allanp

A Technic advent calendar, Oh holey Lego!

Oh wow, Eurobricks is looking sooooooo much better! Excellent work

A tricky challenge indeed given the pieces you're limited to. The very first Technic helicopter set 852 archives a swash plate of sorts using no specialised parts, though it can only do collective control, and uses gravity to keep the top half of the swash plate resting on the bottom half.

Aha! You know something we don't?

That was because of the choice of material used, nothing inherent to the design of the cable itself. Even so, if you do have any of those wires where they used the wrong material, search for @BatteryPoweredBricks channel on YouTube for some tutorials on how to make them better than new again. I still really like the 9v twin wire system. The wires are more flexible and easier to work with. The wires were separate from the motor as well. Plugs can stack as well as be rotated to any 90 degree orientation and it would all work. The system had light bricks and electrified plates and switches and I liked how it felt like building electrical parts felt like building with Lego bricks. It would be nice if the next system is more separated out instead of having pre built stuff. So instead of the current motors with inbuilt gear reduction, in built wires and encoders, have them all be separate things. This is meant to be Lego, where we build it how we want, right? What if we want to build our own reduction that's more specific to the situation, or what if we want to be super lazy and add multiple stages of a pre built reduction box, or what if it would be better to have that reduction be in a different place to the motor? What if we don't need an encoder in a particular situation like a drive motor in a small car. Why pay to have all that extra electronics and wires when it just needs the basic motor? By separating things out we could go back to the stackable, 90 degree rotatable, more Lego like 9v twin wire system. Heck, even trains could get their electric rails back if they wanted to! And incorporate some of the modern DCC type advanced control of modern toys train sets. Lego sets could go from super simple and basic motor and battery box (reducing the cost of having motors in smaller play sets), to super complicated stuff with rotary encoders and other different sensors all on their own separate wires. You'd only have to include what a set actually needs, even right down to only having 2 wires if that's all it needs, reducing costs. Not every motor needs an encoder. Sets like 42099 had a quite inefficient drive train also, because you had internal gear reduction in the motor, followed by a gearing up stage, followed by reduction in the wheel hubs. I do love those planetary reduction hubs, being separate from the motor, but having gear reduction pre built in the motor as well meant little left to build for us! The Cat bulldozer is really bad for this. You mount the motor directly to the reduction hub and job done. What the heck? I want to build that sh#t, not have it pre-built for me! But it's okay, for this rather expensive set you did get to build more advanced gearing to motorise.....the ladder! Sometimes you go down a wrong path and you need to take a step backwards to enable you to go forwards. It happens. Separating things and going back to the 2 wire system would reduce costs as well as give much needed flexibility to the system for the more advanced models, and enable you to build it your way, not to mention how ever a set designer might want to build a set.

We haven't heard much if anything about the summer wave though have we?

Ah right, thanks for that. I'll have to check the MSDS for any silicone oil I have, or have used. It's a good way of seeing what harmful ingredients it may contain. Thanks again for pointing that out.

Issues with silicone oil?

Sounds to me like a friction weld rather than a sonic weld.

Agreed. While it's interesting to see new electronics and a possible confirmation that PU is gone, I don't see this particular new system being good for Technic. Having to charge each motor individually and turn on/off each one wouldn't be fun play time. Being able to code and program stuff is one thing but they need to get the basics right first, like simple, inexpensive plug and play operation, like the 9v system or PF. Then if they want to add other functionality like basic RC then add receivers and physical remotes like PF, and if they want to add more advanced programming options/RC then have something like the control center that doubles as a big, fully programmable physical remote, or even the code pilot from the 9v system. There shouldn't be any need to be tied to third party smart devices or computers.

Nice job, the proportions look pretty accurate for such a small scale.

To make the engine bigger for these 1:5 scale bikes it would be really nice to get more of the engine. We only ever get the bottom half, so it would be great to see the cam belt/chain and some representation of the cam shafts. I'd prefer that over making it less realistic.

I'm just glad we still keep the proper engines. It would suck if they all went to the cam style engine. No idea why the new Ducati went that route.

Wowsers!

A lot of interesting thoughts there. In terms of sets being challenging, sets were obviously harder when I was a child, like 8868 when I was only 8 years old due to putting one of the rear differentials the wrong way round and having to figure out what I did wrong. But it wasn't the end of the world. They got easier as I got older and more experienced building sets. I don't think it's really possible to make a set that would be actually challenging for us unless you make poor instructions. No matter how complex the final product, all we will ever do is place one piece against another, or one assembly of pieces against another, and repeat, nothing is difficult if the instructions are clear. The only way to induce any kind of challenge for experienced builders would be to make poor instructions or introduce something entirely new such as insanely complex rigging or real hydraulics that would require a process of bleeding out all the air in the system or something like that. I do remember finding the Arocs pneumatics slightly more fiddly than previous pneumatic sets including even 8455, but that was because the Arocs hoses came pre cut and they were too long in some cases, particularly the blue hoses that connect the valves. After trimming them to a more suitable length it suddenly became just as easy as anything else. Set designers are cautious of making sets too challenging for inexperienced builders and that's only fair. Although I do disagree with some of their chosen methods for making things easier like color vomit, Lego is meant to be fun and not like airfix, which does require more time and skill to make a great looking model. I'd also love to see a set with 10 or more pneumatic functions with hoses and/or wires everywhere. A full lighting package would really increase the wiring to be a full on wiring loom! But I'm also a fan of giving the customer some options to tailor their build experience. For example, make all pneumatic hoses black so that it looks more authentic to real life, and supply a sticker sheet with colored and/or numbered bands that you can wrap around the ends of the hoses. This way you can have far more colour coding for pneumatic hoses than the current 3 color system, but in a way that's far more tasteful (a small coloured band would look far better and more authentic than coloring the entire hose) and the stickers can even have a clear numbering system to make placing/routing the hoses correctly super easy, barely an inconvenience, no matter how many hoses there are! But if you want more challenge then just don't use the stickers. Cables in panels are marked a similar way but stickers would be cheaper to do. As for your suggestion of a $1000, 10,000+ piece crane, I'd be totally up for that. A $1000 Technic model? Yes please. But How can we make a crane, or any set sooooooo good that $1000 seems like a price worth paying? It can't be just big. It can't be more of the same just.....more. It would need next level mechanical excellence! No linear actuators, at $1000 this is not a toy. It's not enough that the functions are replicated but the way they work in real life needs to also be replicated (I'd say that's true for any flagship). For $1000, new, massive pneumatics would be a minimum requirement but also, at that price we're getting into the realm of real hydraulics. They might be plastic and it might use water instead of oil, but hydraulic non the less. Were also talking new, more powerful motors and if it's RC then absolutely a big physical remote. There are many, including many on this forum that say they would never pay more than say $200 for any set. I'm not one of them but still, This would have to be sooooooo good, soooooo next level, so beyond what they thought was possible that it makes even them say okay, I need this! You'd also likely want to cast a wider net to appeal to some of the big time youtubers that aren't really Lego focused already, but would feature a set if it was that next level in terms of teaching real world mechanics, such as Adam Savage (tested) or Jerry rig everything.

If you want to, it's your Lego. Your question is essentially a question of Lego purism. Some members like to stick strictly to what comes in a Lego box unmodified. Others allow themselves to go crazy with modified parts, 3D printed parts, third party parts (such as buwizz or aluminium beams and steel axles), clone brand parts, brushless motors, metal bearings and so on. But when posting your model in the forum it's usually customary (though not required) to state what parts stray from pure, unmodified Lego. Enjoy the hobby how you please, there's no judgement here. And besides, don't Lego designers themselves create new parts for themselves to use?

The Audi tires would look good on some heavy machinery like a mobile crane, I'm surprised we haven't seen it yet. For your mobile crane suggestion, what should we be exited about? How would it improve on previous mobile cranes we've had? Some farming machinery would be good. Something I've been meaning to MOC (but have no time) is a tractor which pulls a seeder/planter. Into the seeder you would dump a pile of tan 3/4 technic pins, and when it's pulled along by the tractor, it would place them down on the floor on end like a field of crop. Then I'd also build a combine harvester that could actually gather them off the floor as it goes, and into it's hopper. It would also have a thin conveyor made of chain, or maybe it could use the newer larger worm screws to unload them out the auger pipe into a trailer. This could then be loaded back into the seeder and the fun starts again. If you want more complexity and more of an idea of what these mobile factories we call combine harvesters are like, maybe the seeder could place down two different types of pieces to represent wheat and straw, and the harvester would have internal rotating drums and shaker plates to separate the wheat from the straw. The straw pieces gets dumped out the back and the wheat pieces get stored in the hopper. That would be a really cool set of farming machinery.

Do you mean front wheel drive only (can't think of any, except the 8862 B model, which is a combine harvester!), or do you mean any sets with driven front axles, which would also include 4x4s and 6x6s? If it's the latter, sets with a motorised front axle would include 42129, 42099, 9398 and 42070. There's also sets like 42030 which is an articulated front loader, so there's drive but no suspension or steering on the axle itself. For sets that come with a driven front axle but that don't come motorised, so you can motorise them yourself, you have to be careful as most of them use differentials, CV joints and a gearing ratio that isn't suitable for being motorised. Many of the big supercars are like that, but the 8110 unimog might be okay as you can easily swap the 1:1 portal axle ratio for a 1:3 ratio.

I haven't really been excited by the call backs to older sets in other themes. I would much rather get a proper retro set, meaning it is the exact same set with the same original packaging and all that. Apart from the barcode and a few parts mould updates, it should be indistinguishable from the original. If they are going the retro route, I don't want retro marketing, I want proper retro sets. If we're talking about a new set for Technic, I think a mostly studfull universal set with a new ungeared motor (like the 9v 5x4 motor) and simple battery box would really hit the spot. There would be no panels and a lot of gears and belt drives, a mechanical playground of fun! The majority of studded Technic parts are still in production so it wouldn't be too difficult, and being studfull has a lot of advantages. It's easier to build more generic b, c and d models when you don't have to care so much about the looks, it's easier for the consumer to have fun building their own mechanical creations and it would act as a bridge between regular Lego and Technic. There could even be a second pneumatic focused universal set also. As for the flagship Technic set, I would hope that they get back on form before 2027, but I'd like the sort of set that says "this one's for you!". It's not marketing that makes it for the adults that have been buying sets for many of those 50 years, because marketing can't do that. It's the fact that it's "true" Technic, and a true flagship at that, something that feels truly special like now the designers are just showing off!

Proper Lego ones aren't usually too stiff unless they have been left for a while not being used. sometimes both valves and pneumatics can stick on the first few operations after storage. I'd like to try a silicone oil from a bottle but so far have just used a spray can of silicone lubricant. I spray a bunch into the cap and then use it from there, either carefully dripped into the ports or down the side of the valve or applied directly to the pneumatic rod. Be careful not to get it on the outside of any ports though as it can make the hoses slide and pop off easier when under higher pressure. This will help a lot with the sticking as well as keeping the rubber seals supple. I usually have a spray can of silicone lubricant, it's great to have handy around the house for lubricating sticky curtain rails, windows mechanisms, bicycle (doesn't trap dust/dirt on the chain like oil would) or also for use on the car door seal rubbers as it stops them sticking in winter.

Nah I don't think so. It's not like TLG couldn't do a flagship scale forklift just because a copy cat company done one already. Besides, I would hope that TLGs version would be quite different. Real forklifts can move quite fast, this looks way too slow for scale speed and not mechanically authentic at all. Looks like a nice MOC, but a Technic flagship? They can do better. With new pieces and recolours, a flagship should be better than a MOC could be at that time.

Yeah, it really depends. 1) They might be using a lot of bigger parts like the liebherr crane. 2) They might also be introducing the next electric system that feels somewhat like a spiritual control center 3 for all we know, the cost of which might make them super careful of the piece count (control center 2 only had just over 1000 pieces, converted to studless would probably be around the 2300 mark). The last time we had 2 non motorized flagships in a row was 2003 and 2004, so I think it will have some form of motorization. 3) Or it might be using a motor and a bunch of pneumatics. To add power to each additional function only requires 1 or 2 added cylinders and a valve. In this scenario the piece count might drop even lower if they supply the pneumatic hose in one long length which you cut yourself (which I would prefer TBH though it's unlikely, even if it is more cost effective). 4) It might be some combination of any/all of the above 5) Or perhaps the least exciting option, it's a fairly unambitious set that just plays it safe. So what would make for a great flagship at only 2300 pieces? I'm not sure a 10 axle mobile crane or JCB backhoe would be on the cards here, I could be wrong though of course. For only 2300 pieces I'm thinking something a bit simpler, like perhaps an all terrain forklift on claas tires with 3 stage mast. Imagine the size of the twin cylinders to extend the 3 stage mast on that! Ideally for a flagship it would have at least one motor, ideally one that's new and more powerful. Would be fun to play with as an RC set also, just please keep it mechanically realistic as well, whatever it is.

There's been a feeling for a while now that PU is being either replaced with the next system or at the very least it's being completely overhauled. There's no concrete proof of this though, only small pointers towards this, like the lack of PU in sets recently as well as selling PU parts off at a discount, or not producing enough to have them in stock. There's something about this years flagship mercedes also, although very competently well engineered, it doesn't feel like it was meant to be a flagship imho. It just lacks a sense of flagship sized scale and ambition and was essentially a simplified 42110. A flagship doesn't solve the problems of the past by removing features, nor is it confined to only 2 new pieces. It's well made, but a flagship? I think it's unfair to place the weight of that title onto it TBH. Combined with the delay of the Liebherr crane also, maybe I'm adding 2 and 2 and getting 43, but it feels like PU promised more than it could deliver, or just wasn't well liked, and has had to be replaced or revamped much sooner than they had planned. I'm hoping for some 2025 Technic flagship information real soon, maybe we'll get some insite into the future of powered Technic sets.

YAY! Merry Christmas everyone.

There's always the option of buying used working/clone parts but sometimes it's satisfying to bring something back to life yourself, and often cheaper! There are some things you can do to try to revive them. My process for old used pneumatics is to first try to clean the steel rod, as any imperfection might prevent a good seal. I start with the least aggressive approach using some scotchbrite. You can spin the rod by attaching a lego motor to it, this makes cleaning much faster. If it still looks terrible, or if I want it looking really shiny like new, I have had good results by mounting the rod end to a lego motor to spin it then shining it up nice with metal polish. I have got really bad ones looking brand new but please be careful with this approach (try metal polish as a last resort), metal polishing compounds may have ingredients that can eat away at the top seal. You also definitely want to make sure you get all polishing residue off the steel rod before you retract the piston because metal polishing compounds also contain abrasives. I don't imagine it's good for the seals but if you are careful, apply a tiny amount to the cloth and wipe all the residue off and do what you can to stop it getting into the top seal it does wonders! After I'm happy that the rod is at least functionally clean I use a thin silicone based lubricant (again, to not eat away at the seals like a petroleum based lubricant might) on the seals by directly lubricating the rod and putting a few drops in the air inlet ports to lubricate the inner seal.