Erik Leppen

Good to see a new compo. I think this will be fun. Curious how everyone's cars will end up. I'll try to enter this time (I skipped a few times) - I should have those tyres lying around somewhere (the wide ones). This theme and the smaller size allow me to play around with colors a bit. I'll probably go for a multi-color bodywork. Have fun, all! :D

I'm really not a fan of such severe part limitations as not using pins, not using axles, not using gears or not using liftarms, or only using particular pre-selected parts. It may result in some original findings and useful oddities, but it won't result in good models, which, I believe, is what these contests are about. To make good models, you need material. Pins are so essential to Technic building that without them, you can't build stuff. We might as well do a system-build contest then. Same goes for the "nice part usage" mentioned above. The goal of a contest is good models. Interesting or original part usage is a means to that end. It's not an end in itself. If you make it an end by itself, then the part usage lacks a higher goal (the good model in question), and, therefore, isn't nice part usage anymore, it's just weird part usage. In my opinion, the goal of a contest should always be to build the best Technic model you can, in some kind of theme. To ensure quality of entries, this requires the full range of basic parts. I can understand eliminating some more specialized parts such as wheels (I'd support a contest with no electronics!) or requiring the use of certain parts (pneumatics contest!), but if eliminating a part type results in worse models, I'd vote strongly against it. (I'm therefore very hesitant about the no-panels idea. We don't have all those parts for nothing.) So my vote goes to theme-based contests, with or without a size or part-count restriction. 42098-scale cars are good. 1:12 cars are good. Walking machines is really cool (but difficult!). Animals is cool (but difficult). Lots of great ideas there :)

I love those ingenious steering solutions. The creativity :) Well done. The whole model has a bit of a Model Team vibe. I really like it. Could be a wonderful Creator set :) By the way, seeing from the reference picture of the red truck, the new Defender wheel arches seem a perfect fit for a bigger version of that model. Something to remember :)

Not really what I expected from the topic title, but lovely model and instantly recognizable! (By the way, the perfect fit between the 1x3 slope and the 2x2 wing is a trick to remember :) )

I'd like to see something a bit more "normal" to be honest. #17 Mad max for me was "outside the box" and actually too similar to #16 for my taste., I'd say let's do something "inside the box" this time. I get the attraction of rube goldberg type machine contests, but my dislike for those is that the models aren't much "interesting" outside the context of such a contest. The builds will be too niche. Also, "assignment-based" contests ( like "transport such-and-so unit over this-or-that trajectory") are great for meetings, but not so much for internet contests. If you're doing such type contest, GBC seems to be the better option so far. There's plenty of interest for those. (It would rule me out, but that's not the concern.) A more generic contest, like B-models, or cars in a certain scale, or whatever, will result in interesting builds that have interest for people who don't care about the contest. Also, if going for 42098-scale cars, please keep in mind those who don't own that set. I'd go for a scale, not for a fit for that set. I don't have that set, and I don't want to buy one just for a contest. (Edit: also, I find 1:12 to be a more interesting scale than 42098-scale, for reasons given earlier: more place for interesting functions and styling.) I also agree with the idea of not requiring any specific pieces, given how the corona outbreak may have slowed down some bricklink or other piece-sales activities. Watercraft seems to be a nice one. (As long as being floating is not a requirement.) I'm still for "re-build the same model as an existing set, but in a different scale." I was also a great fan of the techlug.fr contests, which were usually very specific. Like "build a garbage truck". Or "build a Le Mans car with max 1500 pieces and the same scale & functions as 42039". Being so specific, it's very interesting to compare all entries.

I much prefer the white windscreen edge. I think it makes more sense on the white cabin to have it white "all the way round" or something. But whatever. You can also use a black half-width 7L beam and then a white half-width 7L beam. Both exist.

To be honest I'm really not fond of the squarish look of the central body/roof. The original 8480 set was better shaped in my opinion thanks to the 6x4 beams. I don't really have a studless alternative though; maybe using 1x6x3 arch pieces would give a better (rounder) shape, but I don't know if you want to go that route. Anyhow, really looking forward to seeing more of the functions :D

Interesting. It's not exact 1/7, as you show, but it's surprisingly close. In fact it's 20/12 * 8/24 * 8/24 * 40/24 * 8/24 * 20/12 * 20/24. This comes down to 5/3 * 1/3 * 1/3 * 5/3 * 1/3 * 5/3 * 5/6 i.e. (5*5*5*5) / (3*3*3*3*3*3*6) i.e. 625/4374 If you compare this to 1/7 by dividing it: (625/4374) / (1/7), then you get (625/4374) * 7 = 4375/4374. Interesting how these two highly-factorable numbers are only 1 apart. (sorry. Once a mathematician, always a mathematician :D ) How did you find these two numbers? By chance, or did you run some numbers beforehand to get it? Also, playing with gears is fun :D

Tiny panels in yellow! :D (front bottom)

Super handy scheme. Thanks for making it. This could prove useful. Two little feedbacks: 1. could you put the old numbered panels (#1, #2, etc.) together and the new numbered panels together? I.e. break with the alphabetic ordering? I think this makes more sense if you're looking for a suitable color for a model. 2. could you pin the top row, so when scrolling down, the colorlist is still in view?

Maybe though, you can use the 2L rubber connector as some kind of micro spring in a mini-scale build in some kind of way. Not sure it's good for the part though.

(Re: 42101) In any case, it's weird to rate a set so low because its suspension is too hard. I can't remember people doing that with 8880. ;) i would rate the buggy definitely higher than the crane (you rated those 2 similar). In my view, having a lackluster B-model is much better than none at all, because I don't expect the target audience - 8-year-olds - care much about how the B is similar. It's 2 times as much fun either way, and any B-model, no matter how bad, tells the message: you can build other things with this. I'd say the crane lacking a B model is an unforgiveable downside, because it defies the whole idea of what Lego is ultimately about. Given that the parts don't need to be reusable, no compromises need to be taken, so that single model could have been the best of the best of the best. But it simply doesn't deliver. I just think the buggy is great for what it is, and couldn't have been much better within the price range. In contrary, I'm certain much better cranes can be built with fewer than 1300 parts. But I guess I just weigh some properties differently than you do :) Anyhow, the Claas is a brilliant little set and I think I might get 2 just for the parts, but I think the buggy is a great starter set too and for the rest the catamaran is original, I learned from your review how realistic it is, and it's highly functional. The bouyancy is great, but as another review stated, how many children will actually be playing with it in water?

Would two half pins and a 1x3 tile work for your use-case?

You must have made some kind of building mistake, because if you compare your photos of the hood and windscreen with those on the box, you should notice clear differences. The hood should be sloped a bit and the windscreen much nearer to vertical. So that may explain your "weird proportions". It looks like everything stays in place by friction alone, so maybe you can just pull the hood forward and it all pops into the correct shape.

The only way I can think of is 2 holes and a threaded axle (and of course 2 nuts). But threaded axles are very old out-of-production parts from the studded era. But more than anything, I wonder why you would want to have a turntable without a turntable. What problem are you trying to solve that the standard Technic turntables cannot solve?

I like how it's so different from the official modular buildings but still works really well. One detail I particularly like is how you used the ridges of tiles to create a subtle effect on the corners. It creates a variety of textures that works really well. The separate color for the side wall makes it much more lively as a Lego building, so great choice. Also the subtle use of plates (also in dark orange) on the side wall works really nicely. The black, the greenery and the flowers on the ground floor add a bit of color, making it a really nice composition that separates the gray floor and tan tower.

By yourself? Curious you will review the sets, particularly the crane that noone seems to like (myself included). I can still remember how your reviews on 42039 and 42070 - two other sets that had few fans - made me more positive about them and in fact I rather like 42039.

Now this is a susprise. Not sure what to think. I'm not really worried about the availabiltiy of official Lego parts, but what kinds of consequences does this have for things like Brickarms, Chromebricks, custom (aluminum) parts, and other such "fan-created additions" to the building system?

Hm. Not sure about this wave. The crane seems decent, but still nowhere near 8460. Much will depend on the functionalities. Fake engine? Probably not. All 4 outriggers linked? I don't count on it. Lifting capacity? We will see how this turns out. The huge cabin looks rather ugly to me anyway, and it would have been cool if it were bright light orange, but whatever. For the rest, it's mostly "meh" for me. I hope the boat sports some interesting functions. Cool to see floating elements, anyway (albeit in a weird color). I hope 2 of them can carry a batterybox and 2 motors, then you can have some fun with RC boats. I like the return of medium azure in the stunt truck, but most of the models look rather ugly to me, and there are way too many "race" vehicles. If you remove all the "fast things" it looks like only 2 sets remain - the mini Claas and the crane. Which seem to be the best 2 sets of the wave, in my humble opinion.

Move to another platform? I mean, if we all hate YouTube, and we mean it, we should all leave the platform. Don't stay on a platform you hate. Remember: if you don't pay for a product, you are the product. Google is a company, and by extension Youtube is a platform, whose main business is to sell people's attention to ad companies so they in turn can sell us more crap noone needs but will destroy our climate. I'm considering deleting my videos and finding another place for them. Any suggestions?

Just speculating on the diff... if the axle has to rotate independent of the housing, and the housing is a gear, then the red 28 gear must have a round hole... what if that's a clutch gear (that would explain why it's red), and the new diff housing has the same 4 ridges as a driving ring? That would also explain why it's off-center, and hence, the 2 different axle lengths. Other than that, I'm really not a fan of a pre-assembled diff. I'm not a fan of pre-assembled anything, because that'd be exactly not the idea of Lego. Maybe it's a sign of the times and Lego just trying to get its share of a market where kids don't assemble things anymore, but I don't find it a good sign... But this set is atrociously ugly and overpriced anyway, so what do I care.

Doesn't this answer your own question? I have my doubts about the setup anyway. The dark-gray CV part is also supported only by a half-stud. So I would expect some gear slipping here. Try it out, and see where the weakspot is by engaging the motors while holding the output axle. My expectation is that it's not the half-inserted axles. Also, I'm slightly worried about the combo of XL motors and (single) bevel gears. Is there room to move the motors to the left (to the left of the gray 2x6 plate) and use three 24t straight gears instead?

It looks like a photoshopped image. For example, the stud text is not parallel to the axes of symmetry of the axle. On a true Lego part, this would surely be aligned. (Also, it would be a horrible part to remove.) So my assumption is it's a "wish part" mock-up put together by a fan.

This is the key. Your (dark gray) steering arms are 2x6, but the linkages connected to the gear-rack are 9L. This makes the cirular movements (while moving up and down) different, and the wheels will turn inwards or outwards (i.e. not parallel, when seen from above) when the arms are not horizontal. Fortunately, 6L steering links exist. https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=2739a&idColor=11#T=C&C=11 As a side node, I personally often try to make the suspension arms approximately horizontal on average. Then, most of the movement range of ball-joints and CV joints (for driven axles) can be used for steering. Also I often try to keep suspension travel (= vertical distance between highest and lowest point) relatively little. Yours is 2.5 studs, which I would find quite a lot. The longer the travel, the stronger the springs you need to hold a certain weight. Also, you need somewhat larger wheel arches. But, this is personal taste. I think many builders use larger suspension travels than I do. By the way, I quite like the setup with the linear actuators. However, I didn't realize that they might run into "click" as per @brunojj1's remark. For my Chiron rebuild, I used a solution with worms and 24t gears. You need to beware of twisting axles though, and keep the worm as close as possible to the lever that holds the springs. (In brunojj's setup I'd personally worry about the 8t gears cracking or the dark-gray 8L axle twisting...)

Does it matter that a review comes out before the set? I'd hope not. Jim's reviews are good (the pictures, but also the text). Isn't that what matters? And, if reviews aren't allowed to be critical, then they lose their trustworthiness. I'd much rather have an honest review that is late, than a timely review whose truth is doubted. And I expect that most of us see it the same way. The question is: does TLC see it this way too? Is a critical review better for them than no review? Does them providing a set give them anything in return if the resulting review may end up being harsh? Does them providing the set influence how we see them, and therefore, how we review their sets? If they don't provide a set, may the review end up being even later, but harsher? I think those are questions only TLC and ambassadors can answer.