AndyC

It's a tough call. I think I'd probably go for 8855, mainly because of the nostalgia associated with it. It was by far the biggest Lego set I ever had as a kid and was very mechanically interesting too.

I think in these cases, 'Modular' is TLG-speak for "It's a big set, but don't worry because it comes in numbered bags so can easily be broken down into smaller builds" - I think the idea is to help parents who are possibly worried that such a large set might be a bit overwhelming for younger children, even if they'd really like a fire station, police station etc.

Well I just totally lucked out! Went into Jarrolds in Norwich to see if they had the figs in yet (WHSmiths had a few behind the counter but a massive queue I didn't feel like standing in.) Turns out that not only do they have them, but they've numbered the bags so you can see exactly which fig you'll get. The nice assistant lady helped me fish out a complete set, not only looking into the other open boxes under the counter but even going so far as to fetch an unopened box from the stockroom and scanning the packs to find me a Spartan. Wonderful service and I'd highly recommend anyone in East Anglia wanting a set to pop in.

As a child I was forever getting complained at for having Lego all over the floor. Naturally as a grown up, I still build sets by opening all the bags and pouring pieces out all over the lounge floor. Although I did slightly regret that with the UCS Millenium Falcon as there wasn't an awful lot of spare floor left to sit on!

Arrgh. Delivery man turned up with mine this afternoon whilst I was out, so I'll have to wait for a redelivery on monday. Too excited and impatient. Wonder if I can justify buying a Slave 1 to tide me over in the mean time....

Absolutely magnificent. I really love your description of the build process too, it helps a lot to see what you went through before finalising the design. I do wish TLG would do a set like this, I'd definitely buy it (although not too soon, the new Shuttle has emptied my wallet for the time being!)

Hehe, only just read this. Absolute genius. Oky Wan, I salute you.

Tricky to answer. I've built the A model and have requested the service pack. I might try out the B-model in the mean time, not just because the A model is problematic but rather because I usually like to build all the 'official' models with a set before separating it into my parts bins. If I do, I'll probably rebuild the A model again once the service pack arrives.

Actually, I'd already made a start on it as I can't decide whether or not to buy the real thing and this seemed a good way to "try before you buy"

So does 5893 Offroad Power, I'd say they were the modern equivalent of the Model Team sets. The difference is really that the creator sets are aimed at being parts packs that encourage exploration of differing designs around a theme.

That's absolutely brilliant and instantly recognisable. You've done a fantastic job with the perspective too.

I would expect so, it'd be a very costly businness if they didn't. Anyway, I got my email yesterday, so I guess now it's just a case of wait and see.

I built mine and didn't need to change the little polarity switch to have the tracks work in the same direction. Are you sure you haven't made a mistake somewhere? The only place I changed the polarity was for the gear change motor because it made more logical sense to me to have it the other way around, so that from behind the excavator the remote switch operates in the same direction as the red gear change lever. Have to say, mine seemed defect free when I first built it. Have been playing with it a fair bit* to test it out and the boom raising does seem to be getting slower and sounding more strained with time, whilst the other functions seem pretty constant. Haven't had any issues with the tracks operating at different speeds either. *i.e. probably a lot more than I ever would have if it hadn't been for this issue.

Of course! It's only Lego. It's pretty clear that the technic motors and all the gearing they require isn't ideally suited to younger builders (though fine in an AFOL oriented model like the Emerald Night) so they were always going to need something similar to the powered bogies. They could have just kept the RC one, but I'm guessing they felt it gave them an ideal opportunity to fix some of the flaws in its internals whilst redesigning the casing slightly to take the PF connector. You are of course right that the RC motor could have been used in other models, just as the old technic motors could have been used in trains, but never were for whatever reason. I think it's more all the other parts that cross themes that are where the real savings are.

There are "degrees" of generic. The new power functions trains can use the same lights that technic sets use, the remotes are interchangable in a way they weren't previously. The IR recievers are the same. And there isn't anything truly train specific about the PF train motors either, they just happen to be a particularly suitable size for integrating into trains - they could just as easily be put into other models too. That was the key goal of Power Functions, to avoid very specific parts like the older RC train bases or even the 9V train motors which had to have special train wheels and run on metal rails, making them unsuitable for other applications.

That's not the only difference, though it may appear that way externally. The internals are different and designed to be stronger and more power efficient, as has been borne out by various tests. Furthermore, TLG call them Power Functions Train Motors, so they definitely count as Power Functions components.

In a way this is good news, however it's now put me in a quandry. I've got an 8043 which I was planning to build this weekend, but now I'm wondering whether I should just leave it all boxed up in case it does have to go back for a replacement. Still, I could always just use the parts.... Decisions, decisions.

Well, I got the new bricks today. Now to explore what changes there have been, I guess.

Producing the molds to replicate pieces is expensive, probably prohibitively so in 99.9% of cases (the piece would have to be extremely rare to justify it). More likely to happen is for clone brand pieces to be mixed in with a genuine set (either intentionally or accidentally), but looking for the Lego logo on them is probably sufficient. It's a much greater offence to falsely reproduce a trademark, so even the cloners who blatantly ripped off Lego designs are unlikely to have copied those.

I've got a TabletPC (Dell Latitude XT) which I use for this, trouble is that despite having a higher resolution display than the iPad it's still not nearly good enough for most Lego instruction PDFs and tends to involve a fair bit of zooming, scrolling and fiddling around. Still can't beat a printed copy for working from, sadly.

It definitely works here, are you sure you don't have a cached copy? I seem to find Brickshelf sometimes doesn't invalidate cached copies when it should.

Congratulations on spotting the, um, deliberate mistake. You win the prize! Fixed (that'll teach me to check the last picture in the instructions!) so you can remove the Incomplete tag now (and also from 7683 Fight on the Flying Wing, as I added the minifigs to that a while back)

That jeep looks awful. I've got two of those sets and the colour variation in the greens is nowhere near that bad. The curved slope bricks look ever so slightly different, but only up close if you're looking very carefully.

Great review. I bought this set a while ago, expecting a reasonable model. Like you I was blown away with just how detailed the final thing is. A set truly deserving the UCS label and one of my most favourite sets.

Modular Bank by captaintuddle, 2 points Nice clean design which looks good without being overly flashy. And looks even better when realised in brick. Micro Modular Houses by lisqr, 1 point Lovely idea, extremely well executed. I kinda want a micro-modular ciy now!