Erik Leppen

While I agree with most of what is said, do not forget that this buyer making a profit will only be possible if people are willing to pay the increased price. If we all collectively decided not to buy from this person than his "potential profit" would turn into a loss. In other words, there is a way to collectively reduce this behavior, by making it unprofitable. However this only works if everyone is willing to cooperate. One could even argue that if people are willing to buy the items for an increased price, the original price was actually too low and the money is going to the wrong people. PS I'm not saying I agree with someone doing this.

On EBay: Jurgen's profile: Suspicious. I feel kind of bad (given this is not Jurgen's own initiative, which i think is safe to assume)). I wouldn't know what I could do about things like this. I have reported an EBay fraud before but all I got was an e-mail saying that I was to give proof of my claim, when I already gave a link to the original... Edit: by the way, how do you prove plagiraism? How do you prove that no communication between this person and Jurgen has taken place?

You could simply duplicate the receivers too. I mean if you can duplicate the motors then you can duplicate the receivers. You will then simply end up with a whole bunch of independent circuits - battery box, receiver, motor, and that times 28. Well, not literally times 28, but you get the point. No need to connect the electrical circuit for driving, with that of rotating the turret. All you need is a crapload of money - but given the size of the model you were needing that anyway so yeah If two motors used to drive the same system, do not have the exact same speed, you can always add a differential. However I'm not sure if those are strong enough (particularly the 12t gears that go inside). Edit: or use the RC motors (http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/5292?img=21893). These are stronger, so you need less of them :) Of course they also draw more power and you need a conversion cable.

Yes. But, to take a random number out of the sky, 10,000 people is also "small" if you compare it to the number of children that play with Lego, worldwide. So this "while" can just as easily be 50 years.

I already thought it was "too good" (i.e. of "Afol quality", not what kids build with Lego, even very good kids). Seemingly, the new rule isn't working very well. I still think there is only one solution and that is somehow using the collective knowledge of the Afol community somewhere in the process. For example, by showing the list to just the LUGs first to see if they find anything suspicious, and only after that, make the list available to the public. But I'm sure there are other ways to do this properly. The only other alternative I'm seeing is scrapping the entire competition... Either that, or delivering the awarded prize to the creator of the original! Edit: by the way, dolittle, that's a genius method, never known it even existed! Thanks! Edit: What's also kind of surprising is how this has not been spotted by the judges. Why is it, I ask, that they do not see what we see?

No! The 8460 main model has been a long-time favorite of mine. In fact I still think it is the best mobile crane Lego has created. Compared to the 8421 that many consider ultimate, the 8460 had outriggers that actually lifted the model, a boom that actually had considerable lifting power, and looked pretty good given it had only 850 parts. Edit: yes, slightly offtopic, but I just had to say that. :P

No one said 8466 was a studless model ;) By the way, there were already studless models in 1998. I think 8226 is the first studless model. And as I am looking at it, I think the transition between 1997 and 1998 shows the start of the studless era. Of course, sets from 1997 already used studless parts, but they were more like 8437 which is primarily a studded set. (by the way I use searching by year). Edit: No. 8457 was the first, one year before.

There are different levels of "strong" here. You're talking about strong meaning inseparable by forces in a vertical direction. However strong can also be interpreted as simply rigid (unflexible). In this meaning of the word, studded is certainly more effective because beam-plate connections have much less play than pinned connections. No studless construction I know of beats a rigid beam. To give an example, I don't think I could have designed a frame equally strong (= rigid) as this one with studless beams only. That said, the new 7 x 5 and 11 x 5 panels are of great help in creating rigid studless frames (see 8258)!

Yes, I consider this "the default" 4-speed gearbox and I use the exact same setup in my cars. I cannot imagine anything simpler than this is possible to achieve four different gear ratios. A good thing is, it works great with 8880's white 4 x 6 gear shift plate. :) Also note it can be extended to 6 speed quite easly just by adding another pair of 8-24 gears. It won't be very realistic in terms of gear ratios but if you don't care about this, then don't make things more complicated than needed :)

I'm actually not fond of the 8052. The model is nice and looks pretty good, and the color is nice too, but it has only two functions, and in my opinion switching between the two doesn't work very well. There is a lot of friction so you can't "feel" the end point of the switching mechanism. There is no direct feedback so to speak. If you want a play model, I'd say, get 8069. It has no motor, but it has no less than seven functions for about the same price as 8052: steering front arm raise front arm scoop rear arm raise rear arm scoop rear arm rotate outriggers Not only the play is nice, but the build itself I found quite interesting.

I like Nazgarot's idea of laying out all the parts you have. This is actually quite a good idea :) Certainly. What I tried the last few weeks is starting out with actual bricks, determining what I want and examining the problems. Then as soon as I have an idea what I want I launch MLCAD to design the most difficult parts (usually the gear trains). Then I try to build that in real life to see if it works. From there on, the circle is round :) Right now I'm trying to do something that I certainly wouldn't have pulled off without MLCAD (Example (Work in progress)) By the way, also note that the thing is primarily studless but there's studded parts used specifically in a place where studless wouldn't work. Actually, a large problem with studless constructino is that when you want a strong frame beam over the entire length of your model, it has to be two studs wide most of the time, just to connect things with pins. A studded beam can be strong while being only one stud wide, because you have vertical connections using plates. You only need vertical bracing in a few select spots. That's the reason I used it here. There is no way the middle of the three yellow beams could be made as rigid with studless parts only.

No it is not. It is opinion. If studless was factually superior, then why are all other Lego themes studded? > Because it depends on your goals. Exactly. Studless is better for things that need to be compact or very three-dimensional (e.g. this). Studded is better for things that need to be strong (e.g. this). So don't go around saying studless is factually better, because it isn't. It's suitable for different things than studded building. And that is fact ;)

I like this a lot! I like all the angles and all the round shapes, I like how you did that using angle connectors and flexible axles. Also I just love the completely white body (some parts I didn't even know existed in that color). As Zblj sais, "snowflake" is really what it's like. White and "soft" (due to the rounded shape), which is only strengthened by that little ball on the roof that you used as HOG wheel. And I very much like the modularity. The only thing I would change are the color of the seats. I don't really like the gray. Red seats would fit nicely with the white body I think. By the way, don't forget to enter this into this month's conpetition! It fits the theme perfectly! Edit: this should be a set!

Lego also preferred the method of the back axle, because that is more logical when suspension is extended. However that had problems with the front axle they had to change it there. However because it doesn't have problems with the back axle, they chose to not change it there because they agree with us that it's better. Saving ABS is probably not the issue - it's just one part. It's just that the back axle is actually better, but the front axle needed an adjustment to they did a concession there.

Thanks efferman for the parts list. Looks like a decent inventory, especially the white parts. Also I like what you did with the model. The knobs for the outriggers are in a much better place now and the rear looks better with the white color. Not sure about your version of the wheel arches, and why did you change the arm?

Why do you use clutch gears in the first design? What do they do (of course, not counting the one used for the winch output, whose use is clear)? What happens when you replace them by bushes?

Is the parts inventory known? If not, could you please take pictures of it in the manual? It's a decent set, although I still don't really like the lack of a system in the way the colors are used. White and dark gray are kind of randomly placed everywhere. Contrast that to 8109 where the colors are used much better. But apart from the colors, the IMO too heavy use of stickers, and the weirdly placed controls for the outriggers (those on 8289 were on a much better place), this seems to be a pretty nice set. I like how the white panels are used on the front hood.

See! I was right that on one of the pictures, the two rear axles seemed to be on a different height than the front axle. Hah! :P Anyhow, it looks like this is a much better set than we thought at first sight. It has only two electric functions but both of them have multiple "levels": the flatbed moves along with the wheels, and the fork has a double motion as well. So the design of this set looks really great! And all functionality has been packed in quite a small space, which is always a good thing. The parts selection seems to be decent, but nothing really spectacular. Although there are quite many studded parts, and also quite many transparent parts :) Also, the set is one of the better looking models Technic has had. I think I skip the 8053 and go for this one instead :D

There's nothing against using multiple clutch gears in parallel. Or, for example, one on each wheel. This is surely not an unsolvable problem, even without new parts. That said, I often see people complain about too much PF in official sets, and now all we're suggesting is sets that are extremelyh heavy on PF. What I'd like to see is a flagship without PF. For example take 8069. No PF, no pneumatics, great set. Why not do something like that as a flagship? The already mentioned ideas of redoing the 8855 Prop plane or the 8856 helicopter are great choices too. Both are possible with no PF at all and would make great sets. What I would like to see most, is some sort of folding crane. I.e. this (not necessarily so large, if it can be done on two axles I'm fine with it too). It's something LEGO hasn't ever done yet, as far as I know, and it would be quite a challenge. I'm sure it's recognizable enough as a vehicle to be sold to LEGO's primary target audience. After all, it's a crane so boys will love it.

I'd say 8069 (back hoe) is a must in any super pack, as it's a modest sized set with a huge amount of functionality. Also 8071 (the white cherry picker) would be nice, and the recent red buggy or the previous blue one.

They revamped 8868 with the Unimog, now it's time to revamp 8480 with a new Space shuttle (or similar). I also agree on the color remark by Ultimario. Therefore I'm glad the Unimog is orange, there's too much red and yellow already.

And of course, I want to join the fun of trying to think of something. I made a start, but don't really see a good place to add the spring. But my goal is to give some ideas for others. As some of the solutions are huge, I tried to keep things compact. My solution is to use knob wheels on the hinge, but that doesn't really run very well... (the Brickshelf folder) The gray pins between the green and lime 2 x 4 liftarms form the hinge for suspension travel. Notice that the knob gears catch each other exactly at the hinge, a trick I have seen used in a drivetrain for aircraft landing gear. Also the horizontal movement (of just the 5 x 7 frame and it contents) is limited by the 28 tooth gear of the differential touching the gray bar above. The red pin acts as a stop. PS The color coding is just for easier communication, it's not like we should actually use all those colors

Thanks for the extensive review Anio. Not only are your reviews very informative, but I also use them as a way to practice my French a bit

This sounds so terribly familiar I don't know how exactly I started, because I started as just a kid getting Lego from his parents. But I do remember once having had a huge orange wooden box (about 70x60x20 cm) with 16 compartiments that contained all my Lego, the smallest compartment only containing four blue 2 x 10 plates. And I do remember having had a sorting system by color for years, using ten large bins: white, yellow, gray, red, blue, black, baseplates, wheels, train tracks, misc. And I was slowing moving into Technic so I needed separate boxes for those, also starting out by color. As Technic grew and got more versatile, I frequently rearranged and expanded. And I do remember thinking about sorting by type, and finally taking that decision. A few years ago I bought 24 (yes) identical boxes for everything Technic and special parts (like tiles, SNOT pieces, ...) and re-invented my sorting system. And recently I created overflow bins for Technic pins... And two weeks ago I started splitting some of my Technic parts by type. Right now I don't even have bins for those yet, still thinking what to do with them... And I'm starting to have the problem that I can't really build anything serious in the studded system because I use the studless system more and there's not enough working space to have both in reach at once! Guess I have to sacrifice studded building for the time being. And this is unfortunate because every once in a while I love to have some studded construction instead of just studless Technic... So yeah. Pretty much the same as in the starting post Edit: by the way, there's right now exactly one spot in my sorting system where i sort by color: all transparant parts are together

This won't work. Because of the way you attached the shock absorbers the unit consisting of the 5 x 7 frames can't swing sideways. Exchange the two pins by just one to solve this. Also, attach them to the middle 5 x 7 frame and the other two frames can be removed.