Shopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.comAmazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

10240 Red Five X-Wing Starfighter

2

Comments

  • richoricho Member Posts: 3,830
    emilewski said:

    I am happy about the re-release. I had the current system version in my want list, but will happily get the UCS version instead. I only want one, so might as well go for the ultimate. 13 years is long enough to redo such an iconic ship and it will be much better detailed. I agree the $200 seems too high so will definitely wait for a good sale. As for a UCS Falcon redo, I don't know. It would do well for the same reasons that the X-Wing redo will do well, but I don't see how they could outdo the first one at a price point that would make it worth doing.

    I disagree, they must know that anything under £1000 on the secondary market, and a good condition one sells immediately. If they priced it around £350 it would do very well, as that's a third of the cost of the current secondary market one.

  • emilewskiemilewski CT, USAMember Posts: 475
    ^ Yes, it will do well. But I just don't see it being a huge jump in improvement over the previous one (without inflating the cost so much). The X-Wing on the other hand being from 13 years ago can be vastly improved upon. I can see them doing another Falcon in another 8 years perhaps before the license ends.
  • TheLoneTensorTheLoneTensor MericaMember Posts: 3,950
    Just image google "10240 lego" if you can't wait.
  • jockosjunglejockosjungle Member Posts: 701
    There is going to be a young han solo movie, so surely a new MF would tie in nicely. Really looking forward to the X Wing!
  • atkinsaratkinsar Member Posts: 4,272
    Brickset article is now up: http://www.brickset.com/news/article/?ID=5777. We respected the embargo at least.
  • pvancil27pvancil27 Member Posts: 588
    Gotta love the doomsayers. Oh noes, one remake 13 years later, the sky is falling, the ground it opening up and we are getting ruled by cats.

    Good option for those of us who dont want to spend 800$ on one of the most iconic ships from the movies. Lets wait and see what the next model is before we go all doom and gloom guys. If its another rehash then Doom and gloom it all you want.
    mathew
  • atkinsaratkinsar Member Posts: 4,272
    I'm very happy about this remake, I don't have the original and I think this one looks great and comes in under £200.
    richo
  • LegoboyLegoboy 100km furtherMember Posts: 8,769
    ^ I agree, it does look good, but not quite there when compared alongside the ultimate version.
  • samiam391samiam391 A Log Cabin in KY, United StatesMember Posts: 4,335
    edited February 2013


    samiam391 said:

    ...still different enough in construction and part selection that it's arguably worth picking up (which, if you had all of them, might not have been an option...

    The construction looks vastly different. Look at the way the wings are connected. Look at the shocks connected to the wings. Look at the engine intakes. It is going to be a very different building experience.

    Maybe it's just me, but I don't remember saying that so I'm not sure why I was quoted! That was @emmtwosix. ;-)

    Anyway, I'm more of an oldies person, and still don't see much a difference. I would rather have had a different set, as opposed to a re-hash. Boba's/Jango's Slave I, Venator, etc..

    Honestly, I'll pry end up getting the new one anyway, if anything just so I can build more LEGO :-)
  • KarrdeKarrde Member Posts: 7
    Diggydoes said:

    Is it the same canopy than the last one? Can someone tell if it's printed (from the pics)?

    The Video they just released says 1 stud longer.

  • thorniethornie Member Posts: 245
    No desire to get this. IMO the latest NON UCS version f the X-wing looks just as good, takes up less space, is over $100 cheaper and suits my needs just fine.
  • BastaBasta Australia Member Posts: 1,259
    I think this release was bound to happen, the X-Wing is the first or second (MF being the other) most iconic ship in the SW Universe. So many people missed out on the old one, and I'm not going to be suprised if this ends up being the highest selling UCS model TLG has ever produced. How can they ignore that, just to appease what is probaby a relitivly small segment of the Lego fan base (those who aren't happy about the realease).

    Sure prices on the secondary market of the original will most likely take a bit of a dive, it may even affect prices of other EOL UCS models as people hold off spending big amounts in the hopes of a cheaper remake, but this problem is only going to affect a relitivly small amount of people.

    Personally I think that as long as we don't see a continual release of rehashed UCS sets one after the other I'm fine with it.

    dougts
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,874
    edited February 2013
    I don't see what the problem with a remake is, personally. If you're happy with the largely inferior, terribly outdated version released over a decade ago, then nobody's forcing you to get the new one. But I think it's preposterous to suggest that the way TLG should go about things is to create the most iconic ships of the franchise and then gradually create more and more impressive designs that resonate with fewer and fewer people. It's simply preposterous that the UCS treatment of one of the most iconic ships in the whole franchise should be allowed to remain one of the shabbiest models in the UCS series just because "it's been done before".

    The new version may not be flawless, but it uses a large number of far more impressive building techniques than the previous version, creating a much more accurate likeness without any need to introduce overspecialized parts to do so. And the X-Wing, given its iconic status, deserves no less. It's not like LEGO City or even minifig-scale LEGO Star Wars where the design is updated every two to five years, to the consternation of collectors-- it has been over a decade since the last UCS attempt at an X-Wing, and at this point the old one needed an update so badly that there's really not much sense in complaining. You can't even complain about this one "not matching your fleet" like in LEGO City or LEGO Star Wars playsets, because nobody (to my knowledge) has a fleet of UCS sets, and frankly the old one didn't go very well with later brethren like the UCS Y-Wing anyway.

    Want a different UCS set? A year is not so long a wait, and with every passing year the quality of the UCS sets tends to improve, so you'll probably get a better model in the long run (assuming you're not hoping for something truly obscure, like a Z-95 Headhunter, or something simply impossible, like an accurately minifig-scale Sandcrawler).

    I say this as an owner of the original UCS X-Wing who has frankly been disappointed with the quality of the model for years. Few are the UCS sets since 7191 that haven't surpassed it in terms of overall design quality. It was great for its time, but its time ended a long time ago and it's high time the X-Wing got a second chance at success. And chances are, I won't complain if 13 years down the road we revisit it once more.
  • CaptAPJTCaptAPJT Member Posts: 223
    Well I'm happy to be getting the fresh version of a model I've lusted over since I was 13. Obviously marketing at Lego has spoken and its obvious to most of us I imagine that the market for a €200 X-Wing probably blows any other yet to be made model out of the water.

    I'll also mention that some existing UCS models could do with a re-visit, especially the N1 starfighter 10026 which gets its butt kicked by the system 7877 in almost every way.

    I've said before and it still applies that I'd like a UCS Venator, A-Wing, Slave 1 etc.. Lets face it though we might as well accept the inevitable remakes and choose to enjoy them, or pass them by.

    As far as I'm concerned "The King is dead! Long live the King!"
  • emmtwosixemmtwosix Member Posts: 80
    I bet eBay just got ugly...
  • CaptAPJTCaptAPJT Member Posts: 223
    emmtwosix said:

    I bet eBay just got ugly...

    Maybe resellers are gonna flood the market with 7191 and no one will want to buy it because of 10240 and I can snap up both mwahahaha!
  • Sabreman64Sabreman64 Member Posts: 10
    I'm really disappointed to see that LEGO are now re-issuing UCS sets. This UCS release slot could have been used for a vehicle not previously released as a UCS set. Instead, they re-release the X-Wing. I'm not bothered that the value of my 7191 will plummet - I had no intention of ever selling it anyway.

    Another complaint I have about this set is that it's not different enough from 7191 to justify buying it if you own the earlier set. At least with System set reissues, the sets are usually different enough to justify buying the later versions. For example, 7151, 7663 and 7961 are all different enough from one another to make the later versions worthwhile purchases for owners of the previous versions.
  • LegobrandonCPLegobrandonCP CanadaMember Posts: 1,912
    The designer's voice sounds like the one in the LEGO City commercials. :)
  • BrickDancerBrickDancer Dunes of TatooineMember Posts: 3,639
    edited February 2013
    Wow. TLG is out to damage the UCS line permanently in a long term way for some collectors.

    First, congrats to all those non-owners of #7191! It is a joyous day for all of you and there is no problem at all with this re-release of an existing UCS model. Please take pictures as you checkout at the cashier as a memento.

    Second, why does everyone think this is such an improvement over the previous? The wing connection is horrendous with a light bley technic cutting through half of the white wing. The nose looks simple, like a system version compared to the brick-built slope nose of 7191. Less detail and layering on side of fuselage. Lack of red on engine intakes looks bland. Main improvements I can see are the rear half of the thrusters.

    What's done is done, they've broke the covenant of the UCS line for what it is in principle and what it means to those folks who already own it. Yes, its been 13 years since they bought it (or paid over the odds for one recently). But all those excited new customers will out weigh the negative in their calculations, especially once you put the revenue on the balance scale too. Its just a matter of business, so I'll respect that. But that's not what I thought Lego valued most, I thought it was their brand (damaged UCS line integrity), creativity (release a new model) and respect for their own creations of the decades (rehashing a crown jewel). This move is counter to all those points. Maybe I should start thinking more rationally and business-like when it comes to my buying & collecting habits.
    Brick_Obsessiony2joshsamiam391Legoboy
  • bellybutton290bellybutton290 Member Posts: 453

    The designer's voice sounds like the one in the LEGO City commercials. :)

    I like how he has a little swoosh at the end of the vid you all know you'll do the same once you finish building it!
  • lulwutlulwut Member Posts: 417
    edited February 2013
    This isn't a rehash, this is a red five x-wing. Now 'collectors' have to buy it to complete their collection.
  • y2joshy2josh Member Posts: 2,002

    Second, why does everyone think this is such an improvement over the previous? The wing connection is horrendous with a light bley technic cutting through half of the white wing. The nose looks simple, like a system version compared to the brick-built slope nose of 7191. Less detail and layering on side of fuselage. Lack of red on engine intakes looks bland. Main improvements I can see are the rear half of the thrusters.

    And this is my main gripe. Though a small reseller myself, I'm not too fussed about the value of the old one tanking, as anyone who was holding this for thirteen years made a severe miscalculation. My problem isn't even completely in that it's a rehash. My issue is that this is a UCS set (of which a limited number are released per year to begin with) that is far inferior to its 13 year old counterpart. Still, this is filling what has traditionally been the throwaway May UCS slot for me, so I'm still mildly okay with this. If October brings an equally sloppy TIE Interceptor... I'll be a lot less thrilled.
  • mdellemanmdelleman Vancouver CanadaMember Posts: 274
    I don't and have never owned the original but I really don't understand all the hate.

    The old set is 13 years old. Are there really people who stashed 20 of these things in their closet 13 years ago and couldn't see the writing on the wall the last year or so? Even then why should LEGO make decisions because it will piss off resellers? For a collector why wouldn't they want another X-Wing? It's similar yes, but it's still another one of the most iconic Star Wars vehicles there is.

    I'm sure many will disagree with me but just my 2 cents on the whole thing.

    dougts
  • samiam391samiam391 A Log Cabin in KY, United StatesMember Posts: 4,335
    edited February 2013

    Simply, they did it for the money. Low hanging fruit of a popular model that is easy to design and cheap to make so it's right price point for maximum market of buyers. Fast and easy, so business wise it's obvious and will yield great sales.

    Unfortunately, LEGO is a company as we often forget. They have to generate sales, and profit must be their first priority.

    We all know that LEGO usually goes above and beyond the call of duty to ensure it's customer's happiness. Stories here on brickset, LEGO Cuusoo, etc., more than prove that.

    It seems that they've been slipping away from this somewhat, but they still maintain a very healthy and outstanding profile.

    However, if one wants to take LEGO's side in this argument, you could say that they didn't do it for profit. The X-Wing is Luke's ship, it took out the Death Star, it flew to Dagobah, etc.. It's iconic, plain and simple.

    LEGO's fan base has grown to astronomical proportions compared to what it was 2000. I think it'd be fair to say that LEGO re-released this set to give other people a chance at it. 13 years is a very long time, and this ship is very coveted. An entirety of new fans will come along, and those that have always been fans, but never had the opportunity, will now have it.

    Yes, one can easily argue that it was all for profit, but you can also argue it was done for the fans.

    It's a slight to the "long time collectors" for sure, but one has to make sacrifices. I'm somewhat peeved too about this, but I'm somewhat more cheered up knowing that people will get to open up and build an X-Wing. A ship that may have always been their "jewel", or as was previously termed in this thread, their "holy grail".

    It'll be a great moment for them, and honestly, it makes me smile.

    While they are opening up their X-Wings, I'll be anxiously waiting for October!
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409
    samiam391 said:

    LEGO's fan base has grown to astronomical proportions compared to what it was 2000. I think it'd be fair to say that LEGO re-released this set to give other people a chance at it. 13 years is a very long time, and this ship is very coveted. An entirety of new fans will come along, and those that have always been fans, but never had the opportunity, will now have it.

    I wasn't around LEGO in 2000, that's for sure...

    My son wasn't born then, he'll be 8 this year... While I already own 7191, I might end up buying this for my son so he can build one himself either this year or next, depending on when he is ready for it...

    Being able to give him an all-new set rather than taking apart 7191 which he already has seen built, is actually a nice option.

    I'm not thrilled about this development, but I do understand it, given the business factors LEGO has to keep in mind, I probably would have made the same decision.

    BTW, why does everyone call this is a UCS set? I don't see UCS or Ultimate anywhere on the box. Yes, I see that it has a display plaque, but is the word Ultimate anywhere to be found?
  • graphitegraphite USMember Posts: 3,263
    ^ Does the box for 10212 have UCS on it? The image in the database of the box doesn't. I thought all that was hashed out in the UCS thread a while back. Some of them are marked that way some aren't. I'd say the plaque marks something a UCS just as well as the box would.
  • samiam391samiam391 A Log Cabin in KY, United StatesMember Posts: 4,335
    edited February 2013


    BTW, why does everyone call this is a UCS set? I don't see UCS or Ultimate anywhere on the box. Yes, I see that it has a display plaque, but is the word Ultimate anywhere to be found?

    Welcome Back! ;-)

    That'll get into the entire UCS debate, over what's a UCS and what's not.

    I think the plaque and piece count are the main factors in associating it as a UCS.

    In all fairness though, LEGO doesn't specifically call it UCS.
  • HarryPotterLoverHarryPotterLover Member Posts: 238
    @LegoFanTexas No, but neither does it on the Death Star, B-Wing, R2-D2, etc but it says ultimate in the LEGO description and the Designer Video
  • drdavewatforddrdavewatford Hertfordshire, UKAdministrator Posts: 6,487
    edited February 2013
    I've been pretty critical about the annual procession of LEGO Star Wars remakes - I've complained about it on various forums (fora ?), I've blogged about it here, and I grumble every 6 months when the latest batch of remakes is announced.

    I'm surprisingly ambivalent about this X-wing remake, however. Maybe it's because 13 years seems a reasonable wait to re-release such an iconic set for a new generation of LEGO Star Wars fanatics, and maybe I'm kidding myself that this UCS remake is a one-off. Certainly I'll be less forgiving if more precious UCS slots start to get filled up by remakes going forward - with so many potential UCS sets still waiting to be produced - A-wing, Slave 1, AT-AT, Venator etc. etc. I'd rather the designers gave us something we can't already get rather than make small incremental improvements to existing sets.

    Bottom line however is that LEGO are primarily in the business of selling sets and making money, and I'd bet a year's salary that an iconic ship such as the X-wing will sell exponentially more copies than, say, the B-wing. So it's not rocket science.
  • GothamConstructionCoGothamConstructionCo Colchester UKMember Posts: 741
    I believe this is good news for those who were not "lucky" enough to be an AFOL with a disposable income 13 years ago and who missed out on one of the most iconic SW vehicles.

    Maybe TLG need to reevaluate the use of the UCS installs as it means different things to different people.
    If TLG want an acronym for the flagship sets May i suggest CURRENT,(Collectors Ultimate Redesigned Rehash Encompassing New Techniques) :)

    TLG Will be gauging the reception and success of this set as to the viability of future UCS redesigns.
    So if you are unhappy with the idea of UCS rehashes in the future have your say by not purchasing it.
  • bkprbkpr Texas, USAMember Posts: 295
    I think it's great! but I bought the smaller X-Wing last year and even though the new one is bigger and better, it's essentially the same thing. I'm not a "collector" per se, just like Star Wars and Lego. I'd be all over it if I hadn't bought the smaller one. (I love the last few frames of the video when the designer takes the ship of the stand a zooms it out of the frame. That was the only part which made me consider getting this set).
  • jockosjunglejockosjungle Member Posts: 701
    Resellers will make this the most popular set ever! Along with lots who just want it, maybe that obi wan ship was a wake up call, no bogger wanted it. When you're paying 200 quid, it's adults mostly, they don't want a yoda chronicles ship, they want iconic ships
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,289
    I split this discussion about the 10240 X-Wing from the rumors thread since it has been confirmed.
  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,129
    Let's face it - the last 3 UCS vehicles (SSD, B-Wing, Obi-Wan) - and maybe the 10212 as well - have all been relatively obscure SW models aimed at the Star Wars "geek" collector. By most anecdotal accounts, all have kind of underperformed sales-wise.

    There are a ton of people out there that would gladly snap up a more iconic UCS vehicle like the X-Wing, so it's kind of a no-brainer move really.
  • rchaddrchadd Member Posts: 187
    So whats the future of R2D2? How many UCS star Wars models are they going to sell together?
  • canuckcanuck Member Posts: 88
    ^ Probably going to end up like the Modulars and have as many as possible at once.
  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,129
    10225 has only been out 9.5 months. Hard to see it going anywhere
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,289
    dougts said:

    Let's face it - the last 3 UCS vehicles (SSD, B-Wing, Obi-Wan) - and maybe the 10212 as well - have all been relatively obscure SW models aimed at the Star Wars "geek" collector. By most anecdotal accounts, all have kind of underperformed sales-wise.

    You're right, and for the B-Wing, it's a shame. I think the ship and the LEGO model are both really cool.

    Of course, my fondness of the ship primarily stems from countless hours playing the PC games: X-Wing, X-Wings vs TIE Fighter, and the B-Wing expansion, which predates the births of a good portion of LEGO's market audience :P

  • YellowcastleYellowcastle Member Posts: 4,401
    ^ I think the one I played was called Tie Fighter but oh we're those so much fun.
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,289
    ^ I probably played that the most because the missions were more fun, but obviously no piloting the B-Wing in that game
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409

    ^ I think the one I played was called Tie Fighter but oh we're those so much fun.

    The story of Tie Fighter and the 2 expansions was brilliant, shame that didn't get turned into a movie, there is sure enough material there for a trilogy.
  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,129
    the whole series was fantastic. I logged a ton of hours behind all the various starfighters. TIE was a better game of course, being newer, and who doesn't like being the "bad guy" - it was one of the early games that let you play from the antagonist POV.
    dragonhawk
  • Lego_Lord_MayorcaLego_Lord_Mayorca H-Town, USAMember Posts: 565
    So, this new UCS X-Wing is all very cool news and an awesome set, no doubt. But where is everyone getting this notion that ANOTHER UCS set will be released in the Fall? Lego only releases one new Star Wars UCS a year. In 2010, we had the Imperial Shuttle and Obi-Wan's Jedi Starfighter, yes, but in 2011, it was just the SSD, and last year, it was just the B-Wing Starfighter. I don't really count R2-D2 as UCS, but if Lego does, then I understand this anticipation. Hopefully, I answered my own question, haha.
  • lulwutlulwut Member Posts: 417
    Did the previous x-wing suffer wing sag? Pictures of the new one shows slight sagging, gonna be disappointing.
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,289
    edited February 2013
    My comment on the main site news article:
    "The wings themselves on 7191 don't sag, but their weight strains the technic pin attachment points to the body such that the four wings don't extend perfectly uniform. They're prone to coming a little loose and it doesn't take much to jar it completely loose. The mechanism to open and close them is difficult.

    The photos show that the new model is attached with beams so it looks like these problems have been addressed."
  • RTORTO Member Posts: 65
    edited February 2013

    So, this new UCS X-Wing is all very cool news and an awesome set, no doubt. But where is everyone getting this notion that ANOTHER UCS set will be released in the Fall? Lego only releases one new Star Wars UCS a year. In 2010, we had the Imperial Shuttle and Obi-Wan's Jedi Starfighter, yes, but in 2011, it was just the SSD, and last year, it was just the B-Wing Starfighter. I don't really count R2-D2 as UCS, but if Lego does, then I understand this anticipation. Hopefully, I answered my own question, haha.

    It seems to be hit or miss: http://brickset.com/browse/themes/?theme=Star Wars&subtheme=Ultimate Collector Series

    '04 - 1
    '05 - 1
    '06 - 2
    '07 - 1
    '08 - 1
    '09 - 0
    '10 - 2
    '11 - 1
    '12 - 2
    '13 - 1 (so far announced)

    Before '04, they averaged two per year.
  • lulwutlulwut Member Posts: 417
    UCS or not, #10195 filled the '09 void.
    FollowsClosely
  • BrickDancerBrickDancer Dunes of TatooineMember Posts: 3,639
    ^Indeed! It's my favorite non-UCS set by a mile. Awesome on display, it's minifig scale and playable also.
  • LegoboyLegoboy 100km furtherMember Posts: 8,769
    ^ Over #10188??
    kempo81
  • ColoradoBricksColoradoBricks Denver, CO, USAMember Posts: 1,660
    Not sure it was mentioned before, but I was looking through the LEGO catalog I received today. While the #10227 B-Wing and #10225 have the UCS mention, #10240 X-Wing does not (along with the DS on the same centerfold..). I checked [email protected] and same thing, no mention of UCS for #10240 (Build the ultimate LEGO® Star Wars™ X-wing Starfighter!) but it does for #10227 (Take on the Empire in the ultimate collector series B-wing Starfighter™!) and #10225 (Presenting the ultimate collector series R2-D2).

    While there is the word "ultimate" for #10240 and a stand with data sheet , UCS comparison stops there. So is #7191 still the only UCS X-Wing ?

Sign In or Register to comment.

Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?

Please use our links: LEGO.com Amazon

Recent discussions Categories Privacy Policy

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Brickset.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, the Amazon.com.ca, Inc. Associates Program and the Amazon EU Associates Programme, which are affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.