Review: Waterfall from BuildAMoc
Posted by Huw,
Last month we published an article about Build a MOC, a website where you can buy kits of other people's MOCs and make your MOCs available to others.
The company is still running the promotion whereby every new order placed before the end of November will be entered into a draw for one €100 voucher and three €50 vouchers.
This article, a review of one of the kits available there, Waterfall by TonyFlow76, has been a few weeks in the making. I had originally intended to publish it shortly after the first one, but we had a few problems with it. My daughter Alice built it and got it working, but then part of the mechanism failed. I tried to repair it before photographing, but that resulted in it breaking even more, and I lost patience with it.
So, last week I asked Brickset member Skizz who lives close by to rebuild it and to let me know how he got on. Here are his impressions of it:
This is an interesting model, mainly because it isn't an official LEGO set. It's based on a model created by TonyFlow76 with instructions produced by Polo from Planet GBC. As a result, there are a few things you wouldn't see in a LEGO set, mainly unusual build steps.
Box and packaging
The set came packed in an attractive and sturdy flip-top box.
The parts are sorted by type and bagged separately in what seemed like 100 zip-lock bags. That makes it easy to find what you need while building, and the bags are reusable, so environmentally it's not too bad.
The Completed Model
The completed model does look good, the rocky look of the scene has an organic feel to it, there is a good use of colour and the mechanical elements mostly work well, the waterfall and water splashes, but the rocking of the boat is very minor. I suppose if you had a couple of minifigs in it (not included), as shown on the Plant GBC site, they'd get seasick and lose their picnic if it was rocking too much! I am left wondering how they got the boat to the pool?
For all the good points about the model, the biggest criticism I have about the finished model is that it is fragile, both the finished model and during the build itself - there were steps where bits would fall off as parts were added, and some parts didn't fit properly.
The Build
The build starts off without too much drama, the base for the model is constructed. The only criticism I have at this point is that I'd have used several 2420 CORNER PLATE 1X2X2 pieces rather than the 3024 PLATE 1X1 that has been used.
It then moves onto the waterfall and this is where the issues with the build process start. There are a few steps where technic beams are slotted over axles and onto plates. I think at this point the waterfall mechanism could have been built separately as a sub-assembly and then placed onto the base when it's finished, that way the vertical parts could have been assembled before sliding them over the axles.
The way the water splashes work is a set of 32072 TECHNIC ANGULAR WHEEL on a length of flex tube that is slotted into a pin at one end and a 6587 3M CROSSAXLE WITH KNOB on the other. The tube only slots into the axle by a millimetre or so it can come apart quite easily [This is the part that broke when Alice built it -- Huw]. It works well as a clutch though so winding the mechanism the wrong way won't break anything. When I built it, the tube was slightly longer than the gap it was placed into, a trim with a blade for the brave would solve this.
This section of the build finishes off with constructing the linkages that make the boat rock. It's an interesting mechanism with an unusual way of offsetting pieces by a fraction of a block. At this point, all the mechanics are built, but there is a feeling of fragility because all the linkages and axles are supported on pillars of bricks with no interleaving of layers to provide strength.
The next stage of the build concentrates on all the rocks. Rather than building the whole model up in layers, the rocks are split into 4 sections and each is built separately which adds to the fragility as there are lots of vertical sections that aren't linked together. There are a couple of instances during this stage where pieces are placed that have very little support underneath them like 2x4 plate suspended underneath a 2x6 plate or a column on a 2x3 plate held up by just one stud at the corner.
Once the scenery is nearly complete, the water surface is built. At this point I found it hard to see where the pieces should go as the piece edges are hard to see as a result of them being translucent. Once built, it is slotted into the model but is only supported in a few places so pressing the wrong bit can make the water surface break. Then the boat is built which looks OK, it does look like a boat, but the side panels are only held on with a single SNOT stud in the centre of the boat, so the edges can rotate easily by accident.
Next is the foliage and the tree. The tree is made of two vertical sections placed adjacent to each other. As a result, the tree is extremely fragile and tricky to build. But once built it does look good. In my set, the pink flowers look slightly different to those shown in the instructions so that might be why they don't fit well, they are slightly larger than one stud so don't fit snugly up against the rock face.
Finally, the instructions show which way to turn the crank to make the model work correctly. Turning the wrong way isn't going to break anything as the way the tube is connected acts as a good clutch.
For the video above I made a gap in the baseplate and created a set of gears connecting underneath to a worm gear, motor and battery box. I had to rebuild the model as it didn't survive the removal of the base to add the gap very well.
Overall
It's a nice model with some interesting building steps. It is fragile though and does make you realise how much effort LEGO puts into their instructions to make them easy to build and strong. I think with a bit of work, these problems can be resolved which would elevate this model to something that's fun to build and see working without fear of bits falling off! A couple of minifigs to sit in the boat would have been a nice addition.
As it is, it's really best suited to experienced LEGO builders who don't get frustrated easily.
The model costs £137 which, for a set with 910 pieces, feels expensive. In comparison, the Fiat 500 set has 50 more pieces and sells for over £60 less.
Would I recommend buying this set? Probably not, there are just too many negative points to justify the high price. There are much cheaper and more interesting models available on that site like the Tensegrity Sculpture, which is just spooky magic!
Waterfall by TonyFlow76 is available at Build A MOC for £116 [a newly reduced price] and if purchased during November you'll be entered into a draw for one €100 voucher and three €50 vouchers.
Thanks to Build A MOC for supplying the kit for review. All opinions expressed are those of the author.
86 likes
17 comments on this article
Thanks for the honest and fair review. It does highlight just how much effort goes into the stability of official models.
I applaud the idea, and effort, to do something unique and unusual. It is a little expensive though.
I recently purchased instructions on how to build a parade float. The resulting set was beautiful, and matched my expectations in every way. However, there were some simple mechanisms to make parts of the model move as the float tires turned. These mechanisms never worked smoothly, despite considerable time by me trying to troubleshoot the possible reasons. As this article states, it makes you appreciate the effort Lego puts into the design of their official sets, and how they function so robustly.
Price puts the BrickLink/designer program into perspective I suppose.
Terrible high price and not that good of a set
I actually like this set very much, but the price is way too steep.
Kudos to the Build a Moc initiative though.
And how about that "Hey, Afol" shout written on the box? Desecrating but funny.
Oh, and thank you for a straightforward review and especially for the heads-up on that magical Tensegrity Sculpture: masterful building.
Ha I just looked at their site and they have some MOCs that they are charging $3,500 for.
EDIT: They have one MOC that costs over $16,000.
I thought the action feature would have the boat turn & then appear to be heading over the falls.
Hey all! Gerardo from BAM here!
First of all, @Huw, thanks a bunch for the honest review - LOVE IT!
I've actually taken a harder look at the inventory file and fixed a few older molds that were driving the price higher than it should have been, and updated the pricing accordingly. Thanks all for the feedback!!
It's an fairly pleasant looking model but I must say as someone who lives relatively close to a large number of waterfalls it's kind of weird to have a boat on a tiny body of water just between two waterfalls. I'd prefer a more natural looking waterfall without the boat.
Everyone needs a Skizz now and then!
I suspect that the set’s fragility both during its construction and when in use is due to it having been designed using CAD and then not properly tested with actual bricks. Connections and construction steps that look fine on screen may not work so well when subject to real forces and gravity.
This is a really beautiful model! It's so weird to see interiors that don't use colorful System and Technic parts though, having been used to officlal LEGO models. And just as I thought it's difficult to make out the different parts that are used because there's so much light grey on light grey.
As someone who strives to make their MOCs as structurally robust as possible, I find that it really is something that needs to be part of the entire design process from the ground up, from the foundation, and not an afterthought. When I'm creating something with structural integrity in mind, it really permeates every aspect of the design. I also often use LEGO's official models and instructions as references — I'm always asking myself if a young child plays with my model, how can I ensure it holds up to the different ways a child might grab it, fiddle with it or even be unexpectedly rough with it? Display models, understandably, tend to put this on the backseat since the assumption is that you'd only have to deal with the fragility while building it and then not have to worry about it after it's done as it won't be handled much by a TFOL/AFOL owner. But when it's integrated into the entire design process you can really see this in effect even during the build process, and I think that's beautiful.
I'm not a highly experienced designer or anything but I find that designing with this mindset does limit my creativity a bit when it comes to finding new and unconventional ways to put two unique parts together. I do prioritize structural integrity as I mentioned and am willing to make similar sacrifices that LEGO makes, but I'm constantly learning new techniques and trying to find a better balance. It's what I enjoy most about designing LEGO models, besides the actual finished product of course!
That's a very nice model. As far as the price goes, I can appreciate that it's much more expensive to offer a full custom set, and it's no charity work. Sometimes, when I receive an order from BrickLink or LEGO BnP, I wonder how on earth such few pieces can cost so much.
A regular LEGO set is a mass produced product.
I would say that BuildAMoc could save on zip lock bags. Surely not everyone is going to reuse them.
Nice little set. Makes me think that we're due for a Niagara Falls set. To parallel Architecture, imagine a "Natural Wonders" series, Niagara would be a great kickoff for that.
Thus the exercise demonstrates that good instructions are 50% of the experience and can make or break a fan-model.
(The other 50% is cost.)
(And buy my dinosaurs.)
@LegoSonicBoy:
I mostly design with LDraw via MLCad, so I have the opposite experience. Yes, I design as robust as possible (some models, like my minifig-scale Bat-pod just can’t accommodate much strength), but since it’s all digital, I can turn parts invisible and dig into the design at any point, change colors to easily identify “placeholder” parts where layers need to be completely redesigned, and switch back and forth between two or more alternate constructions in a matter of seconds.
I also design a lot of stuff (particularly cars) from the outside in, as I find it easier to do SNOTwork when I have a defined space to fill, and it’s the exterior aesthetic that I’m most concerned about. In terms of strength, though, it matters in more ways than you’d think. I typically do around 15 displays each year, and designing for strength means the most I usually have to worry about is a cheese wedge falling off a side view mirror (and since I individually bag my cars and pack them in padded travel cases, it’s easy to figure out where a missing part is located, or where a spare part came from).
@PaulRevere:
I would prefer to see them kick it off with Grand Prismatic. If they can make that look good, anything else should be cake.
Great review, a real humdinger for sure! Thanks for this, Huw.