Review: 75331 The Razor Crest (2)
Posted by CapnRex101,
75331 The Razor Crest provides some desirable minifigures and its construction is exceptionally enjoyable, but the most important aspect of the Ultimate Collector Series is definitely the model design. Fortunately, Din Djarin's prized starship continues to impress!
This model presents fantastic detail and closely resembles the onscreen vessel, inevitably improving upon the existing 75292 The Razor Crest in almost every regard. The interior is especially remarkable and matches the external design.
Summary
75331 The Razor Crest, 6,187 pieces.
£519.99 / $599.99 / €599.99 | 8.4p/9.7c/9.7c per piece.
Buy at LEGO.com »
The accuracy, detail and functionality of the Razor Crest rivals any other UCS product
- Authentic shaping
- Good texture balance
- Extensive interior details
- Appealing minifigures
- Some gaps between panels
The set was provided for review by LEGO. All opinions expressed are those of the author.
The Completed Model
Minifigure-scale Ultimate Collector Series models are consistently among the most popular and the Razor Crest is completely ideal for this scale. The shape of Din Djarin's transport is instantly recognisable here and I think the predominant light bluish grey colour works well. The onscreen vehicle is admittedly more metallic, but providing sufficient drum-lacquered pieces to create the necessary effect would be impractical.
Naturally, the sheer size of the Razor Crest is impressive on display. The model measures 72cm in length, including the protruding laser cannons, so dwarfs 75292 The Razor Crest. When compared with 75192 Millennium Falcon, the length should actually be nearer to 60cm, although finding an accurate minifigure-scale has always been open to interpretation.
On this occasion, the scale was established by the 3x3x6 curved panels which form the cockpit canopy. Their shape perfectly matches the source material and the whole prow section presents remarkable detail. The laser cannons, for instance, include accurate emitter shrouds and armour panels to protect these weapons, with stickers providing some extra texture.
The front is ingeniously assembled in multiple directions to avoid the need for stickers, capturing the distinctive band present beneath the canopy during the television series. The addition of two Technic wheels underneath also reflects the original vehicle, while 3x3x1 quarter spheres form accurate curvature on the underside, appearing in light bluish grey for the first time.
The aforementioned canopy panels are both printed with strengthening bands, while the central 2x5x2 windscreen element features a sticker. In this instance, I actually prefer the sticker to a printed design because this can be applied to line up almost seamlessly between the decorated bands, whereas printing could be accidentally offset.
Accessing the cockpit interior is simple, as the entire canopy section is not actually connected to the fuselage and can be easily removed. The proportions of the interior seem perfectly accurate and I appreciate the integration of some dark red elements for colour. Surprisingly, the chair has never been produced in dark red before.
The seating configuration corresponds with the source material and Din Djarin's seat is attached on a turntable, so can rotate a short distance. Some rotation is needed because various printed consoles surround the pilot. Their mismatched designs would be unsuitable for certain craft, but the Razor Crest has experienced many modifications, so the varied controls look nice. Grogu's favourite control lever and knob is also present.
An opening door allows minifigures to enter the vestibule area behind the cockpit, where there is space for Grogu's hover pram. There is also a clip for the Mandalorian's blaster rifle and a clever recreation of Frog Lady's egg incubator, with a stud where Grogu can stand beside this alluring container! Also, the ladder is correctly positioned inside this vestibule.
Descending this ladder leads into the cargo hold, again matching the layout of the Razor Crest onscreen. The upper deck can be removed to reach inside, although detaching the side panels gives easier access. They are only secured using clips and tabs at their base, but you must also remove the angular panels on top, as shown in the above image.
Furthermore, minifigures can enter the transport using the boarding ramps on either side, which faithfully unfold in two stages. Posing minifigures on the tiles and anti-studs of the ramp is rather difficult though, while the tiled section does not fold flat inside. Nevertheless, I am impressed the designer was able to replicate this feature of the vehicle and the doors appear equally effective when closed.
Removing the upper deck also reveals Din Djarin's sleeping quarters. This dark tan bed nestles inside a relatively narrow space, which prevented the designer from also including the refresher found here during the series. I would consider the refresher more recognisable, but perhaps the bed provides greater opportunities for play.
Furthermore, including the bed also creates space for some cables underneath, recreating the maintenance bay where Grogu attempts to rearrange red and blue wires. For total accuracy, this would be located directly behind the cockpit rather than underneath, but I appreciate the use of every available area aboard this vehicle. Grogu can stand inside.
The flame yellowish orange stripes on the exterior look excellent, certainly improving upon the dark tan stripes from 75292 The Razor Crest. However, there is a conspicuous colour difference between the brick-built parts of the stripes and the stickers. While far from ideal, the location of these stickers means they are generally overshadowed by the engines, which partially disguises the colour variation.
Tiles and studded surfaces are perfectly balanced across this model and the integration of dark bluish grey and dark tan highlights looks wonderful too. The angles of the fuselage are also very accurate, including across the low-profile landing gear housing. Unfortunately, the landing gear cannot actually retract or easily detach at the back because its housing extends underneath the fuselage and no display stand is provided. I can excuse this omission though, given the sheer weight of the model.
Intricate texture continues across the top of the fuselage, where tiles and wedge plates combine to form interesting angles. There are some gaps between sections, but these seem unavoidable without developing any new parts. The model does take advantage of the lately-introduced 4x4 tile though, which originates from the Super Mario theme.
The vehicle measures 51cm across at its widest point, so the proportions of the engines appear perfect. They are densely constructed and therefore heavy, but the central fuselage structure is certainly strong enough to support both nacelles. Once again, dark bluish grey pieces decorate both engines and narrow chain links are employed to great effect, appearing in light bluish grey for the first time.
Dark tan elements also provide a welcome contrast, particularly around the thrust nozzles. I love the series of 1x1 slopes positioned where the engines widen as well, softening the transition and representing additional texture. Moreover, light bluish grey wheel hubs originally developed for 10269 Harley-Davidson Fat Boy provide mechanical details.
An escape pod is situated atop the vessel. This never appeared onscreen, but is represented on various toys and introduces an effective contrast. The vessel is integrated quite nicely and could perhaps be mistaken for exposed engine detailing, although the visible window suggests its true purpose aboard the Razor Crest.
Naturally, the escape pod is removable leaves behind a void, showing the internal construction underneath. However, it seems appropriate than an external escape pod would yield an obvious gap in the fuselage when launched. The designer has also avoided extremely vibrant colours in this area, including only muted shades.
This escape pod notably resembles those found aboard the Millennium Falcon, measuring 8cm long and including a window to view the occupant. This window comprises two trans-clear 1x2 tiles, which are ingeniously secured between 1x2 plates with side rails and 2x2 curved corner tiles, instead of being connected with studs.
The access panel is easily removable and there is comfortable space for one minifigure to stand inside. The dark tan upholstery looks good and the round window is situated at exactly the right height for a standard minifigure. Additionally, I like the basic control thrusters, which also match the source material.
Three panels can be detached to access the cargo hold, which seems nearly as detailed as the exterior! However, the fuselage is relatively deep and reaching inside to place the minifigures is therefore tricky. The transport is not designed primarily for play though, so being able to view the interior will be sufficient for most owners.
Fortunately, the large panels on either flank can be removed, like those towards the front. They are attached using clips and a rubber Technic beam, so are not necessarily intended for removal for access, but the process is easy. Detaching the left panel, for example, reveals a generator, a stack of Imperial crates and Din Djarin's weapons cache. The bowl also appears quite frequently throughout the series.
Five blasters are found inside the weapons locker, while the Mandalorian's thermal detonators are stored in the Imperial crates. The stickered 'baby on board' sign, translated into Aurebesh, is another fun addition and Boba Fett's equipment is kept beside the locker. Although this helmet lacks the damage shown when Din collects the armour, I certainly welcome its inclusion.
The opposite wall includes a carbon-freezing chamber beside two frozen bounties, connected to the ceiling using clips. Each item is designed to be removed, creating space for customisation or providing a better view of other furnishings, as shown below. The floor is predominantly covered with tiles, featuring only occasional studs for attaching items and minifigures.
A minifigure can stand inside the carbon-freezing chamber, as shown below. The clamps for the frozen blocks are unusually detailed and their size matches the chamber quite well. However, a selection of Technic parts are visible around the walls. Sometimes these would detract from the design, but the Razor Crest includes various missing panels onscreen, so some untidy features are authentic.
Stickers decorate the carbonite blocks and closely resemble those available in 75292 The Razor Crest, albeit without the status displays. The human character has appeared already, while the Rodian design is new. Both include printed consoles on their side and trans-green lights indicate the healthy status of the prisoners. I think the frozen Mythrol should also have been provided.
Kuiil's blurrg also fits inside the cargo hold, even with the Ugnaught riding on top. In fact, there is enough space for two blurrgs after removing both carbonite blocks. However, there is no net to separate part of the hold for the animals, which is slightly disappointing because I think there is ample room to secure a fabric net.
Blurrgs were originally introduced in the Ewoks: Battle for Endor television film, before returning on Ryloth during Star Wars: The Clone Wars. Whenever LEGO is designing a new animal, there are options to manufacture a unique mould or assemble the animal from existing parts. I think choosing to build the blurrg was the correct decision, albeit integrating exclusive printed eyes on 1x1 round tiles.
The head, arms and tail are articulated and I like the dynamic stance of the legs too. Also, there is a slot for Kuiil or another minifigure to ride the blurrg, fitting neatly inside its saddle. The shape of this creature looks fantastic, taking advantage of various curved slopes and tiles to duplicate the animal's reptilian hide and bulky physiology. The dark tan accents are effective as well.
While definitely not curvy, the bodywork on the Razor Crest seems even more accurate than the blurrg. The transitions between armour sections towards the rear are incredibly smooth, leaving only tiny gaps in certain areas. Texture continues along either flank and the top, although maybe most impressive are the mechanical details situated at the very back, nestling between different panels.
Furthermore, the loading ramp functions exactly as presented during The Mandalorian, including extending rams and a folding segment at the bottom. Much like the forward access ramps, there is little opportunity to display any minifigures descending the ramp, although I think keeping the exterior completely smooth was more important.
Ultimate Collector Series models are almost always accompanied by information plaques, which sometimes incorporate spaces for the minifigures. This example comfortably accommodates the four characters and the blurrg, flanking the plaque. As always, applying this sticker centrally and without any air bubbles or dust underneath is difficult, so I am looking forward to the introduction of printed plaques.
The consistent style between Ultimate Collector Series plaques is very welcome, although such consistency often extends to mistakes. Thankfully, there are no informational errors or spelling mistakes here, although I noticed that a couple of 5x5 curved slope bricks are missing from one of the engines. While obviously not ideal, at least this error is very subtle.
Overall
LEGO has achieved an exceptionally high quality across the Ultimate Collector Series in recent years, particularly concerning minifigure-scale creations, between 75192 Millennium Falcon and 75313 AT-AT. 75331 The Razor Crest undoubtedly reaches the same standard, including superb detail across the inside and outside. The interior access could be improved, although the panels on either side are removable.
The proportions of the Razor Crest are also extremely accurate to the source material and I love the functional ramps, which descend precisely as shown onscreen. The cockpit and efficient use of internal space are appealing too. Additionally, I think the price of £519.99, $599.99 or €599.99 represents reasonable value, relative to the other Ultimate Collector Series models, so I am very pleased with this entire set.
Part one of our review, discussing the minifigures and construction, is available here.
174 likes
63 comments on this article
Easily one of my most anticipated sets of the year. It'll be mine someday!
Thanks for a spectacularly-written review Capn! The only thing that could make it better in my eyes is a comparison with past minifigure-scale UCS sets - even regular sets that are also in relative minifigure-scale, as featured in your 'Minifigure-scale Star Wars vehicles' article from last August. I can imagine that would be pretty time consuming to do, though.
The set is nice but it's ridiculously oversized and the price is NOT justified in any way, shape or form. Specially when you consider the set is also full of big stickers that should have been printed as LEGO still can't produce sticker colours that match the brick colours.
Only someone who gets stuff for free from LEGO could call this price tag "reasonable".
It isn't. It absolutely isn't. Just like the AT-AT wasn't either. Comparing it to other unreasonably priced UCS sets doesn't make it reasonable or acceptable.
Been waiting for this one a long time and not disappointed on how it came out. Expensive yes but I think the quality and size justify the price. I will take a chance on waiting until next week’s double VIP promo to purchase this one but I wouldn’t be shocked if it sells out before then. If it does there’s plenty of other sets I’ve been holding off on so no big deal really. I will get it eventually to add to the collection. Well done LEGO!
I would love for my rich uncle Scrooge McDuck to show up on my doorstep one day with this in his hands. I think the price is pretty reasonable for such a big spaceship, relatively speaking. However, I'm not my rich uncle Scrooge McDuck, so I'll have to be content with 75292.
Inflation is up 13% in 2 years. It has hit LEGO and the new ppp is here. Every new review seems to have the negative bullet point - 'too expensive'. But I love that LEGO is still willing to produce these large sets even if I can't justify buying it. These sets are for the whales now. Dream on LEGO, dream on.
Am I the only one who thinks 8.4p / 9.7c per piece relatively good value?
The overall price of £520 is too much for me, and I won't be able to afford it, but the amount of plastic for your pound seems decent. It slips below the 10c pp mark that is usually deemed acceptable.
Looks amazing. My only complaint about the model itself would be that "clear" plastic they've changed to for the canopies. That said, there's no way this set would ever fit my budget. I do own the Falcon but that was a once in 20 years purchase. $500+ becoming the norm is just not going to work for me, I wish they'd scaled this down a bit.
@djcbs said:
"The set is nice but it's ridiculously oversized and the price is NOT justified in any way, shape or form. Specially when you consider the set is also full of big stickers that should have been printed as LEGO still can't produce sticker colours that match the brick colours.
Only someone who gets stuff for free from LEGO could call this price tag "reasonable".
It isn't. It absolutely isn't. Just like the AT-AT wasn't either. Comparing it to other unreasonably priced UCS sets doesn't make it reasonable or acceptable."
“NOT justified in any way, shape or form” - not by over 6000 pieces? Is it your contention that any number of pieces, no matter how great, should not cost above a certain ceiling?
How do they manage to mess up the information label in some way every time in sets that always cost outrageous amount of money?
@BrickBob09 said:
"Am I the only one who thinks 8.4p / 9.7c per piece relatively good value?
The overall price of £520 is too much for me, and I won't be able to afford it, but the amount of plastic for your pound seems decent. It slips below the 10c pp mark that is usually deemed acceptable."
Agreed. I think it’s a fair price for the product being offered, it’s just too large for me to justify the cost.
@djcbs said:
"Only someone who gets stuff for free from LEGO could call this price tag "reasonable".
It isn't. It absolutely isn't."
Reasonable value is subjective and will never be agreed upon. Some place value on design, others on playability, and others on piece count.
But, far more importantly, the value a person places on money varies hugely. This set might be extortionate if it equates to half a month's wages, or peanuts if it's half a day's wages. Neither is absolute, or correct.
@CapnRex101 said in the review:
"The aforementioned canopy panels are both printed with strengthening bands, while the central 2x5x2 windscreen element features a sticker. In this instance, I actually prefer the sticker to a printed design because this can be applied to line up almost seamlessly between the decorated bands, whereas printing could be accidentally offset."
I get what you're saying, but considering Cobi and some Chinese brands can make flawlessly aligned edge-to-edge prints over multiple pieces, why can't Lego? I can understand the process for that to be more complex and therefore expensive, but we're talking a €600 set here. For that kind of money, they should be able to put in a little more effort.
But even for less expensive sets this should improve. I mean, I recently built the Singapore skyline set, which contains several repeated prints that are all over the place. Same story with the solar panels on the ISS. And while the single one I have is okayish, the wonky astromech heads Jang always gets have long become a meme. I do still very much prefer prints over stickers (and the bad color matching in this set again shows why), but considering the prices they Lego is asking they could care at least a tiny bit about quality.
But overall great review of a set that on second glance makes a better impression that on the first one, though I still have a very hard time seeing anywhere near €600 of value here. Especially considering several obvious cut corner.
And I do think they could have finished the underside a lot better. Not that you are usually gonna see it, but better not put it on a reflective surface, let alone a (hopefully sturdy...) stand.
It’s a great set, but again it’s a lot of money for what is essentially just a bunch of plastic bricks.
Too much for even some of the most hardcore SW/Lego fans.
I already have the original Razor Crest set, but even if I didn't... who has $600 extra just laying around?
‘I think the price of £519.99, $599.99 or €599.99 represents reasonable value, relative to the other Ultimate Collector Series models.’
Then I would trust you are correct and thank you for the hard work and in depth review!
What about value compared to genuine average income? Ok difficult maybe but can we start weighing each complete set for comparative value by weight?
Its as if Lego expects us just to lay aside feeding our families to buy plastic bricks...
Aw shucks you know I want it get out of the way family.
I don't collect UCS sets, and this one doesn't change my policy, because I don't have $600 to spare when there are so many other Lego sets from themes I do collect that also appeal to me. But I must admit this one tempts me more than most UCS sets have in the past. I love Grogu and the brick-built blurrg, and I am very impressed by the level of detail inside and outside. I don't have a problem with the stickers, either.
But I'm happy to admire the set without feeling more than minimal (easily ignored) desire to buy it.
I wouldn't mind having price vs weight used as a reference of value, but I understand that it's a difficult ratio to determine and unlikely to replace p-p-p.
It's not that the price per piece is outrageous, it's not. My issue, an opinion shared by others, is did it need to be 6000 pcs? Could they not offer a reasonable rendition at $250 or $299? I suspect they could. Instead they continue with the $600 kits.
I don't care much about Star Wars and I don't have the budget for such big set. But I admit that the price per ratio is very good and the whole ship looks fantastic. The level of detail is remarkable and the whole design of this craft is just super cool. If only I had the means I would buy this asap.
@CDM said:
"It's not that the price per piece is outrageous, it's not. My issue, an opinion shared by others, is did it need to be 6000 pcs? Could they not offer a reasonable rendition at $250 or $299? I suspect they could. Instead they continue with the $600 kits."
There is a reasonable rendition (75292) at $140, and I'm not sure how much of an improvement you'd get at the $250 or $299 price point. It certainly wouldn't be "minifigure" scale, as they've attempted here. While I will probably never buy this $600 kit, I'd rather it exist alongside the $140 version, than have something that is only slightly bigger and still twice as expensive. Just my opinion.
@djcbs said:
"The set is nice but it's ridiculously oversized and the price is NOT justified in any way, shape or form. Specially when you consider the set is also full of big stickers that should have been printed as LEGO still can't produce sticker colours that match the brick colours.
Only someone who gets stuff for free from LEGO could call this price tag "reasonable".
It isn't. It absolutely isn't. Just like the AT-AT wasn't either. Comparing it to other unreasonably priced UCS sets doesn't make it reasonable or acceptable."
STANDING OVATION !!!
I'm still amazed anyone uses ppp as a metric for value. Yet Lego knows people use this so the parts can get smaller and smaller and smaller and people will say "it's less than ten cents per part. How can you say that's bad value?"
I don't have anything close to the budget (or even the space) required for this, but this is quite possibly the most impressive official LEGO replica I have ever seen. The paneling and angles are spot-on, the intricate details are distributed perfectly to give a sense of exposed parts without just being messy, and the proportions and shaping (two major problems I had with 75292) are pretty much perfect.
Honestly I don't even have a problem with the sticker color mismatch with the stripes, because the actual Razor Crest's stripes are kind of inconsistently colored too (though it can be a little difficult to tell on-screen. Absolutely unbelievable.
Edit: The blurrg is fantastic too, and I'm glad they decided to brick-build it instead of making a custom element.
Upon receiving this set, I did not know what the prices would be and guessed something like £549.99, $599.99 or €599.99, so the eventual prices were roughly as expected. Being realistic about the current price of LEGO, I consider that fair value. Of course, one can always believe that nearly all LEGO is too expensive, so I think taking relative costing into account is sensible.
Also, with regard to price per piece, price per gram or any similar metric, they provide a basic and limited measure of value. I think true value for money may only be considered on a case by case basis because there are so many variables to take into account.
In this case, I would have purchased this set on day one, had I not been sent it for review, so I am satisfied with the value.
I don’t know why they’re touting this as minifig scale, it’s twice the size it should be. The original is correct scale and I feel they’ve just blown this up for interior detail. The Republic Gunship wasn’t in scale and neither is this.
@sklamb said:
"I don't collect UCS sets, and this one doesn't change my policy, because I don't have $600 to spare when there are so many other Lego sets from themes I do collect that also appeal to me. But I must admit this one tempts me more than most UCS sets have in the past. I love Grogu and the brick-built blurrg, and I am very impressed by the level of detail inside and outside. I don't have a problem with the stickers, either.
But I'm happy to admire the set without feeling more than minimal (easily ignored) desire to buy it.
I wouldn't mind having price vs weight used as a reference of value, but I understand that it's a difficult ratio to determine and unlikely to replace p-p-p."
I would love to see recorded weight for Lego sets, but it seems like it would be a large manual effort to get that going across a lot of sets.
People just need to stop talking about the prices, I don’t enjoy that it dominates the comment sections. I read these reviews because I’m interested in the model, in full acceptance I cannot afford it. I do this in the same way I look at SuperYachts, or mansions, or other such luxury items.
If you can’t afford it, don’t just comment that on every new set with something like “Does Lego expect us to remortgage our homes and go without food for this?!?”. The answer is no, of course they don’t. You are not their target market for this set. Enough people clearly have the disposable income to make producing so many high cost sets still very profitable to Lego. Let’s just accept that, and be happy.
@reardonmj said:
"I don’t know why they’re touting this as minifig scale, it’s twice the size it should be. The original is correct scale and I feel they’ve just blown this up for interior detail. The Republic Gunship wasn’t in scale and neither is this."
The original is absolutely not the correct scale. I'm not sure where you're getting this idea or these dimensions. While there's no official dimensions for the Razor Crest, estimations from a bunch of different people put it around 25-27 m, about twice as long. The Revell Razor Crest model at 1:72 would put the Razor Crest's length at 24 m long. Saying it's twice the size it should be would put it around 12 metres, which is the same size as an X-Wing, a ship that seats 1 pilot and 1 astromech.
I would be happy to spend $600 on this (and I do not collect UCS anymore and/or Star Wars). The problem is, in Canada, this will be $874 including the taxes. In that range, I'd rather add a bit more money and get either the Millennium or the AT-AT. That said, I'm still on the fence - this will be a difficult conundrum to solve.
I see a 2x4 brick used in the interior construction next to the side boarding ramp. Nice!
@CDM said:
"It's not that the price per piece is outrageous, it's not. My issue, an opinion shared by others, is did it need to be 6000 pcs? Could they not offer a reasonable rendition at $250 or $299? I suspect they could. Instead they continue with the $600 kits."
This isn't the Slave One, a ship with no consistent interior between media, and barely any screentime.
Size and outside detail are pretty much the only two things this set got perfect.
It was supposed to be 530$ at over 6100 pieces, and this at a point where we were already pretty deep in a the inflation shenanigans. I am sure had they released it before the UCS Falcon re-release it would have gone under 400$. It was that set that gave Lego the confidence that they do not have to factor in their savings due to volume of parts that are being sold by one set vs.s. many smaller sets.
Not even the Modulars can stay at below 200$ anymore. The world has gone mad and I am not going to take it.
"Additionally, I think the price of £519.99, $599.99 or €599.99 represents reasonable value"
WTF
@Anonym said:
" @CDM said:
"It's not that the price per piece is outrageous, it's not. My issue, an opinion shared by others, is did it need to be 6000 pcs? Could they not offer a reasonable rendition at $250 or $299? I suspect they could. Instead they continue with the $600 kits."
This isn't the Slave One, a ship with no consistent interior between media, and barely any screentime.
Size and outside detail are pretty much the only two things this set got perfect.
It was supposed to be 530$ at over 6100 pieces, and this at a point where we were already pretty deep in a the inflation shenanigans. I am sure had they released it before the UCS Falcon re-release it would have gone under 400$. It was that set that gave Lego the confidence that they do not have to factor in their savings due to volume of parts that are being sold by one set vs.s. many smaller sets.
Not even the Modulars can stay at below 200$ anymore. The world has gone mad and I am not going to take it."
Umm.. the world has been mad a lot longer than you're giving it credit for. It's been getting worse recently, yes, but it's been there before. World War I / Spanish Flu, World War II / Cold War and it's proxy wars were way worse, and the fall of the Roman Empire / Dark Ages weren't all that great either. Do I need to mention rampant pollution, potential famines in Africa due to the ongoing land-grab of a war, or the incoming global climate crisis?
In the grand scale of things, LEGO raising it's prices doesn't compare one iota. Yes, it's an inconvenience to the first world, but it's not comparable to "the world going mad". Not. one. bit.
@Johnny__Thunder97 said:
"People just need to stop talking about the prices, I don’t enjoy that it dominates the comment sections. I read these reviews because I’m interested in the model, in full acceptance I cannot afford it. I do this in the same way I look at SuperYachts, or mansions, or other such luxury items. "
The obvious difference here is that all of those things are high quality products made from expensive materials and usually involve fine craftsmanship. There will surely be a few exceptions, but otherwise you usually won't last in that market.
Lego on the other hand still is just a mass produced toy made from cheap plastic. Nothing fancy, just more of it than in less expensive sets. And with the same issues as those sets. They sure can make cool stuff from it, that's why we all love it. But for this kind of money I wouldn't want just *more* of the product, but would also expect a *better* product, without Lego cutting corners. This particular set doesn't seem the worst offender (I actually quite like it!), but for €600 shouldn't we expect nothing but absolute perfection?
For an interesting comparison, look at Gunpla (Bandai). You can get about any robot (sorry, mobile suit...) in a multitude of sizes and levels of detail, with vastly different prices. But compare a €300 Perfect Grade kit with a €50 Master Grade or a €15 High Grade kit of the same thing, and it's instantly obvious you don't just pay for some more plastic. It's a completely different experience.
Reading this review and looking at the pictures reminds me of how I once observed that Serenity from Firefly wouldn't look out of place in Star Wars. I hadn't ever really noticed the resemblance before, but strap a big orange-glowy engine to the back of the Razor Crest and you'd basically have Serenity. Also, I hope that blurrg becomes available in a cheaper set.
Too bad there is no "vac-tube," how else will the fledgling Mythrol "evacuate his thorax?"
@djcbs said:
"The set is nice but it's ridiculously oversized and the price is NOT justified in any way, shape or form. Specially when you consider the set is also full of big stickers that should have been printed as LEGO still can't produce sticker colours that match the brick colours.
Only someone who gets stuff for free from LEGO could call this price tag "reasonable".
It isn't. It absolutely isn't. Just like the AT-AT wasn't either. Comparing it to other unreasonably priced UCS sets doesn't make it reasonable or acceptable."
Once again, the ignorance of AFOL’s shows no bounds.
Not everyone is completely up to date with Star Wars jargon. Clarifying that a "refresher" is a toilet (I had to look it up to confirm that theory) would help your readers, I think.
Thanks for the review!
At this point I just sit back, still interested in lego but not buying hardly anything... because it's a ripoff whether it be a "cheap set" (35$ LOL) or "luxury" 300$+ set... no thanks unless it's amazing like Ninjago City Gardens
@NissanZ32 said:
"How do they manage to mess up the information label in some way every time in sets that always cost outrageous amount of money?"
No doubt. Are the graphic designers at Lego™ so overworked and underpaid that they habitually mess up smple UCS placards and sticker color matching- even on a $600 SET?!
That being said, I'll buy it on day 1 if there's another cool GWP lightsaber.
Great review, per usual. I really appreciate the details (especially the interior description and pictures) and expert analysis.
Lego designers never ceases to impress with their ingenuity and talent. Amazing model.
First - I love how this set looks!!! It is 4 times better than the original one? No! But it still looks amazing.
Second - this set has his buyer and it's definitely not the majority of ppl in this theme) If you think it's too expensive - just buy the original one and improve it! Because complaining in the comments will definitely NOT make Lego to drop they prices.
From all UCS I have only Slave 1 and I f love that set!!! This one gave me the same vibes, and this totally justify the price for ME.
@djcbs said:
"The set is nice but it's ridiculously oversized and the price is NOT justified in any way, shape or form. Specially when you consider the set is also full of big stickers that should have been printed as LEGO still can't produce sticker colours that match the brick colours.
Only someone who gets stuff for free from LEGO could call this price tag "reasonable".
It isn't. It absolutely isn't. Just like the AT-AT wasn't either. Comparing it to other unreasonably priced UCS sets doesn't make it reasonable or acceptable."
@djcbs Absolutely agree your comments on price, but how can a UCS set be oversized? Is UCS not about BIG large scale models so details can be added that don't work at smaller scale. Apologies if I’ve misunderstood
@djcbs said:
"The set is nice but it's ridiculously oversized and the price is NOT justified in any way, shape or form. Specially when you consider the set is also full of big stickers that should have been printed as LEGO still can't produce sticker colours that match the brick colours.
Only someone who gets stuff for free from LEGO could call this price tag "reasonable".
It isn't. It absolutely isn't. Just like the AT-AT wasn't either. Comparing it to other unreasonably priced UCS sets doesn't make it reasonable or acceptable."
Bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaa.
Wow. Go back and repeat your early maths classes kid, because by every metric available, this is a reasonably priced UCS. If you can't afford UCS sets, there's a perfectly good Razor Crest in your price range.
@Albus: So you're saying some people may need a refresher course on Star Wars jargon?
@WizardOfOss said:
" @Johnny__Thunder97 said:
"People just need to stop talking about the prices, I don’t enjoy that it dominates the comment sections. I read these reviews because I’m interested in the model, in full acceptance I cannot afford it. I do this in the same way I look at SuperYachts, or mansions, or other such luxury items. "
The obvious difference here is that all of those things are high quality products made from expensive materials and usually involve fine craftsmanship. There will surely be a few exceptions, but otherwise you usually won't last in that market.
Lego on the other hand still is just a mass produced toy made from cheap plastic. Nothing fancy, just more of it than in less expensive sets. And with the same issues as those sets. They sure can make cool stuff from it, that's why we all love it. But for this kind of money I wouldn't want just *more* of the product, but would also expect a *better* product, without Lego cutting corners. This particular set doesn't seem the worst offender (I actually quite like it!), but for €600 shouldn't we expect nothing but absolute perfection?
For an interesting comparison, look at Gunpla (Bandai). You can get about any robot (sorry, mobile suit...) in a multitude of sizes and levels of detail, with vastly different prices. But compare a €300 Perfect Grade kit with a €50 Master Grade or a €15 High Grade kit of the same thing, and it's instantly obvious you don't just pay for some more plastic. It's a completely different experience."
I'm not entirely sure what "different experience" you're hoping for with your high spend... I would argue that you clearly do get a better product- the design, the techniques used, the accuracy are all clearly significantly better than the playscale version of the razorcrest, which is even more clearly a significant step up from the Microfighter version.
You talk about those other examples being "high quality" products, which they are in their respective fields, though an expert in those things would still find many flaws in the same way as you do with Lego sets. Let's not forget, Lego is a premium product, not a cheap toy. In fact, they're the most successful toy company in the world at the time of writing, and have (relatively) high quality standards.
Now us AFOLs know that they also have loads of room to improve, and I would agree that in a premium set such as this, there shouldn't be compromises made (ie. I personally think it's unacceptable to have stickers in a set costing this amount of money). But we are sometimes so picky, forgetting that relative to most 'toys' on the market, Lego is the Superyacht, or the mansion.
@SnowB said:
""Additionally, I think the price of £519.99, $599.99 or €599.99 represents reasonable value"
WTF"
Do you not understand the difference between price and value?
"I think the price of £519.99, $599.99 or €599.99 represents reasonable value" - says the guy who received the set for free ....
@Johnny__Thunder97 said:
"People just need to stop talking about the prices, I don’t enjoy that it dominates the comment sections. I read these reviews because I’m interested in the model, in full acceptance I cannot afford it. I do this in the same way I look at SuperYachts, or mansions, or other such luxury items.
If you can’t afford it, don’t just comment that on every new set with something like “Does Lego expect us to remortgage our homes and go without food for this?!?”. The answer is no, of course they don’t. You are not their target market for this set. Enough people clearly have the disposable income to make producing so many high cost sets still very profitable to Lego. Let’s just accept that, and be happy."
Preach it. People need to start acknowledging that LEGO produces sets for a range of different budgets, and the UCS line is squarely aimed at people with *a lot* of money to burn.
It's the same deal in the guitar community -- would I love a fully kitted-out, American-made Gibson Les Paul Custom? Sure, but I can't throw away $3,000 on that. And I'm okay with my ~$500 guitars, because they're good too.
I dunno, people are just acting like a bunch of whiney, entitled brats in here.
As a wise philosopher once said,
You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometimes, well you just might find
You get what you need
@Johnny__Thunder97 said:
"I'm not entirely sure what "different experience" you're hoping for with your high spend... I would argue that you clearly do get a better product- the design, the techniques used, the accuracy are all clearly significantly better than the playscale version of the razorcrest, which is even more clearly a significant step up from the Microfighter version.
You talk about those other examples being "high quality" products, which they are in their respective fields, though an expert in those things would still find many flaws in the same way as you do with Lego sets. Let's not forget, Lego is a premium product, not a cheap toy. In fact, they're the most successful toy company in the world at the time of writing, and have (relatively) high quality standards.
Now us AFOLs know that they also have loads of room to improve, and I would agree that in a premium set such as this, there shouldn't be compromises made (ie. I personally think it's unacceptable to have stickers in a set costing this amount of money). But we are sometimes so picky, forgetting that relative to most 'toys' on the market, Lego is the Superyacht, or the mansion."
For some part I do agree, and one of the core strengths of Lego is that every set from a polybag to these UCS sets are based on the exact same system and pieces. But in the end, everything that makes this set better than the smaller and cheaper versions is just that it's bigger, so more detail is possible which obviously results in more pieces.
As you said yourself, in a UCS set there should be no room for compromise, it should be the absolute best Lego can do. In that respect I don't think it being "too big" is an issue at all. And in most cases the designers do an excellent job. But indeed, why do we get (badly matching) stickers? And I've seen people say it would have been too much to ask for this thing being entirely drum lacquered, but at this price point, is it really? Why is the bottom unfinished? Why is there no stand? Why no option to build it without landing gear?
(I do get why it isn't retractable, though I imagine that might be possible if Lego would make selected pieces from metal....though that might be stretching what Lego is....)
As for Lego being a premium product, they might want to be, but I do have some issues with that. Lego certainly ain't cheap, but compared to many other toys it sure isn't outlandishly so. I mean, compare Lego with, say, Playmobil or Hot Wheels, and the actual toy stuff very much is in the same ballpark. The big difference is that for most of those other brands there's a ceiling, there's a point they know they won't sell. Or only if they make something really, really special, and really go above and beyond to justify that price.
Lego very much goes beyond that. First with only very few sets, but in recent years more and more. In itself I don't have a problem with that, if there's a market, go for it, absolutely! The problem I do have is I have trouble seeing Lego as a true premium product. Like I said before, in the end it's just cheap plastic, only a lot of it. Quality? Certainly not the worst, but those expensive sets do have the exact same compromises and quality issues as the much cheaper sets. But where those compromises and issues might be somewhat forgivable in a €50 set, when I spend €500 my expectations rise accordingly. And being a true premium brand means raising the bar to match or even exceed those expectations. On too many levels, Lego isn't even trying to do that, they just don't care. How is that premium?
No product will ever be flawless, but a company that builds super yachts with such glaring "cheap yacht" issues won't survive long....
@sjr60 said:
"
As a wise philosopher once said,
You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometimes, well you just might find
You get what you need"
I saw her today at the reception
A glass of wine in her hand
I knew she would meet her connection
At her feet was her footloose man...
@CCC said:
" @ra226 said:
" I wish they'd scaled this down a bit."
They did scale it down already, 75292 at about 25% the price."
Oh how clever of you. Fine, I'll be more specific: it would be nice if the UCS were in the 3000-4000 piece range and maybe $300-350. Take 75172 and 75181 for example (the Y-Wing and UCS Y-Wing). The UCS is roughly triple the parts. A great improvement over the standard scale, but doesn't break the bank. The old 3:1 ratio of UCS to standard I feel like was the sweet spot.
They don’t call em Ultimate for no reason. Ultimate quality, Ultimate design, Ultimate sophistication, Ultimate technique.
Ultimately there’s no way I can afford it.
@ra226 said:
" @CCC said:
" @ra226 said:
" I wish they'd scaled this down a bit."
They did scale it down already, 75292 at about 25% the price."
Oh how clever of you. Fine, I'll be more specific: it would be nice if the UCS were in the 3000-4000 piece range and maybe $300-350. Take 75172 and 75181 for example (the Y-Wing and UCS Y-Wing). The UCS is roughly triple the parts. A great improvement over the standard scale, but doesn't break the bank. The old 3:1 ratio of UCS to standard I feel like was the sweet spot."
Then You definitely couldn't get that interior. That's the main "feature" here. I think Lego doesn't see a big difference between a 150 and 300$ set. In the end it's Ultimate CS, so the set must be as good as possible and a mini-scale ship is what it is.
@Murdoch17 said:
"Umm.. the world has been mad a lot longer than you're giving it credit for. It's been getting worse recently, yes, but it's been there before. World War I / Spanish Flu, World War II / Cold War and it's proxy wars were way worse, and the fall of the Roman Empire / Dark Ages weren't all that great either. Do I need to mention rampant pollution, potential famines in Africa due to the ongoing land-grab of a war, or the incoming global climate crisis?
In the grand scale of things, LEGO raising it's prices doesn't compare one iota. Yes, it's an inconvenience to the first world, but it's not comparable to "the world going mad". Not. one. bit."
I thought it would go a bit too much off-topic and thus didn't feel the need to mention that the prices of all my food went up by a third of the original price minimum and that media & government itself are telling us to buy warmer clothes because there won't be enough heating gas to go around due to the newest crusade. The increase of Lego prices is the only relevant part of the discussion and the word world was more meant as a term for the world through the lens of a Lego collector.
Going into detail about world history also ignores the reality that most of us didn't live through that and as you know nobody understands anything if you only use words to tell them. In the end this is the low point of anyone that can be considered to not be old and I see no way of real improvements coming up for a long, long time if ever.
@darthsutius said:
" @djcbs said:
"The set is nice but it's ridiculously oversized and the price is NOT justified in any way, shape or form. Specially when you consider the set is also full of big stickers that should have been printed as LEGO still can't produce sticker colours that match the brick colours.
Only someone who gets stuff for free from LEGO could call this price tag "reasonable".
It isn't. It absolutely isn't. Just like the AT-AT wasn't either. Comparing it to other unreasonably priced UCS sets doesn't make it reasonable or acceptable."
Bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaa.
Wow. Go back and repeat your early maths classes kid, because by every metric available, this is a reasonably priced UCS. If you can't afford UCS sets, there's a perfectly good Razor Crest in your price range."
Before the release of the latest UCS Falcon all items above 200$ had noticeably better price per piece ratios than just idling at around 10 cents. Many Star Wars UCS like AT-AT and Falcon are going far above that now and I don't see the cause being the nature of UCS sets using more larger pieces than lets say Modular houses with 1x1 tiles, which caused the houses to always have far better price piece ratios.
The best comparison are 2002 and 2019 ISDs due to them existing far before the inflation crisis. You see an increase of 38% in the weight to the newer set. This disregards that the old set had several heavy magnet parts and generally more big plates. 38% on top of the old price would make it 510$. Even with additional concessions to make it a flat 550$ it is a far cry from 700$.
Fact of the matter is, Lego stopped pricing its sets and parts like a manufacturer. Prices for all sets are now calculated like you are buying single pieces off of Bricklink resellers. But Lego is the manufacturer and has far less costs, or else how could they have produced sets at lower prices before?
@djcbs said:
"The set is nice but it's ridiculously oversized and the price is NOT justified in any way, shape or form. Specially when you consider the set is also full of big stickers that should have been printed as LEGO still can't produce sticker colours that match the brick colours.
Only someone who gets stuff for free from LEGO could call this price tag "reasonable".
It isn't. It absolutely isn't. Just like the AT-AT wasn't either. Comparing it to other unreasonably priced UCS sets doesn't make it reasonable or acceptable."
Thank you! And no one showed us this behemoth.next to UCS Slave-1!
@Anonym said:
" @darthsutius said:
" @djcbs said:
"The set is nice but it's ridiculously oversized and the price is NOT justified in any way, shape or form. Specially when you consider the set is also full of big stickers that should have been printed as LEGO still can't produce sticker colours that match the brick colours.
Only someone who gets stuff for free from LEGO could call this price tag "reasonable".
It isn't. It absolutely isn't. Just like the AT-AT wasn't either. Comparing it to other unreasonably priced UCS sets doesn't make it reasonable or acceptable."
Bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaa.
Wow. Go back and repeat your early maths classes kid, because by every metric available, this is a reasonably priced UCS. If you can't afford UCS sets, there's a perfectly good Razor Crest in your price range."
Before the release of the latest UCS Falcon all items above 200$ had noticeably better price per piece ratios than just idling at around 10 cents. Many Star Wars UCS like AT-AT and Falcon are going far above that now and I don't see the cause being the nature of UCS sets using more larger pieces than lets say Modular houses with 1x1 tiles, which caused the houses to always have far better price piece ratios.
The best comparison are 2002 and 2019 ISDs due to them existing far before the inflation crisis. You see an increase of 38% in the weight to the newer set. This disregards that the old set had several heavy magnet parts and generally more big plates. 38% on top of the old price would make it 510$. Even with additional concessions to make it a flat 550$ it is a far cry from 700$.
Fact of the matter is, Lego stopped pricing its sets and parts like a manufacturer. Prices for all sets are now calculated like you are buying single pieces off of Bricklink resellers. But Lego is the manufacturer and has far less costs, or else how could they have produced sets at lower prices before?"
Yep. Lego™ has admitted that the new UCS Falcon has expanded their idea of what they can sell at the highest price point. The BL Designer Program sets (selling out quickly) surely have not changed this perception.
I can't argue with it. I love the BIG sets! Can I get them all? Yep, but I'm not doing Day 1 anymore. My areas have expanded WAY too much since the Pandemic (Damn you! Awesome Ninjago!). I'm very selective these days. I used to buy the entire SW wave on Day 1. Now, I wait for Lego™ (or other sellers) to show me it's worth it!
The 3x GWP plus 2 x VIP combined with sales suggests that Lego is understanding that it has gone too far. Let's hope it's the case.
I love this set. Like all the UCS sets, I enjoy putting some money away fortnightly for it as that's part of my fun, eventually I'll get it 18 months or more from now. It's a great review and a great set, but I'm not happy about the stickers. If the helmet series at a much cheaper price point, can have different prints for different helmets, then stickers at a set at this price isn't really acceptable and I'm a little astounded that didn't make the con list.
I would like the next few UCS sets to be the size of the Slave 1, B Wing, A Wing, landspeeder, tie fighter though. A big set now and then as the exception is awesome, but we've had 5 in the last few years, and not only is price a massive consideration, but so is space.
@BrickBob09 said:
"Am I the only one who thinks 8.4p / 9.7c per piece relatively good value?
The overall price of £520 is too much for me, and I won't be able to afford it, but the amount of plastic for your pound seems decent. It slips below the 10c pp mark that is usually deemed acceptable."
I think it represented better value in the past, but with detailed sets like this there's a disproportionate number of very small pieces which are not actually worth 9.7c
@monkyby87 said:
" @djcbs said:
"The set is nice but it's ridiculously oversized and the price is NOT justified in any way, shape or form. Specially when you consider the set is also full of big stickers that should have been printed as LEGO still can't produce sticker colours that match the brick colours.
Only someone who gets stuff for free from LEGO could call this price tag "reasonable".
It isn't. It absolutely isn't. Just like the AT-AT wasn't either. Comparing it to other unreasonably priced UCS sets doesn't make it reasonable or acceptable."
Once again, the ignorance of AFOL’s shows no bounds. "
How was that ignorant?
In regard to your comment: there's one in every crowd. By one, I mean a rude insulting person.