is the same price as the previous packs and has the same kind of manufacturing quality, I will pass on it.

This thread is a great idea. I like that radar array made of 24x43 Technic wheels. The oldest pictures I have go back to when I was 11 or 12. There was a beefed up fire engine, back when official City vehicles were still 4-wide, and a Technic truck (can't remember exactly what it was supposed to be). This truck chassis was built when I was 14, but was never completed. It looks better than it actually was, as the design was quite clunky and turned out to be too heavy for the suspension to support. I eventually gave up on the project, as I was running out of pieces by that point too. Even earlier, I often made these giant, multi-colored spaceships shaped like 747s. I used to make one of these models every few years, using all the parts in my collection up to that point. The last one had different sections for different Space themes, like an M:Tron section, Spyrius section, etc., but it was built on baseplates and couldn't even be picked up without falling apart. I don't have any pictures of these though.

I would probably say 6399 too, but this isn't really a fair comparison. 6399 is a much larger set than the other two and includes almost twice as much track. I don't actually have 6399, but have two 6990s and a 6991. Out of those, I think 6990 is a better set.

Always wanted this one. I haven't found a good deal on ebay so far though. I like this model better than the Galaxy Explorer. It was ahead of its time in terms of the details and color scheme, and looks surprisingly modern for a 1983 release. The design of the lab section actually seems to have inspired the rear section in the newer Galactic Enforcer. They have some obvious similarities.