agrof

I guess: marketing. Top Gear and F&F are well known brands among non LEGO fans, which will help to advertise.

It is the poll, what doesn't work. I voted for sure. At least we discovered a bug. :)

Thanks @nerdsforprez, I think a poll can invite even more members, as it is easier to give opinion this way, instead of writing comment. Might be the idea outdated though, as the topic is not so fresh, and most members might have already lost interest on it. :)

Unfortunately, the printed RESY symbol doesn't replace education, laziness, negligence - so it is recyclable, but might never reach the recycling factory. Don't forget, that LEGO goes worldwide to individual households, and each country has their level of awareness, knowledge, and technology for sustainability. In general: Industrial waste management works quite well, but the public one is still very spreaded and dependent on individuals, which is hard to control. Of course we can and must do our best in our micro-environment to develop this processes.

@nerdsforprez Can You please set a poll for this thread? I made previously a suggestion for this... At everyone: is it about the user experience, or about sustainability? For user experience, I am 100% for paper and off-line activity. For environment, You Sirs, just scratching the surface with the building instructions... I just drop some other aspects, and these must be considered in a system, not separately. Plastic bags inside - immediate waste, why to use those? Even in first world the public waste management is questionable. BTW, there is still big debates about composting or burning or recycling. Due to marketing purposes, LEGO boxes are way over-sized. What does it cause? Shipping air - less products in transport - more transport needed - more vehicles involved - more emission. We do emission analysis here (I am working in packaging industry), in the life cycle of a packaging, always the transport and logistics (so called Use Phase) takes the biggest impact. Without any marketing intention, if You are interested what is the background of such calculation, please click here. In share, the impact looks like this (approx figures): Raw material production - 20% Converting raw material - 5% Transport and Logistics (Use Phase) - 70% End of life (Waste Management) - 5% Paper based instructions are not waste, but long-term products, which have much longer lifetime than any (!!) smart device. Just try compare the production impact as example (estimated): paper based BI, lifetime expectancy: 5-20 years energy used for usage: 0 production impact: 1-10 imaginary unit (lets take base the price in EUR) smart device, lifetime expectancy:1-2 years energy used for usage: more than 0 production impact: 100-1000 imaginary unit (lets take base the price in EUR) Okay, you can say, that smart devices are not bought only for reading LEGO BIs, but you get the idea. The big picture, what really matters.

@nerdsforprez Would it be possible to create a poll for this thread? It would be nice to visualize the opinions. My suggestion is: BI paper only BI paper (A+B models) + digital access BI paper (A model) + BI digital (B model) + digital access BI digital only (A+B models) Edit: I am for printed paper too (with digital stock - downloadable from website), most arguments already mentioned by others above.

Here: forward-backward-steering? I guess, like zero effort? (Sorry if I didn't get the sarcasm...)

I really dig the shape, and the usual high level engineering from You is the top of the cake on this B model. I wonder, if AFOLs like Didumos can create such a capable and viable alternative model in their spare time within couple of weeks (let's say 1 week netto work), why is TLG not capable/interested to put same effort (khm... creativity, capacity) for a product like this? Whatever, awesome B-model, love it!

After seeing the simulations, I got the same feeling as @Cumulonimbus. First, these videos sound really harsh, but actually helps a lot for bringing crash tests into digital platform. Imagine, there will be no need to destroy real production cars / planes / anything, and countless tests can be done.

On behalf of many: huge Thank You Attika! I am amazed by the bedcover, holy beans, did not expect such a dynamic one!

It does indeed, but if You click on View WLTP Figures, there is only in-line engines listed. I6 does definitely fit in. Range Rover models do have V engine configurations, but the Defender does not (yet). Nonetheless, the LEGO V6 version from @twoofive looks really good!

There must be serious trouble at JLR than. After making the market loud with new in line 6 cylinder engine, why on earth would they go for V6? You can also order only with i4 or i6... https://buildyour.landrover.com/lr2/r/engine/_/en_xi/l663_k20/4pbxe/a-fe/?_ga=2.258304264.306643662.1570528337-2127566929.1570528337 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingenium_engine_family The 42110 is accurate in this term.

The fake cylinders at the main boom are the best! What an ingenious idea!

I can picture myself something like this from @Lipko: If so, it will be an instant get. Also, a full manual model would be even better!

So, no further pictures before the video release? Any chance?

Issue 4: I think it might be a bug in the model, which from the instructions was generated. As I see, there is no use of that pinhole in further assembly, so I guess it should have been rotated by 90°, like in step 250-251. If so, You can easily push the axle with another one out.

Looks like I just found one with remarkable discount... I might have the donor for my pimped Defender!

What about this interpretation: The natural evolution of language is known, this is how brands like "hoover" spreads for object in general, there is countless examples. This can be a great thing, and considered as Free Marketing, Respect or even Praise towards a brand, which will be part of human linguistic history in this way. This might be read as Honor in most of the cases, and I dare to say the real infringements cases belongs to court, and need no preventive actions, like described in this topic. TLG acts like fighting desperately against this natural evolution. If they keep on with this, the word LEGO will be not the analogy for interlocking bricks, but for a greedy company, who stamp down everybody, but especially individuals. Also, watching the history of recent years, it feels like TLG is behaving like a hysteric child, they are not really successful against real copycat companies*, so they found an easier and way more powerless target to hit. The problem is, that this target is their so called: fan base. Normally, people don't hurt there, where love and food is coming from, but we try to cooperate, support each other. Fans do this by creating and sharing content, spend endless hours and money to keep the heart beating. *It is a known fact, if you move any kind of production to China, it will be copied. TLG did this to earn more profit (=greed?), they took, but didn't realize the obvious risk, now we suffer from the consequences. What TLG does in return? Did we see any kind solidarity as copycat brands started to steal MOC designs - many was even with the help of TLG, as in Cuusoo platform everybody could download LDD models. I do believe, all the fans would have been happy about some words from TLG back than. Nowadays we see actions like this against 3D community (again: fans). I wouldn't call it appreciation, and as written previously, we can not expect any official explanation either soon. Is that a legal move? Might be. We all know that law and ethic don't walk hand in hand. Many cases the one wins, who can twist the words better, or can afford more lawyer. There is many read of this infringements story, for me it just doesn't feel right to waste energy into punishment efforts (and even hitting the wrong target group), instead of putting the same energy into innovation. TLG acts as big tired tyrant, who doesn't want to keep the position by earning love and respect (the hard way), but by kicking and intimidating everybody from the near of the throne (the easy way).

I really like this modell, and would love to own it... but the dependency to smartphone/tablet without physical controller, + fiddling with battery charger is unfortunately no go for me. I am not saying it is bad, because in some perspective it gives more accurate representation of the real machine operation, and really admire the smoothness and power of this beast. It is just not for me unfortunately, or luckily - as I just saved a lot of money. Great hint with the BI @Enantiomeer, already got my copies, thank You!

That looks really exciting project, any chance to take a look at the internals?

This is clear, the parts in the 3D printing libraries are not LEGO products, so strictly read: they can hurt the brand reputation in case. Still, I stand my points, but the worst part in the story is the communication, again. Let me to re-quote: "When asked why the Lego Group has issued takedown notices, the company was less forthcoming. Ida Rosendahl, Associate Manager Corporate Communications at the Lego Group explained they have a high volume of queries. Rosendahl says it could be weeks before LEGO provides an explanation as to why it has issued trademark and copyright takedown notices against platforms and individuals sharing fan art." https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/3d-printing-community-hit-by-lego-takedown-notices-162451/ So, IF the above mentioned LEGO brand usage is the main issue, what takes for weeks for TLG to give a clear statement? Why they leave space for random conspiracy theories? I believe it is equally bad for brand reputation as the "THING" they are trying to fighting with. I wonder if they even realize this...

@kbalage That was really great approach for the review with the interesting bits! I vote for keeping this method. Enjoyed the video, and the new presentation elements in the video editing, keep up with the direction!

I see, but that doesn't apply 1:1 at 3D printing community. Very different product, environment and conditions. They could use these websites and the designs as free bench-marking / brainstorming platforms, also even maybe as market mapping tool. It is just question of attitude, and having right eyes for finding the opportunities, instead of looking for enemies all the time. Whatever, I rather focus on positive things, than eating nerves on the work of law / marketing / communication departments, who proved their objectivity, constructiveness and loyalty towards AFOL community already in the past (nope).

So the issue is the use of the word: LEGO. This solution is much friendlier, rather than complete ban, what @Tommy Styrvoky described. Good, that it was not cleared by TLG in the quoted article: "When asked why the Lego Group has issued takedown notices, the company was less forthcoming. Ida Rosendahl, Associate Manager Corporate Communications at the Lego Group explained they have a high volume of queries. Rosendahl says it could be weeks before LEGO provides an explanation as to why it has issued trademark and copyright takedown notices against platforms and individuals sharing fan art." https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/3d-printing-community-hit-by-lego-takedown-notices-162451/ Actually, I don't really see how people, who go directly to 3D printing page to buy custom 3D printed parts, would mistake that parts as LEGO official products... This action and the foggy (better to say: no) explanation still feels like a cheap shot. Call me idealist, but this is the complete misuse and misunderstanding the abilities and possibilities we have nowadays for sake of IDIOCRACY.

Wait, are we in 2019 or in 1939? I am not sure now... Why to stop here LEGO, those people must be collected and re-educated in camps to follow the ideology properly. Meanwhile I understand the intention of this move (but don't agree necessarily), I do belive they went way too far from common sense and human values... very disappointing. Is really 3D printing that far, that it is competitive with mass production moulding? Did these sites made reasonable hurt on LEGO's profit? Did I miss something? One thing is fighting for clear competition on the market, but as a person, who believes in shared knowledge, education and innovation, I find this very offensive.