allanp

Only 3 days till New York toy fair. Wonder if we'll get any more info. I'm hoping for more on the SUVs planetary hubs!

TBH I don't see countries like China and India giving up coal in the near future either. Maybe I'm wrong though.

Seems like a good reason to celebrate these monuments of engineering now rather than later.

Really? Manually driving regular LAs is tedious enough, let alone ones twice as long! But you wouldn't get anything new with 42082. And considering it has two battery boxes, 7 motors and over 4000 parts ide say it's driving ability is respectable for an excavator. Not great for an off road buggy but then it's not an off road buggy, it's a whopping excavator.

I don't know for sure but to be on the safe side I would limit the speed and torque to what the motor delivers when powered. So if the motor runs at 400 rpm, don't spin it faster than that. You can easily spin it way faster if you push a model along and the drive train is strong. This may lead to the motor generating voltages which the internal components wasn't designed for. And if it delivers a maximum one unit of torque when powered and stalled, don't apply any more torque than that. It's VERY easy to exceed this amount of torque when turning directly by hand. The gears inside have tiny teeth and sit on thin plastic pegs. They are more than strong enough for normal use, but they are still small bits of plastic.

Or how about, with a limit of around 180 parts each, you have to build two completely different pull back vehicles of different colours and a third combined vehicle using the same parts.

Panels used in this way are very strong and rigid, excellent for chassis that don't bend, like in the trailer for the Mack truck.

If the reports of new larger CV joints and 4:1 planetary reduction hubs are correct then Lego universal joints are no longer an issue. There shouldn't be any need for axles as thick as the wheels with motors in them, as that is indeed boring and unrealistic.

I seem to remember Motorola was working on a small touchscreen device for Lego. My Blu-ray player can connect to the internet via WiFi and many devices that are not smart phones have touch screens and Bluetooth. So all the tech exists for them to create a non smart phone separately available alternative. Ide be very happy with that. But you guys know how I like to push things into the realm of coolbutnotinamillionyearsson! So now imagine this. You have this touch screen Bluetooth and WiFi enabled control+ central control module with touch screen in a Technic format, onto which you can connect other input modules (also available separately). These could be push buttons, proportional control sticks or whatever. This means you can build whatever controller you like with as many physical inputs you want in as many combinations and orientations you can imagine. You want a control stick to go from being up/down to left/right, just detach the module, rotate and reattach. This will work for when you want to download the control+ presets for future set releases (or create your own custom presets on the computer using a free control+ preset designer program) for as long as the internet can be delivered to a device via WiFi.

@TeamThrifty my comment about lack of authenticity was more to do with the LAs than lack of complex gearboxes but you are right, function selection gearboxes aren't realistic either! But that would at least be more interesting than (motor, gear, gear, LA) X 7. But I do get it and I'm not complaining either. Control+ is a massive investment and they need a model to show it off, just like 8275 did for PF, and 42100 does that very well. And no-one is forcing me to buy it. I am however grateful for the option to buy what is practically a lifetime supply of control+ in a single set, and for the fact that these large expensive options exist should I change my mind, and for the cheaper SUV alternative as I'm really looking forward to seeing it's new bearings/CV joints.

That's the difference between cost and value. 450 is a lot of money, but 11 cents per piece with all those motors and two control+ hubs really isn't bad value.

That's probably the B model with downloadable instructions only

With over 4000 parts, 7 motors and 2 control+ hubs of course it's gonna be expensive. It's expensive, but for those that don't care much about mechanical authenticity then it appears to be right in terms of value. What's more, TLG are also releasing control+ in a cheaper alternative within the same wave of sets. Just like with the whole smartphone debate, I try to be an advocate of giving customers freedom of choice. You can choose to get the big expensive excavator or you can choose a cheaper alternative way to get control+. So even without bricklink they are giving us options. That's good isn't it? What's also VERY good is that, while this linear actuator clad control+ demo platform in the shape of an excavator isn't for me, I am actually very happy to see TLG and Technic as a theme doing well enough for them to release such a thing.

If control+ is only ever going to be in 16+ sets then that's fine. But if control+ is included in a set aimed at 10 or below I would hope that by that time there would be a non smart phone alternative accessory that could be purchased separately, like the lipo battery. I think that would solve all issues I have with it.

I think a toy is something that's sole purpose is pleasure. This can then be subdivided into more categories, like child's toy for example. Everything Lego releases (except for Lego education) is a toy. But that doesn't mean it's a child's toy. So is 42100 a toy? Yes. Is it a child's toy? That may depend on the child. Is the child smart and patient enough to build it? Will the child enjoy building and playing with it? I can see many children doing that while many others won't. So it could be considered a child's toy in many instances, but is it aimed at children? The age given on the box will answer that question. I'm not sure if the cost of 42100 is that much of a factor as much as the cost of the UCS millennium falcon is. The falcon is more expensive and is an immobile scale replica, while 42100 is cheaper and packed with electronics. How much is a high end games console? But do rising part counts preclude such sets from being a toy for children? I honestly don't think it does. Connecting one Lego piece to another provides the same challenge in a 50 piece set as it does in a 5000 piece set. Only with increased complexity comes the increased risk of mistakes being made that would affect the function of the model. 42100 has a very high piece count but I don't see a whole lot of mechanical complexity. One motor almost directly and simply drives one function. Repeat seven times. I think a child could handle that if they have the patience. The Bugatti is the opposite of that, and so I would say the Bugatti is much less of a child's toy despite being cheaper and with a lower piece count. So high prices and part counts aren't really that big factors in deciding if 42100 is a child's toy. Despite its high part count is it mechanically simple enough for a child? It very well could be. Despite its high cost does it provide enough in return to be good value? I think it probably does considering how expensive Lego is in general. So really it just comes down to do enough children want it. If enough children are asking their parents to buy it to make the set financially viable without the need for AFOLs to make it financially viable, then it's a child's toy that some AFOLs may also enjoy. But if it requires the existence and a substantial number of AFOL buyers to make it financially viable, it's still a toy but in the broader sense of the word in that it's not necessarily a child's toy.

Power functions as a system was added to and expanded over a decade. I'm sure control+ will be added to over the years. I hope one of the things added will be a separately available controller. It seems rediculous to have to give children access to a smart phone (with all its internet and social media access and all the online dangers that come with that, I'm really becoming more unhappy about it the more I think about it to be honest) and Google/apple accounts and contract/pay as you go bills just to play with Lego. I know they could borrow their parents phones but isn't it kind of crap for a parent to have to remove their child's controller every time they get a phone call or wants to use their own phone for any other reason at all? But I do get the other side of the argument, that since many people do have phones, adding such a controller seems like an unnecessary expense, which is why I'm advocating for a separately available controller. After all, power functions had a lipo battery available, I'm not aware of that being included in a set but it was very much appreciated as its own separately available accessory.

I did wonder if the car transporter had a windscreen when seeing the image. But it's very hard to tell if there's a perfectly clear, thin and flat panel in a low Res image.

I agree entirely. The best solution for us would be to release a smart remote (basically a cheap smart phone like device but without a camera or sim card or anything else that makes smart phones expensive, or makes it a phone at all for that matter!). It's basically hand held touch screen with WiFi connectivity to connect to the internet to download new remote profiles for new models and Bluetooth to communicate with the model. No need for sim card, (pay as you go or contract), no need for Google account or anything like that and it would be sold separately so that those of us that have smart phones don't have to pay for something they already have the ability to do, and those that don't have a smart phone can buy this smart remote instead. Those of us that go to display their models at shows won't have to hand over their phones to eager kids and I think most importantly, parents will not have to give their young children a smart phone, which is a view that I personally very much sympathize and agree with. Now I realise these sets coming with control+ in the second half are for older kids, but is control+ only ever going to be in sets for older kids in the many years to come? I don't think so.

I'm glad it's yellow because the gear rack housings appear to be yellow, which is a new and useful colour for that piece.

Do you mean the Arocs racks? The inner part with the gear teeth looks to be dark grey or maybe even black, while the outer sleeve is yellow. Indepenedend? So it's not like the crawler which had live axles (as it kinda looks but it's very hard to tell), but like 8466 with its dual wishbone suspension? Thank you for all this information BTW!

Kinda looks like the SUV has no front but two rear ends!

Imagine operating those long LAs manually

To add to my thoughts in the 2019 thread I like that the new frames are white, it's excellent that they are coloured the same as the model. I also notice that the phone is recieving live inclination angle information from the model. You can see it on the phone when it drives up the ramp. So that's cool and a nice authentic touch.

That's not too bad, we won't get the new parts till mid/late 2019 so it wouldn't be that long to wait.

Just read the SUV has motors in each axle, like the crawler. That's disappointing, but those new parts still sound awesome!