@Brickbuilder0937: Well...he is red, so it'd 'track'...'Red Radar Rover, come over':)

Also: had this one, and it was a fun-little-build:)

I have a couple of this set, purely by luck. Also, recently I built a modernized version with dual dish for my futuron guys. They are always into advanced tech. These older models though, extremely reliable. I should know, they are in business for the last 40+ years.

It really looks like that little vehicle should topple backwards every time it tries to drive, that dish looks way to heavy for it

@tmtomh said:
"Doesn’t get much more classic than this.

It’s my pet theory that at any given moment every classic space collector in the world has all the parts necessary to build this set laying around in their spare parts bin. "
While I had plenty of Classic Space sets (after all, 886 was my very first proper LEGO set) I never had this one, but I did indeed build it with parts I already had.

One of my very first LEGO sets, bought at the time, and much loved. What a great way to start collecting!

For symmetry I moved the dish to be in the centre of the plate, otherwise what was the point of the plate? A green circular brick inside the dish would have also added some colour to a grey vehicle with red hubcaps.

Absolutely classic!

I believe this was the very first Lego set I ever owned. It's so cute!

@Brickalili said:
"It really looks like that little vehicle should topple backwards every time it tries to drive, that dish looks way to heavy for it"
I had this set back in the day - sadly, no longer - and don’t remember it toppling backwards. If you mean in-universe, it would be less of a concern in low gravity. The weight of the Classic Spaceman, even with little gravity, would be enough to keep the vehicle from doing accidental wheelies. When the vehicle isn’t being ridden, you can imagine an anchoring mechanism that’s too small/detailed to be seen at minifigure scale.

Oh, so that's where Musk stole the design from.

Cute! :-)

I'm suprised it didn't come with a turntable piece.

Value used: 9 €
Value new: 280 €.
Still anyone would like to discuss, if there are really people who would spend 450 bucks on a fish tank, or 1000 on a death slice?

One of the early classic Lego space sets, and brought back memories. This. was a 'pocket money' set and I had this as a boy, along with the original Galaxy Explorer (which would have been a bigger birthday or Christmas present) along with the scooter and the buggy. Heady and happy times, when space wasn't even classic yet, it was just new!

What a great little set! I never had this. The closest I got was the little rover in the Beta-1 Command Base. Those little rovers are great, but somehow more recent ones don’t seem as fun. I don’t know if it’s because the wheels feel too big or what.

The ultimate version is that little blue one from the 80s with the rocket on the back. That thing is pure Kerbal.

If you take out the gun/torch, this is a rocket truck!

Still got mine. We’re both hanging in there. :)

Just built out of spare parts, had to swap one black mudguard and the air tanks on the front are red. It'll be today's desk toy!

@tmtomh said:
"Doesn’t get much more classic than this.

It’s my pet theory that at any given moment every classic space collector in the world has all the parts necessary to build this set laying around in their spare parts bin. "

Pretty sure I don’t own a single instance of the light-grey airtanks.

@Zander said:
" @Brickalili said:
"It really looks like that little vehicle should topple backwards every time it tries to drive, that dish looks way to heavy for it"
I had this set back in the day - sadly, no longer - and don’t remember it toppling backwards. If you mean in-universe, it would be less of a concern in low gravity. The weight of the Classic Spaceman, even with little gravity, would be enough to keep the vehicle from doing accidental wheelies."

Weight is relative, though. If the buggy weighs 1/6th what it would on Earth, then the Spaceman would likewise only provide 1/6th the amount of counterweight he would on Earth. The only way it would really matter is that the EVA suits NASA currently use weigh around 200 pounds on Earth, so that’s like having a whole second person sitting in the seat with the driver.

@Zander said:
" @Brickalili said:
"It really looks like that little vehicle should topple backwards every time it tries to drive, that dish looks way to heavy for it"
I had this set back in the day - sadly, no longer - and don’t remember it toppling backwards. If you mean in-universe, it would be less of a concern in low gravity. The weight of the Classic Spaceman, even with little gravity, would be enough to keep the vehicle from doing accidental wheelies. When the vehicle isn’t being ridden, you can imagine an anchoring mechanism that’s too small/detailed to be seen at minifigure scale.
"

I just built it and it's fine, even without the driver. The weight of the parts on the back is barely past the rear axle, and the rest of the truck is more than enough to keep it forward.

In-universe, I'll just say the air tanks are ballast.

I love this song by Golden Earring. Classic Rock for Classic Space.

@ambr said:
"For symmetry I moved the dish to be in the centre of the plate, otherwise what was the point of the plate? A green circular brick inside the dish would have also added some colour to a grey vehicle with red hubcaps. "

Wait, it's not supposed to be in the center!???

I just checked the instructions and it's super ambiguous:
https://lego.brickinstructions.com/instructions/00000/0889/003.jpg

Based on the main image it does indeed seem to not be centered, but it's still ambiguous. I was today years old when I even thought about this...

@Binnekamp said:
" @ambr said:
"For symmetry I moved the dish to be in the centre of the plate, otherwise what was the point of the plate? A green circular brick inside the dish would have also added some colour to a grey vehicle with red hubcaps. "

Wait, it's not supposed to be in the center!???

I just checked the instructions and it's super ambiguous:
https://lego.brickinstructions.com/instructions/00000/0889/003.jpg

Based on the main image it does indeed seem to not be centered, but it's still ambiguous. I was today years old when I even thought about this..."

Wow I never noticed, but in the instructions, it's in the corner, same as the main pic. Damn...

@dimc said:
" @Binnekamp said:
" @ambr said:
"For symmetry I moved the dish to be in the centre of the plate, otherwise what was the point of the plate? A green circular brick inside the dish would have also added some colour to a grey vehicle with red hubcaps. "

Wait, it's not supposed to be in the center!???

I just checked the instructions and it's super ambiguous:
https://lego.brickinstructions.com/instructions/00000/0889/003.jpg

Based on the main image it does indeed seem to not be centered, but it's still ambiguous. I was today years old when I even thought about this..."

Wow I never noticed, but in the instructions, it's in the corner, same as the main pic. Damn..."

The problem is that you’re looking straight across the diagonal, so a plate in the center would line up just as perfectly with a plate in the corner. But it is possible to determine that this _IS_ absolutely in the corner and not the center. If it was centered, the top of the 1x1 plate would not touch the bottom of the 2x2 plate. The outside top corners of the 1x1 plate would precisely line up with the outside bottom corners of the 2x2 plate, and there would be a slight gap between the foreground sides of the two plates.

@Kenmore said:
"One of the early classic Lego space sets, and brought back memories. This. was a 'pocket money' set and I had this as a boy, along with the original Galaxy Explorer (which would have been a bigger birthday or Christmas present) along with the scooter and the buggy. Heady and happy times, when space wasn't even classic yet, it was just new! "

I think I got mine bought by mum on a shopping trip to shut me up - they were about 75p at the time - wish I had kept it sealed in the box when you see the price of a new one though...

@PurpleDave said:
" @tmtomh said:
"Doesn’t get much more classic than this.

It’s my pet theory that at any given moment every classic space collector in the world has all the parts necessary to build this set laying around in their spare parts bin. "

Pretty sure I don’t own a single instance of the light-grey airtanks."

According to Bricklink, twenty-eight sets included them, including some Town sets: https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemIn.asp?P=3838&colorID=9&in=A The only minifigures to wear any were Town ones.

@PurpleDave said:
" @dimc said:
" @Binnekamp said:
" @ambr said:
"For symmetry I moved the dish to be in the centre of the plate, otherwise what was the point of the plate? A green circular brick inside the dish would have also added some colour to a grey vehicle with red hubcaps. "

Wait, it's not supposed to be in the center!???

I just checked the instructions and it's super ambiguous:
https://lego.brickinstructions.com/instructions/00000/0889/003.jpg

Based on the main image it does indeed seem to not be centered, but it's still ambiguous. I was today years old when I even thought about this..."

Wow I never noticed, but in the instructions, it's in the corner, same as the main pic. Damn..."

The problem is that you’re looking straight across the diagonal, so a plate in the center would line up just as perfectly with a plate in the corner. But it is possible to determine that this _IS_ absolutely in the corner and not the center. If it was centered, the top of the 1x1 plate would not touch the bottom of the 2x2 plate. The outside top corners of the 1x1 plate would precisely line up with the outside bottom corners of the 2x2 plate, and there would be a slight gap between the foreground sides of the two plates."

You would see a gap if it was centered, and the cover pic is quite clearly not centered.

@dimc said:
" @PurpleDave said:
" @dimc said:
" @Binnekamp said:
" @ambr said:
"For symmetry I moved the dish to be in the centre of the plate, otherwise what was the point of the plate? A green circular brick inside the dish would have also added some colour to a grey vehicle with red hubcaps. "

Wait, it's not supposed to be in the center!???

I just checked the instructions and it's super ambiguous:
https://lego.brickinstructions.com/instructions/00000/0889/003.jpg

Based on the main image it does indeed seem to not be centered, but it's still ambiguous. I was today years old when I even thought about this..."

Wow I never noticed, but in the instructions, it's in the corner, same as the main pic. Damn..."

The problem is that you’re looking straight across the diagonal, so a plate in the center would line up just as perfectly with a plate in the corner. But it is possible to determine that this _IS_ absolutely in the corner and not the center. If it was centered, the top of the 1x1 plate would not touch the bottom of the 2x2 plate. The outside top corners of the 1x1 plate would precisely line up with the outside bottom corners of the 2x2 plate, and there would be a slight gap between the foreground sides of the two plates."

You would see a gap if it was centered, and the cover pic is quite clearly not centered. "

Agreed! But is there a 1x1 plate present, under the dish, in the cover pic? Who knows for sure!!

I think there are two versions of the instructions for this set, as the first run made it a bit unclear where the radar dish is attached to.

EDIT:
Might also be related to that 1x1 plate mentioned earlier.

@TheOtherMike said:
" @PurpleDave said:
" @tmtomh said:
"Doesn’t get much more classic than this.

It’s my pet theory that at any given moment every classic space collector in the world has all the parts necessary to build this set laying around in their spare parts bin. "

Pretty sure I don’t own a single instance of the light-grey airtanks."

According to Bricklink, twenty-eight sets included them, including some Town sets: https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemIn.asp?P=3838&colorID=9&in=A The only minifigures to wear any were Town ones."

Yeah, I already looked through the list, but didn’t see any sets I specifically recognized owning. I didn’t have many Town sets, or any blue Classic Space sets, so those were easy to eliminate. The closest I was able to get is that 1983 came with this set, 886, and 6824, but I am 99% certain I got my Space Dart I as a standalone set. If I do one any, it’s far more likely my mom picked them up in a bulk collection she got at a garage sale. We had parts in our collection that couldn’t have come from any sets we had opened ourselves (some of the parts had been discontinued before my brother was born), and I don’t remember ever being handed a box that had been identified as Used parts, so I’m pretty sure they got slipped into our collection when we weren’t looking.

I think I’m the odd man out, but this is way closer to my ideal Lego set than any of the $300-500 sets commonly rated among the best these days.

Very hard to provide so much joy with just 29 parts. I have this one and most of the small ones of that era. It's not called 'Classic' Space for nothing!

@HOBBES said:
"Very hard to provide so much joy with just 29 parts. I have this one and most of the small ones of that era. It's not called 'Classic' Space for nothing!"

6803 about to come in and ruin your day by flying in on a derpy-looking ship and either 1. recording your corruption or 2. wrecking your sh*t with a space rocket launcher. All in 25 parts.

@dimc said:
" @HOBBES said:
"Very hard to provide so much joy with just 29 parts. I have this one and most of the small ones of that era. It's not called 'Classic' Space for nothing!"

6803 about to come in and ruin your day by flying in on a derpy-looking ship and either 1. recording your corruption or 2. wrecking your sh*t with a space rocket launcher. All in 25 parts. "

Minimalism to the rescue: well before 6803 ever took off to do its nasty bits, there was 885 patrolling the great empty space at only 20 parts (including the parts of the minifig) to warn about any trouble-makers!

@PurpleDave said:
" @Zander said:
" @Brickalili said:
"It really looks like that little vehicle should topple backwards every time it tries to drive, that dish looks way to heavy for it"
I had this set back in the day - sadly, no longer - and don’t remember it toppling backwards. If you mean in-universe, it would be less of a concern in low gravity. The weight of the Classic Spaceman, even with little gravity, would be enough to keep the vehicle from doing accidental wheelies."

Weight is relative, though. If the buggy weighs 1/6th what it would on Earth, then the Spaceman would likewise only provide 1/6th the amount of counterweight he would on Earth. The only way it would really matter is that the EVA suits NASA currently use weigh around 200 pounds on Earth, so that’s like having a whole second person sitting in the seat with the driver."
I was taking both the relativity of weight and the weight of the suit into account. This set dates from ‘79. The moon suits used by NASA earlier that decade had a mass of 180 lbs (a lunar weight of 30 lbs), so not very different from the 200 lbs you mention. It appears we agree that the Classic Spaceman would counterbalance the radar.

Classic Space is set in the future where suits could be far less massive than those of the ‘70s but it’s not clear that you would want them to be: heavier suits make walking on lunar or planetary low gravity surfaces possible. In the box art for this set, others from the time and LEGO’s marketing images, Classic Spacemen are shown walking; they’re not all floating around.

@HOBBES said:
" @dimc said:
" @HOBBES said:
"Very hard to provide so much joy with just 29 parts. I have this one and most of the small ones of that era. It's not called 'Classic' Space for nothing!"

6803 about to come in and ruin your day by flying in on a derpy-looking ship and either 1. recording your corruption or 2. wrecking your sh*t with a space rocket launcher. All in 25 parts. "

Minimalism to the rescue: well before 6803 ever took off to do its nasty bits, there was 885 patrolling the great empty space at only 20 parts (including the parts of the minifig) to warn about any trouble-makers!"

Love the engines on the fence. I considered that one but the pilot can actually steer, in 6803 they're basically a kamikaze with a bazooka.

@Zander said:
" @PurpleDave said:
" @Zander said:
" @Brickalili said:
"It really looks like that little vehicle should topple backwards every time it tries to drive, that dish looks way to heavy for it"
I had this set back in the day - sadly, no longer - and don’t remember it toppling backwards. If you mean in-universe, it would be less of a concern in low gravity. The weight of the Classic Spaceman, even with little gravity, would be enough to keep the vehicle from doing accidental wheelies."

Weight is relative, though. If the buggy weighs 1/6th what it would on Earth, then the Spaceman would likewise only provide 1/6th the amount of counterweight he would on Earth. The only way it would really matter is that the EVA suits NASA currently use weigh around 200 pounds on Earth, so that’s like having a whole second person sitting in the seat with the driver."
I was taking both the relativity of weight and the weight of the suit into account. This set dates from ‘79. The moon suits used by NASA earlier that decade had a mass of 180 lbs (a lunar weight of 30 lbs), so not very different from the 200 lbs you mention. It appears we agree that the Classic Spaceman would counterbalance the radar.

"

So we finally know that the red spaceman's role is ballast! Don't get off as the cart will tip.

@skypilot22 said:
"I think I’m the odd man out, but this is way closer to my ideal Lego set than any of the $300-500 sets commonly rated among the best these days."

Well, 10497 made it to the finals of the "Best set of the last five years" competition, and it was in-between the two, price-wise. It's also close to *my* ideal set, or at least my ideal Space set. 10320 also sits in that middle ground, and, although it got knocked out in the first round of said competition, is only kept from being my absolute favorite set of the last decade (if not the millennium so far) by the fact that it has to share that honor with 10497.

@Zander said:
" @PurpleDave said:
" @Zander said:
" @Brickalili said:
"It really looks like that little vehicle should topple backwards every time it tries to drive, that dish looks way to heavy for it"
I had this set back in the day - sadly, no longer - and don’t remember it toppling backwards. If you mean in-universe, it would be less of a concern in low gravity. The weight of the Classic Spaceman, even with little gravity, would be enough to keep the vehicle from doing accidental wheelies."

Weight is relative, though. If the buggy weighs 1/6th what it would on Earth, then the Spaceman would likewise only provide 1/6th the amount of counterweight he would on Earth. The only way it would really matter is that the EVA suits NASA currently use weigh around 200 pounds on Earth, so that’s like having a whole second person sitting in the seat with the driver."
I was taking both the relativity of weight and the weight of the suit into account. This set dates from ‘79. The moon suits used by NASA earlier that decade had a mass of 180 lbs (a lunar weight of 30 lbs), so not very different from the 200 lbs you mention. It appears we agree that the Classic Spaceman would counterbalance the radar.

Classic Space is set in the future where suits could be far less massive than those of the ‘70s but it’s not clear that you would want them to be: heavier suits make walking on lunar or planetary low gravity surfaces possible. In the box art for this set, others from the time and LEGO’s marketing images, Classic Spacemen are shown walking; they’re not all floating around."

I just watched a video where someone explained that a moon suit would be difficult to adapt to use on Mars, but that a Mars suit could be easily adapted to use on the moon. The main issue? Those Apollo-era EVA suits would weigh 80 pounds on Mars, and make kneeling down and standing back up an absolute pain for an astronaut who needs to take lots of rock samples. A lightweight Mars suit would probably need minimal changes to be adapted to the lunar environment. It would already need to be able to resist abrasion, provide oxygen, shield from solar radiation, and cool the occupant.

But no, what I meant was that being on the moon would have no bearing on how well the driver could counterbalance the radar assembly. If it won’t work on Earth, weight ratios won’t be any different on the moon. And if it really needs the driver to counterbalance it, it’s going to tip as soon as they try to exit the vehicle, and make climbing back on quite hazardous.

A truck with a radar. Radar Truck.
Epic build
The 50th anniversary remake of this vehicule will have 1500 parts.

One of the classics! I have two, just to be safe.

So the current VSotW was released in 1971 and this set was released in 1979. That may be the shortest gap between the release dates of a RSotD and the VSotW that posts the next day yet, although I don't feel like going through the archives to check. It would take a while, especially since the "Vintage Set" news category is still not showing any articles, requiring more laborious methods of going through the history of the feature.