Sumendar

Or maybe the 406L (~3.2m) pneumatic tube in the 8455 backhoe, granted, that one gets cut to pieces when you start building. edit: And of course there are two 500cm strings in the 8288 crawler crane, but I'm not sure if those count, as they don't connect directly to any other element.

Axles going through several axleholes in half-thick liftarms, the sticking power seems to rise through the roof once you get to four or more. Unfortunately, this seems to be a quite common construct in last decade's official models. In the worst cases, there's a 6+ long axle with one studlength for gripping and no room for pushing.

Readable from the box "Remote controlled driving, stearing[sic] and turning", so that's the last fear of only back-and-forth movement dissolved.

Ah crap, at that price it will only be available in TRU (highest Lego prices in the city) here, if even there (they do stock mindstorms, so I'm hopeful). Still, will be buying. We get the privilege to pay through the nose anyway, so what's another 50 euros on top of 180-190? (crane truck's MSRP is 189€ here) Of course, there's the possibility that the price hike was NA only, or at least won't be as bad here.

I had saved that picture, you're right. It is actually flipped towards the battery box, which would be consistent with a row of connected driving rings in front of motors under the battery box (I think you can see one of the motors in some of the pictures).

As someone on the technicbricks already commented, the batterybox is the other way around, the lid/base colours are clear in some of the photos, the switch behind the box.

I'm not quite sure about the increase in size as the studded -> studless change just exploded the amount of pins and axles in sets, which obviously raised the piececounts a lot. But even if it does happen, it's not enough that the largest flagships are so large that they should use a stronger version of an existing part: The molds aren't cheap, and a mold that would only be used for one set a year is not going to happen, it would drive the price up too much.

Well, giving Cafe Corner to a minor could lead to life-long addiction, must protect the children from that you understand.

Setting aside the unlikely ones to happen (bigger x, stronger y, longer z, the prime motivation for parts is a need in official sets, Lego just doesn't sell anything big enough to require these), here are some thoughts: -2x2 L-shape liftarm, thick or thin, whatever configuration of holes. -all axles notched and/or axle&pin removal tool, the current (official) constructions can be a pain to undo for an adult, let alone the target age group. -> Free to use design idea for the tool: crabclaw-like with suitable friction surface for grabbing axles at one end and halves of a pinhole on the side; small hole for pushing axles at the other end.

edit: nvm, exactly what you said already

There are two parts like that, This one didn't see much use, true, but this one sure did. It's the technic axle connector that was used for general purposes 1993-2007, but was replaced in 2008 by a smooth version for uses other than holding driving rings in place.

The comparison here should be to the 8275 bulldozer, which DID have 260 more parts, but a lot less functionality, meaning a lot less expensive parts (no LA/pneumatic, no driving rings, no turntable, 1 U-joint) and likely a lot less gears too. Yes, it did have two of the M-motors replace by XL-motors, but also one remote less. Do people think that was a bad buy at $150?

Nice to see new photos, but why, oh why, is it always the worst photographers that get such million-dollar opportunities of taking pictures? I understand that he's not a Technic-oriented AFOL, but why on earth did he take both of the excavator shots with the frigging box directly behind the exactly same coloured model? Now a lot of the details are buried in a jumble of yellow, especially in such a tiny resolution photo. More on topic, 1123 pieces on the excavator is a bit of a bummer, compared to the 8265 front loader we're getting 62 more pieces, including 1 linear actuator more, 4 M-motors, 2 IR remotes, 2 IR receivers and a battery box for a probable extra price of ~70USD / 60-90EUR. Cheaper than buying them one by one from S@H, but not a lot. Note that this estimate is based on the preliminary prices which put it at the same level as the 8258 crane truck, at the 8297 off-roader pricepoint it would be bargain. Still looking forward to this and definitely buying, if only for extra tracks and guaranteed newer firmware IR stuff (the firmware thing may become a problem at Bricklink if the single-pin mode catches on). For the crane, I'm a bit on the edge. If the boom extender is a good design and reasonably motorizable, then maybe. Depends a bit on the pricepoint too. Probably will be above 100EUR here, in which case definitely not buying at full price. The container truck looks like it might be the second most interesting model of the bunch, nice functionality at a lower price. Motorcycle will be a definite hit seller, the wheels are definitely not the ones from 8420, the spoke pairs widen towards the rim here, opposite of 8420 where they widen towards hub. The tyres look similar, not 100% sure of the size though. In any case, a street bike for a change.

The valve is closed when centered, so keeping it closed at low pressure might be a problem, as well as closing the valve once enough air has leaked.

Possibly an old idea, but I just successfully tested a pressure limiting valve made of a 2ml disposable plastic syringe and a rubber band. I made a small hole in the syringe body near the top of the scale, then wrapped a rubber band to hold the piston in. Now, when the pressure inside the syringe rises, the piston comes outwards until it passes the hole, at which point extra air starts leaking out. When the pressure drops, the force from the rubber bands overcomes it, and the piston moves back inside past the hole. Adjusting the rubber bands adjusts the pressure limit. As an added bonus the position of the piston gives an idea of how much pressure you have in the system compared to the limit, this could get helpful when deciding whether you need a higher-volume compressor. Comparison to pole-reverser solution: +Small by volume(my proof of concept piece is 13x3x2.5 studs long fully extended,) +Cheap (the usual system requires a pole reverser and a pneumatic cylinder, not exactly the cheapest parts around) +Doesn't require Lego connection +Motor runs continuously -> Less fluctuation in pressure due to acceleration and deceleration of motor -Large largest dimension (13 studs long might be too much for some uses, this can be reduced by stronger rubber band and lower hole location though) -Can't attach to Lego connection -Not Lego -Butt-ugly -Motor runs continuously -> heat can become an issue, part wear, battery lifetime

Took a bit of figuring out to remember, but in step 15 (page 13) the two grey 1x10 technic bricks are inserted after the surfaces on which the steering rails slide, thus the position is blocked both by the axles which should be inserted in the 1x10's and the 1x4 bricks which provide the surfaces (The axle heads nearly hit/come level with the 1x4 bricks). Because both axles are sitting in axle connectors, they can't be slided away either. The solution was naturally simple, just take off the 1x4's and insert the 1x10's, but the building order in the instructions is clearly flawed here.

It's not completed yet, but I'm building the 8880 from spare parts just to see it working, and I could swear that at some places the building order in the instructions is actually either impossible or would require twisting axles and other parts way past my comfort limit. Also had some "fun" time with 8860's gearbox, but I think that was because the gears were a REALLY tight fit on the axles, and thus really hard to move "just a bit". The old sets, even bigger ones like castles, where there's no part call-outs, just a huge game of "spot-the-difference", are not hard per se, but can get a bit tedious at times.

I recently spotted a lot of parts for the 8860 car chassis from 1980 in a picture of a random lot of old technic, bought the lot, and when I was done sorting the pile out, I had all but six rather common pieces like 1x3 plates in my hands, even all the hoses and taps were there, and all the wheels, even though the pic was only showing three! The parts were in excellent shape too, they had probably been 25 years in that attic. A day later I have this beauty looking for free shelf space

At least in one store in Helsinki (Malmi), the Citymarket post-christmas clearance sale has dropped prices even more, for example: 8258 Crane Truck 85€ (got last one from there, others might still have some) 8265 Front Loader 40€ (got two, still plenty left) 7633 Construction Site 50€ (several) That's about 55% off MSRP, got get some!

For the decade in general LEGO, cheese, hands down. There's hardly a MOC around without at least one, in most cases several of them, and they have been used in wonderful ways in the official sets too. For a theme of personal interest, Technic, the IR remote and receiver gave us true remote control for the first time.

You mean 1x1 tiles with the flatties? Aside from being an irreplaceable part (there's no other odd-length tile around), only the houses have a large proportion (up to 7-8%) of the piececount in 1x1 tiles, and in those the piece is used for, well, tiling. Sure, if you also include 1x2 tiles and 1x1 or 1x2 plates, there's a lot, but I don't know if that's any different from technic sets where every pin, bush and 2-axle counts (up to 30+% of pieces) or system sets with tons of small bricks. The grand majority of my parts comes from large mixed lots, and checking my inventory, my most numerous part after the usual suspect (technic friction pin), is actually the 1x2 brick at about 1000 copies in 27k parts. Looking past just the piececount (I usually check the inventory before buying), in my opinion those creator houses are good value for the money, both as original sets and also for MOCing (houses, naturally). Funnily, for MOCing purposes their only downside compared to the modulars is the relative lack of tiles...

I'd say the same, you just have to learn where to look for sets (Citymarket, Stockmann, TRU) and where not to look (Prisma). Only downside I can think of are the high prices at S@H and which you mentioned. As for the AFOL club, I think the closest equivalent is probably Palikkatakomo, which I wouldn't have found myself if I hadn't ran across the name in a list of new ambassadors...

It's a touchy topic. I wouldn't use them, just because for me the challenge is to build with the limitations of the material in mind. But that doesn't mean I would diss someone's MOC just because they used these to achieve something you can't with just LEGO. A feat of engineering is always a feat of engineering, no matter the limitations you give yourself. What might become a more serious problem, though, is that he is not currently making the aluminum parts in shapes and sizes TLC makes for copyright and patent reasons. While this is commendable practice in itself, I really hope the issue won't turn on its head in the future. What if, some day, his parts keep TLC from making the same kind of parts, for fears of the same IP issues? While he might not have the reason to sue, there's always the off chance that one day the rights to his parts end up in the portfolio of Hasbro, Mattel or Megabloks, through a sale or two.

Would a couple of these next to each other on an axle and pinching the wheel axle between them work? Probably not the most life-like or prettiest solution out there, but at least they would allow quick change of wheel.

The program might be easier to find without a serious typo in the name, it is MLCAD. edit: never mind, looks like you found it. Check the ldraw.org website for installation instructions.