Erik Leppen

No, not at all. Just some of the replies on page 2 and 3. I actually haven't bought many Technic sets in a while (8043 was the last) but I might go for this one if it's on a nice offer.

I really do not understand the negativity surrounding this set in this topic. With suspension, driving and steering, and an openable hood, this model already has all the functionality of 8458 and 8461, but in addition to those sets it has a function switch box thgat switches between raising the hood and adjusting the rear wing. This means 42000 has more functionality than all previous Technic F1 cars except 8880B. And it's white (largely). What studless Technic set has had so much white? Optional PF can only be a good thing, because it's optional. You cannot hate a set because of the stickers, because you can always opt to not use them. Also, the wheels are fine. What's wrong with them? So the mediocre execution of the hub parts is the only argument the haters are having.

8868's alternative model was really unique and its automatic pneumatic was very fascinating when I was younger. As a kid, I like the alternative hovercraft model of 8856. The buggy from 8479 (third model) is nice too.

Most of my old pneumatic cylinders are leaking. The extending stroke works fine, but the retracting stroke (i.e. when pressure raises from the upper nozzle) leaks. This means they're only usable in the extending stroke, and changing the switch means all air from an eventual air tank is released. The pumps, switches and tubes still work fine, it's just the cylinders. Not sure about the small cylinder though. Most of those pneumatics are from 8868 and similar-era Technic sets. No extreme things have been done with them and have never been oiled or whatever.

I can't vote, because the website won't let me make an account with my desired username, and neither can I log in, but as I won't buy it anyway I'll refrain from voting. If I were to vote, I'd probably pick crazy1993's Highway Enforcer, because it looks the most like a complete model where everything is just right. I love the quad bike as well because it's original, even though quad bikes do not have my personal interest.

In Technic? I mean, yes, I know they do that for castles or landscapes. But Technic?

That is a friction pin. This means you're introduction a lot of friction to the entire suspension. I personally don't like that. I'd rather use the suspension arms with towballs. Fortunately this is entirely possible with the new hub parts and I don't see any disadvantages to that. Add to that the new 5 x 1/2 beams with axle holes at the ends, that can be used to reinforce the top and bottom suspension arms, much like is done in 8880 and 8865. This was never needed if you mount the spring to the upper arm (as you did). But it still needed if you mount the springs to the lower arm (as 8880 and 8865 do) because the suspension pushes down the lower arm which pulls it apart from the hub.

New sets are getting better and better - why stick to old? Also I think many AFOLs buy old sets because they remember wanting them in childhood. However for increasingly many AFOLs the old sets have no emotional meaning, because they were too young, or not even born at that time. Or already own the classics. Or realize they can get the parts at Bricklink for less and forget about the box - which is after all just a box. And, it might also have to do with the change to the stone gray colors in about 2004. After all, any set from before 2000 has old grays. With the new grays so common nowadays that most will have definitively switched, the fact that a set has old gray means it's incompatible with the parts collection.

The battery box can act as a counterweight. In a crane, that is smart. Count on it the motor is in the superstructure.

"Action race car" is 42011. Action refers to the pull back action. No idea what 42003 is though.

Yes...on the studs. That's a problem for Technic parts, which mostly don't have studs...A random examination of a few Technic parts results in the following: A Lego Technic axle 9 has a 3 on one end and nothing on the other. Another axle 9 has a 4 on one end and nothing on the other. A 2 x 0.5 liftarm has a C and a "83.1" (too small to read, so could be wrong) on it, and nothing else. An angle connector #2 has C LEGO Group on it. A cross block 2 x 2 split has the part number 41678 on it and a copyright symbol, And a 6 and 02 on the other side. All parts are LEGO (I don't own any clone parts). So, a lot of genuine LEGO parts do not have the LEGO name or logo on it. Usually larger parts will, I think, but Technic has many small parts.

I like the one by solic, the grey one with the sattelite dish on the roof. It looks like one of those armoured vans.

I personally do not experience what you are describing (...just to let hear another sound). Eurobricks is doing great; I have seen worse forums many times ;)

Look, a well-argumented opinion :P

Disclaimer: I do not own 9398. Much depends on what you look for in a set. If you want cool functionality, I'd say 8110 and 8258 are both better than 9398. Both trucks have a lot of functions driven by only one motor, so this means nice gearboxes in both sets. I personally prefer the complexity of 8258. But 8110 adds to that 4WD and suspension. In contrast, 8110 has fewer mechanical functions, but replaces a few of them by pneumatics. It's up to you what you like more. If I could keep only one of the two, I'd prefer 8258 I think. But it's a close call between it and 8110. If you want playability, 8110 is the best of the lot. The pneumatic crane works very well and you can actually lift things, where 8258's crane is more cosmetic. Also 8110's crane has a bigger reach and can be mounted front and back. Also it has a winch, where 8258 instead has the awesome outriggers (which are cool to build, but less playable). If you're out for interesting parts, I think all sets have their share. 9398 has orange, and the newest motors. 8110 has more orange, and a decent amount of pneumatics, alongside a decent amount of gearing for the functions. Both of those have all parts for suspension (ball joint stuff). 8110 has cool tyres In fact, 8110 has everything 9398 has, except the remote control. 8258 is a bit more straightforward in the parts department, but it has a huge amount of gears and beams, including a lot of the new 11x5 and 7x5 beams which I personally find very useful for MOCing. Also it has 7 of the new long gear racks, which are quite rare, and an XL motor, where 8110 has the somewhat-more-common M motor. And it has eight identical wheels. If you like to build "on-road" trucks, basically if you have 8258 you're settled. But it doesn't have the parts necessary for off-road trucks. And there's your own point of availability. 8258 is oldest, so will probably retire soonest. My personal order I think would be 8258, then 8110 coming very close, then a long empty space, then 9398.

Also, 8109 just has a flat bed. This new tow truck has a lot more "volume", or so it looks.

english please "Hey, are you Luc who joined the lego technic master builder competition? I'm asking because I participated as well and made some nice MOCs now."

The new wheel holder pieces look nice! Glad they opted for holes - one could insert towball pins so the rotation point lines up with the connection with the inner dark-gray part. I assume the dark-gray part can accept the CV joint parts, right? Anyhow, the set looks very interesting. I want one.

Great to see the tyres on 42009 are the same as those on 8421, and great to see the triple boom and at-first-sight realistic outriggers. This is gonna be a crazy set. Only disappointment is the tiny LAs used to lift the boom. I wonder how that will turn out... With 42009 such a nice crane, 42008 being green, and 42005 a nice monster truck, 2013 might just become a very expensive year for Technic... They are really low resolution. The first pictures always are (for some reason people lose the ability to take good pictures when it's really important )

Yes. Because that worked so well with 8421 Anyhow, it's an interesting question whether to use pneumatics or LA. I think the LA's as we know them are just too short, and they can't easily be combined in-line. Pneumatic cylinders have a shorter range (3.5 studs vs. 5 for LAs) but at least they can be put "in series" like is done with 8460 and 8421. If this crane is like 8421 in size, and having five axles, this probably means the scale is a bit smaller and the vehicle is a bit longer. This would means it would need a longer boom to look good (the boom of 8421 is already on the short side). This means the lifting system should also be more robust. Two pneumatic cylinders placed in-line wouldn't cut it - they'd need at least three. Two LAs placed parallel (as in 8043) wouldn't work very well either - that would look kind of dumb. I think this will either be pneumatic, or like this, or we will see a new part.

Who has written this text? Is that an Afol? I'm asking, because does "green" mean "Green" or "Lime"? Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if it's actually lime. So let's await that before we're getting too enthousiastic about "green Technic". Each?No non-motorized sets? Let's not start another pnaumatics vs. linear actuator flame war... You're free to have an opinion, but linear actuators are not "stupid grey pneumatic wana bees", just as little as studless beams are "stupid studded-technic-brick wana bees". They're linear actuators. Of course we need another flagship crane. Cranes are cool. And if this thing has five axles, it might be even cooler. I hope the axle configuration is realistic and it has nice steering with a tight turning circle. Also I hope it has the right wheels (truck, not balloon). At least there will be a set again that has ten identical wheels. What was the most recent example of that? The fork lift transporter? Why not? The legendary 8421 had only one motor itself. Is that a bad set? By no means. I guess I will never understand the idea that more motors = better. I have no idea where people got that. If you ask me, usually, more motors = worse (8043 is a notable exception), because more motors = less budget for cool techniques for a given price. A set like 8265 was so nice partly because it had no motors. Also there was only one motor in 8258, which I consider to be one of the best sets around. Also I have plenty of motors in my collection already which I can hardly use all at a time. Although L motors are very welcome, at the moment I already own all M motors I could wish for. Anyhow. Looking forward to all sets. Monster truck might be simple becuase it won't be very big and I think it'd be silly to expect Power Puller sized wheels - this set is probably in the $50 range. I'm expecting a size akin to 8858. Tow truck might be interesting, but mainly because of the color. After all, we've had 8285 and 9395. What's left to innovate? The crane will be great, if it has all mechanisms of 8421 (triple boom is a must) and a mechanism to rotate the superstructure. Will this be the crane to beat 8460?

This set seems to be quite a bit more ingenious than I first thought. Great job on he replica. MOCcing is one thing, but building a set from just photos is something entirely different!

With that I can only agree. (Although I do not see how it is related to my quote, but OK). Also, well said ShaydDeGrai, I mostly agree and don't have a lot to add. I expect the Sandcrawler to be rejected, because no way are they going to take the risk with a 7,000 piece model, and if they downsize it too much, people will complain, which is bad publicity. Problem: we don't know whether this is actually the case. It might very well be, yet from marketing perspective it could be unwise to say that.

Any idea how huge the gaming internet community is anno 2012? Video games are becoming as mainstream as books and movies, especially at Lego's main target market - children.