Lego and ... just Lego really

the rocketry show
Wildman Rocketry
rocket sok
Shop deals on ebay
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
dr wogz said:
one of the reasons I've given up on the Technic line. a lot of $$ for a kit full of parts that don't really integrate easily with the Lego system.. Not to mention a mechanical marvel that has a lot of "cut corners".. (Thinking of the bucket wheel excavator: cool, but top heavy & doesn't quite work as planned)
Click to expand...
The biggest problem I had with it when I built my Porsche 911 a few years ago was that yeah, you build it with this working transmission and an engine with working cylinders, and then promptly cover it all up so that you can only see any of those impressive mechanisms by taking it apart.

I've heard that's a problem with the new BMW motorcycle too. Yes, it has a working engine. No, you cannot see it without taking it apart.

Realistic? Yes. Good for a display model? Not really. Those sets should be designed with easily removable panels or maybe optional clear parts that allow people to see the inside.
 
Big issue I have with Technic of late is the demise of Power Functions. The cost inflation associated with Control+ is a whole legitimate topic of its own. But my main complaint is that my kid and her friends are much better off with old Power Functions style controllers. Driving with a phone app is a really deficient experience compared to a classic RC-styled controller. We have some Buwizz control bricks and in that case alternate apps exist such that you can use gamepads, but I don't know if Control+ apps support that. In any case, young kids' hands can barely hold those, plus I'm not excited about them jumping around attached to my phone as they drive. The apps are not nearly as good a solution for kid play as the Power Functions controllers, across the board---cost, durability, accessibility, screen time, versatility, etc..

I would also really love a generic pneumatics set, not one buried in an expensive adult-oriented model.

/old man complaining concluded
 
tjkopena said:
Big issue I have with Technic of late is the demise of Power Functions. The cost inflation associated with Control+ is a whole legitimate topic of its own. But my main complaint is that my kid and her friends are much better off with old Power Functions style controllers. Driving with a phone app is a really deficient experience compared to a classic RC-styled controller. We have some Buwizz control bricks and in that case alternate apps exist such that you can use gamepads, but I don't know if Control+ apps support that. In any case, young kids' hands can barely hold those, plus I'm not excited about them jumping around attached to my phone as they drive. The apps are not nearly as good a solution for kid play as the Power Functions controllers, across the board---cost, durability, accessibility, screen time, versatility, etc..

I would also really love a generic pneumatics set, not one buried in an expensive adult-oriented model.

/old man complaining concluded
Click to expand...
Yeah, the reviews of their off road R/C buggy was all negative towards the controller app for your phone. I agree.. (turned me off buying it) gimme a power functions controller! or revise the older R/C controller, and bring it up to 2.4GHz tech..
 
@bibbster it's a wonderful build! Definitely one of my favorite kit build experiences. Take your time and enjoy the engineering that went into it.
@dr wogz I agree Technic never really hit it with me to begin with. And while I use plenty of studded technic beams and gears in MOCs. I don't really love the panel system.
@tjkopena lots of agreement in the LEGO circles I'm in on that. PF had it's flaws, but control+ is frustrating for everyone!
 
Ronz Rocketz said:
What is the plural form of Lego?
Click to expand...

"Seth Meyers settles the ‘LEGO’ vs. ‘LEGOs’ debate, sort of"


I see that they added 'sort of' at the end, but why would we take a comedian's rant about it as it being "settled"? Whoever wrote that article understood click bait I suppose, but it's hardly settled when a comedian refuses to accept what he admits to be true just because he's been saying it wrong too long and is unwilling to change.

Lame.
 
tjkopena said:
Big issue I have with Technic of late is the demise of Power Functions. The cost inflation associated with Control+ is a whole legitimate topic of its own. But my main complaint is that my kid and her friends are much better off with old Power Functions style controllers. Driving with a phone app is a really deficient experience compared to a classic RC-styled controller. We have some Buwizz control bricks and in that case alternate apps exist such that you can use gamepads, but I don't know if Control+ apps support that. In any case, young kids' hands can barely hold those, plus I'm not excited about them jumping around attached to my phone as they drive. The apps are not nearly as good a solution for kid play as the Power Functions controllers, across the board---cost, durability, accessibility, screen time, versatility, etc..

I would also really love a generic pneumatics set, not one buried in an expensive adult-oriented model.

/old man complaining concluded
Click to expand...
I just took a look at some of the upcoming train sets, and they have the option of either using remote controls or that app. Hopefully this bodes well for upcoming Technic R/C releases.

Still not the same as the old electric trains with metal rails and that nice speed regulator that my model railroader brother and I both really miss, but better than the ones where you have to flip an on/off switch on the train.
 
Antares JS said:
I just took a look at some of the upcoming train sets, and they have the option of either using remote controls or that app. Hopefully this bodes well for upcoming Technic R/C releases.

Still not the same as the old electric trains with metal rails and that nice speed regulator that my model railroader brother and I both really miss, but better than the ones where you have to flip an on/off switch on the train.
Click to expand...
My LUG still uses the metal rail trains at our displays. But replacement motors are getting expensive.
 
Mushtang said:
That one is really cool. There is a circuit board inside the amp, and there's little Lego guitar pics that you store in the big opening in the back of the amp like players do for real.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I saw that and thought it was pretty neat. I'm surprised that they have you stand up the little plates between the studs though. I thought that was an "illegal" technique.

The first thing I started thinking about was how to convert the guitar into an Ibanez to resemble mine. It had me noting all the differences in construction between the two. The biggest headache with such a conversion will more than likely be the headstock. Ibanez headstocks are painted on the front while the sides and back are bare wood, and they are angled back to pull the strings around the nut, rather than recessed like a Fender's headstock is.

I also resumed my Titanic build earlier than expected if you haven't checked out the thread yet.
 
My son, who is 16, long hair, plays guitar like a pro, owns a couple of Strats, built the Lego Strat and didn't pick up on the fact that the little pieces were supposed to be guitar pics.

It was kind of funny, as he finished he said, "They say just to put these back here? What the heck? Are they extra pieces or something?"

He was embarrassed when I told him what they were, which he should have known.
 
Mushtang said:
My son, who is 16, long hair, plays guitar like a pro, owns a couple of Strats, built the Lego Strat and didn't pick up on the fact that the little pieces were supposed to be guitar pics.

It was kind of funny, as he finished he said, "They say just to put these back here? What the heck? Are they extra pieces or something?"

He was embarrassed when I told him what they were, which he should have known.
Click to expand...
I'm a long way from playing like a pro but I'm having fun learning and I have definitely been improving little by little. I can *almost* completely play a couple of Bon Jovi songs and have come up with a few riffs of my own using the minor pentatonic scale. Precisely playing fast solos on the high end of the neck where the frets are a lot smaller is pretty dang difficult though and is probably the biggest thing I am struggling with.

I looked at the pdf of the Lego Stratocaster instruction book before buying it, and was confused about the picks as well. What finally tipped me off that those were supposed to be picks was the instructions showing one stuck in the strings. That's what I do with my picks.
 
Last edited:
Antares JS said:
Yeah, I saw that and thought it was pretty neat. I'm surprised that they have you stand up the little plates between the studs though. I thought that was an "illegal" technique.
Click to expand...

I don't have the Stratocaster, but believe from reviews that they only do that with 1x1 plates?

Historically it's definitely been against LEGO rules to stand up plates like that. But maybe there is now, or always was, an exception for 1x1 plates? Technic had (has?) a similar rule against putting studs into the holes (e.g., to run a plate along a beam), but there was (is?) an explicit permission granted for 1x1 connections (plates, dishes, etc). Lets you do headlights and details like that.

Or they decided to let it by for a display-oriented model, or it just slipped by. Definitely been some lapses in their design reviews applying the rules the past couple years, mostly in bigger Technic sets.
 
Last edited:
hey ik this is completely unrelated but i made this weird robot like thing. Also sorry for bad quality
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20220729_181355.jpg
    IMG_20220729_181355.jpg
    82.6 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_20220729_181416.jpg
    IMG_20220729_181416.jpg
    82.5 KB · Views: 0
Review on the new medieval castle:



⚔️
 

Latest posts

Back
Top