 | | | | | |
Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
And there are more technic sets:
http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/lego.cfm?StartRow=70
Duq
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
This is brilliant design work.
This is what I think of when I think of LEGO Technic models. This has a
very realistic look to it. Very well done!
Someone once asked me why I felt so strongly that the Jack Stone series was
a bad move for the company. I told them that, "it just doesn't *feel* like
LEGO sets when I look at it." This backhoe model is exactly the opposite.
This *feels* like a LEGO model. I realize we're talking juniorized sets vs.
Technic sets, but the principle is the same if you ask me. LEGO sets are
golden when they feel the way you think LEGO sets should... whether new or
old designs, and whether consisting of 10 Duplo pieces or 1000 Technic parts.
This speaks volumes about the ability of the LEGO company to produce solid,
well-designed, realistic Technic models... in awesome and consistent color
schemes. This model should be held up as a standard for the type of quality
work of which the company has always been capable. Bravo and pats on the
back to anyone involved in the planning and design of this set. You've
earned your pay and then some!
> Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
This is a disaster.
Frankly, I don't even see a fire truck in that picture. If you removed the
label and asked people to identify it, I'll bet you wouldn't get 'fire
truck' as your first answer more than 1/2 the time.
What I can't understand is how the company can release the backhoe (which is
a reasonably accurate scale representation of a real vehicle) and also
release that "fire truck" which looks like a VW van that got thrown into a
blender along with a can of Seven Up. Were these done by two different
design teams? Was one an outsourced design, while the other was done
in-house? Something is different between these two models... the connection
to reality is completely dissimilar.
Can anyone offer insights/thoughts on this?
I know there are a bunch of fire apparatus and rescue vehicle LEGO fans out
there. What do you folks think of this? Could this have been done differently?
Happy, confused and frustrated... all at the same time,
Allan B.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> > Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
>
> This is a disaster.
>
> Frankly, I don't even see a fire truck in that picture. If you removed the
> label and asked people to identify it, I'll bet you wouldn't get 'fire
> truck' as your first answer more than 1/2 the time.
It looks a lot like an airport crash truck (a kind of fire truck) to me.
Right down to the low slung body and fat all terrain wheels. The sickening
lime green color is all the latest rage in crash truck colors, apparently....
http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Rapids/2065/deptinfo/crash/crash.html
(shows that ugly color but not the 8 wheel design)
http://www.oshkoshtruck.com/ (shows a movie of a very similar truck although
it's only 6 wheel, if you click on the first thumbnail below the movie screen)
http://www.oshkoshtruck.com/htm/air-muni/striker45001.cfm (this could be our
model... 8 wheels, stylised shape, dark blue transparent color windscreen, etc)
But as a model, this crash truck... it's nowhere near as good a model as the
backhoe, I'd opine. That one's magnificent. So ya, I agree.
++Lar
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> > > Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> > > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
> >
> > This is a disaster.
> >
> > Frankly, I don't even see a fire truck in that picture. If you removed the
> > label and asked people to identify it, I'll bet you wouldn't get 'fire
> > truck' as your first answer more than 1/2 the time.
>
> It looks a lot like an airport crash truck (a kind of fire truck) to me.
Yes, or ARFF's as they are affectionately known. But I should have
qualified my proposal by saying, "if you asked the general public." Larry,
you are far too knowledgeable when it comes to transportation, vehicles etc.
to not see the vague resemblance to reality in this model. You're
overqualified for a poll such as this. :)
The main problem is that design wise it probably wasn't the most suitable to
be rendered in Technic. It *might* have come out better if done with Model
Team specs in mind.
I agree that it's supposed to be an airport crash truck, but take a look at
some of these:
http://www.airportfire.com
or this thread, where this thing has already been mentioned:
http://news.lugnet.com/technic/?n=8756
> Right down to the low slung body and fat all terrain wheels. The sickening
> lime green color is all the latest rage in crash truck colors, apparently....
>
> http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Rapids/2065/deptinfo/crash/crash.html
> (shows that ugly color but not the 8 wheel design)
My guess is that this one my just be a bad pic of a yellow crash truck. I
know that if I took the same pic with my digital camera I could easily make
a yellow truck appear lime green. :)
But notice the FLAT panels and solid looking design of that truck? Not
really represented in any way by the LEGO model. Sorry.
> http://www.oshkoshtruck.com/htm/air-muni/striker45001.cfm (this could be our
> model... 8 wheels, stylised shape, dark blue transparent color windscreen, etc)
Quite possibly. It has the same cab design. But again, what's with the
Super Car chassis parts on the LEGO version? The real ones are almost
painfully flat on their sides. Am I just being too picky? But before you
answer... look at the backhoe again. *Somebody* at LEGO can design
authentic looking models. Why didn't that person or persons work on the
fire truck. Sorry to sound so bitter, but I've been hoping for a large
scale LEGO fire truck for a while now. This just doesn't cut it in my opinion.
I must admit I saw an ambulance (real one) in this lime color of green
today. I have never seen one before... and hope never to again. If this is
a fad, let it pass quickly. The lime green color does not stand out against
other traffic nearly as well as fire engine red, yellow or ambulance white.
I think LEGO should have stuck with at least a traditional color when trying
out a new design like this.
> But as a model, this crash truck... it's nowhere near as good a model as the
> backhoe, I'd opine. That one's magnificent. So ya, I agree.
It's hardly in the same league. That was why I wondered how it came to be
released at the same time as the backhoe. Surely this didn't come from the
same design department.
Allan B.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Before reading any more of my reply, remember, I **agree** with you, I'm not
very keen on the model either.
Although... Nik likes it better than the backhoe. But then, he's 10.
In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> But notice the FLAT panels and solid looking design of that truck? Not
> really represented in any way by the LEGO model. Sorry.
> > http://www.oshkoshtruck.com/htm/air-muni/striker45001.cfm (this could be our
> > model... 8 wheels, stylised shape, dark blue transparent color windscreen, etc)
>
> Quite possibly. It has the same cab design. But again, what's with the
> Super Car chassis parts on the LEGO version?
> The real ones are almost
> painfully flat on their sides.
How about this prototype?
http://thunder.prohosting.com/~arff-2/arff/oshkosh/02.jpg (from the site you
referenced.... good resource... thanks!)
maybe they were going for the water tank look? No other explanation for the
use of those incredibly duff panels I can fathom(1). But if they wanted
water tanks what would be wrong with using the 1/2 round cylinder (ala
http://guide.lugnet.com/set/8250 in yellow) or the 1/4 round cylinder ala
http://guide.lugnet.com/set/10016 ) instead?
Am I just being too picky? But before you
> answer... look at the backhoe again. *Somebody* at LEGO can design
> authentic looking models. Why didn't that person or persons work on the
> fire truck. Sorry to sound so bitter, but I've been hoping for a large
> scale LEGO fire truck for a while now. This just doesn't cut it in my opinion.
>
> I must admit I saw an ambulance (real one) in this lime color of green
> today. I have never seen one before... and hope never to again. If this is
> a fad, let it pass quickly. The lime green color does not stand out against
> other traffic nearly as well as fire engine red, yellow or ambulance white.
That's a perennial topic, so I hear, in the fire fighting fraternity. (I'm
not a firehead like some so it's just what I remember) This layman agrees
with you, red or yellow or white stand out better than lime green, at least
they do to me. But supposedly studies indicate lime green is a good color.
Beats me why. I just don't see it that way. And it sure is horrid!
> I think LEGO should have stuck with at least a traditional color when trying
> out a new design like this.
I agree. Like this design: http://guide.lugnet.com/set/8280 ... an oldie but
a goodie. (and one I just happen to still have good stocks of in my store)
> > But as a model, this crash truck... it's nowhere near as good a model as the
> > backhoe, I'd opine. That one's magnificent. So ya, I agree.
>
> It's hardly in the same league. That was why I wondered how it came to be
> released at the same time as the backhoe. Surely this didn't come from the
> same design department.
Well, maybe, maybe not. Maybe that design's been in the can for a while and
just got approved. Maybe their marketeers think the two models (backhoe and
crash truck) are targeted at different segments and should be at different
realism levels? Who knows.
While we're ripping on designs, let's not leave that ore truck out either,
OK? I'm glad they did an ore truck, mind you, but it's not up to the backhoe
levels by any means. Sort of reminded me of Znap, actually, when I first saw
it...
1 - except for the "you are going to use some of these parts so we can
recoup tooling costs for them whether you want to or not" explanation, of course
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Before reading any more of my reply, remember, I **agree** with you,
Of course you do... why wouldn't you? ;)
Don't worry Larry, I'm not interested in making this into a federal case.
You make good points and I am not going to just pretend that my opinion is
the only one. I certainly don't want to offend anyone who does like this
design. I'm just a tradtionalist when it comes to fire trucks... like we
didn't see that coming. :)
> Although... Nik likes it better than the backhoe. But then, he's 10.
Understood.
> > The real ones are almost
> > painfully flat on their sides.
>
> How about this prototype?
>
> http://thunder.prohosting.com/~arff-2/arff/oshkosh/02.jpg
I can't get that particular URL to load... getting a 404 error.
> maybe they were going for the water tank look? No other explanation for the
> use of those incredibly duff panels I can fathom(1). But if they wanted
> water tanks what would be wrong with using the 1/2 round cylinder (ala
> http://guide.lugnet.com/set/8250 in yellow) or the 1/4 round cylinder ala
> http://guide.lugnet.com/set/10016 ) instead?
That was the sort of analysis I was hoping for. Just people asking questions
about why this design may have ended up looking like this.
> The lime green color does not stand out against
> > other traffic nearly as well as fire engine red, yellow or ambulance white.
>
> That's a perennial topic, so I hear, in the fire fighting fraternity. (I'm
> not a firehead like some so it's just what I remember) This layman agrees
> with you, red or yellow or white stand out better than lime green, at least
> they do to me. But supposedly studies indicate lime green is a good color.
> Beats me why. I just don't see it that way. And it sure is horrid!
>
> > I think LEGO should have stuck with at least a traditional color when trying
> > out a new design like this.
>
> I agree. Like this design: http://guide.lugnet.com/set/8280 ... an oldie but
> a goodie. (and one I just happen to still have good stocks of in my store)
Here's something I'll bet you never thought you'd hear me say Larry.... I
think this design looks dated. Too old and clunky. It needs to be more
modern looking if you ask me. :)
> > > But as a model, this crash truck... it's nowhere near as good a model as the
> > > backhoe, I'd opine. That one's magnificent. So ya, I agree.
> >
> > It's hardly in the same league. That was why I wondered how it came to be
> > released at the same time as the backhoe. Surely this didn't come from the
> > same design department.
>
> Well, maybe, maybe not. Maybe that design's been in the can for a while and
> just got approved. Maybe their marketeers think the two models (backhoe and
> crash truck) are targeted at different segments and should be at different
> realism levels? Who knows.
All very real possibilities.
> While we're ripping on designs, let's not leave that ore truck out either,
> OK? I'm glad they did an ore truck, mind you, but it's not up to the backhoe
> levels by any means. Sort of reminded me of Znap, actually, when I first saw
> it...
I saw it, but don't have the same feelings for dump trucks that I do for
fire apparatus. :) So I'm less interested in disecting it.
> 1 - except for the "you are going to use some of these parts so we can
> recoup tooling costs for them whether you want to or not" explanation, of course
Frankly... that makes the most sense of anything. This looks like a very
forced design... that is, forced by parts, not forced to meet a realistic
look and feel.
All the best!
Allan B.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
>
> > Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
>
> This is a disaster.
>
> Frankly, I don't even see a fire truck in that picture. If you removed the
> label and asked people to identify it, I'll bet you wouldn't get 'fire
> truck' as your first answer more than 1/2 the time.
>
> What I can't understand is how the company can release the backhoe (which is
> a reasonably accurate scale representation of a real vehicle) and also
> release that "fire truck" which looks like a VW van that got thrown into a
> blender along with a can of Seven Up. Were these done by two different
> design teams? Was one an outsourced design, while the other was done
> in-house? Something is different between these two models... the connection
> to reality is completely dissimilar.
>
> Can anyone offer insights/thoughts on this?
>
> I know there are a bunch of fire apparatus and rescue vehicle LEGO fans out
> there. What do you folks think of this? Could this have been done differently?
>
> Happy, confused and frustrated... all at the same time,
> Allan B.
I like the backhoe model as well, although I wonder if there are going
to be any blue airtanks included... hopefully, since this looks like a
large model using the 8466's large tires. It seems strange to me to have
one technic set with 9 pneumatic cylinders: wouldn't it make more sense to
include a motor/air tanks/gear train instead?
As for the fire truck, it is a little different from the standard red fire
trucks we see on the streets: that's because it's an airport fire truck,
which are usually that yellow/lime green color. I would bet that the truck
contains a neat mechanism in the back, in addition to the 6 wheel steering.
While I'm not crazy about the color, it is realistic, but I'll wait to pass
judgement on it once more info is available.
Examples of actual airport fire trucks:
http://www.e-one.com/Cool_Photos/2000/LAX.jpg
http://thunder.prohosting.com/~arff-2/arff/waltek/06.jpg
The truck on the right in the first photo looks most like the LEGO model.
There is also a technic R/C car in silver...
Build well
John
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, John Guerquin writes:
> In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> As for the fire truck, it is a little different from the standard red fire
> trucks we see on the streets: that's because it's an airport fire truck,
> which are usually that yellow/lime green color.
Really? See the link near the bottom of this post. I think a lot of them
are still traditional red, or often bright yellow. Just my opinion, I
really can't back this up with any data.
> I would bet that the truck
> contains a neat mechanism in the back, in addition to the 6 wheel steering.
Mechanism to do what do you think? I figure the two knobs on top control
the front and back steering separately.
> While I'm not crazy about the color, it is realistic, but I'll wait to pass
> judgement on it once more info is available.
I agree we need to see more pics... but so far the impression it leaves with
me isn't very satisfying.
> Examples of actual airport fire trucks:
> http://www.e-one.com/Cool_Photos/2000/LAX.jpg
> http://thunder.prohosting.com/~arff-2/arff/waltek/06.jpg
I would wonder the same of these as I did of one of Larry's pic examples. Are
these just bad color pics of yellow trucks. Especially your 2nd example.
On my monitor here at home it looks very nearly like standard bright LEGO
yellow.
Here is a great site with tons of pics. Most of the vehicles are red,
yellow or white. Again, color pics on the net can lie, but honestly, the
yellow ones look yellow to me. I think the green, as Larry mentioned may be
a current trend or fad. Boy, I hope it passes quick.
http://www.airportfire.com
All the best,
Allan B.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> In lugnet.general, John Guerquin writes:
> > In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
>
> > I would bet that the truck
> > contains a neat mechanism in the back, in addition to the 6 wheel steering.
>
> Mechanism to do what do you think? I figure the two knobs on top control
> the front and back steering separately.
That was also my first guess, but my second guess is that one knob would
rotate the water cannon, and the other would steer the 3 axles.
As for other mechanisms hidden in the back.... not sure, but I would hope
that a large-ish technic model for 70 USD would offer more than just steering.
A damper operated lifting cab maybe, but hopefully more?
(similar to http://guide.lugnet.com/set/8446 )
> > While I'm not crazy about the color, it is realistic, but I'll wait to pass
> > judgement on it once more info is available.
>
> I agree we need to see more pics... but so far the impression it leaves with
> me isn't very satisfying.
I think the technic lineup for 2003 looks much better than this year's.
Personally, none of these sets get me as excited as the 8880 or 8448 did,
and being relatively expensive, I will wait until I see them in stores, and
read other people's reviews.
Build well
John
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.technic, John Guerquin writes:
> In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> > In lugnet.general, John Guerquin writes:
> > > In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> >
> > > I would bet that the truck
> > > contains a neat mechanism in the back, in addition to the 6 wheel steering.
> >
> > Mechanism to do what do you think? I figure the two knobs on top control
> > the front and back steering separately.
>
> That was also my first guess, but my second guess is that one knob would
> rotate the water cannon, and the other would steer the 3 axles.
> As for other mechanisms hidden in the back.... not sure, but I would hope
> that a large-ish technic model for 70 USD would offer more than just steering.
Yes, on second thought, that makes more sense. I guess I was just seeing
the wheels and not thinking of much else.
Allan B.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, John Guerquin writes:
> Examples of actual airport fire trucks:
> http://www.e-one.com/Cool_Photos/2000/LAX.jpg
I can actually vouch for this color being not exactly yellow, I was at LAX
earlier this year and saw those actual trucks or ones very like them. It's
sort of what you'd get if you mixed that reviled lime green LEGO color with
the standard LEGO yellow we love so much, and then added a bit of white to
lighten things up. In other words, lime yellow if you will. NOT standard
yellow by any means. The pic has it pretty close in hue, at least on my
laptop anyway...
Lime green or limey yellow has been becoming more popular on and off for 20
years now. Sigh.
ARFF fans already know this but this stuff (and its brethren) is some
amazing equipment, there are units that can haul down a runway and lay down
a bed of foam wide enough and deep enough to land an airliner that has no
gear down, and do it at speeds you would not believe.
As you can imagine I see a lot of ARFF stuff because of all the airports I
fly in and out of. Hope to never see any of it in use though.
Note that in the referenced picture both front axles of the rear unit are
turned, the unit is not traveling in a straight line.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.general, John Guerquin writes:
>
> > Examples of actual airport fire trucks:
> > http://www.e-one.com/Cool_Photos/2000/LAX.jpg
>
> I can actually vouch for this color being not exactly yellow, I was at LAX
> earlier this year and saw those actual trucks or ones very like them. It's
> sort of what you'd get if you mixed that reviled lime green LEGO color with
> the standard LEGO yellow we love so much, and then added a bit of white to
> lighten things up. In other words, lime yellow if you will. NOT standard
> yellow by any means. The pic has it pretty close in hue, at least on my
> laptop anyway...
O.K. I'm willing to bend on the lime green thing. At least that they are
out there and in use. It's hard to argue with eyewitness sightings. But it
doesn't mean I have to like it. :)
> Lime green or limey yellow has been becoming more popular on and off for 20
> years now. Sigh.
Wow. I'm not sure the trend has been as popular in Southwestern Ontario. I
can honestly say I say my first lime green rescue vehicle just today. Weird
timing, I know, but then that's life for you. And no, the ambulance did not
stand out very well against other traffic, or the fresh blanket of snow we
got in the last couple days. If you ask me, it would have been much more
visible painted bright white with bright orange stripes and detailing.
> ARFF fans already know this but this stuff (and its brethren) is some
> amazing equipment, there are units that can haul down a runway and lay down
> a bed of foam wide enough and deep enough to land an airliner that has no
> gear down, and do it at speeds you would not believe.
It is the technology that impresses me. That's why the shape/design of them
is really secondary, though I find the inverse sloped front ends to be oddly
attractive.
> As you can imagine I see a lot of ARFF stuff because of all the airports I
> fly in and out of. Hope to never see any of it in use though.
Exactly. Although it's nice to know it's there, here's hoping you never see
any of it in action.
Regards,
Allan B.
* Have I drifted off-topic with this response? I'll let someone else make
the call, I'm not really sure. :)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> Wow. I'm not sure the trend has been as popular in Southwestern Ontario. I
> can honestly say I say my first lime green rescue vehicle just today. Weird
> timing, I know, but then that's life for you. And no, the ambulance did not
> stand out very well against other traffic, or the fresh blanket of snow we
> got in the last couple days. If you ask me, it would have been much more
> visible painted bright white with bright orange stripes and detailing.
Must be something wrong with your eyes. Extensive studies have shown that
this optic green (think that's the name) is the most visible color over a
wide range of viewing conditions. Red is a really bad color in the dark and
at twilight. Most new fire and rescue vehicles are this color these days.
The only problem with being so visible is that it's hard to hide how ugly a
truck looks when painted this color.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Dean Hystad writes:
> > Wow. I'm not sure the trend has been as popular in Southwestern Ontario. I
> > can honestly say I say my first lime green rescue vehicle just today. Weird
> > timing, I know, but then that's life for you. And no, the ambulance did not
> > stand out very well against other traffic, or the fresh blanket of snow we
> > got in the last couple days. If you ask me, it would have been much more
> > visible painted bright white with bright orange stripes and detailing.
>
> Must be something wrong with your eyes.
This is very likely. :)
However, I really needed to do a double take to identify this ambulance
yesterday. It simply didn't stand out against the other traffic, the grey
of the sky or the snow. Not nearly as much as I would think it should. I
realize that's not very scientific, but it is what I saw.
> Extensive studies have shown that
> this optic green (think that's the name) is the most visible color over a
> wide range of viewing conditions. Red is a really bad color in the dark and
> at twilight.
Isn't that why some departments began using the bright yellow years ago?
And speaking of visibility at night, here is an interesting quote from Capt.
David Whitt of the Sacramento City Fire Department:
"We didn't like the green, but it was supposed to be more visible than red,"
he said. "Turns out, that's only true in the daytime. At night, it all
depends on lights, anyway, and we're always lit up like a Christmas tree."
- source:
http://www.sacbee.com/content/community_news/sacramento/story/5192455p-6201234c.html
I also found several mentions of how new reflective tape technology has made
the overall color of the truck less important. Which, combined with the
lights, really makes the most sense. From a distance, in the dark, how
visible is any color of paint?
Here is another article though that backs up the lime yellow color (which is
a term Larry also used) with some study data:
http://www.usroads.com/journals/aruj/9702/ru970203.htm
Finally, here's a cute poem to round out my cites:
Why are fire trucks red?
A: Fire trucks have four firefighters and eight wheels.
Four and eight make twelve.
There are twelve inches in a foot.
Rulers are a foot long.
Queen Elizabeth II is a ruler and is also the name of the largest ship that
sails the seven seas.
Seas have fish and fish have fins.
The Finns fought the Russians and the Russians are red.
Fire trucks are always rushin' to fires therefore fire trucks are red.
> Most new fire and rescue vehicles are this color these days.
As a cyclist, I have also dealt with the color/visibility debate. I've worn
both a bright red and a bright yellow jacket during different years. Based
solely on careless drivers pulling out in front of me, I would surmise that
a bright, almost lemon yellow is the most effective... especially at dusk,
during the night and against a white snowy background. Now, I've never
tried lime green, so the study really isn't complete. :)
> The only problem with being so visible is that it's hard to hide how ugly a
> truck looks when painted this color.
I don't think fire trucks are ugly at all. As mentioned elsewhere in the
thread, I think the ARFF's are a great look... looking exactly as they
should for what they do. And classic pumper and ladder trucks are beautiful
machines if you ask me. Will they look awful in 'optic green'? Possibly.
But then so would most vehicles. :)
All the best,
Allan B.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Allan Bedford" <ExpertBuilder-DELETE-TO-REPLY@apotome.com> wrote in message
news:H87rMF.3Ay@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.general, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> > Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
>
> This is brilliant design work.
>
> This is what I think of when I think of LEGO Technic models. This has a
> very realistic look to it. Very well done!
I totaly agree. I take 3 of that one, please! :)
Can anyone see if there is a pnaumatic tank in there some place? I dont
have one yet...
> Someone once asked me why I felt so strongly that the Jack Stone series • was
> a bad move for the company. I told them that, "it just doesn't *feel* • like
> LEGO sets when I look at it." This backhoe model is exactly the opposite.
> This *feels* like a LEGO model. I realize we're talking juniorized sets • vs.
> Technic sets, but the principle is the same if you ask me. LEGO sets are
> golden when they feel the way you think LEGO sets should... whether new or
> old designs, and whether consisting of 10 Duplo pieces or 1000 Technic • parts.
>
> This speaks volumes about the ability of the LEGO company to produce • solid,
> well-designed, realistic Technic models... in awesome and consistent color
> schemes. This model should be held up as a standard for the type of • quality
> work of which the company has always been capable. Bravo and pats on the
> back to anyone involved in the planning and design of this set. You've
> earned your pay and then some!
I agree with you here also. The backhoe model is what we can say is the
heart of "real" Lego; all bricks that this model is made of can be used in
almost infinitve number of ways. And with some fantasy and skill you can
even get it to look like an airplaine using the same parts. You cant say
that about every sets from Lego today...
http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8316
This one does not look like Lego at all. If it wasn't for the LEGO letters
in the name I would not have thought of this as a Lego set at all. I hope it
is not a big investment from the Lego Group company....
And I sorry to say that I will hope Lego stop that Bionicle line. I hate
that stuff, that is not what I can define as Lego at all, its more like
Playmobile stuff.
> > Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
>
> This is a disaster.
> Frankly, I don't even see a fire truck in that picture. If you removed • the
> label and asked people to identify it, I'll bet you wouldn't get 'fire
> truck' as your first answer more than 1/2 the time.
Well, not a disaster. Airport firetrucks (some one mentioned crash trucks,
is that the same thing?) does not always looks pretty. They dont need to,
they only need to go fast over all terrain and be efficient. :)
But the backhoe model was the best of all Techninc sets that I could see on
that site.
Have my own Tracktor model here:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=24410
It does not look so nice, or even at scale because the form of a Tracktor
only came after some try&fail with that steering consept.
Regards
Øyvind Steinnes
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?m=Phoenix
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Øyvind Steinnes writes:
>
> "Allan Bedford" <ExpertBuilder-DELETE-TO-REPLY@apotome.com> wrote in message
> > This is a disaster.
> > Frankly, I don't even see a fire truck in that picture. If you removed • the
> > label and asked people to identify it, I'll bet you wouldn't get 'fire
> > truck' as your first answer more than 1/2 the time.
>
> Well, not a disaster. Airport firetrucks (some one mentioned crash trucks,
> is that the same thing?) does not always looks pretty. They dont need to,
> they only need to go fast over all terrain and be efficient. :)
Sorry, I didn't mean to give the wrong impression. I'm quite fond of the
'real' crash trucks. I think they are a wonderful blend of function vs.
form. They are superbly rugged looking... something the LEGO model lacks
woefully.
It wasn't the type or style of truck that I was complaining about, rather it
was the way in which this type of truck was rendered in LEGO. Based on the
backhoe I honestly believe they could have done better with the ARFF.
This makes me all the more interested in rebuilding a crash truck that I
started about 3 years back. I had a large yellow 4 wheeler that I was quite
happy with, other than all of the upper equipment and fine details. I will
have to revisit that project and see what I can come up with.
All the best,
Allan B.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
"Allan Bedford" <ExpertBuilder-DELETE-TO-REPLY@apotome.com> writes:
> In lugnet.general, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> > Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
>
> This is a disaster.
>
> Frankly, I don't even see a fire truck in that picture. If you removed the
> label and asked people to identify it, I'll bet you wouldn't get 'fire
> truck' as your first answer more than 1/2 the time.
It looks like an airport fire truck to me. Perhaps they look like
that in Denmark?
--Bill.
--
William R Ward bill@wards.net http://www.wards.net/~bill/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistency is not really a human trait.
--Maude (from the film "Harold & Maude")
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
I am happy to see both sets. I agree that the backhoe is the better of
the two, but I will plan on getting at least one of each. Every set I
have put together has taught me something; I am sure the fire truck
(however futuristic? they made it look) will unveil more ideas and
possibilities for me.
Not everything can, or even should be a masterpiece, IMO.
Allen, BTW, I don't own any Jack Stone sets 8-) but, I don't think I
fit the target age group; So I mostly agree with you.
// Joe
-----------------------------------------
http://www.bricklink.com/store.asp?p=ctc
http://home.insight.rr.com/worldof/
-----------------------------------------
Allan Bedford wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
>
> > Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
>
>
> This is brilliant design work.
>
> This is what I think of when I think of LEGO Technic models. This has a
> very realistic look to it. Very well done!
>
> Someone once asked me why I felt so strongly that the Jack Stone series was
> a bad move for the company. I told them that, "it just doesn't *feel* like
> LEGO sets when I look at it." This backhoe model is exactly the opposite.
> This *feels* like a LEGO model. I realize we're talking juniorized sets vs.
> Technic sets, but the principle is the same if you ask me. LEGO sets are
> golden when they feel the way you think LEGO sets should... whether new or
> old designs, and whether consisting of 10 Duplo pieces or 1000 Technic parts.
>
> This speaks volumes about the ability of the LEGO company to produce solid,
> well-designed, realistic Technic models... in awesome and consistent color
> schemes. This model should be held up as a standard for the type of quality
> work of which the company has always been capable. Bravo and pats on the
> back to anyone involved in the planning and design of this set. You've
> earned your pay and then some!
>
>
> > Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
>
>
> This is a disaster.
>
> Frankly, I don't even see a fire truck in that picture. If you removed the
> label and asked people to identify it, I'll bet you wouldn't get 'fire
> truck' as your first answer more than 1/2 the time.
>
> What I can't understand is how the company can release the backhoe (which is
> a reasonably accurate scale representation of a real vehicle) and also
> release that "fire truck" which looks like a VW van that got thrown into a
> blender along with a can of Seven Up. Were these done by two different
> design teams? Was one an outsourced design, while the other was done
> in-house? Something is different between these two models... the connection
> to reality is completely dissimilar.
>
> Can anyone offer insights/thoughts on this?
>
> I know there are a bunch of fire apparatus and rescue vehicle LEGO fans out
> there. What do you folks think of this? Could this have been done differently?
>
> Happy, confused and frustrated... all at the same time,
> Allan B.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
That firetruck... Ugly would be an understatement :)
Releasing sets like that is NOT the way to get me to reach for my wallet.
The 3 small mini sets look acceptable though.
As for the backhoe, its got some good points (the large quantity of
Pneumatics for one) but the worst point is that it doesnt have any beams.
Compare and contrast with a set like the 8431 Pneumatic Crane Truck which
uses a fair wack of beams. Its going to take more than some interesting
looking wheels, digger buckets, and a bunch of pneumatics to make me want
one lego.
Give me beams, plates with holes and all the other stuff that makes a set
like the 8431 crane (yes I do own one) so good and mabie I will buy.
Untill then, there is always second hand parts and borrowing stuff off my
friends :)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
>
> Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
>
> And there are more technic sets:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/lego.cfm?StartRow=70
>
> Duq
Wow! 9 cylinders, that's unprecedented, It's also the same number as on my
AK912 crane. The thought of adding pnumatics to the shovel on the original
JCB had crossed my mind before.
Jonathan Wilson's right, the lack of beams is appalling. The firetruck isn't
that bad in my opinion. It looks like a childs toy, which is exactly what it
is. I think the reson for each new set being designed differently is that
Lego have catered for a large demographic. The fire engine is more of a
beginner's set and the backhoe more of an advanced set, with the
construction vehicles being the 'baby' sets.
As far as the fire truck goes, in my opinion the colour and styling are
right, and I like the 8 wheel steering and fancy wheeltrim paint.
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Yeah!! :)
I think, despite the odd looks of some of the models, the message is clear -
Technic as a name may have fallen by the wayside, at least in TLC's plans,
but the idea behind the parts is still alive and well - "build working
models". That means they didn't throw out the moulds :) Which means we can
still get supplies of parts :) Any ideas about what we should call these
kinds of parts - gears, axles, "bricks with holes in them", pneumatic parts,
etc - now we're not supposed to use the "Technic" word anymore ;)
JB
In lugnet.general, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
>
> Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
>
> And there are more technic sets:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/lego.cfm?StartRow=70
>
> Duq
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
As one who has spent alot of time in recent days complaining about the lack
of new sets, I am thrilled with these new sets. I love the backhoe and I
think the fire truck looks great too. Count me in to preorder these and get
them as soon as Lego has them ready.
Thanks for the detective work in finding out this information.
Bob Gomez
member 905
In lugnet.general, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
>
> Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
>
> And there are more technic sets:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/lego.cfm?StartRow=70
>
> Duq
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Its worth taking a close look at some of the other items on marz.
4481 (a Star Wars set) seems to have some interesting looking ring gears.
(What might once have been referred to as Technic parts ;) I wonder what
options will exist to attach things to the inside of these?
JB
In lugnet.general, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
>
> Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
>
> And there are more technic sets:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/lego.cfm?StartRow=70
>
> Duq
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
I too, am very interested in making some interesting project with those
gears. I am wondering if they will mesh with gears already produced or only
work with the mechanism included with that set. Now to dream up something
good to build with them...Steve? Any ideas?
-Rob
"John Barnes" <barnes@sensors.com> wrote in message
news:H881qB.85I@lugnet.com...
> Its worth taking a close look at some of the other items on marz.
>
> 4481 (a Star Wars set) seems to have some interesting looking ring gears.
> (What might once have been referred to as Technic parts ;) I wonder what
> options will exist to attach things to the inside of these?
>
> JB
>
>
> In lugnet.general, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> > Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
> >
> > Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
> >
> > And there are more technic sets:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/lego.cfm?StartRow=70
> >
> > Duq
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
A few observations about the new sets (now I've had the time to have a
better look).
First the fire truck. I've seen enough disaster movies to immediately
recognize it as an airport firetruck. The color, oh well, maybe I'd prefer
yellow or dayglow orange.... There are definitely two knobs on top. Back and
front steering independently would be very unlikely on this kind of vehicle,
the second knob to control the hose makes much more sense. From the size of
the vehicle there must be something interesting inside. From what I can see
in this picture it looks unlikely the cab or the back will open up. There
are two things I can't work out in the picture: what's that blue thing
between the wheels, and what's the white bit that obscures part of the beam
in the top right of the picture?
The Backhoe grader. I'm afraid there won't be an airtank inside. Just look
at the size of the cab. There must be at least five pneumatic
valves/switches (outriggers, front up/down, front tip, back up/down, back
tip), maybe six (an extra for the back). With the amount of hoses that'll
take I don't think there'll be any space for a tank. Interesting bits in
this picture: the one red piece of tubing in the back, I wonder what's the
significance of that. Even on a good looking model like this they couldn't
resist the temptation of those ugle body panels (the tiny one between the
wheels). I like seeing the large rims in yellow (I could do with a few for
my next project). Most of all I fear a hefty price tag for this one...
As for the small construction vehicles: I'll get those in a flash as soon as
they hit the shelves. Even if there's hardly any new parts in them for me, I
think they're very well done: they're just cute. And Lego should be
encouraged to make more of this....
Elsewhere I noticed two more RC cars: 8366 has a cool look and uses Silver
Champ wheels. 8369 looks interesting on the parts side: new wheels/tyres,
new shocks (as far as I know) and.......... new style body panels! Aargh!
Not again!
Three other sets caught my eye: 4402/4403/4404. They look like sort of entry
level model team sets. I certainly like the looks of them.
As for Galidor: I'm lost for words. What's this doing on the Lego site
anyway? (http://www.lego.com/Galidor/)
Bionicle on ice? I couldn't care less. That bionicle c*** produced some of
the parts they're now using for those four wacky motorbikes, so at least
it's not all useless....
Duq
"Duq" <lugnetpost@skipthisbit.duq.tmfweb.nl> wrote in message
news:H87LFK.9yM@lugnet.com...
> Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
>
> Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
>
> And there are more technic sets:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/lego.cfm?StartRow=70
>
> Duq
>
>
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> are two things I can't work out in the picture: what's that blue thing
> between the wheels, and what's the white bit that obscures part of the beam
> in the top right of the picture?
I think the blue thing is supposed to be a hose reel.
The white bit with the trans blue thing on top? That's a light bar isn't it?
Mark
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> As for the small construction vehicles: I'll get those in a flash as soon as
> they hit the shelves. Even if there's hardly any new parts in them for me, I
> think they're very well done: they're just cute. And Lego should be
> encouraged to make more of this....
Agreed! I think those little sets are cute too. The truck seems to have a
gear-driven dump mechanism, and the front end loader seems to have a
gear-driven front bucket lifting/lowering mechanism. Prices appear to be 20
USD for the dump truck and front end loader, and 6 USD for the little
forklift. Which is very reasonable for technic IMHO. I will definetly be
getting the 2 larger sets.
> Elsewhere I noticed two more RC cars: 8366 has a cool look and uses Silver
> Champ wheels. 8369 looks interesting on the parts side: new wheels/tyres,
> new shocks (as far as I know) and.......... new style body panels! Aargh!
> Not again!
http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8366
probably uses the controller/receiver of the recent 8475 R/C buggy.
So it's a normal technic set (ie. modular design) with the new styling
panels, probably the new 8475 motors, and likely a servo output for the
steering.
http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8369
appears to be in the same trend as the 5600 racer and the more recent
4589 racer (http://www.brickset.com/search.aspx?Query=4589). It's probably
a one-piece chassis with steering and drive inside. The wheels and
suspension look very similar to conventional radio control cars; which again
makes me think that's it's a one-piece chassis/wheels/suspension. But it's
strange that it's in the 8000 series, which is usually reserved for technic.
There are a few technic parts in the rear wing support structure. Strange....
Build well
John
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
hi dug
my observations are:
#. whole sets are done using liftarms
i read on this group i think that lego is going to build models only from
liftarms
so these models are good point to start with it
if it's true - they are builded with no bricks at all this is the main
issue!
some people said here that liftarm are not as good as bricks
but some including me are saying that it is a good direction
because IMHO in real world there is no bricks connected to each other just
like that
all mechanizms in real world are more simmilar to liftarm-based rather than
bricks-based
but this is out of topic
#. the blue thing is hose rolled between wheels i think
but why it is so low positioned and why the hose is so long (to be rolled)
and in addition there is the red one thing between wheels
according to ie destroyer droid 8002 the red details means particular
functions
so maybe the blue hose and the white thing at the end of vehicle is... the
hydro-something system hmmm??? :)))
#. 8454
what is the gray thing above rear wheels and below green liftarm
what is the small gray circle behind the seats
#. the next observation is about the 8455
the picture is not too good but aren't the pistons of the new version -
without brick at the bottom???
the pump is definitively the standard one (so maybe there is some bricks
:)))
#. 8455
how the arm is turnded
how the support arms are folded (the lenght of piston is relatively short
comparing to liftarm below)
why valves are not exposed (where are they excluding 2 which are showed)
"Duq" <lugnetpost@skipthisbit.duq.tmfweb.nl> wrote in message
news:H88KIw.3GH@lugnet.com...
> A few observations about the new sets (now I've had the time to have a
> better look).
> First the fire truck. I've seen enough disaster movies to immediately
> recognize it as an airport firetruck. The color, oh well, maybe I'd prefer
> yellow or dayglow orange.... There are definitely two knobs on top. Back • and
> front steering independently would be very unlikely on this kind of • vehicle,
> the second knob to control the hose makes much more sense. From the size • of
> the vehicle there must be something interesting inside. From what I can • see
> in this picture it looks unlikely the cab or the back will open up. There
> are two things I can't work out in the picture: what's that blue thing
> between the wheels, and what's the white bit that obscures part of the • beam
> in the top right of the picture?
>
> The Backhoe grader. I'm afraid there won't be an airtank inside. Just look
> at the size of the cab. There must be at least five pneumatic
> valves/switches (outriggers, front up/down, front tip, back up/down, back
> tip), maybe six (an extra for the back). With the amount of hoses that'll
> take I don't think there'll be any space for a tank. Interesting bits in
> this picture: the one red piece of tubing in the back, I wonder what's the
> significance of that. Even on a good looking model like this they couldn't
> resist the temptation of those ugle body panels (the tiny one between the
> wheels). I like seeing the large rims in yellow (I could do with a few for
> my next project). Most of all I fear a hefty price tag for this one...
>
> As for the small construction vehicles: I'll get those in a flash as soon • as
> they hit the shelves. Even if there's hardly any new parts in them for me, • I
> think they're very well done: they're just cute. And Lego should be
> encouraged to make more of this....
>
> Elsewhere I noticed two more RC cars: 8366 has a cool look and uses Silver
> Champ wheels. 8369 looks interesting on the parts side: new wheels/tyres,
> new shocks (as far as I know) and.......... new style body panels! Aargh!
> Not again!
>
> Three other sets caught my eye: 4402/4403/4404. They look like sort of • entry
> level model team sets. I certainly like the looks of them.
>
> As for Galidor: I'm lost for words. What's this doing on the Lego site
> anyway? (http://www.lego.com/Galidor/)
> Bionicle on ice? I couldn't care less. That bionicle c*** produced some of
> the parts they're now using for those four wacky motorbikes, so at least
> it's not all useless....
>
> Duq
>
> "Duq" <lugnetpost@skipthisbit.duq.tmfweb.nl> wrote in message
> news:H87LFK.9yM@lugnet.com...
> > Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
> >
> > Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
> >
> > And there are more technic sets:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/lego.cfm?StartRow=70
> >
> > Duq
> >
> >
>
>
>
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> #. the blue thing is hose rolled between wheels i think
> but why it is so low positioned and why the hose is so long (to be rolled)
> and in addition there is the red one thing between wheels
> according to ie destroyer droid 8002 the red details means particular
> functions
> so maybe the blue hose and the white thing at the end of vehicle is... the
> hydro-something system hmmm??? :)))
The hose I most likely a thing for the non-existing (?) Technic figures to run
around spraying with. The red bit is probably the noozle.
The white thing in the back appears to be some sort of styling and a tan/gold
disc can be seen. Perhaps another, larger, hoose reel?
True water capabilities would be cool but not likely since it's pneumatic
tubing and I reccon the mix of pneumatics (as in the other set) and water is
not a good one.
> #. 8454
> what is the gray thing above rear wheels and below green liftarm
Looks like some sort of mudflap (if you refer to the dark gray panel fairing
that's also positioned above the front wheel pair).
> what is the small gray circle behind the seats
The photo quality is too bad to tell, can't zoom the JPEG.
> #. the next observation is about the 8455
> the picture is not too good but aren't the pistons of the new version -
> without brick at the bottom???
The one tilting the bucket appears too look like a new piston however the ones
used to raise the bucket and support legs are of the normal type.
> how the arm is turnded
Good question.
> how the support arms are folded (the lenght of piston is relatively short
> comparing to liftarm below)
It will probably raise 45-degrees up from horisontal.
> why valves are not exposed (where are they excluding 2 which are showed)
There can be a third behind the mudguard/cab. My guess is there is an identical
set of valves on the right side.
/Tobbe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> A few observations about the new sets (now I've had the time to have a
> better look).
> First the fire truck. I've seen enough disaster movies to immediately
> recognize it as an airport firetruck. The color, oh well, maybe I'd prefer
> yellow or dayglow orange.... There are definitely two knobs on top. Back and
> front steering independently would be very unlikely on this kind of vehicle,
> the second knob to control the hose makes much more sense.
Maybe it controls the hose arm on top?
> From the size of
> the vehicle there must be something interesting inside. From what I can see
> in this picture it looks unlikely the cab or the back will open up. There
> are two things I can't work out in the picture: what's that blue thing
> between the wheels,
Looks like a hose.
> The Backhoe grader. I'm afraid there won't be an airtank inside. Just look
> at the size of the cab. There must be at least five pneumatic
> valves/switches (outriggers, front up/down, front tip, back up/down, back
> tip), maybe six (an extra for the back).
I'd say definitely 6.
> With the amount of hoses that'll
> take I don't think there'll be any space for a tank.
Very unlikely. But I don't think you need a tank when you're using the
manual pump.
> Interesting bits in
> this picture: the one red piece of tubing in the back, I wonder what's the
> significance of that.
Looks like ordinary flex hose to me - dunno why it would be red.
> As for the small construction vehicles: I'll get those in a flash as soon as
> they hit the shelves. Even if there's hardly any new parts in them for me, I
> think they're very well done: they're just cute. And Lego should be
> encouraged to make more of this....
I agree! These sets look great for younger technic builders to start on!
ROSCO
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Hey
Look at this picture:
http://f24.parsimony.net/forum61776/messages/58775.htm
And then this:
http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
The last picture is just an proto type! Look at alle the wrong colors, the
"old style" off valves, the back grab is "naked" there are missing some
"styling"...
There is missing one pneumatic pumps, and it is not placed on the right place.
Best regards Kim Andersen
In lugnet.general, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> A few observations about the new sets (now I've had the time to have a
> better look).
> First the fire truck. I've seen enough disaster movies to immediately
> recognize it as an airport firetruck. The color, oh well, maybe I'd prefer
> yellow or dayglow orange.... There are definitely two knobs on top. Back and
> front steering independently would be very unlikely on this kind of vehicle,
> the second knob to control the hose makes much more sense. From the size of
> the vehicle there must be something interesting inside. From what I can see
> in this picture it looks unlikely the cab or the back will open up. There
> are two things I can't work out in the picture: what's that blue thing
> between the wheels, and what's the white bit that obscures part of the beam
> in the top right of the picture?
>
> The Backhoe grader. I'm afraid there won't be an airtank inside. Just look
> at the size of the cab. There must be at least five pneumatic
> valves/switches (outriggers, front up/down, front tip, back up/down, back
> tip), maybe six (an extra for the back). With the amount of hoses that'll
> take I don't think there'll be any space for a tank. Interesting bits in
> this picture: the one red piece of tubing in the back, I wonder what's the
> significance of that. Even on a good looking model like this they couldn't
> resist the temptation of those ugle body panels (the tiny one between the
> wheels). I like seeing the large rims in yellow (I could do with a few for
> my next project). Most of all I fear a hefty price tag for this one...
>
> As for the small construction vehicles: I'll get those in a flash as soon as
> they hit the shelves. Even if there's hardly any new parts in them for me, I
> think they're very well done: they're just cute. And Lego should be
> encouraged to make more of this....
>
> Elsewhere I noticed two more RC cars: 8366 has a cool look and uses Silver
> Champ wheels. 8369 looks interesting on the parts side: new wheels/tyres,
> new shocks (as far as I know) and.......... new style body panels! Aargh!
> Not again!
>
> Three other sets caught my eye: 4402/4403/4404. They look like sort of entry
> level model team sets. I certainly like the looks of them.
>
> As for Galidor: I'm lost for words. What's this doing on the Lego site
> anyway? (http://www.lego.com/Galidor/)
> Bionicle on ice? I couldn't care less. That bionicle c*** produced some of
> the parts they're now using for those four wacky motorbikes, so at least
> it's not all useless....
>
> Duq
>
> "Duq" <lugnetpost@skipthisbit.duq.tmfweb.nl> wrote in message
> news:H87LFK.9yM@lugnet.com...
> > Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
> >
> > Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
> >
> > And there are more technic sets:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/lego.cfm?StartRow=70
> >
> > Duq
> >
> >
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
Looks familiar in some way:
http://www.lotek.nu/creations/backhoe/index.html
(OK so they're both yellow and backhoe's with the large wheels).
I will probably get one of these, at least for the pneumatics.
I hope it's a Technic turntable in the back of that thing for the backhoe.
The front bucket looks like a new item.
> Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
I like it but will probably not buy it at full retail.
Best regards,
/Tobbe
http://www.lotek.nu
(remove SPAM when e-mailing)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.technic, Tobbe Arnesson writes:
> In lugnet.general, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> > Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
> > http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
>
> Looks familiar in some way:
> http://www.lotek.nu/creations/backhoe/index.html
>
> (OK so they're both yellow and backhoe's with the large wheels).
>
> I will probably get one of these, at least for the pneumatics.
>
> I hope it's a Technic turntable in the back of that thing for the backhoe.
I hope it's not.
A long pin or two vertically seperated hinges will work much better than a
horizontal turntable.
A hinge is often preferable in applications requiring a rotation of less
than 180 degrees.
The strenght of the hinge on a JCB backhoe is demonstarted when one JCB backhoe
lifts itself into the air with it's arm and another JCB then drives
underneath it.
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> > I hope it's a Technic turntable in the back of that thing for the backhoe.
>
> I hope it's not.
>
> A long pin or two vertically seperated hinges will work much better than a
> horizontal turntable.
>
> A hinge is often preferable in applications requiring a rotation of less
> than 180 degrees.
I did not mean function-wise, I meant partwise. I'd like more turntables :)
> The strenght of the hinge on a JCB backhoe is demonstarted when one JCB backhoe
> lifts itself into the air with it's arm and another JCB then drives
> underneath it.
That must be a sight...
/Tobbe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Tobbe Arnesson writes:
> > > I hope it's a Technic turntable in the back of that thing for the backhoe.
> >
> > I hope it's not.
> >
> > A long pin or two vertically seperated hinges will work much better than a
> > horizontal turntable.
> >
> > A hinge is often preferable in applications requiring a rotation of less
> > than 180 degrees.
>
> I did not mean function-wise, I meant partwise. I'd like more turntables :)
So what your saying is 'I Hope lego do a bad job because I'll get the parts
I want' :-). Even if that's not what you actually mean.
I just buy them off Ebay, I have loads.
> > The strenght of the hinge on a JCB backhoe is demonstarted when one JCB backhoe
> > lifts itself into the air with it's arm and another JCB then drives
> > underneath it.
>
> That must be a sight...
Check out this link
http://www.heservices.co.uk/entertainment/stunteam/stunt1.htm
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> So what your saying is 'I Hope lego do a bad job because I'll get the parts
> I want' :-). Even if that's not what you actually mean.
Yep :)
> I just buy them off Ebay, I have loads.
I too have a load but I don't buy parts from other sources then sets.
> > > The strenght of the hinge on a JCB backhoe is demonstarted when one JCB backhoe
> > > lifts itself into the air with it's arm and another JCB then drives
> > > underneath it.
> >
> > That must be a sight...
>
> Check out this link
>
> http://www.heservices.co.uk/entertainment/stunteam/stunt1.htm
Cool, thanks for sharing!
/Tobbe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Hello all,
After reading all the threads of the original message, I would like to
contribute my 2 cents, (before I’ll gladly give them, along with few hundred
dollars more to Lego).
8454 – Funny how the more ugly set got more responds than the other one.
However, this pile of liftarms has more than meets the eye:
1. The knob closer to the front seems to have double action: It is not
steering like the one behind it, but is connected to some kind of liftarm,
enabling it to work as a four-direction joystick.
2. The thing between the green liftarm and the black panel at the back is
the regular engine; I guess it is connected to the non-steering wheels.
3. The blue hose between the wheels is connected to the red “thing” close to it.
4. Nothing seems to open on the body – no doors of any kind, so there is
something else that is hiding there.
5. There are two dark gray handles next to the steering knob, that has to
control something like...
6. ...(did someone say) a water gun! Could this be the first hydro-lego set,
or is it just my imagination?
Yes, it is ugly, yes I would have a few.
8455 – What a magnificent way to say: “We want to fix our stupid mistake
from 15 years ago!”. The original 8862 Backhoe was supposed to be looking
like this. I guess the 8868 Airtech was already defined, and Lego didn’t
want the 8862 to be more superior in this sense.
The lack of airtank or compressor just mean that we have to work harder to
operate it – will anyone refuse to buy it because of this? Will anyone
resist the temptation to add an airtank AND a compressor to this set? (Don’t
forget a differential and 6 cylinders engine…).
Well, I also cannot find more words to say about it. I think that the price
of this set will be similar to the price of just the pneumatic system on any
BrickLink store... If so, it would be a great buy.
These two sets define the only way that the Technic theme can go by: More.
More wheels (8454), more pneumatics (8455). Lego had covered almost all the
mechanical features in the past, now things can get only bigger. However,
there are three types of vehicles that Lego didn’t produce in the past, and
will probably introduce in the next couple of years:
1. Large truck with many wheels. A successor for the 8868 and 8479. That’s
what the 8454 is for.
2. Family car. The legendary 853 was the only large scale family car, not
supercar. Unlike the real life, for Lego, supercars are easier to design
than family cars, because of the engine location (a problem that was solved
only in 1999 with the 8448), the doors (the only door that Lego know how to
design is gullwing door) and the size of it (based on the 8448, a Lego
family car would probably be ~60cm long, with more than 1500 pieces).
3. Minivan. Probably the most important type of car in the past 20 years. To
build it, Lego need to rotate the engine, add many sliding, lifting, moving
doors and many flexible seats. Such a set would have ~1500 pieces as well,
or even more than that.
Finally, two personal points, which I would like to add here: First, for
about two month I have a huge (75cm), 8 wheels chassis sitting on my Lego
shelves, waiting to be the next ultimate Airtech-something. Now Lego has
it’s own first 8 wheeler. Mine, by the way, is a twin-steer chassis, with
all wheels drive (7 differentials!) and independent suspensions. Did I
mentions that is has the 8466 wheels?
Second, I’ve already started collecting parts for my version of
all-pneumatics Backhoe... Nice to find out that Lego is doing what I’m
expecting it to do. Now I’m waiting for the family car and minivan. In the
meanwhile I’ll have a few of those 8454 and 8455.
Enjoy,
Avi Parvin
In lugnet.general, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8455
>
> Or this 8-wheeled fire truck with 6 steering wheels:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/moreinfo.cfm?ID=LEGO-8454
>
> And there are more technic sets:
> http://www.marzdistribution.com/insideMarz/lego.cfm?StartRow=70
>
> Duq
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> 8454 - Funny how the more ugly set got more responds than the other one.
> However, this pile of liftarms has more than meets the eye:
>
> 1. The knob closer to the front seems to have double action: It is not
> steering like the one behind it, but is connected to some kind of liftarm,
> enabling it to work as a four-direction joystick.
agreed
under the back knob you can see the ball-pin
the front knob is connected to it
but the front knob seems to be enable to move in one direction only
> 2. The thing between the green liftarm and the black panel at the back is
> the regular engine; I guess it is connected to the non-steering wheels.
i agree
when i sharp a little bit the picture then it shows part-studs of engine
bricks
> 3. The blue hose between the wheels is connected to the red "thing" close
to it.
yes and when you look closer you can see that this red thing is a fire
extinguisher
simmilar to http://peeron.com/inv/parts/4599
and above the rolled hose you can see two black
http://peeron.com/inv/parts/75535
one upper and other lower to enaboe the hose to pull out
> 4. Nothing seems to open on the body - no doors of any kind, so there is
> something else that is hiding there.
> 5. There are two dark gray handles next to the steering knob, that has to
> control something like...
like door open knobs on the roof in http://guide.lugnet.com/set/8466
but i think they are pushed to the front instead of to the down
> 6. ...(did someone say) a water gun! Could this be the first hydro-lego • set,
> or is it just my imagination?
i think it's true :)))
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Avi Parvin writes:
> 1. The knob closer to the front seems to have double action: It is not
> steering like the one behind it, but is connected to some kind of liftarm,
> enabling it to work as a four-direction joystick.
I'm not sure about that, perhaps the liftarm is just to support the knob.
> 3. The blue hose between the wheels is connected to the red “thing” close to it.
I think the red thing is just the handle at the end of the hose.
> 6. ...(did someone say) a water gun! Could this be the first hydro-lego set,
> or is it just my imagination?
That was also my initial thought. But... I think it's too good to be true.
> Finally, two personal points, which I would like to add here: First, for
> about two month I have a huge (75cm), 8 wheels chassis sitting on my Lego
> shelves, waiting to be the next ultimate Airtech-something. Now Lego has
> it’s own first 8 wheeler. Mine, by the way, is a twin-steer chassis, with
> all wheels drive (7 differentials!) and independent suspensions. Did I
> mentions that is has the 8466 wheels?
Wow! What a monster!
- David
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Avi Parvin" <parvin@netvision.net.il> wrote in message
news:H8B4pB.n5@lugnet.com...
> Hello all,
>
> <snipped a lot>
> 2. Family car. The legendary 853 was the only large scale family car, not
> supercar. Unlike the real life, for Lego, supercars are easier to design
> than family cars, because of the engine location (a problem that was • solved
> only in 1999 with the 8448), the doors (the only door that Lego know how • to
> design is gullwing door) and the size of it (based on the 8448, a Lego
> family car would probably be ~60cm long, with more than 1500 pieces).
Th family car is an idea I like to see more of too. But, let's take a
moment to look at the auto manufactures and market consists of in the real
world: the SUV.
I recently went to an auto show here in San Diego. There were the ''to be
expected'' stuff, sedans, pick-ups, sports cars, etc. Many of the car
companies there were really showing off their latest asphalt road going
SUVs- Nissan, BMW, Volvo, Porsche, etc. , not the off road, mud running
kind. Even AMG, known for their cranked up MB sedans and coupes, has done
the same to the G90 they had shown at the show. Maybe LEGO should do as the
big car companies and create their own asphalt running and not the ''made
for mud'' sets that 8466 gives (speaking for myself).
> 3. Minivan. Probably the most important type of car in the past 20 years. • To
> build it, Lego need to rotate the engine, add many sliding, lifting, • moving
> doors and many flexible seats. Such a set would have ~1500 pieces as well,
> or even more than that.
Now that's an idea I like and should have been built a long time ago. We're
still a ways off before the SUVs take over the minivan market and I doubt it
ever will. So I say ''Hey LEGO, how about a minivan for us Technic fans out
there!''
> Finally, two personal points, which I would like to add here: First, for
> about two month I have a huge (75cm), 8 wheels chassis sitting on my Lego
> shelves, waiting to be the next ultimate Airtech-something. Now Lego has
> it's own first 8 wheeler. Mine, by the way, is a twin-steer chassis, with
> all wheels drive (7 differentials!) and independent suspensions. Did I
> mentions that is has the 8466 wheels?
Pictures! Pictures! Pictures!
> Second, I've already started collecting parts for my version of
> all-pneumatics Backhoe... Nice to find out that Lego is doing what I'm
> expecting it to do. Now I'm waiting for the family car and minivan. In the
> meanwhile I'll have a few of those 8454 and 8455.
>
> Enjoy,
>
> Avi Parvin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Avi Parvin" <parvin@netvision.net.il> wrote in message
news:H8B4pB.n5@lugnet.com...
> The lack of airtank or compressor just mean that we have to work harder to
> operate it - will anyone refuse to buy it because of this? Will anyone
> resist the temptation to add an airtank AND a compressor to this set? • (Don't
> forget a differential and 6 cylinders engine.).
When the set is avaiable I will buy a few sets and try everything :)
(Hope there is a tank in the set, because I dont have one yet)
The fun with Lego models is that there is a possibility to change the
orginal model and add more stuff to it or make it better or more fun or just
better looking.
> These two sets define the only way that the Technic theme can go by: More.
> More wheels (8454), more pneumatics (8455). Lego had covered almost all • the
> mechanical features in the past, now things can get only bigger. However,
> there are three types of vehicles that Lego didn't produce in the past, • and
> will probably introduce in the next couple of years:
Larger sets will almost always means that they have more rooms for more
techincal gadget like doors opening with pnaumatic, steering on more wheels,
piston engine, transmission gear box, cranes and so on. And THAT is what I
like!! :)
> Finally, two personal points, which I would like to add here: First, for
> about two month I have a huge (75cm), 8 wheels chassis sitting on my Lego
> shelves, waiting to be the next ultimate Airtech-something. Now Lego has
> it's own first 8 wheeler. Mine, by the way, is a twin-steer chassis, with
> all wheels drive (7 differentials!) and independent suspensions. Did I
> mentions that is has the 8466 wheels?
HEEY!! Stolen my idea? :)
I have a (for now) a 6 wheel drive chassis with 8466 wheels. Mine is not
twin steer. But probably have to add it to make room for more technical
gadget like a few motors and pnaumatic controllers for the crane.
I've also have drive on all wheels and independent suspension for each
wheel. My problem now is to make a BIG vehicle as small as possible... You
probably dont understand what I mean, but there is a few things like
difrential and independ suspensions that togheter is hard to make in small
size. So thats is exactly what I'll try to do :)
Here is what I got so far:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=28498
Regards
Øyvind Steinnes
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?m=Phoenix
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
"Øyvind Steinnes" <senniets@online.no> wrote in message
news:H8Cq6z.Hw1@lugnet.com...
>
> When the set is avaiable I will buy a few sets and try everything :)
> (Hope there is a tank in the set, because I dont have one yet)
You get one with this:
http://shop.lego.com/leaf.asp?Type=4&CatID={64FB878F-9964-48FC-BB4D-201A3EFE
E425}
Jennifer
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Jennifer Clark writes:
>
> "Øyvind Steinnes" <senniets@online.no> wrote in message
> news:H8Cq6z.Hw1@lugnet.com...
> >
> > When the set is avaiable I will buy a few sets and try everything :)
> > (Hope there is a tank in the set, because I dont have one yet)
>
> You get one with this:
>
> http://shop.lego.com/leaf.asp?Type=4&CatID={64FB878F-9964-48FC-BB4D-201A3EFE
> E425}
>
> Jennifer
Shorter non-wrapped URL:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?M42123203
Set: 5218 TECHNIC Pneumatic Pack.
/Tobbe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> Check out this backhoe with 9(!!) pneumatic cylinders:
Meh.
The 8862 backhoe is better, in my opinion.
I like how it uses a mix of pneumatics and gears+axles.
I love the solid chunky tires of 8862, and they fit much better a heavy
tractor than the air filled balloon tires of 8466. (Which *do* fit a sports
type vehicle, from which they do happen to come from , 8466 Off roader and
8457 Power Puller.)
Plus, 8862 is made of a heap of good ole technic bricks, which look more
"lego" than liftarms, when it comes to bodywork. (I *do* appreciate
liftarms, especially in tight spaces, but not when they're overused for
vehicle body work)
If only 8455 came with an air tank, but it doesn't look like it, as many
pointed out. My 8862 is currently outfitted with one, which was easy enough
to incorporate, having a nice spot reserved for it in the cab next to the
pneumatic switches.
*yawn* The 8455 is just a huge bunch of pneumatic cylinders, nothing else
interesting really.
The fire truck, however, looks somewhat original, depending on the unknown
feature that nobody knows anything about. If it is a water pump, then Lego
got my money RIGHT THERE. :-)
Sorry for having a quite different opinion than the rest. :)
| | | | | | |
