Erik Leppen

To what extent does the book actually teach "how to build brick cars" rather than merely present examples? I'm asking, because if a title starts with "how to", I expect it to teach me how to. Not just show how the author did it, but how I can do it too. What does he tell about how he approaches a design; how does he come up with the model he came up with, which details to include and which to ignore; how to use blueprints to get to proportions, how to decide on a scale? Etc. Those kinds of questions; are they answered? In short, what does the book offer, besides the instructions?

I would expect a V6 in the truck, rather than an inline. The cylinder configuration may not be realistic that way, but the shape would be better, and it would be better than no engine at all I'd say. Also, expect the wheels to be 49.5; not 62.4. If the wheels are 25% larger, the whole truck has 2 times as much volume, so will be about twice as expensive, so I would want twice the functionality to justify a possible purchace. I don't expect this from a 1H set. Also, the silhouette of the tires seem to suggest they are 49.5s, which are relatively wider than 62.4s.

I use MLCad. There you don't have to align gears and you cannot "test" geartrains. Testing needs to be done in real life anyway. I use it to plan something inside-out, so that I can plan a function before I plan the frame that will hold it. Then when I have something testable, I build it for real. That the gears don't align in the digital build, I don't care.

This is wonderful. One really big pro you forgt to mention, IMO, is the incredibly cool alternative model. It looks a bit odd, but it has a really clever automatic pneumatic system not found in any set ever since. (If you haven't built the alternative model yet, you really should. The looks don't do it justice). But what catches my eye is the instructions. I know them, I started Technic with 8853, but being used to modern instructions now, what I really dislike about the old ones is that you work on everything af once. There's zero modularity. Why not first the chassis then the cabin, then the details on the truck, then the superstructure, then the crane, then the grabber? I think what modern instructuions teach better than old ones, is that things are built up from smaller functional sub-things. (Set 8448 was the absolute king of this aspect). But great to see you doing such a review. Too bad about the glaring mistake in the set number in the first shot. Hope you will be doing more reviews. If I may do one suggestion, please check out 8460 some day. It's my favorite studded set.

Scale models are not just vehicles. Architecture is also scale models, so they should be here as well. (Maybe in a subforum).

I should revive it, actually. Maybe when TC12 is done. One of the problems I had at the time was that the original set was at another place than my own parts, so I didn't have the dark blue parts at hand. But yes, it would be a shame if this ship stranded...

What disturbs me a bit about the pullback vehicles, is that they're essentially the same set. I know we had these sets in pairs for some time now, but at least in previous years they were most of the time two different vehicles. Now they're two almost identical cars. Also, the pop-off "engine" thing doesn't look very engine-like. The small container truck looks perfect for the target audience. The cabin looks a bit crude, but at least it doesn't have a one-part container like 8065 did. Two functions, steering and loading, looks to be enough for a set this size. The dozer is an odd one out, I think. Why the weird futuristic wheels? Also, why "compactor"? And why the blue sprockets? What does this tell about 2018H2? I'm sure this new recolor isn't just for this set... As for the Mack. I have the idea that Lego wants to set very high expectations for this, which we have seen earlier with the Porsche. We know how that went... OK, so given what we see, what functions can it have? - Steering - Fake engine - Outriggers - Container loading/unloading So that's four functions (not counting openable doors, hood, etc.) If that's the complete list, and if it would be all manual, then that would be a bit light, for such a large set. But there might be PF somewhere, or a function selector system. Let's hope in any case that there's more than meets the eye. And who knows in what ways the shaping and color scheme will surprise us.

After having seen some of the sets, my opinion on them is a bit mixed. I personally find the rally car really ugly; it's clear to me that the lack of variety in blue panels hindered the design. Good to see 2x5x7 panels in blue, but why aren the existing 2x3x5 and 1x2x5 panels nearly absent? For me, the design lacks finesse and detail, it just looks like a few large panels are thrown in without an attempt to fill the gaps/corners with smaller pieces. Also, the coloring is a bit too mixed-up. So I suspect the designers had to stay within a limited budget here. Also, the car could really do with better wheel arches than 42039, e.g. by adding a blue flex axle. But I'm really glad it's not red. But Technic isn't about looks, so I really hope that the functionality makes up for it. IMO there should be at least drive, steer, suspension, fake engine and openable doors. I think the headlights will fold down. But let it please have a gearbox. That would make it much more interesting, and all that would be needed to have a proper (non-licenced) supercar again. The fire jeep looks decent, but nothing special. I suspect it's part of a play theme along with 42068. There looks to be a winch. A nice surprise would be some kind of suspension, even if it's only a pendular rear axle. Not sure what other functions this could have, except drive, steer and some opening doors and side panels. The catamaran looks good but I fear it's - again... - heavily dependent on stickers, and I'm fearful of what's left of the blue-yellow color scheme if left unstickered. Also I fear it's mostly large panels and little else. But let's hope for some functionality inside. Also, not sure whether this is blue or dark azure. My guess is it's normal blue, with the 2x3x11 curved panels we saw in 42042. The hovercraft looks nice, although I'm not a fan of the shaping, I do think it can pack some functions. I expect hidden wheels to drive the fans, and some way to steer it, where the rudders are again linked to a set of wheels. There's also a simple ramp. But the unusual shape means longer geartrains, which can be interesting. The added car doesn't appeal to me, it might be without functions but I hope it has steering and a pendular rear axle. (both are possible at this scale). My other concern with this set is that it's again a lot of large panels. I hope there's movement in the skirt, so that it can look like how a real hovercraft starts and stops. But I suspect it's fixed, like all hovercraft has been in the past. But it's very nice to see a hovercraft again, in a decent sized set. All in all, these four sets look decent, albeit a bit simple. A lot depends on the rally car having a gearbox or not, and the functions of the sailboat. I like how they're trying out new subjects/themes, but I hope this doesn't come at the cost of losing functionality, which is in the end what Technic is about. I haven't seen the other sets yet.

Wow, people have started already, or have ideas. I have multiple vague ideas, but without a particular preference for any of them. I am thinking of not doing suspension, because I figure that will complicate things a lot. There's a lot of wacky things you can do with wheels that will become exponentially more difficult if you want suspension as well.

How good of a builder you are isn't even important. That's not in the job description. As I see it, there are two main requirements. Good voice, and car knowledge. Edit: so I'd even dare to say that Eurobricks isn't the probable place to find the ideal candidate, because my estimate is that great talkers are relatively under-represented here, simply because this forum focuses on other things (building talent and written communication).

Looking very nice! I like how much space it has inside and how you used black 5x9 beams to create a stiff structure. The only thing I'd do differently is the color of the side pillars. I think because they're dark gray, it looks like the side is one very long window. I'd personally make them white too, to break the large dark panel into sections. Also, why is there a gap in the digital side view that isn't there in the real car? There is a angled gap is between the large panel of the front door and the long thin panel below it. It looks like the panel is angled in the real car, but not in the digital file.

This is exactly how a great Technic set has to be. Lots of functions, but still a great looking truck. That said, I'm not sure whether it will work as a set, for children. The functions are realistic, but they may not speak to children's imagination as much as an excavator or a crane would. Especially the functions that handle the garbage will probably work the same way in reality, but they may not be "cool" enough for Lego's primary audience. They may also be a bit hard to operate for kids because they require a specific order. In normal sets this is often less the case. But as a MOC, it's as good as it gets. Do you think you will be doing some photos from the inner workings?

If there's a product planned for 2018, you can assume its design/production is already long underway. The product won't change much. What this Voice person will be helping with is communicaton. So I think he or she is more of a sales person than a designer. Basically, they're looking for a good talker with some in-depth knowledge so they can ask the right questions to the people TLC wants to speak.

I'm not so sure about this model. I mean, the all wheel drive is nice, and steering and articulation are OK functions, but most of the other functions are just moving panels. The trailer's arm isn't driven, and the "base" is a folding box with a crane that's simpler than that of 42064. Not sure how this qualities as "technic". A City set or a Star Wars ship also has hinged panels. You can't even deploy the "outriggers" without lifting the box (which can't be done in reality). I think my problem with it is that all functions just feel very "local". There's no function, except drive, where the part controlling the function is any distance away from the function itself. The main model has this problem too in places, for example with the doors. At least 8466's doors had a knob on the roof that had to be pushed. In 42069A, you open the door just by, well, opening the door. In 42069B, you move the loading arm by, well, moving the loading arm. You rotate the crane by grabbing the crane and rotating it. That's not Technic. It would have been Technic if all the moving panels in the base were linked and you could fold the base out with one movement. Usually I build both models of a set, but here I really see no reason to.

Interesting theme! I see I have been credited for thinking it up, but it's quite different really. It's a race! Cool! It's pretty different from what I thought about when I wrote it, but it sounds a lot of fun. Having this race narrows things down to vehicles that look like they can win something. So there's a game element that has been added. This is interesting, because it makes us think about how our vehicles will race against god-knows-what, in a race, and try to win. And we don't know how we should win - the rules of the race are probably wacky themselves too! I mean, maybe the winner of the race through Lego City is the vehicle that the City's inhabitants find the most fun. But I have a question (that I don't see covered. Yes, I found a hole :wink:) It's said this is a driving contest. Does this mean that drive and steering must be remote-controlled? I.e. is it a driving contest between Lego builders? Or is it just a driving contest between the imaginary drivers sitting in our vehicles? And in the latter case, should our vehicle have a driver? (say, a minifig?) But let's see what I can come up with. I have some vague ideas, but not sure yet about their wackyness.

I never liked the term "color vomit" because I was never really against it. On the day 3L pins became blue instead of black, I liked how you can read pictures of models much better. That's what color coding does. I can't stand when people use black 3L pins - it just feels as if something is wrong. I use color coding too. In my recent instructions you will find colored axles. It's somehow more fun, and makes it easier to read. I do try to do it the same way though as TLC does it: one length = one color. So if 6L is red, then all 6L are red. And if I need red 8L, I try to make 6L and 10L black and 12L red again. For some reason I really like doing things "official style". Coincidentally, I needed yellow 7 and 11 axles in a new model I'm building, and red 6L, so it fits the color scheme exactly. (That model is almost done, so I will show it shortly on the forums).

Now this is a really nice Technic model. With proper functions; I like how you made such large sections move relatively smoothly and how the sprayer has only very little bending. And I like how you added lights everywhere, and of course the tiny fold-down ladder. And even though it clearly places function over form, it still looks great. (And I say this as totally not into agricultural machinery). The color scheme works really nicely here, with the black details around the cabin. Why doesn't TLC make sets like this. It's very original and different, yet still a vehicle, so it would fit great with the existing lineup of sets. I'm not fond of the tyres personally. But, given the limitations of Lego wheels they're the best choice to come close to the real version, I guess. With the Claas tyres it would become a wholly different scale. And I like the size of this - it is large enough to have all the functions, but not larger.

I'm not so sure the designer himself is to blame. We know Uwe can design great models, so my feeling is there has to have been some kind of external constraint he had to follow. That new color, with its very limited range of parts, may be one of them. (Remember that 8258 and 8285 use colors that had almost all pieces available)

Umm, no. Technic set "should" not "look big and mean". That's not what Technic is for. The Technic slogan has long been "technik wie in Wirklichkeit" (roughly "techiques as in reality"). That's what Technic is for - for building things that can do things, modeled after some realistic or existing thing. The main model of 42070 seems to do that pretty decently, with its 6 functions, but it's painfully missing decent suspension that shows how it's done "in reality" on off-road trucks. So 42070's A model I would rank as "OK-ish", at best. I has no redeeming qualities, it's stuck together with large parts and lots of empty space and unfinished things, the gearbox and, in fact the whole internal structure, looks like a mess (I don't mean the colors, I mean how everything is built up. It's beams running everywhere without a clear design method), and frankly 6 functions isn't very much for a €250+ set. By comparison, a set like 42008 (that seems to be disliked by some, I don't know why), is a technical marvel that has the same number of functions but with 1300 pieces for about €110, and it looks better (as much as you may hate the shaping, and there's certainly critique to be given, at least it looks finished from every angle). If 42070 was made to "look big and mean" then by all means it seems to have succeeded, but if that was the goal, then why is it a Technic set?

This is a strange set of spares, but it seems @kolbjha is correct. If you check the set's Bricklink inventory, https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?S=42025-1, and see the Extra parts at the bottom, it mentions the same four axles.

Adding that fourth gear doesn't do anything of value, though, except adding a tiny bit of friction and maybe decrease the chance of slipping between the other three gears. It doesn't strengthen your drivetrain, because it just sits there loose.

Do you have any idea why the steering system is like this? Why is it not gear-rack based?

This is starting to look really nice, man. Good job so far. I like how popeople are thinking along to help find the best solution for the front.

I'm not so sure about that. I sometimes have the feeling that sets are in a big box just because the final model will be big, and a big box will make the target audience more eager to have it. And a big model justifies a big box much easier than a small compact intricate model. No matter whether the box is half empty. In case of 42070, the model itself is half empty too, but no child will care, so no parent will notice. I'm sure that if 42069 were in a box the same size of 42070, parents would be a bit disappointed by the final model's size, because the average parent doesn't see or understand the value of a tightly packed model. Because boxes have a lot of empty space. Much more than Sariel's reviews seem to indicate. A little anecdote to demonstrate: a while back I decided that I wanted some Lego to build at my boyfriend's place, so I bought 42066 (the medium blue jet), built it, and afterwards, took the parts home. According to Sariels video, the box is 58 x 37 x 8.5 cm, which is about 18L, and he says it is 80% full. The book and stickers is about A4 and, say, 1.5 cm thick, which is about 1 L. Afterwards, I took the parts home in three bins that totalled less than 6L. Which means the box is at most 7/18 filled, or less than 40%. The set could have been packaged in the box of 42062 (container yard). Things are probably worse for a set like 42065, because it has expensive (for their size) electric components, so it's more expensive per volume, so to make people buy it, it has to look bigger than it is.

This is a great review Jim. Many thanks. I think I'm now fully convinced to get this set. I like the versions with wheels, but I think you're right about tracks making the vehicle just that bit more original and interesting. The track units do add a lot of parts though. As usual, your photo quality is brilliant and a big reason to check out these reviews. I also think your super high ratings at the end make a lot of sense. I'm curious how much I myself will like the set (because I'm very much a geartrain-loving person, and this set seems a bit light on that. I'm curious to what extent all the other moving parts make up for that.) The black with purple and ylloe looks amazing. The red wheels are not my taste. I think the best wheel setup is Unimog tires with yellow rims, with the same black covers 42070 uses. Although I like the power puller version as well :) By the way, what is "the shotgun side of the vehicle"? Is that the passenger's side and if so why is it called that? I think the play report by the children that visited you, is somehow the most enjoyable part of the review to read. I wonder, how much and what did they do with 42070, also compared with 42069?