42056 Porsche 911

cloaked7

^ I agree.  I can't think of a legitimate reason for not giving the buyer the outer carton.  Especially if they ask for it.  At its basic purpose, the carton is a way to protect a $300 LEGO set.  They buyer may want to protect it, just like LEGO.

TheLoneTensor

SithLord196 said:

While the gearbox mistake should be criticized, I do feel as though a little too much hate is being heaped on the set for other parts of it. While I'm sure they could have worked harder to try and add more realistic steering and more realistic suspension, plus the all wheel drive, I also fear that may have pushed the set much closer to the $350 or $400 mark. One other thing we don't know is how much of each purchase ultimately gets sent to Porsche.

It all comes down to price I think, and the perceived violation of the 10 cents per part rule coming in at 11.1 cents/piece.  The double-whammy is that this is a Technic set, which means tons of little gears and linkages which usually pump up the piece count.  Finally, seeing as they are coming out close to each other, compare it to the new Big Ben, which, being a big creator set, tends to also have lots of tiny parts and wedges.  That set is nearly 1500 more pieces and costs $50 less!  At 6 cents/piece, that's nearly half that of the Porsche.  No wonder people were instantly praising what a great value that is.

People like it, and are buying it, but are finding it very easy to criticize because it's just too damn expensive.  Lame insider linkage spin aside, if this were $250, I feel it'd be garnishing a lot less hate.

SirKevbags

Well anyone getting the outer boxes officially  shouldn't be as the directive is not to be distributing them as is supposed to happen with all shipping boxes. And no matter if we see it differently because of the price of the set, to LEGO it's just a shipping box and no different to the one that holds six City sets or a pair of GBHQ. It's job has been done if it gets it to store in good condition.

I personally don't see the harm in giving them out and was actually quite surprised to see them in single cartons. I don't recall them being any different to a regular shipping box in terms of box thickness but I can check tomorrow.

pharmjod

That just further proves my point. If LEGO actually has a policy about shipping boxes not being given to customers, well that is just further evidence of a company that micromanages too much stupid stuff. Perhaps fix your website before making inane store level policies.

TheLoneTensor

pharmjod said:

That just further proves my point. If LEGO actually has a policy about shipping boxes not being given to customers, well that is just further evidence of a company that micromanages too much stupid stuff. Perhaps fix your website before making inane store level policies that are destined to be inconsistently followed, at best.

Fixed that for you :)

TigerMoth

SirKevbags said:

I personally don't see the harm in giving them out

Shipping cartons provide information about volumes - something that's usually in very short supply. On a one-off, or random, basis, it might not be too useful; on a larger scale, particularly with people collecting sets, that may be more than TLG are prepared to reveal.

xwingpilot

TRU sent me #75094 in it's LEGO shipping box. It looked like three of that set were originally packaged together (TRU just put air-filled bags in the empty space). It's actually really useful to have a LEGO shipping box to store set boxes in because they fit exactly.

SumoLego

There is no formal policy with shipping containers.  That's purely discretionary on the part of whatever manager or assistant manager you asked.

I would just make sure to catch them before they unpack all of the cases.  

richo

I'll say it again. If I am dropping £250 on a set on day one as a loyal collector with like £20k life time spend on Lego, and they have the cartons, I expect to be given one if I ask.

MaffyD

richo said:

I'll say it again. If I am dropping £250 on a set on day one as a loyal collector with like £20k life time spend on Lego, and they have the cartons, I expect to be given one if I ask.

And that's why I think graded levels of VIP membership is a good idea. Although in this instance could possibly identify @richo as a reseller! :-) Only joking, obvs!

coachie

Picked mine up today from the Cardiff store  MISB (Mint in Stuttgart Box)  No problems getting the outer carton.

Shipping was a bit pricy though.

Brew

TheLoneTensor said:

SithLord196 said:

While the gearbox mistake should be criticized, I do feel as though a little too much hate is being heaped on the set for other parts of it. While I'm sure they could have worked harder to try and add more realistic steering and more realistic suspension, plus the all wheel drive, I also fear that may have pushed the set much closer to the $350 or $400 mark. One other thing we don't know is how much of each purchase ultimately gets sent to Porsche.

It all comes down to price I think, and the perceived violation of the 10 cents per part rule coming in at 11.1 cents/piece.  The double-whammy is that this is a Technic set, which means tons of little gears and linkages which usually pump up the piece count.  Finally, seeing as they are coming out close to each other, compare it to the new Big Ben, which, being a big creator set, tends to also have lots of tiny parts and wedges.  That set is nearly 1500 more pieces and costs $50 less!  At 6 cents/piece, that's nearly half that of the Porsche.  No wonder people were instantly praising what a great value that is.

People like it, and are buying it, but are finding it very easy to criticize because it's just too damn expensive.  Lame insider linkage spin aside, if this were $250, I feel it'd be garnishing a lot less hate.

I just took a quick look at what is currently being offered in the Technic line and on the surface 11.1 cents/piece actually looks fairly average. Granted, some of these come with power functions so you have to take that into consideration. The highest is #42030 RC Volvo Wheel Loader at $249.99 with 1636 pieces (15.3 cents/piece) and #42052 Heavy Lift Helicopter at $139.99 with 1042 pieces (13.4 c/p). These come with PF but are they worth $90 and $40 respectively? Maybe... I just think this pricing is more of the new norm from TLG rather than the Porsche being way out of line. I don't think comparing it to the new BB is fair either. It is a good value, but it looks like many replicate pieces without a ton of variety, which undoubtedly makes it cheaper to produce.

Yes, I am a fan of the Porsche, but I am trying to be objective regarding its value.

TechnicNick

^ The Volvo's PF is easily worth the extra, the Porsche will look even more expensive when the BWE is released, with 1000+ more pieces for £50 less. And a motor!  That's a lot of 'Porsche Premium Tax' - more than I care to pay.

pharmjod

I'm gonna wait for Amazon and others to carry it and discount it. At some point sales will stagnate and I don't think it's crazy to expect anywhere from 15-25% off on it in a year or so. I can wait.

SumoLego

^ Unless you wait six weeks and panic!  Panic!  It's sold out online!  Panic!

SumoLego

So much for August 1st...

SithLord196

TheLoneTensor said:

SithLord196 said:

While the gearbox mistake should be criticized, I do feel as though a little too much hate is being heaped on the set for other parts of it. While I'm sure they could have worked harder to try and add more realistic steering and more realistic suspension, plus the all wheel drive, I also fear that may have pushed the set much closer to the $350 or $400 mark. One other thing we don't know is how much of each purchase ultimately gets sent to Porsche.

It all comes down to price I think, and the perceived violation of the 10 cents per part rule coming in at 11.1 cents/piece.  The double-whammy is that this is a Technic set, which means tons of little gears and linkages which usually pump up the piece count.  Finally, seeing as they are coming out close to each other, compare it to the new Big Ben, which, being a big creator set, tends to also have lots of tiny parts and wedges.  That set is nearly 1500 more pieces and costs $50 less!  At 6 cents/piece, that's nearly half that of the Porsche.  No wonder people were instantly praising what a great value that is.

People like it, and are buying it, but are finding it very easy to criticize because it's just too damn expensive.  Lame insider linkage spin aside, if this were $250, I feel it'd be garnishing a lot less hate.

Fair points. Especially when you compare it to the Arocs. That's why I have to wonder about how much money Porsche wants from each sale. Seeing as this is supposed to be a premium set, it is entirely possible that Porsche wants a premium amount of money from each one sold. 

I am still considering getting it. I really want the Arocs but I feel like it would better to try and build #42039 and this Porsche before attempting a much more technical set like that. Plus as I said earlier, I just sort of have VIP points sitting there I haven't used yet and I'm fairly certain a good amount of them expire by the end of this year. 

TigerMoth

SithLord196 said:

Seeing as this is supposed to be a premium set, it is entirely possible that Porsche wants a premium amount of money from each one sold.

Maybe it's cynical, but I wonder whether the opposite might be true in that VAG are pushing all their brands, via any means possible, in an attempt to ward of the possibility a major car manufacturer becoming an ex-manufacturer. Their name is not the most popular in the industry at the moment and they have made some sizeable loses recently.

If so, their cut of the purchase price would be the last thing on their minds,

monkeyhanger

^ I'm pretty sure they haven't made any sizeable losses yet, their profits are down but they still made a boatload of money ("only £2.4bn" in the 3 months to March). There's the looming threat of a big US lawsuit and other fines, but the heat has definitely been dying down on a singled out VW after tests of other marques have shown that their diesel engines are pumping out far more NOx than previously thought because they're also set up to be cleanest under certain conditions, even if they aren't detecting test conditions and actively changing their running parameters to suit.

With the old Beetle set and new one coming, as well as the camper van, Lego seems to have had a long standing good relationship with VW which is continuing with the Porsche model.

Crowkillers

The recall has been due to a problem with the inner packaging..

MaffyD

^ what recall?

SumoLego

Did anyone else see a subsequent announcement that the set would be available worldwide on June 1st?

TigerMoth

monkeyhanger said:

^ I'm pretty sure they haven't made any sizeable losses yet, their profits are down but they still made a boatload of money ("only £2.4bn" in the 3 months to March).

They use quarterly accounting and made a $2 billion loss on Q3 - their first loss in 15 years. I think $2 billion counts as "sizeable". And that is just the beginning.

They're also rather upset that it means Toyota have overtaken them again with regard to the number of sales, having only managed to stay top dog for three months.

They need all the goodwill they can get at the moment.

Crowkillers

MaffyD said:

^ what recall?

The recall of why they were never available at Lego Shop At Home like they were supposed to be on June 1st..

MugenPower

SithLord196 said:

While I'm sure they could have worked harder to try and add more realistic steering and more realistic suspension, plus the all wheel drive...

The real car isn't AWD, though, unless I'm missing something else you're referring to...

monkeyhanger

TigerMoth said:

monkeyhanger said:

^ I'm pretty sure they haven't made any sizeable losses yet, their profits are down but they still made a boatload of money ("only £2.4bn" in the 3 months to March).

They use quarterly accounting and made a $2 billion loss on Q3 - their first loss in 15 years. I think $2 billion counts as "sizeable". And that is just the beginning.

They're also rather upset that it means Toyota have overtaken them again with regard to the number of sales, having only managed to stay top dog for three months.

They need all the goodwill they can get at the moment.

$2 Billion is huge, but in the scale of VW, that amounts to around 50% of the profit they make in the average quarter, over the year they've been well in the black - a blip in one quarter doesn't mean much to any major company as long as it remains a blip, and that loss accounts for money set aside, not already spent.

Everyone is beginning to realise all the car companies are manipulating outputs during the conditions experienced under the EU testing cycle (VW's published and actual mpg aren't remarkable in the European car market to imply they're doing something that no-one else is doing to achieve market beating outputs, and the average consumer cares far more about running costs than environmental issues in the main.

It wasn't long ago that Toyota and Honda had some major recalls on their hands for various safety feature concerns (mainly the airbags) and their share price got a hammering with an accompanying drop in sales - that blew over and the VW scandal is blowing over too.

The Americans wouldn't pursue one of their own (GM, Ford etc) with such vigour, but they smelt free money coming from Germany and now they've realised everyone is at it their enthusiasm has waned a little because they'll have to sue their domestic manufacturers too.

The whole emissions/mpg issue has been a consumer con anyway - with the advent of stop-start tech all the manufacturers posted an increase of 20% in mpg, after about 6 months when their customers reported that they weren't seeing noticeable gains with these new cars they had to start advertising "mpg achieved on test cycle is for comparison purposes only and may not reflect real life driving conditions".

monkeyhanger

Hoping to see this in the flesh at the Metrocentre today but I doubt it'll look any prettier in the flesh.

TigerMoth

monkeyhanger said:

$2 Billion is huge, but in the scale of VW, that amounts to around 50% of the profit they make in the average quarter, over the year they've been well in the black - a blip in one quarter doesn't mean much to any major company as long as it remains a blip, and that loss accounts for money set aside, not already spent.

I just used a figure I happened to know, but you're still wrong. They also posted a loss for the year. On top of that, the Department of Justice is likely to come after them for $50 billion. But few here are interested in all that.

Everyone is beginning to realise all the car companies are manipulating outputs

Yep. But the place where the mud has stuck is VAG and their market share has taken a hammering. Most people know little about cars, so it's all about on trust. Whatever the rights and wrong, VAG are the ones that got the bad press. They're the ones that have got to work double time to boost their image.

That's the bit that's relevant here. The suggestion that a significant cut from #42056 is heading in their direction may be unfounded for the reasons I have mentioned. We should be interested in that, because it might mean we are seeing a shift by TLG towards expensive AFOL sets. Recently, there was the Firehouse, but until then, it's only tended to be true for sets aimed at Star Wars fans.

I don't care whether VAG sink or swim, but I'm very interested in whether TLG are upping the ante.

MaffyD

Crowkillers said:

MaffyD said:

^ what recall?

The recall of why they were never available at Lego Shop At Home like they were supposed to be on June 1st..

I knew about that - I didn't think of it as a recall if it was never available in the first place (or was it available for a time?) Is it still not available? I've been busy and away from the Internet these past few days.

xwingpilot

Really enjoyed the JANGBRiCKS review of this (and how he ignored TLG's statement about the shift order error in the instructions and just matter-of-fact came out and called it a mistake and showed the fix).

Still, a truly amazing set...

SithLord196

MugenPower said:

SithLord196 said:

While I'm sure they could have worked harder to try and add more realistic steering and more realistic suspension, plus the all wheel drive...

The real car isn't AWD, though, unless I'm missing something else you're referring to...

Mistake on my part then. I thought I saw somewhere that the real car was all wheel drive.

I ordered a copy anyway. Need to call them tonight though, because the fountain hasn't shipped (it's labeled as "In Process") and I'm worried if they withhold it until the Porsche is ready to ship that either 1.) I'll miss it or 2.) It'll damage the box.

TechnicNick

SithLord196 said:

MugenPower said:

SithLord196 said:

While I'm sure they could have worked harder to try and add more realistic steering and more realistic suspension, plus the all wheel drive...

The real car isn't AWD, though, unless I'm missing something else you're referring to...

Mistake on my part then. I thought I saw somewhere that the real car was all wheel drive.

I ordered a copy anyway. Need to call them tonight though, because the fountain hasn't shipped (it's labeled as "In Process") and I'm worried if they withhold it until the Porsche is ready to ship that either 1.) I'll miss it or 2.) It'll damage the box.

The real car is rear-drive, but it does have 4-wheel steering. An opportunity missed by Lego, there.

stevemack

I disagree, the 4 wheel steering used on cars only turns the rear wheels by a few degrees.  Hardly visible and not worth it, it wouldn't be like an 8 wheel crane so to say

SithLord196

I'm not familiar with how four wheel steering works.

For those that have built the set and are familiar with it, would it have been hard to implement?

TheLoneTensor

stevemack said:

I disagree, the 4 wheel steering used on cars only turns the rear wheels by a few degrees.  Hardly visible and not worth it, it wouldn't be like an 8 wheel crane so to say

First off, you sure about all that?  Even a few degrees can have a significant influence on the steering.

As for Lego implementing it, the biggest problem is that the way 4-wheel steering works is greatly dependent on the vehicle's speed.  At high speeds, the wheels all turn in the same direction, which results in a strafing effect (useful for lane changes, drifting, etc.).  At low speeds, the front and rear wheel pairs each point in different directions to effect a tighter turning radius.  If Lego were to do it, they would probably pick the low-speed one if only because it looks more dramatic.  It'd be totally doable.

bandit778

Basically,  if I remember rightly the rear wheels turn slightly in the opposite way to the fronts giving the car a sharper steering circle and also faster cornering as there is less drag from the 'straight' set of wheels. It shouldn't be that difficult to do (in principle) as the reduced steering angle in relation to the main steering has already been done on the Arocs truck (although that was in the same direction of the turning wheels). The main problem that I can think of would be the in the parts and space required due to the length of the chassis on the Porsche. 

cloaked7

I think (not sure, not a Porsche expert) the 4 wheel steering is an option or only available at a certain trim level.  Main thing being, not all 911's have it, so to me it's OK that the LEGO version doesn't.

SithLord196

According to Porsche's website:

"Rear axle steering

Fitted as standard, the new rear axle steering with sport tuning combines performance and everyday driveability. An electromechanical adjustment system at each rear wheel enables the steering angle to be adapted based on the current driving situation, steering input and vehicle speed.

The advantage for day-to-day driving: during low-speed maneuvers, the system steers the rear wheels in the opposite direction to that of the front wheels. This has the virtual effect of shortening the wheelbase. The turning circle is reduced to make it easier to park. The advantage for sporty driving: during high-speed maneuvers, the system steers the rear wheels in the same direction as that of the front wheels. Driving stability is increased by the virtual extension of the wheelbase and agility is enhanced by the simultaneous steering of the front and rear axles, especially during overtaking maneuvers on the racetrack."

willobee498

Yup, a really cool feature, but the amount the real wheels actually turn is probably about the same as the sloppy play in the Lego wheel hubs.

stevemack

Don't get me wrong, engineering wise, yes it's perfectly feasible and would be cool, but what I meant was in real life it's barely visible; it's 1.5 degrees max either way.  So to do that in scale on a model would be invisible, you can probably force more than 1.5 degrees with the press of a finger on a model :)

graphite

cloaked7 said:

I think (not sure, not a Porsche expert) the 4 wheel steering is an option or only available at a certain trim level.  Main thing being, not all 911's have it, so to me it's OK that the LEGO version doesn't.

You are correct, but keep in mind this isn't a generic "911" model, it is specifically a GT3 RS which is the model that has the 4 wheel steering.  So it is the correct trim level.

TheLoneTensor

stevemack said:

Don't get me wrong, engineering wise, yes it's perfectly feasible and would be cool, but what I meant was in real life it's barely visible; it's 1.5 degrees max either way.  So to do that in scale on a model would be invisible, you can probably force more than 1.5 degrees with the press of a finger on a model :)

I'm no Porsche engineer, but I'm pretty sure it's more than 1.5 degrees.  If I'm wrong, Pitfall will eat my hat.

cheshirecat

Your hat is safe. From total911.com

...At speeds below 50kph (31mph), the rear wheels are steered up to 2.8 degrees in the opposite direction of the front wheels.

This effectively reduces the car’s wheelbase, making it more manoeuvrable at low speeds. As a comparison, 2.8 degrees of turn on the front wheels would equate to 45 degrees of steering lock.

When the car is travelling over 80kph (50mph) the rear-axle steering turns the rear wheels up to 1.5 degrees in the same direction as the fronts. This effectively lengthens the wheelbase, making the car more stable in high-speed corners.

http://www.total911.com/technology-explained-rear-axle-steering/

stevemack

I make that half a hat to eat :)  50mph+ is 1.5 degrees, I just forgot to read the whole article....oops!

Still, 2.8 degrees on a scaled model? Noticeable?

MattsWhat

^technically, a sports car spends only a tiny % of the time going over 50mph (it spends most parked up looking good), so I make it only a few fibres of The Hat to be eaten.  (But yeah - it wouldn't be noticable, but they could have added it in just to show off on the build - I assume it was intentionally left out so as not to wreck the play features of this set that is quite clearly aimed at being pushed around the lounge floor).

cloaked7

Personally, I would much more preferred that LEGO did something about the holes in front of the headlights (yes, this has already been mentioned) than to include 4 wheel steering.  :-)  
(I didn't mention this to start another discussion of the headlight holes.  Just comparing the two aspects.)

ColoradoBricks

For those interested in the 4 wheel steering, the #8880 Super Car implements it. Despite the bulky look, it is great Technic model, it also has AWD, 4 gears in H pattern, chain linked transmission among other great features.

Brew

I would think since it is an electromechanical system to steer the back wheels it would not really be that accurate to add a bulky mechanical linkage to the steering wheel. Also, 2.8 degrees on a 2.5 inch diameter wheel is about 1/16 of an inch off centerline (or 1/8 inch difference from front to back of the wheel). Some people may notice, but most would not.

I give TLG a pass on this one.

Fauch

also not sure the stability at high speed is very relevant for a lego model.

GothamConstructionCo

^^^ Don't forget the pop up headlights ;o)