Review: 76161 1989 Batwing
Posted by CapnRex101,
Batman has employed numerous aircraft since his introduction, including the notable Batwing that appears during Tim Burton's 1989 Batman movie. This spectacular vehicle has maintained impressive popularity and provided inspiration for many subsequent designs.
76161 1989 Batwing seems extremely accurate when compared with the onscreen vehicle, matching 76139 1989 Batmobile in that respect. Furthermore, both models are constructed at exactly the same scale so they should appear superb when displayed together, particularly given their complementary aesthetic features.
Box and Contents
The packaging for 76139 1989 Batmobile attracted considerable attention and this design matches its predecessor in many respects, featuring an attractive glow that distinguishes the black model from its background. However, this box features an interesting matte finish across the backdrop while the Batwing is slightly glossy, creating a fantastic effect. Moreover, the card stock is substantially thicker than usual.
Canopy components are packaged separately from the 22 standard bags that are numbered between one and thirteen. They are accordingly better protected from damage inside the box, although scratches remain. One instruction manual is provided as well, comprising 364 pages, along with the ubiquitous sticker sheet.
I have been slightly disappointed by the relative lack of supplementary information found in various instruction manuals across the 18+ range, although 76161 1989 Batwing breaks that trend. Instead, the manual contains comments from the set designer, Adam Grabowski, along with numerous photos showing the original vehicle. These comparison images with the source material are particularly striking.
Several stickers are also included, focusing primarily upon the cockpit controls which display some wonderful details. Applying the large information plaque sticker can prove challenging without trapping air bubbles or dust, although I have found success when only detaching the sticker from the backing sheet as I move across the 8x16 tile. This process generally enables more consistent application, thereby avoiding any air bubbles.
Minifigures
Remarkable excitement surrounded the appearance of this Batman minifigure, inspired by Michael Keaton's portrayal of the character, when 76139 1989 Batmobile was released last year. His return here seems inevitable and the design remains exceptionally appealing, due primarily to the unique cape and cowl piece which is made from rubber so approximates the original costume.
Distinctive texture is visible across the cape, contrasting with the cowl which looks smoother. This combination demonstrates outstanding accuracy and I love the moulded cape which appears surprisingly dynamic, despite its static position. However, this large component significantly restricts the options for displaying the figure, except on its dedicated stand.
The head remains unchanged from 2019 which is somewhat disappointing because there is certainly potential for improvement here. Batman's eyes should have been visible through his cowl in my opinion. Nevertheless, his differing facial expressions look good and I am delighted with the torso decoration, particularly given the metallic gold belt. Batman wields a batarang but lacks his grapnel launcher on this occasion.
An exclusive depiction of the Joker accompanied 76139 1989 Batmobile and another unique minifigure appears here, wearing the character's mime attire. This clothing has no association with the Batwing but has been depicted beautifully here, featuring an appropriate top hat along with a matching jacket. The flower on his lapel and fabric tails both look marvellous but the bow tie should have included white spots.
Furthermore, the torso is decorated with a spotted waistcoat while the legs feature intricate chequer across the front. These designs correspond with the movie and the Joker's distinct makeup seems equally authentic, including tiny red lips! The grotesque creases around this villain's mouth match those on the previous figure, although they are particularly visible here.
Bob appears beside the Joker throughout the Batman movie and would have been perfectly suited to inclusion here. However, the Boombox Goon is provided instead and looks superb when compared with the onscreen character, whose name is Lawrence. His huge moustache and sunglasses both appear faithful to the source material and the severe facial expression is excellent too.
The purple torso includes tremendous detail as well, displaying the Joker's face alongside a lovely fastener which resembles two dice. Additionally, three playing cards adorn Lawrence's right arm. This design looks magnificent but departs from the original character, whose jacket sleeve only features one Joker card. Even so, arm printing is always appreciated.
Lawrence carries a light bluish grey boombox which looks reasonable, although I am surprised that black was not chosen instead. Meanwhile, the Joker includes a white quill which he uses to assassinate Vinnie Ricorso during the movie, apparently confirming that the pen is truly mightier than the sword!
Construction
The enormous scale of 76161 1989 Batwing becomes immediately apparent upon beginning assembly of its Technic frame. These components provide incredible strength, especially after reinforcement by plates underneath. Various colourful elements are included, although they are wholly concealed when the construction process is complete.
Another layer of plates is subsequently fixed across the top, enclosing numerous 2x6 bricks inside. The resultant structure feels notably heavy and maintains absolute rigidity, continuing even to the extremities where narrower sections of the wings are attached using Technic pins. Curved slopes are then distributed along the leading and trailing edges of each wing and fitted using brackets.
Curved slopes are placed along the outermost edges of each wing, nestling almost perfectly against wedge plates. Despite their apparent simplicity, these curved slopes are connected using an unusual combination of clips, bars and two rubber bands to ensure that the elegant shaping remains intact. I was surprised to encounter two printed 2x2 round tiles which display Batman's famous insignia inside!
Having completed the robust wing structure, attention next shifts to the fuselage and external detailing. Various tiles, wedge plates and curved slopes are employed extensively across both wings and internal decoration begins to emerge within the cockpit. These assembly techniques are successful but lack the diversity that permeates construction of 76139 1989 Batmobile.
Nevertheless, the building experience remains enjoyable. Four brick-built structures are fixed across the underside of the Batwing. These are reliant upon bricks with studs on the side and feel absolutely secure. The colourful components shown at the centre of this image reveal the connection point for the display stand, hence they are not visible on display.
This model incorporates few smaller assemblies and constructing the cockpit furnishings was accordingly appealing. The seat comprises hinges and slopes to create its bucket shape while the surrounding control consoles feature numerous stickers. Even so, combining varied angles between these consoles is interesting and feels reminiscent of the Batmobile from 2019.
Weapons and the cockpit canopy are the final sections to be constructed, along with display stands for the Batwing and the associated minifigures. The assembly process is undoubtedly enjoyable but seems rudimentary when compared with 76139 1989 Batmobile. Of course, the source material determines the building experience to some degree and the Batwing evidently necessitated fewer elaborate techniques than the Batmobile.
The Completed Model
76139 1989 Batmobile includes an excellent display stand for the minifigures and exactly the same stand is available here, comfortably accommodating Batman, the Joker and Lawrence. Grotesques are positioned at either end, resembling those found outside Gotham Cathedral during the film, while 1x2 masonry bricks decorate the front. These basic details encapsulate Gotham City's characteristic architecture.
Ultimate Collector Series models traditionally include elevated display stands and an unusual light bluish grey example accompanies 76161 1989 Batwing, contrasting against the black vehicle and reflecting the turntable from 76139 1989 Batmobile. This structure is slightly more substantial than others, incorporating tiles along either flank which generate brilliant brickwork texture.
The information plaque seems conventional though, providing specifications about the 1989 Batwing alongside an image of this elegant craft. This black and white styling maintains consistency with the Batmobile plaque and differentiates these models from the Ultimate Collector Series range within Star Wars, where blue highlights appear prominently on the information plaques.
Connecting the Batwing to its stand is simple and I think the model looks spectacular, due in particular to the contrast between the display stand and this vehicle. The angle is fixed which was necessary to support the substantial weight of the Batwing, although that does only yield two options for display with the aircraft flying upwards or downwards, as demonstrated below.
Unfortunately, the attachment point to receive the display stand is situated towards the rear, thereby preventing sideways display which has been successful for recent Ultimate Collector Series sets. I imagine the sheer weight of the wings would have eliminated this option, even if the display stand were positioned closer to the centre of gravity beneath the cockpit.
Despite these shortcomings, I am quite impressed that an elevated display stand is provided because this vessel is larger than most creations with an elevated stand. This rendition of the Batwing measures 51cm in length and features a wingspan of 58cm, exceeding the enormous width of 75192 Millennium Falcon! The proportions are accordingly perfect and the silhouette of the Batwing is immediately recognisable, featuring suitably curved wings.
The aforementioned considerable size was necessary to match 76139 1989 Batmobile and these famous vehicles look fantastic together. Information has sometimes differed regarding their scale but these designs conform to modern reference material for both vehicles and the LEGO models integrate shared features, notably including extremely similar seats.
Curved prongs are situated at the prow, presumably housing sensor equipment and forming distinctive ears when the Batwing is viewed from above. Their shape appears quite accurate from certain angles but these two prongs should narrow to a point. 4x6 wedge slopes cannot recreate that shape perfectly which is disappointing, although limited alternative solutions are available.
Furthermore, this model lacks the deployable cutter which appears onscreen and I think the cockpit canopy could have been improved. Trans-black 4x4x6 curved panels and one 8x4x6 cone are combined to create an attractive shape, although the original canopy includes much greater curvature. I think an exclusive component would have been most appropriate here as capturing this shape correctly is exceptionally important.
However, the interior looks marvellous and the canopy is easily removable. Dark bluish grey elements present a delightful contrast against the surrounding black bodywork and I love the dramatic angle of Batman's seat. The backrest and headrest are both adjustable but they are intended to remain at the angle shown below, nestling against the engine housing.
Technic bricks remain exposed inside the footwell which is unfortunate, especially since they could easily have been concealed beneath black tiles. However, the control surfaces include brilliant detail and I appreciate the moving throttle and directional levers. The stickers feature numerous buttons and switches alongside a targeting screen that displays the Joker. Several balloons belonging to the Joker appear on another screen beside the pilot.
Another sticker is applied above the engine. This metallic silver design corresponds with the classic symbol from the 1989 Batman movie, although no engine detailing is hidden beneath this cover. Instead, opening the engine housing reveals two red crowbars which appears odd. Fortunately, their purpose is stated in the instruction manual.
These crowbars are included to remove the seat, thereby revealing the wall hanger element underneath the cockpit. This component was introduced with the LEGO Art range and allows models to be displayed on walls, including the Batwing which is shown against a wall in some official images. After suspending the Batwing, you can then replace this seat and conceal the hanger piece.
Displaying the Batwing against a wall requires its underside to be completely smooth. Certain details from the onscreen vehicle are therefore omitted, such as prominent lights, but the craft created for the film was also relatively lacking in texture across the underside. Additionally, the smooth structure ensures that this model rests nicely against any flat surface, without the need for landing gear.
Placing this vehicle on the display stand allows the deployment of two ventral stabilising fins. These are significantly smaller than the dorsal fins and correspond precisely with the original vehicle. While simple, the extending fins are among my favourite details throughout the entire model because lesser renditions of the 1989 Batwing might have omitted them.
Bat-shaped stabilisers are also positioned beside the cockpit. Their scalloped shape seems reminiscent of the fins on 76139 1989 Batmobile and matches the source material, although I think their trailing edges appear slightly too dramatic. Another tiny fin is fixed between its larger counterparts which demonstrates wonderful attention to detail.
Enormous cooling fins dominate the fuselage immediately behind the cockpit, incorporating numerous wedge slopes which create realistic texture. These conspicuous fins contrast with smoother bodywork along the centre of the Batwing, ensuring that they stand out. In fact, the entire model includes greater variation between smooth and studded surfaces than the earlier Batmobile which is an interesting decision.
Batman deploys twin GE M134 Miniguns when approaching the Joker during Tim Burton's movie. These weapons are accordingly mounted beside the cockpit and integrate splendid detail, although each cannon should feature six barrels rather than four. Furthermore, these deadly Miniguns cannot actually retract into the fuselage. They are easily removable though, much like the rockets located between the stabilising fins.
Delightful texture envelopes both wings, combining exposed studs and tiles to superb effect. The extensive use of 1x2 grille tiles towards the wing tips is exceptional and dark bluish grey highlights are also distributed across the wings, accurately recreating discernible details from the studio miniatures. I think pearl dark grey pieces would have been more suitable than dark bluish grey, although relatively few elements are available in pearl dark grey.
Articulated flaps are located on each wing, opening to reveal additional dark bluish grey tiles underneath. Functions are always welcome but these dark bluish grey flaps appear awkward against the black bodywork in my opinion. However, I love the curved outermost edges of the wings and the trans-yellow navigation lights look magnificent, standing out appropriately from the overwhelming plethora of black elements.
Overall
76139 1989 Batmobile was among my favourite sets produced during 2019 and substantial expectations therefore surround 76161 1989 Batwing. I think this rendition of the celebrated Batwing satisfies those high expectations, albeit without matching the remarkable precedent established by the previous model. Subtle details cover the exterior and the shaping is lovely, particularly around the wings which are deceptively elaborate in their construction.
However, the cockpit canopy deviates from the source material and I believe the prongs might have been improved as well, perhaps relying upon angled wedge plates rather than wedge slopes. The minifigure selection is also slightly disappointing, despite their undoubted individual quality. Batman's repeated presence is required but offering Lawrence instead of Bob is unusual, given the renown of the Joker's 'Number One Guy'.
Acknowledging those issues, 76161 1989 Batwing remains exceedingly appealing for display and complements its contemporaneous Batmobile. Moreover, the price of £179.99 or $199.99 seems reasonable based upon the imposing scale of this model, hence I would recommend the Batwing to owners of 76139 1989 Batmobile. When choosing between them, however, I favour the 2019 set.
This set was provided for review by The LEGO Group but the review represents an expression of my own opinions.
165 likes
73 comments on this article
Look nice. thank you for the review.
This is a wonderful looking, massive model. The scale didn't dawn on me until the underside shot. It'll be hard to choose between this and the A-Wing as my next 'wing', but this one seems to have a bit better value. Plus wall-mounting is such a great space-saver.
Love it and will buy it, but maybe in the new year. Only disappointment is the lack of mechanical pincers at the front for grabbing balloons.
That is black (and sometimes very, very dark grey) crafted into a beautiful form.
@Snazzy_Bricks said:
"so we get 2 massive batman sets and for marvel all we get is garbage, minus the tower?"
Batman is more popular with adults.
Bob wasn't in Joker's good book when the Batwing turned up in the movie so they went for the safer character maybe
I Didn't Buy the Batmobile but I'm seriously considering this!!
Apparently it can be wall mounted too, i love the structure & Detail and the minifigs are brilliant I'm surprised lego made Lawrence and Not Bob...
But overall I love it hope the next UCS vehicle is the penguin's Duckmobile, or Mr freezes Car from their respective movies!!
Great, thorough review.
Some of my overall concerns/nitpicks:
1. The bad font use/design on the plate. Could be markedly improved overall.
2. The lighter greys against the blacks. Too great of a visual contrast. Just too much. As I recall the contrast is downplayed in the packaging renders.
3. Non-retractable mini-guns. C’mon, don’t kill the fun factor! :)
4. I’ll always be the kind of consumer that argues for premium, all new minifigures in expensive sets. Do the re-use stuff in 150.00 sets and lower.
5. Really? Lawrence?
Other than those first world problems, you can bet Ima gonna be building the batsh*t outta this thing once I get my greedy hands on it.
Very cool, but still wish we could have gotten Joker's ridiculous giant revolver!
I just want the goon!
@Snazzy_Bricks said:
"so we get 2 massive batman sets and for marvel all we get is garbage, minus the tower?"
Iron Man Helmet this year, UCS Helicarrier a few years back, and there was a well-done Hulkbuster as well. Marvel quality sets exist, they are just spread over a few more years.
First off, thanks for the review CapnRex101. Seeing the picture with the Batmobile sure gives an idea of how big the set looks. As a Batman fan, I'll definitely pick this set. After that, I'll be lacking space for sure as I already have the The Tumbler, the 2018 UCS Y-Wing, the 1989 Batmobile and the NES.
Sure, there are some inaccuracies, but I see them as compromises. For the amount of toys that were over-the-top with the action figures not fitting in the canopy or having to push the head or something to use action features, I think we can accept some flaws. Not that the set should be spared from criticism as I do believe the clips used to steal Joker's balloons could have been an action feature much like the miniguns on 76139 1989 Batmobile.
And yes, Lawrence instead of Bob is questionable... but Lawrence does participate in the climax at the Church, only for a few seconds. I'll always associate Lawrence to the Museum scene as he's the only other goon with an actual name. And yes, I'll reiterate: Bob should have been the obvious choice, yet I'm sure licensing issues could have been the case. Tracey Walter is a good friend of Jack Nicholson as well. Although I'm sure George Lane Cooper would be proud to see himself as a LEGO minifigure.
Well, I like the car more that this one. It does look like a bog toy and not a collectible model.
Nicely done review, thanks. The building technique of sandwiching an interlinked grid of Technic bricks between plates is pretty common in large sturdy vehicles like landships, spaceships, and boats, but I think this is the largest Technic brick sandwich ever (for an official set). Most of the build looks great, but the forward slope and prongs could really benefit from more attention to detail and some of the amazing techniques in the Batmobile, instead of phoning it in with wedge bricks and curved slopes aligned with the grid. The cockpit canopy is a reasonable attempt using existing parts, but it really fails to capture the swooping curves of the original. Instead it looks flat and cramped. They should have used the UCS A-wing canopy or budgeted for a new mold, as with the Batmobile windscreen.
We need a swooshability rating too. ;-)
Nice review. Looks great, wouldn't mind getting it at some point to go with the Batmobile from the prior year.
Thanks for the review, and photo showing relative size to Batmobile. Only concern is not sure how strong the clips and bands are at holding the weight of the curved end slopes, looks like a lot more clips are needed. It would be good to see on display first in a Lego or toy shop to see how convincing it looks.
I'm not enough of a Batman fan to want to collect LEGO Batman sets, let alone these large-scale vehicles, but I really enjoy that such LEGO models exist. It's love letter after love letter to fans, and they only seem to get better. I like that the wall-hanging paradigm from LEGO Art is making its way to other display products wherever suitable, too. It's a testament to LEGO engineering that these massive, complex models can be mounted on a wall and retain structural integrity, all while looking pretty darn smart.
But the whole "oh no the internals are colorful but thank God they're all covered up" spiel I see everywhere is getting really old. Especially when that remark is made within the "build process" section of a review. Yes, it's an entirely valid complaint when colorful internals aren't covered up properly and are visible from outside, but LEGO has always designed sets this way, it's intentional, it's nothing new, and it only serves to enhance the building experience not just for inexperienced builders, but even perhaps for experienced builders who are easily overwhelmed by huge sets such as this. To better serve uninitiated readers, I'd much rather explain why such colorful elements are used before assuring the reader that the elements are covered up thereafter.
@LegoSonicBoy said:
"But the whole "oh no the internals are colorful but thank God they're all covered up" spiel I see everywhere is getting really old. Especially when that remark is made within the "build process" section of a review. Yes, it's an entirely valid complaint when colorful internals aren't covered up properly and are visible from outside, but LEGO has always designed sets this way, it's intentional, it's nothing new, and it only serves to enhance the building experience not just for inexperienced builders, but even perhaps for experienced builders who are easily overwhelmed by huge sets such as this. To better serve uninitiated readers, I'd much rather explain why such colorful elements are used before assuring the reader that the elements are covered up thereafter."
I think the vast majority of readers understand why more colourful elements are sometimes used inside LEGO models, although I can state the most frequent reasons here:
Colourful parts generally improve the building experience and are sometimes helpful when distinguishing between similar elements.
Most elements are more readily available in particular colours which can result in the use of incongruous shades.
Designers sometimes integrate references based upon the colours inside sets. For example, you can often find the colours of the Portuguese flag inside Marcos Bessa's creations.
However, it is not always apparent whether those brightly-coloured elements are concealed upon completion, hence I think it worth mentioning in reviews. After all, there are instances where such pieces are not completely hidden which can have a detrimental impact.
Good set, but for sure the batwing is not as popular as the batmobile. On the other hand, I would prefer to see the Bat from the dark knight rises (2012) instead.
It may be tiny in comparison, but I prefer the Batwing from 76111 (https://brickset.com/sets/76111-1/Batman-Brother-Eye-Takedown). I made a few cosmetic mods to 76111's Batwing, but otherwise think it looks great. Sometimes, small is beautiful.
This is a great review! Thanks!
They actually gave Joker THE quill?
@Lordmoral said: "They actually gave Joker THE quill?"
The quill he uses to murder someone, yes.
Remember, Lego is all about non-violent play.
Great review as always cap. Any chance you could add a picture of the Bat-wing mounted on the wall with an additional shot from the side? I assume it can only be mounted one way? Also, does Lego provide an appropriate wall hanger or do you need to source your own? Will a large screw do the job or does it depend on the traditional "L" angled fitting? Thanks in advance.
Can't wait to get this!
Might have my Dollar Bill Tuxedo Batman pilot it just for fun.
Is there a reason we’re not using the word Gargoyles now? Did I miss something?
@Snazzy_Bricks said:
"so we get 2 massive batman sets and for marvel all we get is garbage, minus the tower?"
So the sets correspond to the source material then...
;-P
On a more serious note, contrary to some I highly appreciate the mentioning of whether those hideous odd coloured parts are visible on the finished set or not. It's annoying enough that TLG, contrary to basically all of the alternatives, feels the need for this measure at all (just like the questionable dumbing down of instructions to the extreme - which thankfully is also not the case with any other manufacturer), but even more so when the final product doesn't manage to conceal these pieces. Like the hideous sight through the huge gaps on the current UCS Star Destroyer, to name but one of the worst examples.
@Fandabidozi said:
"Is there a reason we’re not using the word Gargoyles now? Did I miss something?"
Very basically: a grotesque is decorative, a gargoyle is a grotesque that carries rainwater away from a building.
@Galaxy12_Import said:
" @Snazzy_Bricks said:
"so we get 2 massive batman sets and for marvel all we get is garbage, minus the tower?"
Iron Man Helmet this year, UCS Helicarrier a few years back, and there was a well-done Hulkbuster as well. Marvel quality sets exist, they are just spread over a few more years."
I mean yeah but also the Helicarrier came out 5 years ago. So really you're only looking at an Iron Man Helmet (which doesn't have great reviews) and a Hulkbuster.
I recognize the font from the 1990 Batman Game Boy game.
Game also had some batwing levels.
@Snazzy_Bricks:
Don't worry, they'll make up for it by phoning it in for the first 2021 wave of DC sets.
@legoavenger14:
No! No sets based on the Schumacher movies. Next should be the Lobser-copter from The Dark Knight Rises! Also, a retail release of the large Batpod.
@CapnRex101:
You missed a few reasons:
4. They've basically been instructed to use off-colored parts internally, as younger builders respond better to having a more varied color palette.
5. They sometimes take advantage of parts being hidden to release them in new colors that otherwise would not be available.
6. They use colored parts for build-orientation. Both the Cuusoo DeLorean and the SW Droid Commander use red and blue parts to help you keep track of L/R orientation of a nearly-symmetrical build, so you know which side/end of the build to add parts to.
@gonesnakee:
Marvel is being marketed to kids, with Disney+ as the favored platform. DC is releasing R-rated animated films on home video, with a new TV series in development to be aired on HBO in addition to renewing shows like Harley Quinn and Doom Patrol to HBO Max.
@twodoors:
It uses one of the hanger pieces from the new mosaic line. I've not heard the ideal size for the screw, but the keyhole slot is deep enough that one should be sufficient as long as you sink the screw into a framing stud. It's worth noting that if you display it in this manner, the weight of this thing will probably be enough to cause the screw threads to "bite" into the plastic a bit over time. If you can find such a thing, I'd probably suggest a pan-head or button-head wood screw with a 1/4" shoulder that's as large a diameter as the keyhole slot will accommodate.
@twentythree:
Maybe go with Scu-bat or Mermaid Batman, since he's going to be swimming in that giant chair.
@tfcrafter:
Did you forget about the mosaic already?
Great model, great review.
Agree swooshability rating/comment needed with all flying structures.
@Zander said:
"It may be tiny in comparison, but I prefer the Batwing from 76111 (https://brickset.com/sets/76111-1/Batman-Brother-Eye-Takedown). I made a few cosmetic mods to 76111's Batwing, but otherwise think it looks great. Sometimes, small is beautiful."
And thus, with this comment, the new hover feature on this website became the greatest thing in the world to me.
Nay...the Universe.
Still getting used to hovering over the hyperlink text for ease of viewing!!!
@PurpleDave said:
" @Snazzy_Bricks:
Don't worry, they'll make up for it by phoning it in for the first 2021 wave of DC sets.
@legoavenger14:
No! No sets based on the Schumacher movies. Next should be the Lobser-copter from The Dark Knight Rises! Also, a retail release of the large Batpod.
@CapnRex101:
You missed a few reasons:
4. They've basically been instructed to use off-colored parts internally, as younger builders respond better to having a more varied color palette.
5. They sometimes take advantage of parts being hidden to release them in new colors that otherwise would not be available.
6. They use colored parts for build-orientation. Both the Cuusoo DeLorean and the SW Droid Commander use red and blue parts to help you keep track of L/R orientation of a nearly-symmetrical build, so you know which side/end of the build to add parts to.
@gonesnakee:
Marvel is being marketed to kids, with Disney+ as the favored platform. DC is releasing R-rated animated films on home video, with a new TV series in development to be aired on HBO in addition to renewing shows like Harley Quinn and Doom Patrol to HBO Max.
@twodoors:
It uses one of the hanger pieces from the new mosaic line. I've not heard the ideal size for the screw, but the keyhole slot is deep enough that one should be sufficient as long as you sink the screw into a framing stud. It's worth noting that if you display it in this manner, the weight of this thing will probably be enough to cause the screw threads to "bite" into the plastic a bit over time. If you can find such a thing, I'd probably suggest a pan-head or button-head wood screw with a 1/4" shoulder that's as large a diameter as the keyhole slot will accommodate.
@twentythree:
Maybe go with Scu-bat or Mermaid Batman, since he's going to be swimming in that giant chair.
@tfcrafter:
Did you forget about the mosaic already?"
My thanks PurpleDave for your response. I have lots of wall space in my study and precious little shelving space so I'm hoping I can source these wall hangers and use them to good effect to display some of my "space ships". Ideally the hanger would be best if it could slot into the new piece rather than just rest on it and damage the plastic. Something to investigate once this new piece becomes widely available. Cheers!
Great review!
I hope there'll be an accompanying GWP when it's launched, available in larger quantities than last year's minifig-scale Batmobile…
Another missed chance to introduce a new Michael Keaton print or at least use the 2019 Batman head instead of being cheap about an adult collector set and use the same standard 2012 head in it. Of course most people who buy this have or will buy the Batmobile as well and having two identical minifigs because of this is just lame. A leg print or tiny change would have made collectors happier.
Also, if the Batmobile could get a custom cockpit windscreen (even printed) why couldn't the Batwing as well?
But, very good review. Thanks @CapnRex101!
P.S. Another reason why LEGO uses colored bricks inside the models is to make it easier for the instruction designers and use as orientation help (info from the Fan Day 2020).
Been thinking about @Snazzy_Bricks original comment about the lack of Marvel sets aimed at the adult fan base. There might be some small truth to that. Though the statement needs to be evaluated completely.
The sets exist, they are just different. (One set that I didn’t see mentioned was the recent Iron Man art set). The more I thought about it I almost think a comparison of the two Universes and their more adult theme sets, possibilities, etc., would make a really interesting feature article.
Also, what do you think the chances are we will see a UCS Batboat from Batman Returns with a New Keaton minifigure, Catwoman and Penguin? I’d be into it.
When I read the title of this article, I thought, that’s a huge set number.
By my various gods I hope and pray:
Let me never become pedantic about exclusive minifigures or printing or lack thereof; life is too short and there is too much LEGO to build.
Anyone know if they’re doing a small scale model free with it, like they did with the Batmobile?
@twodoors:
So...I need to amend my previous response. I've been trying to find out actual details on the hanger element, and while several sites (including this one) have pointed out this new element and its purpose in their reviews of both the four mosaic kits and the upcoming Batwing, _NOBODY_ seems to have actually gone through the process of hanging anything with this. I even called LEGO.com just now, and asked if they had any official info on this part. The best I got was that the part name includes the number "4.85", which might be the diameter in millimeters. Looking at closeups of the part, the keyhole slot looks to be based on the Technic pin hole, but looking at the PDF instructions for one of the mosaic sets I noticed something I hadn't considered before. The hanger element appears to be pressed right up against the back of the 16x16 plates that the mosaic is built on, which means there's no space between the two parts for a screw head to fit. The keyhole slot is angled towards the bottom, has vertical sides in the middle, and a semicircle at the top. Inside, it's just a wide rectangle. Logically, the screw head is intended to fit inside that rectangular space so it doesn't require any clearance on the outside of the part.
The 4.85 number roughly corresponds to the diameter of a LEGO stud, for which I've found a "4.8" measurement. So, I'm thinking a basic wood screw might be best. It's designed to anchor things into a stud, so that part's taken care of. They generally have shoulders on them so you won't have to worry about the threads biting into the bracket. And the heads are small enough that they should fit inside the bracket.
Without having a part to actually measure, I think your best bet would be the longest 10 wood screw you can find. According to a size chart I found online, the longest they make that size in is 2-1/4". I'd have preferred at least a 2-1/2", but that doesn't appear to be an option. You'll want to pilot drill the hole so you don't risk splitting the stud. For softwood, 7/64" is suggested. If you can't get that size, I'd advise going smaller (3/32") so you don't risk having the threads pull out. If you're installing the screw by hand (and you're not Arnold), either rub the threaded portion of the screw on a bar of soap, or apply a drop or two of liquid soap (be careful not to drip!) to the end right before you begin driving the screw into the piloted hole. This will lubricate it temporarily, making it easier to turn in...for a little while at least. Try to do it in one attempt, or remove the screw and try again (with more soap) later if you need to. It's not unheard of to snap a screw off if you try to drive it in more after letting it sit too long.
@essel:
My local store's manager hadn't heard of any promos like that the last time I asked, and I just called LEGO.com today to ask about recommended screw size (they didn't have any info on hand), and as long as I had someone on the phone I asked about the Batwing. She didn't have any info either. Either they're doing a much better job of keeping it secret, or this will not have an exclusive promo associated with it.
@R0Sch:
Possibly the sales numbers for the Batmobile warranted a Batwing set, but not splurging on a custom canopy element.
Also, that's reason 6 from the extended list in my previous post.
@blogzilly:
I touched on the mosaic in my previous post as well, because I'd also noticed that it seems to have been forgotten in this discussion. Oddly, it's the only mosaic I know for certain I've actually seen at a regular retail store. Target that had them stocked right next to the helmet yesterday.
Really wished this came with a smaller set for GWP like the 1989 Batmobile. 76120 came with with a small Batwing that can be easily remodeled.
@Galaxy12_Import said:
" @Snazzy_Bricks said:
"so we get 2 massive batman sets and for marvel all we get is garbage, minus the tower?"
Iron Man Helmet this year, UCS Helicarrier a few years back, and there was a well-done Hulkbuster as well. Marvel quality sets exist, they are just spread over a few more years."
what hulkbuster? Hope you are not talking about this year's pancake buster because that one is dumb crap .
@PurpleDave : I think you're overdoing it with a 2 1/4 inch screw. I don't know how much the Batwing weighs, but Bricklink says the Batmobile is 4670 grams, about 10 1/4 pounds. Subtract the packaging and instructions, it's probably eight pounds at most. The Batwing has about 1000 fewer pieces, but maybe they average bigger, so let's say the Batwing is ten pounds. A 1 1/2 inch nail will do the job in drywall, you don't need a stud. Put the nail in at a 45° angle, about halfway. Of course, some fool will do it wrong and blame me. But that type of person shouldn't be allowed access to tools in the first place.
"BAT ENGINE" made me laugh!
@560heliport:
That works for hanging pictures because most pictures weigh a lot less than ten pounds (frame included), and people aren't just punching nails into drywall. Drywall is going to wear away over time, and with every instance of someone pulling that Batwing off the wall, until the point where the nail will easily pull out with the slightest tug, and will no longer be at an upwards angle. That's the point where your Batwing will crash to the floor. If you're just using a regular nail, you _ALWAYS_ sink it into a stud. You need special hangers if you plan to stick them into drywall in the gap between studs. One of the most common looks like a nail with no head, and has an angled circular plate that kinda makes it look like a sword. The plate will keep this nail from sliding further into the wall, the lack of a proper nail head will keep it from getting pulled back out of the wall when you remove something from it (because there's nothing to catch on), and the angle of the plate will help keep it from sagging over time. Another newer style (Monkey Hooks) looks like a giant J-hook with an extra little curl at the short end. The problem with the former is that the lack of a head means it will be easy to bump the Batwing and knock it off of the picture hanger nail, and the length of the shank that sticks out of the wall may need more space than the Batwing is designed to accommodate. The latter may result in the entire weight of the Batwing resting on just the tip of a piece of wire (by which I mean the flat circle at the very end, not the terminal portion in general). Monkey Hooks do make a low-profile option, but I don't see a weight rating listed on their site, the hook on the end is awfully short, and the description specifically says it's designed for "small items".
The benefit of running a long wood screw into a stud is that you'll have a wide head that the hanger element will lock onto, and the screw won't just pull free like a nail in drywall. This means in order for the Batwing (or mosaic) to come free, you'll either have to lift it off of the screw head, or pry it off with enough force to break the hanger element. Just sink a nail into drywall, and you'll be looking at both a drywall repair bill, and a Bricklink order to replace the parts that get damaged when it falls. Hopefully there won't also be a trip to the hospital, or something irreplaceable going into the trash because of what the model lands on.
could we please have a review on how this is wall-mountable?
@PurpleDave: I only hung a thousand or so pictures in 19 years of doing office furniture and related work. Whatever.
@560heliport:
If you're using common nails, framing nails, or finish nails to hang a picture on _drywall_, I'm surprised you haven't had someone file a claim against your company by now. Probably what happens is a few years after you finish a job, someone complains to maintenance about a picture falling down, and they mutter under their breath while fixing it. I spent a couple years working general maintenance where I had to figure out how to correct a lot of really bad, sometimes professional decisions. As those decisions go, regular nails in drywall is one that many people think makes sense. Tons of college students probably do it every year, but their nails don't have to hold more than about nine months. If it was a good solution, there wouldn't be so many products out there that are specifically designed for hanging pictures.
Speaking of which, I may have found the perfect solution:
https://utrdecorating.com/products/decohooks
https://utrdecorating.com/products/decohooks-40-lbs
They're like Monkey Hooks (no tools necessary to install, and specifically designed to hang stuff on drywall), but instead of a bare hook they have a flanged head. The flange sits flush against the drywall, and as long as one of them is sized to work with the LEGO hanger element, the head will lock into the keyhole slot and keep the model from coming off the wall until you want it to. There are four different head sizes, and two different weight ratings. The two head sizes on the 40 pound hooks look like they may be too thick between the head and flange, so the hanger element would just perch on top rather than dropping down over the head as intended. The 20 pound hooks come with either a 0.4" or 0.25" head. A 1x LEGO brick is 0.375" wide, and the cavity looks like it's a bit wider than a 1x brick.
I hung pictures in corporate office buildings. Those people don't stay in an office for more than a year or two, for the most part.
"If it was a good solution, there wouldn't be so many products out there that are specifically designed for hanging pictures." Marketing: convincing people to buy things they don't necessarily need.
I think I'll put mine on a table.
As for Marvel, they always skew younger. There are 'grown-up' products for Marvel fans but they are fewer. The Hulkbuster model is one of them ( https://brickset.com/sets/76105-1/The-Hulkbuster-Ultron-Edition ). So is the Helicarrier ( https://brickset.com/sets/76042-1/The-SHIELD-Helicarrier ). And the bust and wall art (although you can't find that last one in the Marvel Super Hero theme, you have to move to LEGO Art).
I don't mind - I have enough Lego to display as it is. Seeing as I like Marvel, DC, Star Wars, Technic Supercars and so many others...
@MakkaPakka said:
"
what hulkbuster? Hope you are not talking about this year's pancake buster because that one is dumb crap .
"
See my post above - it's the Ultron Edition one. Released 2018 with 1300 pieces.
Is there any word on whether this will ship with an exclusive "gift" set on release, similar to the Batmobile?
@cooljoe:
I just called the local LEGO Store, and they still haven't heard of any related promos (though it does qualify for any regular promos that are active when you buy it). They get their shipment on Monday in advance of VIPs being able to start buying it on Wednesday, so I've been advised to call back then just to make sure. But for right now, the actual Batwing sets are the only thing listed for that shipment.
They may have skipped a Batwing GWP due to an issue with the Batmobile GWP. The Keaton Batman minifig looks nice on the little display stand, but the flowing rubber cape isn't really compatible with a seated position in a vehicle. I haven't seen any photographic proof (and I haven't broken the seals on either my UCS or GWP Batmobiles to try it out), but I suspect that Batman minifig isn't really capable of fitting in the smaller Batmobile. And since the cape and emblem are formed into the cowl, and the torso has no emblem at all, it's not like you can just swap the cape/cowl for a standard pair.
Minor nitpick that I'm making only because I've been playing a *lot* of Flight Simulator recently...Those aren't flaps but rather are either spoilers or air brakes. Flaps increase lift. These are going to slow down or otherwise reduce the aerodynamic properties of the Batwing.
@blac0205:
Given their placement and design, I would guess air brakes. I've sat near the wings on quite a few flights and had a clear view of the air brakes when they open up as soon as the plane is firmly settled on the landing gear. That said, lift is created by causing the air to take a longer path to flow over the wing than it does to flow under the wing, so it seems like air brakes would actually increase lift. If they don't, I'm sure it has something to do with disrupting the smooth airflow, probably causing vortices.
But in terms of the actual Batwing design, we never see any evidence of flaps, ailerons, rudders, elevators, or any other means of controlling the plane besides basic thrust. However, the MAGMA drone being developed now has no external moving parts at all. All of those hinged control surfaces are gone. Instead, it uses directed airflow through the trailing edge of the wings to intentionally disrupt airflow over the wings, which can produce the same results as all of those traditional control surfaces. It's a great idea for drones (especially stealth drones), but for manned craft (especially passenger planes), any loss of power means a total loss of control, and if I understand the process correctly could even result in an immediate nosedive. But it would be totally like Batman to have this sort of technology in use over 30 years before even the military starts developing it.
Anyone know if and what the gwp might be?
@James2506:
There's zero hint of anything like the minifig-scale 1989 Batmobile, so don't get your hopes up. Currently, what you can expect is the Mindstorms mini robots with any purchase $100+. If you buy in-store only, there's a Build Your Own Vehicles polybag that doesn't exactly spark my interest. As always, promos will change over time. If those don't do it for you, you can always try to hold out for one that does.
Tomorrow, though, my local LEGO Store gets their shipment of Batwings. At the moment, they don't have anything else listed on the invoice, but I'll be able to get a definitive answer after they receive their delivery. I took Wednesday off just in case, but I'm currently thinking I may end up cancelling and just wait a bit to buy mine.
Just bought it from LEGO.ca ... No special free GWP here in Canada; just the same freebies as they have had all month :(
I dunno if i built it incorrectly but does the canopy just sit on top of the vehicle and isnt actually held in place by anything?
@Volfogg:
No, that's one problem with the set. If you hang it on the wall, the canopy is prone to falling off the model because it's not actually attached. When I build it, I'd like to display it on the wall, and I plan to look at how I can tweak the design to hold the canopy in place.
@PurpleDave said:
" @Volfogg:
No, that's one problem with the set. If you hang it on the wall, the canopy is prone to falling off the model because it's not actually attached. When I build it, I'd like to display it on the wall, and I plan to look at how I can tweak the design to hold the canopy in place."
IT IS NOT! IT WILL NOT FALL OFF! Don't assume junk like that please. The whole thing is built for hanging. All possible functions (which there aren't any of anyway) and fancy features so many of you are missing are deleted so it can be hanging. Whole structure starts and is built around the hanger piece so it can be hanging. The frame made rock solid so it can be hanging. Big plates sandwiched and utilizing all the studs possible which makes the buildup more annoying than it would be if it wasn't ment to be displayed vertically, so it can be hanging. Even the "how you hang it" is an elaborate process, to make sure it can be HANGING on a wall, and can't be knocked off by accident (when you use the correct size screw with correct size head that is).
This was thoroughly tested over and over again, the model was artifically aged, and then hung on a wooden wall that is at a highly frequented place (vibrations) in the Billund office, and it's been there for over a year now, nothing falls off. A slightly tilted one that's been converted to a lamp is hanging here for six months, we ripped it off the wall, we threw it on the floor to see what happens in the unlikley scenario when it falls off the wall. We held it by the wing tips to see if the frame is strong enough and whatnot. Every scenario we could imagine was tried out.
Best regards, the fat dude who came up with this thing.
@Gamlebilrokker:
The local LEGO Store has their copy hanging up, and the cockpit canopy is sitting next to the stand and minifigs below it. I noticed this after reading a review mention that the canopy isn't actually attached to the rest of the model. The hull itself may be rock solid, but this one section appears to have unresolved issues.
I don't care how the local LEGO Store has it displayed, there isn't any unresolved issue, the cockpit is held in place with plenty of friction (as in, the two front 2x2 bows need to be attached after the cockpit is in place, because otherwise it's difficult to squeeze the canopy assembly in place, plus there is also gravity that prevents it from falling off, think a bottle on a shelf) it's not balancing on the rest of the model, but the sides of the cockpit create a cradle where it sits, so it's held from all four sides, it will not come off, there is no need to change anything because it's not broken. Please stop spreading nonsense like that.
@Gamlebilrokker:
I haven't built it yet myself, so I don't know how it actually works. What I do know is that however you claim it's designed to work...isn't working. No, seriously. You can have a complex and elegant solution that works perfectly every time, except that if that solution isn't precisely implemented the same way by everyone, whatever they do instead _isn't_ going to work the way you intended.
Take, for instance, the hanger element. Watching the video, I can see that the model was elegantly designed so that the bottom of the keyhole is blocked to prevent the hanger element from lifting off of the screw head, making it impossible to remove the Batwing from the wall without first removing that bit of construction that blocks the bottom of the keyhole. Except, I can think of three separate ways that someone can hang this that render that fancy design 100% ineffective:
1. Someone suggested that all you need to do is sink a nail into drywall, and that it's okay if it's not even into a stud. The problem with this is that you can just pull that nail out of the wall with your fingers. Add the Batwing to it, and now you can grip it with two whole hands rather than just two fingers. You're going to pull the nail out, and there won't be anything left to hang it on.
2. One of the possible methods of hanging the Batwing that I personally mentioned (before the video came out) was Monkey Hooks. It's just a wire hook. There are special picture-hanger nails that are just a metal shaft with an angled plate to keep them from being pushed through the drywall. You could sink a finish nail into the wall, and even if it's into a stud it has the same problem. None of these solutions have any flared heads, so the keyhole lock is meaningless because there's nothing that locks into the keyhole slot. It's just like hanging a coat on a coat-hook.
3. The keyhole slot is flared toward the bottom. Just because a screw or nail has a head that's wide enough to not be able to fit through the top of the keyhole slot doesn't mean it can't do so at the bottom where there's more room. The video shows what looks like a drywall screw sunk into a faux brick wall (likely pressboard formed to look like bricks, because that screw is sunk right into the edge of the mortar joint without any visible anchor). That drywall screw may not be as secure as intended if you lift the Batwing up so the head is located at the flared base of the keyhole slot. Shift the model sideways, and you might get just enough clearance to get one side of the screw head free of the keyhole slot, at which point you can just slide it back the other way to pop it free. You previously mentioned, "the correct size screw with correct size head," but when I called up Consumer Affairs a while back to ask them what size screw this hanger element was designed to work with, the person I talked to looked through everything she had access to and couldn't find any recommendations for what to hang this from.
So, if it's that easy to completely disable the safeguards built into the construction around the hanger element, without even realizing that there were supposed to _be_ safeguards, why is it so hard to accept that people might have difficulty getting the cockpit canopy locked into place? And keep in mind that as an 18+ set, this is being specifically marketed to people who have no experience with LEGO construction.
If you haven't build it then this discussion is pointless. Again, for whatever reason, you elaborate possible possibilities, and (what makes me nuts) spread your assumptions into the whole wide world. What angers me most, is that you assume that we designed a very heavy, 200 dollar item, that has a "new" (as in we never made a set/3D object to be displayed hanging on a wall) feature, and we haven't done any research prior that, nor tested it thoroughly.
Of course what you say in the first quarter is somewhat true, if you build it wrong, then yes, you will run into trouble, but that applies for everything. If built as intended, with a certain margin of error that has been taken into account, this will work. Cockpit and hanging it up (again, three copies are hanging here as I write this, and they have been hanging for a very long time). If you skip all technic pins while building it, then you'll probably run into trouble too, but that is obvious, isn't it...
The fact that noone can tell you the right dimensions of the screw/nail is very simple, ONLY YOU know what walls you have in your house, there will never be any info released about the dimensions of the hanger, because LEGO can't take the responsibility for people's poor choices, and we don't want consumers to call and say that we told them to use a drywall screw sunk in half an inch in a concrete wall... Ikea or home depo doesn't tell you either how to hang up their stuff.
That being said, all three reasons you mentioned are correct if you use the wrong hardware to hang it up, and I'm sorry, but an adult should think long and hard for about a second before he or she finds out how to solve that little riddle, when in doubt, go to the hardware store with the hanger bit, and try out which screw (correct for your wall) has the correct shaft diameter, and the diameter of the head. Then, even with that key hole, you won't be able to take it off the wall. Period. There is no way, except for brute force, the hanger is so deep off the lowest point, and the prongs are long enough to prevent it form tilting so that the correct size screw can slide out.
@PurpleDave said:
So, if it's that easy to completely disable the safeguards built into the construction around the hanger element, without even realizing that there were supposed to _be_ safeguards, why is it so hard to accept that people might have difficulty getting the cockpit canopy locked into place? And keep in mind that as an 18+ set, this is being specifically marketed to people who have no experience with LEGO construction."
Because if they will follow the instructions, they will not run into problems. Simple. They are 18, can drive, smoke, in Europe can get drunk to the point where they don't remember their mother tongue, can have a family, kids, watch all movies, can get tattooed without asking for permission and I hope that if they have the 200 bucks, they'll be able to follow the instructions and put together what essentially is a kid's toy.
Write me when you built it, and it fell off your wall.
@PurpleDave - The canopy is secured by considerable friction around the front and sides so does not detach accidentally when displayed vertically. Also, it is supported from underneath when positioned vertically so I cannot see how the canopy would fall off, even if the Batwing was bumped.
In fact, having just tested this myself, the canopy remains firmly in position until the model is approximately twenty degrees beyond its vertical position.
"However, this box features an interesting matte finish across the backdrop while the Batwing is slightly glossy, creating a fantastic effect. Moreover, the card stock is substantially thicker than usual."
Odd, my box isn't matte, it's glossy on all sides. I noticed it when I stacked the box with my Batmobile box which is matte. I didn't think much of it until I read the quote above from the review. I'm not going to do anything about it, but just curious, anyone else get a glossy box? I'm in the US and ordered online from shop.lego.com during VIP access.
@Gamlebilrokker:
No, it's not pointless. What I'm getting from this discussion is that you:
1. Determined how to safely hang this thing on a wall, so it won't just pull loose, specifically regarding the dimensions of the fastener (maximum diameter that will fit inside the keyhole slot, minimum size required to keep it from popping out unexpectedly).
2. Kept this information _secret_ from your customers because you don't want to be sued if they get it wrong.
3. Expect them to get it right, even though you don't trust them enough to pick the right type/length of fastener.
4. Forgot that engineering is an arms race between the engineers trying to design a better foolproof product, and nature trying to breed a better fool.
5. Forgot that this leaves you wide open to lawsuits in the US, and possibly other countries. Seriously, I live in a country where lawnmower instructions have to tell you not to pick it up and use it for a hedge trimmer...because people have tried.
Hopefully you figure out your mistake from a bunch of customer service calls where people are just trying to figure out what type/size of fastener they should use, and not because it fell on some kid's head. Don't worry about me, as Consumer Affairs sent me a free hanger element so I get an idea of the true dimensions of the keyhole slot (since _NOBODY_ has posted this info online), so I won't even open the seals on the box until I've found something that will do the job safely. I've built actual boats out of wood, and actor-proof sets and props. Who you need to worry about is 560heliport, who, further up this thread, advised people that a nail into drywall (just drywall, not a stud behind the drywall) is sufficient.
And if you really do work for The LEGO Company, maybe use your internal communications network to reach out to every LEGO Store and ask them if their display copies have their canopies installed, or if they're sitting loose on the platform below like it was at my local store. After all, most LEGO Store employees are not hard-core AFOLs with tons of experience in complex construction techniques. Many of them are just people who were looking for a part-time job, and are good with people (especially of the younger variety), but had never built a LEGO set in their life before getting hired.
@CapnRex101:
So here's a question, then. How well do you have to build this for the friction to hold the canopy in place? If you don't firmly press the parts together, can it affect the way this functions? I ask because I've done a ton of public shows over the last two decades, and I constantly see instances where people build something, but don't always press the parts down all the way. They might be sitting a little high, or they might be canted to one side or the other. Some people intentionally do this in their MOCs to achieve a particular look, and others just don't notice that the part isn't firmly seated. I've designed MOCs where certain things would only work if the parts were seated so tight that they can keep another element from rotating on a pivot, and I've designed other MOCs where it was only possible because it's possible to leave a bit of a gap when you attach a part. Friction fit is something that often doesn't work if you get a bit sloppy with the construction.
Build it, write me when it fell off your wall.
Seriously, you come up with your elaborate oponions on every single set no matter what theme, and I have a life besides my job, chatting with you and trying to argue my case is not a part of either.
You write that there are unsolved problems, there aren’t. I tried to explain it, fail miserably, so if you think your assumptions are correct without even having had this thing in your hands, then so be it. I don’t care. You won. Or whatever that is you want to hear from me.
Just STOP SPREADING RUMOURS based on whatever comes to your mind. Please.
And yes. I not only work here, I DESIGNED that thing. I spent about a year of my God given time on this earth putting this set together, nailing and screwing on multiple copies on random walls, and tested every bit of it over and over again to make sure it does what I decided it needs to do. And it does. It hangs on the wall just like I designed it for many months now and there are no issues.
I’m sorry though that I expect that minimum of building it halfway correct to make it work as I intended.
Just as a side note, We checked what happens if you don’t press it together firmly, and parts of it are even designed so that certain bits that might be overseen or not pressed together like intended here and there, will be pressed together by following assemblies. One of these things is your favorite, the canopy. So even if you put it together with gaps the size of grand canyon while trying to use your lawnmower as a bubble bath, you will press it together automatically when it’s in it’s cradle, while you put on the last bit of the hull. Well, you probably won’t just to proove me wrong, but whatever...
@Gamlebilrokker said:
" Or whatever that is you want to hear from me."
I want to see you admit that it's a hypocritical move to say you won't publish dimensional data on the hanger element and the size of fastener required to safely install it because you think the general public is too stupid to follow instructions, but somehow smart enough to get it right without any guidance at all. But I know you won't. Any other company on the planet would include the screws (and anchors) necessary to safely hang an item like this, and instructions on how to do so, but somehow the "Only the best is good enough" company not only leaves them out, but refuses to tell anyone the diameter of screw head required to keep this from pulling right off the wall, while _PROMISING_ everyone that it won't, all because they're afraid of opening themselves up to lawsuits. That's some fly-by-night company behavior, right there.
You said it can't fall off the wall because you fully tested it to prove it's impossible. I quickly listed three different ways this could (and probably will) be hung that would allow it to easily fall free with just a simple push from below. That leaves your company wide open for lawsuits. If they really want to avoid them, they need to release detailed instructions on how to install this, so that if someone ever tries to sue them, they can simply point at the instructions provided, compare them to the method that was actually used, and say, "See, we told you exactly how to do it, and there's where you got it wrong."
So, I guess the most helpful answer you could give is to tell me the easiest way to get in touch with your legal department.
@PurpleDave said:
"
I want to see you admit that..."
Well, You won’t get it. I’m a designer of a set you haven’t even had in your hands yet, and not our legal department.
That’s one, two: I’m quite sure that a company like LEGO made all the percautions neccesary to avoid lawsuits even from Americans. Or do You really think one day between breakfast and lunch the LEGO DC Superheroes team said we want to hang up around 5 pounds of bricks On a wall and the legal said “ok”?
Again. Your house, your walls. You are brilliant at making a fuzz and random assumptions and yet You expect that the people at LEGO Service know every wall in the world and every fastener possible and have an answer for You?
In Your words: After all, most LEGO Service employees are not hard-core AFOLs with tons of experience in complex construction techniques. Many of them are just people who were looking for a part-time job, and are good with people (especially of the younger variety), but had never built a LEGO set in their life before getting hired”.
Call service, I’m sure they will be able to redirect You to our legal affairs where you can talk some other poor person into the ground.
Good luck.