Cavannus

I've just ordered my Emerald Night today... Maybe I should have waited... No, I shouldn't have : anyway I'll buy the combo pack later at the same time as the 7641 "Pizza to go and eat on the Bus" and probably a few other sets in mid-2009. Thanks for the scan!

You're not! See below. You are missing one parameter: the voltage (e.g. 7.4V). You get the overall capacity in Watt/Hour by multiplying the capacity in Ampere/Hour and the overall voltage of the pack. For instance, 6 AA batteries at 2300 mAh (i.e. 2.3 Ah) make: 6 cells x 1,2V x 2.3Ah = 16 Wh This is in theory, you must add some loss factors due to the AA's NIMH technology. 7.4V is a standard voltage* for lithium-polymer (Li-Po) batteries -- one of the best technology for general public. The box is expensive** because of: 1. The batteries inside that are expensive bare 2. The inclued charger I mean the battery and its charger are both in the "Rechargeable Battery Box". It is the safest solution to protect against short circuits and overcharges. But all this stuff is expensive indeed! * 3.7V is the nominal voltage for one single Li-Po cell, so there are two in a 7.4V pack. NiMH technology has less capacity for a given volume than Li-Po or Li-Ion, but it is cheaper and safer (you don't need a strong protection against shocks and short-circuits). ** I also expect a combo pack which include the led and all I need to motorize the train

For those who are curious about the article but don't want to open the malware pages: > Read the "Bizarre Lego Sets" article in PDF > View a screenshot of the malware page (Both links are hosted on my website server)

Because I feel jalous Seriously, I thought it was easier for Lego to make a new set available on the S@H prior to "physical" stores (for stock management & dispatching reasons), so I was surprised to discover that this set had been released in German stores first.

Why haven't you posted a review yet?? It's a pity for many of us that is set has been available in stores before the S@H...

I like the orange bricks because they look old-fashion and classic while they are quite recent. When I was a child, I was dreaming about orange bricks as a nice-to-have that would never exist! Furthermore the BNSF train engine and the recent recycle truck are mostly orange and look very nice. I also like the yellow bricks that many don't like, because for me this is the "Lego colour": I think about the minifigs, the Yellow Castle, the 80s and the more recent #10156 yellow trucks, etc. I don't like the pearl bricks, especially the golden pearl, because they look cheap.

Classic Space too!! A line like the first 1978-79's one, with realistic bases and ships. Not necessarily blue & grey, this could be white or any other colour scheme as long as this represents the conquest of space in the very next decades.

Thanks for this detailed review. My girlfriend didn't understand why I will buy this set, now she does!! Of course this set is above average and looks like a MOC. However there are a couple of petty details that make me be disappointed: There are too many holes on the blue tavern walls, especially on the second floor between the windows and the spyglasses. It's really a pity! And why is there no door upstairs? Why is the door frame left open? This looks very cheap especially considering that the set contains many details. You get cows, poultry, fishes, food, even horse poops -- but you don't get a door for the blue house! About the tan house: an attic would be great: with only a couple of pieces, you get a lot of playability (to hide a rebel, a treasure, etc.); moreover it would be more realistic. It's a pity not to have it. Indeed there are no stairs and it's weird considering that all recent house sets have ones; but I'm not completely disappointed if I consider that the 80's sets didn't have ones either. The cows are very realistic while the (older) horses have right angles and look more schematic. The cows are Playmobil-like and the horses are Lego-minifig-like. There shouldn't be such a difference!

I agree with you about the 70-80's buildings: they respect the overall shape (and it's funny to notice that the round towers came later in the Lego line as they do in history). Actually I meant that people who think that the early sets are 100% realistic are wrong: they follow our common representation of Middle-Age rather than historians' knowledge. I forgot the education side that Lego itself tries to promote! However I wanted to tell people who want their children to play as they did 30 years ago, that today's hot games don't look like the ones that were hot when we were young. Anyway I'm against the "cheap crap" too and I'm really happy to see that Lego has increased the quality again for a couple of years. "Not entirely unrealistic either" --> That's what I meant (but not entirely realistic either: they just need other colours and simpler shield designs to look like medieval rebels)

I was born in 1975 so when I saw the new grey Castle line in 1984, I loved it immediately! I stopped loving Castle sets around 1986 (keeping an interest in Space and City) that means that I've always preferred the non-fantasy sets. And when I saw some fantasy sets in a shop, I always thought there were definitely ugly and irrelevant compared with "my" serious Middle-Age sets. Furthermore in France the Castle line was called "Middle-Age" ("Lego Moyen-Âge") so maybe this made me believe that it should have been realistic and not fantastic. About Space: Now as an adult I like the first 1978-79's Classic Space sets because they represent a realistic conquest of space (let's remember that in 1980, we were supposed to reach Mars or to build lunar bases within the next 20 years), but as a child I didn't care about this and I liked all the new sets that came after. That's why I wrote that Lego is a toy; the designers are right when they design for the kids before all -- even if that doesn't match our Afols' expectations

Keeping only the old realistic in order to teach history is a non-sense for me. First, children can make the difference between the real world and a story world. Second, what we adult think is historic, is actually mostly not. I mean we have a representation of what castles, knights, soldiers, etc. were, but this representation is false at 70%. So if you want to teach your children about Middle-Age by making them playing with those sets you think are real, you're wrong. Let them play and imagine their stories! Furthermore the toys my parents played with in the 60s looked completly old-fashion and bothering in the 80s when I was a child. So now the toys -- i.e. the Lego sets -- I loved are not those that match today's children's whishes. I don't like their toys either but I believe I don't have to impose my preferences and judge theirs. Don't forget: Lego is a toy before all, so it does make sense to get the same things as other toys including unrealistic features. However I prefer the realistic lines far ahead of the fantasy lines. The BF and Lions factions have been already less realistic than the previous ones (e.g. those in the Yellow Castle) but the rest has been quite close to the reality as all of you know. I think the Forestmen look like old movies' Robin Hood (in green tights) rather than real rebels, but they haven't been a fantastic line either. And I like the new current Castle sets because they mix historic designs and fantastic creatures so that you can select what you want (i.e. you can buy the Battle Pack and the Medieval Village if you don't want any troll, witch, etc.). I hope the KK2 had been only a (bad) dream... :P BTW: thanks for having posted this topic. I'm happy with it! Before it I thought people like me who don't like the fantasy Lego sets were rare... But now I'm feeling better!

Ooops, you replied faster than me. But I'm happy to see Jojo's picture, that means that I didn't dream when I read that both exist in the same box!

I agree, I've thought the same thing since I saw the cabin interior. I would expect an interior but with basic pieces though (I know this costs a lot for them) to get several suggested details, e.g.: - two or three medium or small steering wheels or even flowers for pressure control, - a small car door for the furnace (that's enough, no need of a built door) - a couple of gauge pattern titles - maybe one or two control sticks All these pieces are basic and would not require a higher cost compared with the existing built furnace -- but this would make the cabin more realistic and playable! I've been surprised too that the carriage's extremities look open, without closed doors (e.g. like on the Santa Fe), which is cheap. I'm waiting for to see other pictures to check if the car is fully closed or not. Sometimes the simple remains the best. If you need a door and if such a part exists and fits, use it! Anyway I'll buy the Emerald Night because I love it despite these "cheap" lacks.

About the rubber wheels: I'm sure that the motor will fit in the tender and that the rubber wheels allow the drive wheels to turn and animate the pistons. I don't see a motor in the engine itself; furthermore this is the easiest and the most flexible solution as I think a 9V motor could be implemented as well as the upcoming RC system. Doors: Well, I like these built doors: they make the construction more attractive. Actually I don't care. But I don't like the fact that there is no door on the carriage extremities (like on the Santa Fe engine & carriages); that makes it looking weird and less realistic in contrast with the rest of the train that is well detailed. About the set: I think they will sell additional carriages (as they did for the Santa Fe) and these should be compatible with other train sets as additions. By the way, does "flexible tracks" mean "compatible tracks", i.e. compatible with 9V or RC? Just a guess though...

I'm not convinced by this set either. I don't like the mix of themes that is a non-sense (two identical classic space, one postman between them, etc.), and the centered torso logo as well as the new helmet makes them wrong. I would see theme boxes too: one for city, one for space, one for castle... For sure I'd buy one of them, at least the castle one if there would be two 375/383/677's minifigs and probably the space one if it would include a jetpack and a city spaceman with golden visor. Maybe Lego should have chosen another strategy for their Vintage Minifigure Collections*. If so, it's really a pity because they'll say that customers don't want vintage releases, which is wrong in my opinion. * I can imagine that these sets look cool during a focus group session; but what about in a shop or when browsing the S@H?