allanp

Ah yes! Liking the cock pit controls, there does appear to be both cyclic and collective controls, and they are dual controls too! I'm not sure what happening on the image, it does look like the whole rotor head is tilting 8856 style, there's even an arrow to say it tilts that way, but still I'd be a little surprised if that was the case. If it does make any wind at all then the different rates of attack as the rotors turn will likely cause some slight tilting of the main head. Besides I think it's just a difficult function to describe in one photograph as it's something that changes with time. "See how the different parts work together - just like they do in a real helicopter" That's looking to be true! And if that's true then see how this mechanical fan boi sprints to his nearest Lego store day one of its release!

It's all good My gearbox is a first sketch but axles shouldn't bend if only driving a fake engine, for motorised models you can add bracing beams between gear pairs. The friction will be much lower as there's only two rotating axles (or three for an added reverse idler gear) and no power is sent through idler gears on rotating axles. As the narrow drive rings are being pushed/pulled along by pegs on both sides there is no twisting force meaning very little force is required to move them, so no need for massive pegs on the top part. But still this is only a first draft to show how it could be. I'm not saying this untested first draft is a completely finished design by any means. Of course there comes a point where we have to accept the limitations of plastic but I don't think we're there yet. I'm also sure they have the tools and the talent to come up with something just as compact, frictionless, cool looking and realistic given enough reason to!

@kbalage you are of course correct about what their aims and goals appear to be and I'm not denying that. But I also agree with you in that I'd also love to see a slight change there. Not so much away from their current aims and targets as I do understand them, they can keep those but I'd love to see more of an additional effort towards the true mechanical aspect of the Technic theme. Of course they should be great display pieces but that doesn't mean they can't be anything other than that. And forgive me, when you say in your reviews "these are just display models" you always seemed fully happy with that fact. I didn't know you'd like to see things being changed also. I'm not sure it about trying to prioritize being "educational" as such. It's about being close enough to reality that it has its own coolness and wow factor. A gearbox isn't just a means to an end, it can be a mechanical beauty in its own right. And when it's close enough to reality or "build for real", it's educational value is an unavoidable but very positive side effect. But as things are right now, they are just display models and they might as well not have gearboxes. But that does NOT mean that's what should happen. That's only a sad lamentation of the current state of things. If they are only display models and nothing more, it's THAT that should be fixed. These sets sell a lot. Increase that, even if it is only by only a small percentage, it's still a lot of extra sales.

Right, so some people didn't know what a gearbox was and so they don't need to include one, is that the reasoning here? Believe it or not there are some adult people out there that actually do know what the gearstick in their car is for. And besides, can we really be that surprised when that hot mess of gears and axles in the Sian/Ferrari is hardly recognisable as a gearbox? Maybe if it was designed more realistically they would have recognised it as that thing that makes engine go broom! And I still haven't heard a good argument as to why TLG should be targeting ONLY people that don't know what a gearbox is with their most expensive Technic sets. I didn't know what a differential gear was as a child, but thanks to Technic I was able to build and fully understand its function even if I couldn't put it into words. No you don't have to find an equivalent group of buyers. You can keep the existing group of buyers but add onto it an additional group of buyers that are interested in those technical details. What's more, the kind of more realistic gearboxes I suggest would be more easily recognisable as a gearbox to the casual buyer, and be easier for them to build and understand, so everyone is happy!

While it's important to have some shelf appeal and attract the casual fan, I still don't see why that should be their only target with every single bloody 18+ set from every bloody theme including Technic! Adults are fairly diverse people. Some might like pure shelf queen's with nothing of interest on the inside. But why cater only to them? You can still have shelf appeal while still having something of interest to the gear heads out there, the 1:8 scale cars are big and expensive enough to invest some time and effort into the internal mechanics that make it a supercar. Yes there's beauty on the outside, but like the real life F1 gearbox video posted earlier (and dare I say my own first draft gearbox example, which I have a few improvements in mind for) there's a mechanical beauty on the inside of these vehicles also that shouldn't be overlooked. The Sian/Ferrari gearboxes however are not things of mechanical beauty, they are overly colourful overly complicated mechanical hot messes!

Well it shouldn't be just a display model. It should look good on display if course, but it shouldn't be just that. Otherwise just make it from regular Lego bricks.

Apparently yes. Rumours are it has motorised rotors with simple battery box, multifunction gearbox for rotors, landing gear, sliding door and winch, another two speed gearbox for the rotors (slow to see the blade functions working and fast to generate a bit of wind), and best of all apparently it has full cyclic and collective controls of the 5 bladed main rotor. Those are the rumours from promobricks who are usually pretty accurate.

Like most complex new parts I expect it would need a few rounds of rapid prototyping and revisions. I don't think the teeth would disengage that easily as they are straight, there shouldn't be hardly any forces moving them apart, at least not enough to overcome the flat faces in each of the cams stop positions. To reduce the sliding friction I made the sliding hole 2 module long to prevent twisting and aid sliding. I think the biggest issue would be getting the cams to rotate precisely enough to the right positions, an 8t gear used to make it click into position would help, and a new piece similar to what you find in some real life motorbike shifters would help greatly also. Or maybe use a 4 position indexer and gear down 2:1. But as an idea I think it shows the concept pretty well.

The panels aren't a big issue for me. That gearbox however...since then I made my own first draft, only in the computer though. The rotary cams can support 8 speeds but I would need to fiddle with the gear sizes, or just have 6 forward, a reverse and a neutral position. But even at only 6 speeds I'd much prefer this. Gears are double sided and 6 speeds fits into 9 studs of length. Cam position locking can be done with an 8t gear (if you want to lock always in a gear position) or a 16t gear (if you want to also click into any of the 8 neutral positions between gear positions) as the spaces between gear teeth align with these positions on the cams, though a new, 8 position indexing piece may be needed to reliably position the rotary cams. There are probably some issues and certainly improvements to be made as it's only a first sketch of an idea but you get the point. Much more realistic, more intuitive and easy to understand, less friction, compact size can fit into non supercars (like trucks, 1:5 scale motorbikes, etc), for high torque (motorised) models the 2 axles can be braced with beams between 2nd and 3rd, and 4th and 5th gears (making the gearbox 2 studs longer). I'm all for attracting the casual fans and making it look good on the box, but why not also include something mechanically new and improved like this to ALSO attract the die hard fans as well?!

It's been allowed with instructions which are also copyrighted, but then Lego freely shares those anyway. So really I think only Lego can give that permission to share, I don't think this forum can give that.

It works great for me, but then I used to build small models using the 8x2 electric plates as regular plates and play with them in the garden, digging and such, so they've had lots of abuse from my childhood self, yours might not need such attention but the technique for cleaning them does make them like new even after my abuse, and once your set up it's really quick. Just remember to save those paper lolly sticks!

I am thinking (and hoping) that the upper starfish piece doesn't move and is fixed to the shaft/beam/whatever it may be. To be authentic then the swashplate (the part that can't be seen) is the only part that moves up/down and tilts.

It's very good to read you're planning to resume the fun!

True. 6 years is better than one still on the shelf coughferraricough

IT'S F@#&ING BLAKBIRD!!! Sorry! Erm....yeah I gotta hand it to Lego, the book has proven very popular, probably more popular than Lego thought, so hopefully there will be a second run "due to popular demand". Or maybe an E-book made available?

I'm still most excited for the heavily rumoured new parts (hopefully a proper swash plate). Can't see that part yet and the upper part is blurred. I am still excited but I admit it looks a bit messy design wise and out of proportion, like the rotor it a bit too far forward and the body is too tall, so the front slopes are too close to the slope of the windscreen. But we always say Technic isn't all about looks right? It's extra height might be a packaging issue. There's gonna be quite a lot of internal mechanics such as the multifunction gearbox, 2 speed gearbox, all the linkages for the (hopefully) included cyclic and collective controls, winch, landing gear and sliding door. There quite a bit more there than some previous flagships so that's probably why they had to make it taller to fit it all in. This model will likely be seriously densely packed with a nice variety of mechanisms, some of them more authentic than what was previously possible so despite its messy look, the more I think about it the more I like it.

Well of course it's an instant purchase for me, likely several! Yes it's too similar to 42053 but I'm a sucker for new (recoloured) pneumatics, it's similarly to a previous set is my only real complaint, and the previous set happened to also be very good! As I haven't bought many newer sets there's also a few new to me parts (really hope there's some 3x19 frames in there).

That's reassuring, I do hope he's okay. All the best to you Grum if you read this.

I don't know why so slow, I guess it's easier to have the gearing done for you? But the whole point if Technic is you get to build all these cool mechanisms. Why have much of it done for you in a prebuilt assembly? Why have many different motors that are all the same, all geared slow and powerful instead of having a range, like: 1) 2x2x3 micro motor (very slow, 40-60rpm) 2) 2x3x5 micro servo with central axle hole (pairs nicely with valves) 3) 4x5 L motor (minimal internal gearing if any, minimum 2000 rpm) 4) 5x5 XL high torque motor (roughly 800-1000rpm) 5) Ludicrous buggy motor! (Just POWAH, similar speed and torque of old buggy motor but in less weird, more usable form factor) That's a greater range of options for less motors! I suspect the motor driver chips are in the hubs, but would be better in the actual motors, with hubs providing bus power and signal only. I might be wrong on that though.

Many very mixed opinions. Just to scratch the surface the old one is very limited on features but very intuitive and fun to play with, and system is open to all the old 9v motors like buggy, ungeared 5x4 and micro motors. New app based RC has lots of features but many find that touch screen isn't fun to play with, coding needed to make custom creations, not a great range of motors to choose from (they are all big, slow with lots of torque, and that's it) and the whole system feels undercooked right now.

And thank you again for part 2. Regardless of if we always agree, your reviews are always very clear, unbiased and informative, can't ask for more

I don't think anyone is asking for a completely monochromatic/all black colour scheme. That's misrepresenting the argument into one that's easier to defeat. But why do the colours have to be so bright and goofy looking? Surely there's a far more tasteful colour palette available, like black, dark grey, light grey, tan, metallic dark grey (for special pieces like the wave selector), the main set colour and so on, instead of bright red, bright blue, bright yellow, purple and and so on. We know building mistakes still happen even with the goofy colours, could it be possible that a brightly coloured piece doesn't stand out in a jumbled mess of brightly coloured pieces?! And what if there was a better way, like having the bag numbers go much higher. Building technic sets it's hard to find that brightly coloured piece in a large pile of brightly coloured pieces so colour vomit doesn't help me there either. It doesn't matter it if illuminated, I still won't see it under a pile of other illuminated pieces. However the 89 batmobile with it's all black exterior goes up to bag numbers 24 and it was a way better building experience, while Technic sets with more pieces don't go anywhere near that high. And for gears you can mould the number of teeth into the gear and call it out in the instructions, for the wave selector you could mould an orientation arrow into it. For pneumatic hoses, instead of the three colours you could have something similar to those little wire ID sleeves, which come in many colours and also numbered, for a much more tasteful, removable and fool proof method of avoiding mistakes, or colour the ends of the hoses any number of different colours. And for gearboxes, make them simpler and much more true to life and all those different sized clutch gears will only physically fit together the right way, so you can't mess it up and it's much easier to understand and trouble shoot if you do mess it up, just to name a few examples of other options. Colour coding is fine but colour vomit as it is now....isn't even the best option (though it might be the cheapest), as well as destroys the feeling of "build for real". Am I wrong? Technic for me is about the internal mechanisms, so to me they might as well go full knex (never go full knex ) and colour code the outside panels as well!

Thank you for the detailed review. And you're right, I am disappointed. There's a lot of passion for enticing casual buyers on display (didn't they have the 18+ 1:10 scale cars for that?!) but zero passion for making an authentic model of the real mechanics, it's a literal copy/paste of a previous mechanical abomination so I give up on this series of cars.

Easy nope for me. They made the box more "premium" and expensive, looks more costly than even the mid 90s era boxes, but there's non of the appeal of those older boxes that allowed you to see all the functions under the lid and gaze at all the pieces through the clear plastic. They made the wheels bigger but they didn't utilise the extra space and just gave us the same old suspension/steering geometry. They got the bigger shocks from the BMW motor bike, but with the metal inner spring and plastic outer spring they are even less mechanically realistic than before. They made new gears for the differential but they don't really offer anything new we couldn't do before. They copied and pasted the unrealistic, rainbow coloured mechanical abomination of a gearbox from the Sian, except now the gears are in the wrong order. They printed all the pieces but they slapped one printed piece onto a steering wheel that's still completely horizontal and not angled up slightly toward the driver. They even went through all the effort of making a large hardback book detailing how closely they worked with Ferrari, to make a car that's mechanically completely different to the Ferrari. It's a Ferrari so it won't look as good as the Lamborghini, it's more expensive with less wheel drive. Sorry but I just can't consider buying this at any reduced price.

You know, I bet that if the guys and gals over at Lego was reading this thread right now they might be a little confused lol. "Oh God, now they are saying building Technic is boring, why are they even fans of Technic?!" but I totally get what you mean. Stacking regular bricks is satisfying and therapeutic in a way. But for us gear heads, building mechanisms is where it's at. There's nothing better than that! This might be an issue for sets like very tall cranes and supercars, because all of the mechanisms (the good stuff) is done in the first quarter of the build. After that it's just "beam stacking". I think the Liebherr having large lattice boom sections is really going to help. Someone mentioned the 42100 boom and how that was a boring build experience. Wasn't that full of mechanisms? Why would that be boring? I think in that case, the thing is such a complex spaghetti of gears and axles, that you don't know what mechanism you are building. So when you add a motor, instead of thinking "oh, that's the motor for the bucket tilt", you are thinking "oh, I guess I'm putting a motor there now!", so you kinda don't get the intended mental payoff that building the mechanism is intended to provide. If you don't know what you are building then you can't really fully get why you are building it. Contrast that with the Arocs where most of the time you know exactly what mechanism you are building and why you are building it and it's a much better and more mentally satisfying experience. Same with Sian gearbox. It's always "oh, this gear goes there. Now this axle. Now that gear.....don't know why but that's what the instructions say". If instead it was adding a pair of gears meshed together on two axles and you go "oh, that's a new gear speed, ooooh next I'm adding reverse gear" it would feel much better. That's just my take on it.