[REVIEW] 42128 - Heavy-duty Tow Truck

[Jim]

2 hours ago, m00se said:

I'm really impressed by the functions of this models. You do mention the lack of a gearbox as a plus, but I do consider it a positive: There are more than enough gearboxes out there and to me it's just a bunch of gears that make the pistons move slower or faster without adding real functionality. By not focusing on these kind of functions they kept room for al these original functions that you haven't build multiple times before.

You probably mean "as a con" instead of "as a plus".

It's a minor con for people who are into gearboxes. I do like gearboxes, but I also like proper working functions...like the ones in this set 

[bitbamboo]

Yesssss!!!

This fat-packed with extra sugar truck will fill my Technic addiction hunger, not as those semi-skimmed stevia-edulcorated Ferrari (42125) and Ford (42126)

 

What makes this review outstanding is that mixes top-notch focus-perfect photographic skills against an i.d.e.a.l grey backdrop (great choice),  with a humble and sincere narrative of a true AFOL that is a joy to read.

 

Many thanks for your effort and sharing

[mostlytechnic]

Does no one remember 42008 Service Truck? Reviews keep comparing this to 8285, but not a single one I've seen has mentioned 42008 which I think is a better comparison set. It had pneumatics AND LAs, lots of functions, and dense construction like this one. And a lot of stickers  It was just a smaller scale and Euro-style. For some reason there was a lot of hate for this truck, even when I reviewed it 

 

 

As for the stickers... the ones on 42008 look at least reasonable to me. The ones on 42128 look like garbage. And I say that as an American who sees these trucks in real life, where they often DO have lots of decoration on them like this one with some serious copyright infringement

 

One other lacking detail I see in this set from reality - most of the trucks that actually have a rotating crane on them have a second set of side outriggers at the back. Lego'd have to extend the truck at least another 3-4 studs to do that though, and I prefer to see both side and rear outriggers like they did here. In the real world they'd be separately controlled, but that's really getting nitpicky, and some might say Lego making them work together is interesting and clever design on a toy set. 

[1974]

5 hours ago, agrof said:

3 hours ago, mostlytechnic said:

Does no one remember 42008 Service Truck? Reviews keep comparing this to 8285, but not a single one I've seen has mentioned 42008 which I think is a better comparison set. It had pneumatics AND LAs, lots of functions, and dense construction like this one. And a lot of stickers  It was just a smaller scale and Euro-style. For some reason there was a lot of hate for this truck, even when I reviewed it

 

That was the last studless set I bought. Worked rather nicely, but I do remember it getting some flack for both combining LAs and pneumatic? Thought that was rather silly

The outriggers that do not extent to the sides but are behind the last set of wheels seem to be much more used on european trucks. Which themselves are quite different looking from US trucks

Also, that pic of that truck ... Doesn't look like it has outriggers at all (it's not a "rotator" btw) ... And would have severe problems navigating european roads

The deco is cool, but not needed on this LEGO set, imho

Edited July 17, 2021 by Milan
Removed quoted block of pictures and text.

[suffocation]

13 minutes ago, mostlytechnic said:

Does no one remember 42008 Service Truck?

42008 has always been one of my favourite sets and has inspired a lot of my own (admittedly mediocre, but that's entirely my fault) builds.

[kbalage]

I can just repeat what was said many times already, a great review of a great set! And I'm still jealous of those amazing photos, any chances for an Eurobricks Technic photography course?  

[Jim]

37 minutes ago, kbalage said:

I can just repeat what was said many times already, a great review of a great set! And I'm still jealous of those amazing photos, any chances for an Eurobricks Technic photography course?  

Thanks mate!

Actually, we are in the midst of transforming the Reviewer's Academy to an open workshop type forum. And we will surely update the photography topics.

1 hour ago, mostlytechnic said:

Does no one remember 42008 Service Truck? Reviews keep comparing this to 8285, but not a single one I've seen has mentioned 42008 which I think is a better comparison set. It had pneumatics AND LAs, lots of functions, and dense construction like this one. And a lot of stickers  It was just a smaller scale and Euro-style. For some reason there was a lot of hate for this truck, even when I reviewed it 

Actually, I missed that set, so I didn't think of using this set as a comparison.

1 hour ago, bitbamboo said:

This fat-packed with extra sugar truck will fill my Technic addiction hunger, not as those semi-skimmed stevia-edulcorated Ferrari (42125) and Ford (42126)

1 hour ago, bitbamboo said:

What makes this review outstanding is that mixes top-notch focus-perfect photographic skills against an i.d.e.a.l grey backdrop (great choice),  with a humble and sincere narrative of a true AFOL that is a joy to read.

Thanks for the kind words 

Which reminds me; I do need to get myself a new backdrop, because this one has seen better days. 

[gylman]

While this is a good Technic set, much better than 90% of what they have released in the past few years in terms of value for money, it doesn't seem as great to me as everyone is going on about.  The youtube review by Sariel gives a very good look at the strengths and weaknesses. Bottom line for me is that this set would have benefitted from some tanks to make the pneumatic action smoother, and that a lot of the other functions require a lot of tedious turning of knobs.

Too bad the only option for motorization these days is Control+, which for me is a "DO NOT BUY" indicator. I would have happily paid $100 more for a motorized power functions version that did most of the work for me.

[Johnny1360]

2 minutes ago, gylman said:

While this is a good Technic set, much better than 90% of what they have released in the past few years in terms of value for money, it doesn't seem as great to me as everyone is going on about.  The youtube review by Sariel gives a very good look at the strengths and weaknesses. Bottom line for me is that this set would have benefitted from some tanks to make the pneumatic action smoother, and that a lot of the other functions require a lot of tedious turning of knobs.

Too bad the only option for motorization these days is Control+, which for me is a "DO NOT BUY" indicator. I would have happily paid $100 more for a motorized power functions version that did most of the work for me.

Not that I disagree with you but this just goes to show no matter how good a given set is or how reasonably priced it is, not everyone will agree on whether it is a great set or not and I am fine with that. 

I am looking forward to getting this set and will likely immediately start modifying it, to me that is what I look forward to the most in a set, modability. Like you I would like to see it motorized, so I will be working on that. Also I will be adding some panels or lift arms on the back to make the crane appear to be lower. Fortunately I have many spare parts in the right colors and many PF components. Do wish I had some air tanks though.

[howitzer]

41 minutes ago, gylman said:

While this is a good Technic set, much better than 90% of what they have released in the past few years in terms of value for money, it doesn't seem as great to me as everyone is going on about.  The youtube review by Sariel gives a very good look at the strengths and weaknesses. Bottom line for me is that this set would have benefitted from some tanks to make the pneumatic action smoother, and that a lot of the other functions require a lot of tedious turning of knobs.

Too bad the only option for motorization these days is Control+, which for me is a "DO NOT BUY" indicator. I would have happily paid $100 more for a motorized power functions version that did most of the work for me.

I feel that motorization would add a lot of not-so-necessary complications, as you'd need a motor, a battery box and a distribution gearbox to operate all the knob-functions and I'm not at all sure all those could be fitted inside without heavy reconstruction of the model. A motorized pump is of course always nice too, but I don't mind manual pumping either, as the pneumatic functions aren't operated constantly. Air tank would of course give more time after pumping for operation, but once exhausted you'd have to spend a lot of time manually pumping (not a problem with motorized pump of course). It would certainly fit this vehicle, but at this price point it's understandable that they didn't bring it back.

That knob-turning is annoying for sure, I think I'm going to replace the knobs with cranks as soon as I'm finished building.

[Ngoc Nguyen]

This set will fit nicely into this group photo

 

[Bartybum]

I don't agree at all with all the desire for a pneumatic tank. The manual pump has a high enough volumetric flow that the response is fast enough. There's no need for an air tank besides potentially motorising a compressor.

[Polarlicht]

I agree!  No tank needed imo! With the pump only 2-3 pumps are needed to get one cylinder going. And you are not using the cylinders constantly to need to store air!

I have the set 8462 which has two tanks,... but for what? They are kind of useless when the only action for them is raise/lower the axle lift and extend the crane.

You just have to pump way more times with a tank, since the pump needs to fill the tank first, and than gets pressure to the cylinder.

[weavil]

I haven't been this excited to want a set so much in sooo long!

[Ullum Zurt]

6 hours ago, Coolusername said:

I agree!  No tank needed imo! With the pump only 2-3 pumps are needed to get one cylinder going. And you are not using the cylinders constantly to need to store air!

I have the set 8462 which has two tanks,... but for what? They are kind of useless when the only action for them is raise/lower the axle lift and extend the crane.

You just have to pump way more times with a tank, since the pump needs to fill the tank first, and than gets pressure to the cylinder.

That's very interesting.

I found adding a tank to 42053 made play a lot more enjoyable. I was able to more precisely control the raising and lowering of the arm. My kids could also grab and play with it whenever they wanted compared to 42043 where i had to pop-in batteries everytime they wanted to play.

With that in mind, I was already beginning to source for another tank and pneumatic tubes for 42128 as well. But if there isn't a need for precise control of the pneumatic cylinders, as in they just need to move from 1 extreme to the other, and that can be achieved by 2-3 pumps, then perhaps adding a tank may not be worth the effort/cost.

Any thoughts on this?

[Polarlicht]

1 hour ago, Ullum Zurt said:

That's very interesting.

I found adding a tank to 42053 made play a lot more enjoyable. I was able to more precisely control the raising and lowering of the arm. My kids could also grab and play with it whenever they wanted compared to 42043 where i had to pop-in batteries everytime they wanted to play.

With that in mind, I was already beginning to source for another tank and pneumatic tubes for 42128 as well. But if there isn't a need for precise control of the pneumatic cylinders, as in they just need to move from 1 extreme to the other, and that can be achieved by 2-3 pumps, then perhaps adding a tank may not be worth the effort/cost.

Any thoughts on this?

Airtanks are a bit overhyped imo. I just removed my airtank from 42053 again (more info in the 42053 mods thread). For 42128 they probably won't do much. I guess you can controll the movement and stop the cylinder quite precisely where you want with the pump

Edited July 18, 2021 by Coolusername

[gylman]

LOL. I did say I it was better than 90% of Technic sets, and given that they release only 3-4 decent sized sets a year, at most, means it's one of the top 2-3s sets of the past 5 years. I just finished 42082 a few weeks ago, so I am a little spoiled - what an incredible set that was. 

I'll be buying this set, no doubt make some minor mods, and I'll judge about the air tanks.  Personally I never met an air tank I didn't like in a pneumatic set. 

[LEGO Train 12 Volts]

Great review, beautiful truck and amazing livery!

[Citromon]

4 hours ago, gylman said:

I just finished 42082 a few weeks ago, so I am a little spoiled - what an incredible set that was. 

That is the last technic set I have bought... 3 years ago! Finally, Lego came out with something decent. But also, I have a fear that next to the Arocs this set may look a little ... childish?  They are also quite similar in terms of functionality. 

[Polarlicht]

How do these "new" valves actually feel? The old ones always had no, how could i describe it, ratchet stop point really, you couldn't "lock" them in place.

You always pushed the lever a little too far and had to correct back and forth...

 

[CP5670]

On 7/18/2021 at 2:59 AM, Coolusername said:

I agree!  No tank needed imo! With the pump only 2-3 pumps are needed to get one cylinder going. And you are not using the cylinders constantly to need to store air!

I have the set 8462 which has two tanks,... but for what? They are kind of useless when the only action for them is raise/lower the axle lift and extend the crane.

You just have to pump way more times with a tank, since the pump needs to fill the tank first, and than gets pressure to the cylinder.

I agree, the airtanks are not really useful for models with manual pumps. The key is to first open the valves and then pump it, not the other way around. They work much better with motorized compressors.

I don't buy many sets these days, but might just pick up this one. It has all the right functionality with no real flaws, although I would have liked extra pneumatics instead of LAs for some functions. I like the color scheme too, and those new beams will be very useful.

[VBBN]

Great review as Always Jim.

I was curious to see them start using those modified liftarms after the Off-road Buggy, nice to see them in use here, and with more sizing. Looks like a good set to potentially get some pnematics experience with, this one may end up on my wishlist!

[jensrodi]

On 7/16/2021 at 3:00 PM, Jim said:

I can't help but think this is TLG's answer to some clone brands using these.

I consider this is deliberate tactic from LEGO to include just a small number of new parts, to "force" AFOL's to buy the new sets, even though they already have the other 99% of the parts in storage. I my view there is no real reason for perpendicular beams. Yes, they make some builds easier, but all of it can be realised without these beams. Just look at for instance 42043, which in many ways could be compared to this new model.

That said, I must complement on a very thorough review. It is a joy to read :-)

Edited July 20, 2021 by jensrodi

[howitzer]

40 minutes ago, jensrodi said:

I consider this is deliberate tactic from LEGO to include just a small number of new parts, to "force" AFOL's to buy the new sets, even though they already have the other 99% of the parts in storage. I my view there is no real reason for perpendicular beams. Yes, they make some builds easier, but all of it can be realised without these beams. Just look at for instance 42043, which in many ways could be compared to this new model.

That said, I must complement on a very thorough review. It is a joy to read :-)

I don't think there's any single part type that is absolutely essential to Lego builds, but these alternating hole beams have been on the wishlist of many Technic builders for a long time. I'm predicting that they will become very common in the future, much like the pin with pinhole part, which was introduced only in 2015, but very soon you'd find them everywhere in Technic builds.

[mic8per_]

Great review, amazing set! I am going to buy this set. It looks really good without the stickers.

Edited July 21, 2021 by mic8per_