Erik Leppen

The point is, that this won't work if the superstructure is not balanced. For example, on large cranes, when you're lifting stuff the center of gravity changes. Also, there seems to be no way of reducing friction. Or does the superstructure have a few sets of wheels underneath that will roll over some tiled surface below the turntable? This is of course possible if there's room for that. As I see here, http://www.engineeringwithabs.ch/mturntab.htm the way he has done this is very clever.

I consider that very bad news. Power functions elements make models a lot more expensive without really adding techniques. Then redesign technic bricks The proves it's possible to lower the holes in Technic bricks by 0.12 mm... Edit: but I don't really believe this is the real reason. Anio's arguments sound a lot more realistic.

I like how the top half of the turntable is secured in horizontal direction, but what (except from the red gears) prevents the top half of the turntable from just falling off?

Yes, this is what appeals to me too. The thought that for example, the grooves on the standard inline axle joiner, would have been designed with the driving ring in mind, would never have crossed my mind. However seeing in Technicopedia the first is from 1993 and the second from 1994. As pointed out in the 1993 Technicopedia article, this is probably not a coincidence :) To be honest, the thing I'd like to see updated the most, is simply the yearly articles on sets and parts in a specific year :)

True, you start with the idea of how it should work/look and then look for the parts that "fit best". But, there are parts that just almost never offer themselves as best fit. To me, those kinds of parts could be called "useless" for the way I build MOCs (and for the types of MOCs I build). It's not that I specifically try to not use a given part, it's just that I never happen to need it. To me, that is synonymous to the part being useless (for my style of building etc.). And that has nothing to do with being unimaginative.

As a Technic builder, one of those pieces I cannot recall having ever used, is There are more, but this is the first part that comes to mind when thinking of "useless parts"...

In my personal opinion I find that using a combination often results in a messy looking model. A completely studless model can be very good looking and a completely studded model too, but as one has studded surfaces and the other has flat surfaces, having both on the outside can give a messy look. Of course there are many exceptions to this :) Of course this is not true when only using one system in invisible places, e.g. like using studless only on the inside and creating a fully studded body, or using studded only for a frame and then building a completely studless body around it to hide the studs. Usually official sets that combine these systems do it very well in my opinion. Untrue. Or, atleast, not universally true. My latest supercar is practically built the other way around - I built the frame first and then built the modules to fit in. This works well for this situation because when I build the mechanisms first and the frame around it, the frame usually ends up being too flexible. The reason I created the frame first is to achieve rigidness. If I had to choose one system I think I prefer studless. One big advantage is that it works the same in all directions. The three dimensions are the same. In studded building, the unit is 1 x 1 x 2/5 stud, in studless building it is 1 x 1 x 1. This means mechanisms are more easily re-arranged in vertical positions. You see that happen to good effect in 8258 which has the vertical gearbox. I think the studless system is in general more logical. :)

I'd love to see a supercar too, but nothing extraordinary. The scale of the Technic Enzo 8653 is a good scale to me. Making it larger means it'd be a lot more expensive (volume = size3 and price ~ volume) and it'd be cool to have such a set for the price of, say, that of 8297. In fact I neither really care about the shock absorbers or any parts that need modification, I'd just love to see how Lego would build such a thing with the current collection of studless parts. The only part I need are bigger truck wheels. And that would open possibilities for some large sets too.

I dont buy those sets due to limited budget, but if I would, it'd probably be 50% for parts 50% for model N/A because of my answer to #1 Of the three models mentioned, the Taj Mahal is in my opinion by far the most interesting as a model. I'd love to see the Belgian Atomium, mainly because of the interesting building techniques that would be needed. Other ideas: Guggenheim Museum, Sydney Opera House, Sagrada Familia, Bank of China, a sports stadium, ... Anything ultimate Technic; but I'd love to see a Technic supercar using the studless building system that's now usual in Technic. A Technic set like the Dinosaur of the 8485 Control Center set would be very interesting too. Oh, and any supercar done in the style of the 10187 Volkswagen Beetle (and the other models that didn't make it, that are displayed in the back of the instruction booklet of that set). Preferably the Lamborghini Countach. Technic needs large truck wheels. NOT balloon tyres!! I mean actual truck wheels, like those on 8421, 8285 and 8258, but larger (say around 10 or 11 stud diameter). My other gripe about Technic is the limited availability of colors. Nearly all sets are yellow or red, especially flagship sets. There's all the parts you need in blue, lime and white (except maybe a few special parts like panels) but they're hardly used (sets with blue or lime usually only have very few such-colored parts). This makes it very difficult to collect parts in those colors. Also, more different Technic sets. Not just cars and trucks, try something different (like the aforementioned Dinosaur). It 's also long ago that a good Technic helicopter or ship has been released.

This. The loop of pneumatic cylinders being connected to the valves of other cylinders was really a wonderful system that made the alternative model of 8868 a unique model in its own right. It's certainly inspiring as I tried to build similar systems back in the day :) Also, I consider the wing door version of 8448 better than the convertible. I also think the alternative of the 8258 crane truck is pretty original, nice looking and full-featured (like the main model). I don't have the set, but what about the dinosaur from 8485? http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=8485-1 And finally, the not yet released motorbike 8051 seems to have a pretty nice looking alternative chopper.

You shouldn't regret that Anio. In my opinion it's good to know there are more languages in the world than just plain everyday English. I'm already using too much English compared to other foreign languages. I don't speak French myself, but your review is very useful - both as a review and as a great opportunity to practice the language :) (in fact your entire site is a useful learning tool :D) And of course many thanks for the great pictures of what seems to be the best Technic set ever. Especially the drive train from the four M motors is an amazing piece of Lego engineering, but actually there's very little in that set that doesn't look great. In fact I like all second-half-of-2010 sets. The chopper looks particularly good at first sight, and even though I'm not interested in motorcycles in particular (I believe the 8422 is my only motorbike set), the good alternative model makes the set move up a few places on my wanted list. Mobile cranes are my favorite type of model and the 2010 one looks interesting; I'm still curious to the alternative. But I'll probably skip this crane because it doesn't seem to have really ingenious functions (although I love the outriggers). I might change my mind when the alternative model shows up :D The blue truck is the least interesting to me. The alternative model seems to be a waste of designer's time (I don't see anything interesting in it) and there is too little blue and too much grey for my taste. Otherwise it looks like a decent model and it's something we haven't seen before.

A few Technic sets I think are very good, but you eventually have to decide for yourself which model you like best. Also you could check www.peeron.com for the inventories of parts. Newer Technic sets I think are very good: 8265 (Wheel Loader, 2009) is full of functions and looks very, very good for a Technic set in my opinion. I think it is one of the best. Contains no motors, but would greatly \ benefit from power functions for playability. For construction and a static model it can go without though. At about 80-90 Euros (Netherlands) it's not ridiculously expensive, for about 1000 parts. 8258 (Crane Truck, 2009) is also filled with functions, four of them controlled by an electromotor (Power Functions XL motor) through a gearbox which is a joy to build. Also a very good parts pack with many gears and many beams in four different colors. Also good looks. Contains some little flaws though, and it's quite expensive at about 130-160 Euros fora bout 1800 parts. But as said, it comes with a simple Power Functions set (batterybox, switch, motor). 8294 (Excavator, 2008) is a great mid-sized set. It's a bit smaller than the above to but still very good I think. About 50 Euros for about 700 parts. I don't really agree with the 8275 Bulldozer (2007). If you like electronic systems, it's really cool, but if you're more into gear systems and mechanics, I think it's a little bit simple. This model is really meant to show off the potential of the Power Functions system and as a play model. Includes remote control. About 150 Euros for 1300 parts, but if you would buy the electronics as separate parts youre already at 1/3 of that (at least), so if you want the electronic components, picking up an 8275 is a wise move (if you can find one!). Older Technic sets I like a lot: 8460 (mobile crane, ~1995). Not a huge set (800 parts), but quite a lot of functions and very sturdy. Also re-released some years later as 8438 and 8431. Make sure the pneumatics still work though. 8856 (helicopter). Nice deviation from other models and pretty large. Also some nice functions, the coolest being the "joystick" in the cabin that steers the main rotor. Contains the Flex system. Also good alternative model. The true classics of Technic are 8868 (Air Tech Claw Rig), 8880 (Supercar), 8480 (Space Shuttle) and 8479 (Scanner Truck) and 8448 (Supercar II). Of those, I personally think 8880 is the best (but all are very close). A good set I never owned, but built once using instructions from a family member, is 8865 (Test Car). About work space - it depends on whether you plan to build sets, or build your own creations (MOCs) - for the first the space you need is directly proportional to the size of the set - and as you got the green grocer you can estimate the space needed. If you wnt to build your own models you need more room because you don't know beforehand whch parts you will need and therefore need to have quick access to more parts at once. But I would suggest a desk or any other solid surface above a bed because I think you lose parts easier on a soft surface and everything wobbles :P If you're sitting there often (or planning to) it might be worthwhile to invest a little in a good working space.

It is a construction toy, that alone I think makes it appeal more to boys than to girls. I think girls are more into social interaction, which playing with Lego doesn't offer equally good as some other toys, like, say, games (not necessarily computerized). I wouldn't be surprised if the Lego Board Games series would appeal more to females than other Lego themes.

As a mobile crane builder as well, I am quite impressed with this. It definately looks great and I was very surprised you managed to put so many motors in that small space. Also the cabin is very nicely done with tiles. Also the combination of yellow with dark gray works very well :) I too would be very interested in what's inside

This one strikes me as odd. Why would that make any difference? Could you explain that?

Saw this thing on Brickshelf and it really makes the official 8265 set look like a mediocre play model. Your model is really a work of art; ideal combination of good functionality and a great model. Like on real models, you don't actually see the internal workings, but they're still there doing their jobs. Just like the real thing. Superb MOC!

I think it is very brave of you to tell all this personal stuff on the internet. But I was surely touched - but I'm glad it finally turned out all good and you're a happy person now :) But as I'm reading this, the credit doesn't go to Lego, it mainly goes to your parents! They're the ones that made the right decisions. How Lego comes into play in the story is of course great but as said, partly coincidence. I think I'm going to save this link in case I want to show others what building with Lego can do to a person. But I'm wondering - do you still have trouble hearing? Or have you completely learned how to cope with it? It's OK if you don't want to tell of course, since it's quite a personal question... Edit: oh and by the way, the title is really perfect. You should really really store this story somewhere by the way.

For me it's slow too indeed. I don't think that is the problem. The slowness usually occurs when I load a part page - I want to know how many I have of a certain part in all colors, but what the site does is generate a humongous list of all sets this part has ever occurred in in all possible colors. After it has finally looked up, processed and displayed that load of information including its color table, their shop prices I don't even want to know, and total amounts in all sets together I'm not interested in, then it finally bothers with my own parts. I think that's the wrong order. I'm not sure how many people are using the site this way, but to me it's a waste of computation power that could be spend doing other stuff (like serve other people faster). There should be a way to just load my own inventory. That can't be that hard. I have only like 30 unique sets stored in My Parts out of a total of thousands, so that should load reasonably fast. Especially with very common pieces this is a problem - I just want to know how many Red Plates 1 x 2 I have, not how I could have had thousands if I would own every set...

Nice custom alternative model you've got there! Although I think I like the roofless version a bit better, both are still good. I like all the different angles.

The craetor of this has done a very good job at the model, but I dislike the headlights and the too-obvious wheel decorations. I think this is a MOC because if it were a set, Lego would at least have used some transparent parts to make the headlights, and almost certainly not this. Also, the windscreen contains colored axles #12 (appeared in set 8448); I don't think Lego would do that soon (but of course I could be mistaken). What the model does show is the great potential of the new panels :) So, long story short, good MOC :)

Suspension like in 8448, front steer with steering wheel, back drive, gearbox (although the reverse gear is way too large). Thanks! And yes Technic is my favorite theme for as long as I can remember building my own creations, although I'm starting to enjoy Creator too. Good point. I think I'll get the same as I have at Lowlug :) Thanks for the warm welcome from the others too, of course :)

I didn't read the whole thread, but I think this is the whole source of the problem. Some males seem to think that if you make it pink enough, it will appeal to girls. Most of us will have noticed that about every toy store has a "pink section". I don't think "girly colors" are the answer to appealing more to girls (but I don't know of a survey that supports or opposes that). Stereotypically, girls like to think of stories and adventures for their characters and play them, and boys like large vehicles (trains, trucks, bulldozers). I think girls are just not that much into "building" and every single lego set needs to be built before it can be played with and I think that might be part of the cause. I have a book on game design lying around that has a small section about computer games for girls, if I don't forget I could check out what the authors are saying about the subject. If I remember correctly, I have once read about a survey that showed that boys instantly grasp to vehicles and stuff, while girls don't seem to care what they're playing with. Not sure though, and can't find a reference.

Do you mean like the Tetris pieces? http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3052/280802..._5cbe0a048a.jpg Or do you mean more like what I recently thought of (but never posted here)? http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=4039194 This would create a half stud offset, I think this would be very useful to complement the jumper plate. Some other parts I thought of: A vertical half-plate offset part: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=4039193 useful in snot constructions The (mentioned before) inverted cheese slope http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=4039195 Useful in small constructions with studs facing everywhere; you might not have space to make a stud turn the right direction to use a normal cheese slope. Therefore I think inverted cheese sloped could really broaden the amount of shapes possible. "Inverse tiles" - plates that have studs, but no stud recievers at the bottom. The bottom would be flat like tiles, and the top would have a groove just like regular tiles have at the bottom. This could be used for finishing off parts of a model that happen to have studs facing down or inwards. Also, specifically for Technic constructions... a useful little liftarm: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=4039198 A pin extender (half a pin joiner round + a 1 stud pin with friction) http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=4039199 And because it is only a matter of time... http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=4039196

I knew this site for longer, but only now I see you are having a topic about it. I want to say it's a great site and I once sat for hours reading through the years. I was very disappointed to see it only go to 1993, I wanted to read more (1994 wasn't there at that time). I now saw you added 1994, and I enjoyed reading it and the 8880 article. I'm really looking forward to upcoming years, because it's about here I started getting into Technic. Looking forward in particular to your discussion of the 8460 crane truck in 1995 (and your general opinion on the entirety of the Technic theme through the years, e.g. the studless system; and to see how it actually evolved). I like how you're also describing new parts for each year, it gives an overview about when certain things became possible. I for one didn't know that the inline axle joiners and the 8880 were so close together and that a lot of parts like the 16t clutch gear seem to have been designed with 8880 in mind. It's cool to read things like that, especially on sets I own :) Anyhow, I still have a suggestion - and the good thing is, it won't be much work to implement (I think) . I think it'd be a nice addition if in the articles about set comparisons, e.g. http://www.ericalbrecht.com/technic/excavators.html, in the table at the bottom, next to the Set column there would be a Year column. This would give a clear image of how much time is between similar sets, and how much time there was for the models to "evolve". But, then again, the site is really becoming a wonderful encyclopedia of Technic - exactly what the name suggests. Keep up the good work!

Hello there to all of Eurobricks My name is not hard to guess and I'm a Dutch fan of Lego - actually an SFOL (student fan of Lego), but I'm long enough into Lego to consider myself AFOL I got into the plastic bricks because my brother and I got sets from our parents. How little did they know back then how a hobby could go out of hand over the years Anyhow, we started out with City but soon moved to Technic. First set I still remember is 8853, the wheeled loader. A long time favorite set of mine is 8460 Pneumatic crane truck. Main reason is that it was packed with features, especially the cool steering and the outriggers that really lifted the model. I am also really blessed for having got the 8880 Supercar when it was still in the stores (but I was very lucky, it was one of the last in the stores!), so I didn't have to hunt it down second-hand. My brother had the great 8868 Air tech claw rig. My brother followed the more classical pattern of losing interest in Lego at some age, but I somehow kept interested in playing with the stuff. And at age 23, I still am... Anyhow, I think it was in the year 2004 that I joined LowLUG, the Dutch Lego community, where I got along with the other members. And I'm still active there. About a month ago I started reading around here at Eurobricks - they had reviews of the new 2009 technic sets, so I had to check them out. While reading more through the boards I found some other interesting discussions and I thought, well, why not join the fun If you're into cars and trucks and Technic, you might have seen my Brickshelf before. [shameless advertising] My Brickshelf folder [/shameless advertising] I like mobile cranes. I even try to recreate some of them. My best recreation to date (according to my own opinion) I think is the the Demag AC70 City: Demag AC70 City I also like supercars. Occasionally I try to recreate existing models, like the Pagani Zonda: Pagani Zonda Whenever I buy a set I try to build custom alternative models. I think my best attempt at that is the tow truck from 8421: 8421 tow truck Sometimes I build something without wheels, but this rarely turns out great (in my opinion). Something I really want to make some day is a human-like (upright) biped independent walker. Or a roller coaster. Other things I do besides Lego building is creating 2D computer games and composing music using the computer. And a lot of forum browsing... That's about it for now I think.