Erik Leppen

Price per piece is probably used because it is easy to count, with the piece count being either on the box or computed from an inventory, and the price clearly visible in the store, the price per piece is estimated on a whim. The price per kilogram can only be guessed, or measured with a scale. Also, 10 grams of tiny pieces is worth more than 10 grams of large pieces, in my opinion. If one wants to be relaly precise, one should create a program that takes a set's inventory, asks Bricklink for all the prices of all pieces in the inventory, and computes the value that way. Then we have an interesting measure.

I actually think this year's mobile crane 42009 is already too big. I do not own it but it's obvious they had to cut some corners due to the size of the thing. Most obvious are the LA's holding up the boom; they look puny in comparison to the huge truck. Although the space in the upper structure is well used, and the outriggers are a technical marvel, I think the set itself is too big. Also notice how they couldn't create a big alternative model, instead they went with multiple smaller vehicles. I prefer to see a set like 42008 (the green tow truck) which is much more modest in size, but filled to the brim with interesting stuff. Often those 1000ish part sets are quite brilliant (42008, 8265, 8109, 8289 I think are all great sets, and even 8294, 8069 and 8107 and 42005 look quite ingenious). The 8110 Unimog was a better set in my opinion, because it just worked and it doesn't feel like concessions have been made. So I'd say the limit is about 2000 parts. Both for the wallet, as for the workability of a model. So I hope the Lego team has realized this as well :)

This is, indeed, a lovely little bugger :) I like the tricolor scheme as well, and I like how you added a working steering wheel. Great work!

I like it! It looks kind of like a sports buggy.

http://www.erikleppen.nl Contains more than just Lego by the way :D

My problem with PF is that it adds a lot to the price of a set without adding complexity. For one motor, 100 regular parts. See 8285, which had almost 1900 parts and was cheaper than than 8043 which had only about 1150 parts. Also it seems that almost all flagship sets have PF. I'd like to see a flagship set without PF. 8285 was again a good example. 8289, 8053, 9396 are nice too, but not flagships. But it has to be said that sometimes adding a motor adds a level of complexity because of all the gearboxes, see 42008, 42009, 8258. Sets with a heavy focus on PF, 8275 and 9398, are not really my thing but a nice diversion into playability and will surely attract kids. 8043 is the exception because it is genuinely complex as well.

That's an interesting quote by someone with "stalKING" in his username :D

8454? That was my first studless set at least, and I remember I wanted it badly because of all the new parts I didn't own back then. 'Cause those very long beams of which 8466 contained two, looked to be so useful :P

Let me post my LEGO webpage here too. It's in Dutch but for the pictures it doesn't really matter. http://www.erikleppen.nl/frontpages/lego_bouwwerken.php

For some reason I find this very amusing. It's an original idea to even think of testing this. I thought it was funny. But I am quite surprised by the general high amount of connected pieces. Are you using pieces that have only very little clutch power left? What happens if you do this with newer bricks? I never find these amounts of "complexes" in my sorted part bins. And my bricks have all the time of the world to "connect" ;)

It's good to see we don't have to scroll endlessly through a one-dimensional list to find our building instructions. :D

I hate to say it, but the studless Burj Khalifa linked by Matt doesn't exactly look very strong... Add triangles to create strength, rectangles are "foldable". Of course, a studless 4m high building is much cheaper than a brick-built building of the same height ;)

Every roller coaster fan should check this out: https://www.facebook.com/coasterdynamix It looks like CoasterDynamix are filling a huge hole in the market by creating Lego compatible roller coaster elements with which one can build realistic roller coasters using a Lego structure and CoasterDynamix track parts and cars. This is going to be very interesting :D Thanks to Leqa on Lowlug :)

Lovely combo between the brightly colored train and the natural colors of the environment. I like the tunnel/bridge "high/low" contrast too. Great little scene! With microscale you can do a lot with a little :) Edit: also you leave me groping in the dark as to how it's all connected inside the loc :)

That would not work. Turning it around does not change the handedness. You can try that yourself with an axle and two different-colored 1 x 2 liftarms (say blue and red). Mount them with 90 degree offset. Then, hold the blue one in your hand and look where the red one is pointing. Then, take the red one in your hand in the same position and observe how the handedness has not changed. Anyway, a part like this would have way too few uses. The one use you mention is already solvable using the technique shown. So the part would not create new options. Also there would be too much confusion with the existing axle joiner. Bad idea. I'd rather see a new part that can be used in countless ways. The beams mentioned by TasV are a good example. Also I'd still like to see a 28t bevel, a 28t double-bevel and a 32t regular gear.

Won't change much. There are no sets with 100s of wheels. Things would probably change if you would leave out the "Technic Pin with friction".

The outriggers of 8460. Simple but elegant. Edit: Lovely topic, by the way :)

I have had problems with Nitro Menace 8649. There was a batch of them that had some parts in the wrong colors. Just at the time I needed the set it was hard to come by, and in hindsight this was recause of Lego calling the sets back to add a sheet showing the replacement colors. My set also had two axles 4 missing. For the time being, I used axles 6 which I noticed were still left and which was fortunately possible in the construction, and at the end it turned out that alongside the two missing axles 4, there were indeed two axles 6 too many. So I never reported this, as I could just build the model.

Like a few others, I do not display sets. When I'm not MOCing, my entire collection exists of loose parts :) Well, when I get a new set I display its main model for anywhere between one day and two weeks, depending on how much I like it, repeat for the alternative models, and after that they become parts packs. To me, a set is a parts pack with one or two inspiring example builds :) Lol, I had a nice example of that when displaying 8265's main model, which is a very nice model so it survived the week, but I noticed that afterwards the tyres had a noticeable bump in them because the model's weight had rested on the same spot for a week :P

I think the only Technic purchase I would consider anywhere near a "bargain" is 8043 for €117. That was a very nice price for 1100 Technic pieces amongst which four motors, two receivers, two remotes, four LAs, and as a bonus it's a very complex and interesting model to build. I think I would have regretted if I wouldn't have bought it.

Why don't you sell your white wheel, buy four silver wheels for your car (or whatever you are building) and spend the remaining 36 dollars for something you always wanted :)

So many wheels, and I have never even thought of such a thing. Cool! Anyhow, what I find most impressive is how you managed to make the cabin not sag, given that it is so big. Even though now I read you used a "trick". Smart! I'm very curious as to what this will look like with the rocket launching section added. Edit: PS I like what you did with the mirrors. Also, too bad the steering looks quite simple with only a few angles. Would be cooler if you had more different angles. This is definitely possible, see my Demag AC1000 mobile crane chassis attempt: http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/ErikLeppen/MOBILE-CRANES/DemagAC1000/lego_ac1000_sturing_.png

Just when you thought you had seen everything :D

[series of pictures] The fact that you have managed to make something as trivial as "interestingly colored models" into a selling point only proves the point you seem to argue against.

You're surely a dedicated builder, that can't be denied. Interestinly, when I read the first post I was already thinking, you should go studded for the frame. Fortunately you found that out yourself already :) I like how you combine the two building systems to their full potential. And the whole thing is becoming to be quite a monster ;) There's one thing though. I'm not fond of your twisting-axles suspension idea. Even though Technic axles are a dime a dozen, I don't like the idea of a MOC that damages parts on usage. But I guess that's a matter of taste. I would have gone for springs, or bogies of some sort so that even without springs the wheels have some motion to adapt to terrain. (Same goes for the rubber liftarms on the bucket by the way. Although it makes me wonder why there's a bucket on a tank?) Anyhow, I like how you're going to put a working gun on it. Youre doing a great job, carry it on :D