Anio

EDIT : Professional building instruction available here : You can email me at setechnic@gmail.com /EDIT Hello everyone, Et voilà ! My latest UCS MOC is finished. And it is the podracer of Sebulba. UCS Sebulba's Podracer by Anio, sur Flickr UCS Sebulba's Podracer by Anio, sur Flickr With my UCS AT-TE, it is the most complex MOC I've been working on so far. And in fact, when I consider how tricky the build is, I think this MOC didn't took me that much time to design. Note that I've painted some parts. Indeed, they did not exist in the right colors. I do not feel guilty at all about that, even though I'm a purist. I just paint parts to have the part in the right colors. I did not use paint to add details or create new colorst. I will replace these painted parts by real Lego parts as soon as they are produced. :) Here is a picture of the structure of each engine : Some more pictures : UCS Sebulba's Podracer by Anio, sur Flickr To do all the details, I've used DBG, LBG, copper, and few tan and dark tan pieces. I think the final result works pretty well. On each sides, there is the flamethrower. Both can be opened. I did the energy binder with transpurple parts. It is not exactly the right color (trans-pink would be better), but I had no choice given that the parts I needed have never been produced in trans-purple. UCS Sebulba's Podracer by Anio, sur Flickr UCS Sebulba's Podracer by Anio, sur Flickr View from the rear : The pod was very fun to build. And I must say that it is much smaller than what I expected. In fact, the engines are sooooo much bigger than the pod. The pod is not very complex, but it has all the necessary details and the right colors at the right places. :) The minifig is a bit too small. But it is not such a big deal. :) UCS Sebulba's Podracer by Anio, sur Flickr Depending on the ressources we use, the size of Anakin's and Sebulba's podracers vary a lot. Sometimes their engines seem to have the same size, and sometimes, the engines of Sebulba are much bigger than those of Anakin. So, I would say that my podracer of Sebulba is more or less at scale with the pod of Anakin. If you want to know more about the building process or anything else, let me know. ;) And a video of the MOC : Hope you like it !

Yes, a cockpit is a very nice addition to that 10026. :) But the shape of the fighter is less streamlined. And as you already said, it is "just" a mod. IMO, 10026 is really a great set. And still the greatest N-1. By the way, yesterday I read a very interesting review of these Naboo Fighters on FBTB. :) edit : I guess I'm not a Sega fan.

My copy of 8110 has old 16t clutch gears.

Too many stickers, but still a great set ! It is very accurate and has a lot of details. The colors are aesome. The inventory is very good too. The minifig are very impressive. TLG improved them a lot compare to what tey used to be in the old podracer. I have the minifig Sebulba, and I must say that he is bigger than what I expected. The trans-clear support are also amazing. They are VERY stable. You can push the pods from every side, the pods never "falls". Besides, it supplies trans-clear liftarms for Lego Technic MOCers. I would like to see more sets which are that beautyful and accurate.

But other gears are pointed. They do not need to slid when reengaged (at 90°).

Yes, that's the main resaon why they are used. Strange. With only 4 teeth, it is IMO "harder" (well, no that hard actually...) to reengage knob wheels.

The 8110 costs 200€ is most contries in Europe. So please, do not reverse the problem...

Yes, your are right. No doubt about that. The 10221 is better than my Executor regarding a profil view. I'm aware of that. But if you look at 10221 with any other angle (the front, the back, the bottom, and the top) it is just a nightmare.

Once again, you prove that you have a very good understanding of what can be done with a given inventory. You scraper is way more nice, playable, fun, and original than the official B-model. Bravo :)

Wrong. TLG did some great ships/starfighters. And for some models, AFOLs never succeeded to make MOCs which are significantly better and not inspired from the official models : 7181, 7191, 10134, 10026, 10174, 10175, 10179, 10030, 10019. Arghhhhh... I'm so impatient to get this 10221. Not to get the model himself, cause I won't keep it built for a long time. But to make a comprehensive review and logically prove all his flaws. It will be so easy...

Yes, but you omit one very basic thing : what is legal is not necessarily fair.

Yes, and that's why I wrote "wise words". edit : well, people may still be able to get the rims of the 599 GTB easily, to replace the rims of the Enzo. Moreover, even if these parts are licensed, it may be possible to order them on Lego Direct since they have been used in a Technic helicopter as "non licensed parts".

DLuders, you are saying very wise words. But regarding the situation explained by Paul, you seem a bit naive (no offense) if you deeply believe in your explanation. A seller on BL may have 40 rims for years. And then, with a coincidence, a guy need these 40 rims for a MOC or a mod, just few days after NK announced his BI ? Sorry, but it sounds absolutely unbelivable to me.

What the hell did they expect ?? O_o I know it is not possible, but what would be fun would be to ask to Nathanaël and Joshua to change/remove the rims from the "official" instruction ! Thus, everyone could have the "new" official NK model, and the one who bought the 44 rims would have lost 150€. haha. That would lecture the guy on his moral. edit : oh, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I have the impression that the Technic theme (the Technic parts, actually), is more affected on BL than other regular part (studfull). :/ edit 2 : anyway, the one would bought the part should logically put them back on BL (or ebay) soon. Yes, obviously with a premium.

Yes, I noticed that too (I posted a comment on TB's about that). Of course, NK super car cames to my mind too. But I was a bit naive cause I didn't consider that the rims could have been bought by only one person. I thought many people bought them cause they wanted to have they own copy of NK's car. Some people are definitely too greedy...

I do not know if a TIE Bomber is as big as a TIE Advanced. But I think that using the same wings as the TIE Advanced is a great idea. :)

These parts wouldn't make a good looking result. But more important, it is not possible to attach something properly on the hypotenuse of the wings. edit : hum, you said vertically. Don't really see what does it mean on the model.

Ok. Hard to say... Actually, the angle is mainly defined by the structure. To reduce the gap, it would be necessary to increase the angle of the wings. Maybe 1x2 plates + 3x2 wings can work. But I'm still not convinced that a zig-zag is better than a gap.

I'm waiting for your third version, then.

Is it possible to post photos of the inside ? (to see how it is made)

Yes, I think we both explained our point of view. :) I would like to correct something I wrote. It is indeed not the designers who do mistakes or wrong choices, but the people who are above them. A designer is able to design good greebs ; no doubt about that. But someone above may have said "Hey, you see the huge amount of greebs on the top ? Do it with 3 parts !" @ gotoandLego : using 2x3 wings woundn't change anything about the gap. ;) Actually, using a 1x3 plate + 2x3 wing was just a (smart) way to get the angle of 3x12 wing (which was not produced at the time)

@ Aeroeza : Yet another fanboy spotted. -_-' You just can not admit that sometimes Lego designers do some wrong choices. Yes they are set designers, but in fact, they are still (official) MOCers. Like every MOCer, they can do some mistakes, wrong compromises. You think 10030 is weak, and you would like this model to be stronger ? No problem ! Do no attach the underside triangles upside down. Put it with studs up, do few modifications inside (with about 30 parts), and on the back near the 3 main reactors, and it's done ! If you want another mistake, look at the Technic theme (it is an example, but I know this theme pretty well ; I'm pretty sure it would be possible to find other examples in other themes). They could not sell 8043 for 2 months in order to fix 2 problems on it (a problem with a 16t gear, and a problem with linear actuators). Or look at 8110, it has again a part that have to be redesigned. Or 8289, a 1050 part fireman cherry picker with very few functions (compared to part number). In the next years, they released a motorised cherry picker with only 800 parts which worked much better. And this year, they release 8071, which has exactly the same functions as 8289 but 460 (!!) parts less ! (basically - 40% @_@). Yes these 2 models has been made to make money (like every set), but it is plain obivous too that these models have to replace the poor 8289. I do not know if you have this model or if you know a lot in Technic, but if you look at the way 8289 is built, you will see how it sucks ! ;) And before you ask me "So, are you saying that you do not do any mistake when disigning your MOCs", I answer : Yes, sometimes I do mistakes. Look at my first Slave. The approach I built it was definitely not the good one. Even today, its back side has still too much different parts to be an official set. Same for my Executor. It would require to use a bit less different refs to make the greebs to turn it into an official set. But that is something very easy to change. As for my pod, I know it is (waaaay) too fragile to be an official set. On the 10221, the greebs are made of 3 differents parts (tile with clip, plate round 1x1, and plate 1x2 with something :p). Com'on ! It is a 400$/€ set ! Have you seen the back of 10179 and how many different parts there is ? I look at it right now, and I may have count at least 20 different refs ! Even on 10030 which has much fewer greebs than 10221, I've count 9 different refs. And here comes the 10221, with absolutely no greeb on the back ! Oh, btw, it is not true to say the bridge can not be seen from outside. It seems there is a bunker in the middle, with no greeb.

Very nicely executed.

Do not worry for my Executor. ;) I did a 1,6 meter Executor with only one support... So, there is absolutely no problem for a 1,2m Executor with 2 supports. I know why there is a gap, thanks. ;) But this 1cm gap sucks anyway. If you say that, I guess you don't design much MOCs, do you ?

Thanks for the pic. It enables to see many details. Few words about the stickers : they have a very low life expectancy. But it is even worse when they are applied on a slope with grain. :/ Even on this official pic, a sticker is a bit detached from the 2x2x2 slope.