CP5670

5982 as a set looks lame. The purple and yellow don't go together well at all IMO. I like the piece selection though. The new Squidman is great, and I see a trans-yellow windscreen as well. It would be great if that color is used in the other villain sets as well. Trans-yellow is essential for Blacktron 1 MOCs, but it's the hardest color to get any windscreens in today. I hope that computer slope is actually printed and not just a sticker.

I think there are actually two different hair pieces you are referring to. The one in the catalog looks like a more textured version of the usual male hair with square sideburns, while the snack bar one is like the pigtail hair piece without the pigtails.

Some good ideas there. A reverser unit like you described would be very useful for a lot of things. A telescoping mechanism would also be cool and would let the piston extend quite a long way, but making it strong and rigid enough when fully extended may be an issue. You can buy all the parts individually from Lego Education for pretty reasonable prices (in the trans-light blue colors). I believe they ship internationally these days.

Cool, are you the guy who sells the LifeLites units? The basic, non-flashing one looks pretty attractive to me for the price. I might get one or two of those soon.

I agree with him on both points too. I think your preference on this topic will depend on what the main attraction of Technic is to you, whether it's the structures or the mechanisms. For me, it's the latter all the way. In fact, I think the biggest advantage of Technic over more advanced (metal, tool-based) building systems is that you can largely ignore structural issues and focus on the mechanical aspects of your models. Studded Technic bricks allow you to build a framework quickly and intuitively, and you can then think about the geartrains, linkages and other moving parts of the model. This is no longer the case with purely studless construction, which forces you to plan out the structure carefully and can involve some trial-and-error to just get the framework right, before you get to the mechanical aspects. I don't necessarily limit myself to only studded or studless construction, but I use whatever I think will the best and easiest way to make a given mechanism work. In short, I like to "play chess" with the mechanisms. Anything that helps me make mechanisms is good, and anything that detracts from that is bad.

The problem is that they slightly damage the holes in Technic bricks over time. They have an extremely firm grip and their plastic rubs off on the insides of the holes, leaving dark smudges there. Also, when you remove them from bricks, you have to pull them out at a perfectly straight angle. If you mess up and they come out at an oblique angle, the lips on them crush the brick plastic and leave visible indentations at the edges of the holes. Add in the general difficulty of removing them in the first place, and you have arguably one of the worst Technic pieces ever made. When I realized all this a year ago, I took them off from all of my built models and replaced them with the modern kind. If nothing else, they can still be used as rocks or some other granular material. 8865 and many other late 1980s sets came in two versions, one with the original pins, and an updated 1990 version with the new pins. My copies both included the old kind though. I hear you. Studless construction does have its benefits, but not when it is used exclusively like today.

The axle framework looks nice here. The overall style of the model reminds me of 8412 in that sense.

I agree with what Blakbird said. I got out of my Lego "gray age" by buying a ton of MISB Technic sets from ebay and Bricklink around 2000-2002, and never thought twice about building them if I had enough room on my display shelves. Did you get the set when it originally came out or from ebay later on? It's worth taking inflation into account here. The set might not have appreciated in value as much as it seems, relative to the original price you paid. I did have two unopened 8865s at one point (reasonably cheap at about $130 each), and built them both. The only thing I regret is using the 1980s-style friction pins they came with, and not realizing the effects of that until recently.

Steve Witt said something to that effect at this year's Brickfair. He said that their "design group" was told to cut down the total number of colors and somehow decided that the grays were not colorful enough to fit in with the reduced palette, and they changed them without telling anyone. He also said that the company's attitude towards AFOLs was also very different back then and that in hindsight, it was a mistake. At last year's event, the TLG quality guy also said that "some people higher up have admitted that it probably wasn't the brightest decision they made." As you said, I think it's ultimately just PR talk, and TLG would do it all again today if it suited them to do so. On the other hand, the original 2004 color changes would have been a terrible decision from even a business point of view (cost of retooling machines, kids didn't notice, AFOLs stopped buying Lego for a year), so I think they would certainly regret that. As far as City buildings go, the special pieces are one attraction for me. If a set is lame but contains lots of unusual but versatile pieces for a good price, I would still buy it and use it as a platform for mods. However, this has rarely been the case in recent years due to all the quality issues, coupled with the distinct lack of printed pieces. I almost always mod my sets in some way. There are very few sets that are perfect to me in their original form, and I can only think of two or three City buildings like that.

The Code Pilot doesn't make exactly that sound though. The only beep-like sounds it has are the musical notes, and those can't be pitch shifted. The old 9V L&S sound bricks sound different to me too. This sound is actually much more like the beeps the Microscout (from the Star Wars Mindstorms sets) makes, but that thing is not programmable as far as I know. The models are large enough to contain an RCX or NXT, which can easily make such a sound. However, from looking at that point in the video, I think it's pretty clear that he is using some custom solution.

I doubt TLG will do any more re-releases of old sets, especially of anything from the old gray era. The gray change was basically what killed the Legends and made them unattractive to their target market. 8421 was very good, but it should have had a manual knob connected to the turntable somewhere, and the boom tends to come down too fast due to its weight. 8455 was practically perfect though.

A new PF micromotor would be great, but as allanp said, it needs to have better long-term reliability than the old one did. I think it would actually be more useful for minifig scale models than Technic ones. The existing PF M motor is already pretty small and compact for most purposes in Technic models. I can certainly see where you're coming from here, but external gear reduction is always going to be less efficient than what the motors do internally. For example, the original 2838 9V motor is usually weaker in practice than the 71427 geared one, even though it's technically more powerful. Most of the sets with ungeared motors also used rubber belts to reduce the speed instead of gears, which further reduces the motors' power. Gears work, but they are quite noisy and the high speeds can in some cases wear down the gear plastic. The 5292 9V motor comes closest to what you want though. It's actually more powerful than the XL, but runs at something like 1000rpm. There is some gear reduction inside but it's fairly minimal.

Interesting idea. This would create a nice effect for a row of several lights. However, for two lights it would be a lot easier to just use the old 9V lights, which had flashing capabilities built in. This is actually one thing I don't like about the PF lights. A polarity change won't make them flash, unlike the old lights. There are also third party solutions like LifeLites, which are expensive but probably the best option. You get 8 lights with various built-in patterns.

I guess there are a limited number of standard construction vehicle concepts TLG can use. As long as they don't do any one of them too often, I'm fine with it. A grader is a pretty common piece of equipment though. They have made them in the past in Universal sets like 8074, just not as a standalone set. In fact, TLG has made sets on some quite obscure concepts in the past. As a kid, I had no idea what 8857 and 8457 were supposed to be until I looked them up later on.

SP1 and SP3 don't really see things the same way.

It did seem to work on some of the sets I mentioned earlier. The 8865 is not nearly as bad today as it used to be when I first got it, although that was back in 2001. Maybe it just takes a long time. Since we're on the topic, there was one strange set I got a few years ago with the opposite problem, a used US 1988 copy of 6990 (not the one I referred to earlier). The set was opened but the pieces were seemingly in perfect condition, with no scratches or yellowing whatsoever. The pieces were also from the correct time period (molding marks on side, etc.) and had not been substituted from a newer set. However, the gripping strength of all the pieces ranged between average and very low, a big departure from all the other late 1980s sets I have. Some of the small 1x2 plates would barely hold together at all. I ended up replacing many of the basic pieces in it and it's in much better shape now, but I never understood what could have caused this. I still keep the weak pieces around as they can be useful in some situations.

Ah, you're right. I forgot about the ones in the instructions.

One person in the Lego quality thread did mention seeing a 1997 set like this, one that I also have and haven't seen anything unusual with. The location difference is the only thing that comes to mind. I have a number of "tight" sets that are exactly as you describe (6394, 6395, 6990, 8862, 8865, etc.), but they are all from the 1987-1990 period I mentioned earlier, and they are all from Europe or Asia. I think sets earlier than that don't have this issue, although I only have a couple and can't say for sure. The faded box cover is caused by prolonged sunlight exposure but that shouldn't affect the pieces inside. If anything, I think heat will loosen the bricks' grip.

I do like that blue plane better. It seems to have removed the single-piece wings, which are by far the biggest problem with the larger planes. Those pictures are great too. Where are they from? They look like the old catalog dioramas, which we haven't seen for many years since TLG stopped producing the small catalogs.

Nice review. Until recently, this was my favorite set among all of the space flagships. As you say, it has some flaws, but the overall Space Shuttle-like shape gives it a great, sleek look. I didn't have the set as a kid, but I based many space MOCs back then around the same shape. I actually like the SP2 color scheme a lot, except for the red. The red looks somewhat out of place, but the other colors go together very well. This ship, like the rest of the theme, does seem quite poorly armed for its size. It's funny because the SP1 ships have very heavy weaponry and no engines at all, while SP2 ones have plenty of engines but hardly any weapons. On a side note, if you like this set, you might be interested in this.

I don't get why they put the light in the minifig's foot. That looks really odd.

That's interesting. The clasping power of bricks had been reduced a lot by 1996, although it was still significantly higher than today's level, if that is your basis for comparison. What set is it? Do you know what country it's originally from? (the catalog it comes with may give an indication) I have noticed a few differences between the American and European sets I have, but I don't have enough of both from any given year to say anything for sure.

This is a great model. The functionality is similar to 8265, but the appearance really sets it apart. I especially like the look of the cab and the windows around it. I would be interested to learn what you did with the wheel hubs too, and how sturdy they are in practice.

What year is this set from? The pieces from about 1987-1990 simply have a very strong grip, much stronger than modern bricks. I've seen all of the things you describe on many sets from that time period. It's normal for that era and if you keep using the bricks (or just keep the set built), their gripping power will drop over time to more reasonable levels.

I locked the hatch in place on the other side just for stability. The entire rear section is otherwise only held up by the beams on the bottom, and it creates some unnecessary friction in the axle leading to the manual knob.