CP5670

It's more like TLG thinks that kids are dumber. This kind of set would probably have been on a single, unfolding sheet 20 years ago and had all the steps compressed onto that. The L and R have always been there on the doors though.

I don't necessarily. I like the modern architecture style you linked to and after all, I'm a Technic builder. But I think this building strikes a fairly good balance between the detail of standard, non-modular City sets and the CC and GG, which looked over-decorated in places.

I need to catch up with some of you this time around. Things were kind of hectic last year and I didn't get a chance to meet anyone from this forum.

I've seen fire stations that look like that around here too. As I said earlier, it's really a matter of modern or traditional architecture, rather than American or European. You'll find a mix of both types in any country.

I'll almost certainly get this set, but it does have its flaws. The main issue is the crappy stabilizer design with the manually operated ends. I wonder if it's possible to improve them and make them come down automatically as they extend out, like the ones on 8421. Also, there is a Wabra sign in front of the steering wheel. Is that a TLG set designer? 8285 also said "Wabra's Road Service" on it. They might have changed the sticker material in the last year or two. Recent sets I have don't seem to do this anymore.

I'm missing it. Is it only available on some countries' sites?

I don't really see this set as "American" as opposed to the earlier "European" sets, simply more modern than traditional. And I think this is a good thing, as I don't particularly like that traditional style. There are very few real life buildings like CC and GG in the places I've lived in (except at my university, which has many of them), but I know they are common in older cities with a longer history, in both the US and Europe. This new building, on the other hand, could fit well into a modern town if you remove the 1932 sign and maybe the bell. Most sets have had the milky colors for the last two years, and I would expect to see more of that here despite the high price. Some pieces have improved lately though. As for the brick alignment, it's common to see that in these preliminary images, so it might just be due to bad building on the marketers' part. The same issue came up here.

Has anyone gotten a Galactic Enforcer yet? It would be great to have a review of that. The second half of the instructions for it are up on the Lego site now, and the model looks excellent there. The big interior section in the middle is very reminiscent of the old Galactic Mediator.

It looks like some of you are even worse than me with this. I place most pieces so that any molding marks are hidden or at least facing the same direction, although I usually don't bother with friction pins or 1x1 round pieces unless it's very noticeable. The good thing is that molding marks on basic pieces are not that common these days, much less so than they once used to be. The poll results are interesting though. I was actually expecting it to be split roughly 50/50, given how often I see it in pictures posted here. Even very good MOCs often have misaligned pieces like this that don't appear to be intentional. I tend to use a brick (something bigger than 1x1) attached to adjacent studs, and then slide down the 1x1 piece alongside it. The best thing is to get the alignment right before you actually attach the piece.

That would make sense. I also thought that exhaust pipe looked strange, but it's common to see building mistakes in these preliminary images. The black railing on the side is not properly built either.

This looks quite nice, but like the previous modular city sets I probably won't be buying it unless I find it for a heavy discount somewhere. It has a lot of pieces but it just doesn't look very big considering that it's $150. I like the overall appearance of this better than the previous sets in this line though. They had fantastic details but I was never a fan of their "old fashioned" look (that and the high prices are why I haven't gotten any of them), and the building here looks somewhat more modern despite the 1932 sign and the vehicle.

I generally don't care for all the Lego branded gear that TLG releases, but this actually looks pretty nice. The color scheme is perfect. If past products are any indication though, the things that actually look like they're worth buying tend to be heavily overpriced. The size may also be on the small side if it's meant for kids to put on.

Do you bother to align 1x1 bricks and plates so that they are perfectly straight? Unlike larger bricks, 1x1 pieces are connected to other parts by only one stud and can freely rotate around it. This includes 1x1 bricks, plates, tiles and several variants of them. I attach these pieces carefully when building both official models and MOCs, and take the time to completely straighten out the edges before I move on. This can be tedious to do in some cases, like the floor tiles in the Creator houses, but I think the end result looks much more nice and uniform. However, I often see misaligned 1x1s in pictures posted here and on Brickshelf, so it would be interesting to get some thoughts on this. I have in mind here situations where the intention is to have them straight (as opposed to deliberately misaligning them to achieve a disorderly look), which is how they're used in almost all official sets. Straightening them out is actually easier to do today than it used to be 15-20 years ago. The bricks had a much stronger grip back then and you sometimes couldn't rotate a 1x1 piece without taking it off and putting it back on.

A 1x3 tile doesn't seem very useful. Any use I can think of for it can be accomplished with a 1x1 and 1x2, as described earlier. The only thing is that it would provide more strength in some cases. The first one already has an axle hole, and you can just put the usual pins into the other one. This would be far more useful.

I might try using the weights on my Metroliner. It generally runs fine but can sometimes derail on high speed turns. You can still get those weights from Lego Education. I got a bunch of them for Technic models several years ago.

This thing looks quite handy. It would especially be useful for Technic models, where angular beam placements are common.

Those models are very impressive. I had to spend some time looking over your diagrams to figure out how the models worked. I think the large number of pneumatics needed to make anything interesting is why we never saw any more official models using control circuits. 8455 was an exception though and the ideal set to collect for setups like this. It would have been nice if it had an official alternate model with a control circuit though.

This image was posted on TechnicBricks too. It pretty much backs up what we thought earlier; that set is very similar to the old 8459. There should be enough room for an M motor above the engine, as this model is somewhat larger than 8459. From a previous image, the manual wheel for the LAs is in the back, although I'm not sure about the transmission switch. There is a red lever in the old image that no longer appears in the new picture. It's a good source of LAs, but it is fairly expensive and doesn't bring anything new to the table if you already have an 8459 like me. I will probably save my money for 8258 instead. When are these sets supposed to be released?

I didn't like it in the old sets either, unless the model was quite small. In fact, the most common modification I make on my space sets is to close up open cockpits. Doing it on this set doesn't really look trivial and would require a substantial redesign of the front part. SP3's strength is really in its big sets, which are far better than these smaller ones.

By the way, the set number here should be 6813, not 6831. 6831 was an SP1 vehicle.

I put up a single 640x480 image for my MOC threads, which links to the Brickshelf gallery, along with a short description that is usually copied out of info files I have on Brickshelf. This does a reasonable job of "selling" the MOC without taking a lot of effort. The actual pictures on Brickshelf range between 1280x960 and 640x480, depending on how close-up they are taken. Like others, I also tend to ignore MOCs that lack any preview picture at all, unless the thread has a lot of responses and seems to be something out of the ordinary.

Great review. This set has actually been reviewed before, but it's good enough to warrant another perspective. Most of the dust can be removed easily by rubbing the pieces against a cloth or carpet, even the layers that don't come off with compressed air. I use these things and they work very well, although they won't get the dust inside the hollow studs on Technic bricks. I don't think the build is that hard actually (in a good way). The studded construction makes it more fun and intuitive to build than modern Technic sets. The instructions definitely have more steps than than current sets though. The mother of all heavy instructions was actually the manual for the previous super car, 8865, which had one step involving a staggering 134 pieces. There was also a cool incident with this set several years after its release. I'll quote myself from the other thread:

I can sort of see where 5150 Lego is coming from. That phone thread did seem pointless at first glance, but the truth is that there are two or three very similar and equally pointless threads on the same page. That being said, I don't really come to EB for general, off-topic discussion, as there are simply better forums out there for that. Also, I get the feeling that those who are claiming that moderator actions should be unquestionable by default have never seen a forum outside the Lego community. I can give many examples of what happens over time if there is no possibility of dissent at all. This might be something to consider for the administration: if you want to "downgrade" the status of the posts there (since they are not Lego related) and discourage spamming, one alternative is to loosen the rules but to have the posts not count towards a user's total. This is common practice on many other forums, and was done a few years ago on one I moderate. This applies to any topics on any forum out there. Falling back on such an attitude would make for a functioning forum, but not necessarily a good forum. And to be fair, EB is not like that at all. ImperialShadows has taken the time to explain his actions here in great detail, even if people might not agree with his reasoning, which is more than you can expect at a lot of other places.

It also costs more though, even accounting for inflation. $3 in 1992 is around $4.50 today, and that set is $7.

There were three Hydronauts and two Stingrays, which didn't make much sense considering that it was a Hydronaut base. The Stingray sets, in contrast, contained only their own guys.