Here in my area "poof" has an entirely different meaning.

 

3 hours ago, Ciglione said:

Here in my area "poof" has an entirely different meaning.

 

In your area? ? 

he means Puff... ;-)

27 minutes ago, mauro23 said:

he means Puff... ;-)

 

4 hours ago, Furious_george said:

Hahaha poofage. Always wondered why Americans where always saying "poof" on here till I realised  they meant disappeared.

Word poof is very different here.

Yeah, I was just watching "The Imitation Game" last night...very different slang across the pond

20 hours ago, ravenb99 said:

No poofage on snow speeder. 

http://www.thebrickfan.com/

2 hours ago, Pseudoty said:

http://www.thebrickfan.com/

And there's an AT-AT pictured on the box, which I read as a clear sign that AT-AT will be the other UCS set this year.  Actually, that would be really cool, though I can't imagine the two sets being to-scale with each other.

Er, never mind.  The pictured box is the one for the previous UCS Snowspeeder.

Edited January 14, 20178 yr by GhostDad

8 hours ago, GhostDad said:

And there's an AT-AT pictured on the box, which I read as a clear sign that AT-AT will be the other UCS set this year.  Actually, that would be really cool, though I can't imagine the two sets being to-scale with each other.

Er, never mind.  The pictured box is the one for the previous UCS Snowspeeder.

I still think an UCS AT-AT is on the way which would nicely compliment this set.

Funny thing is all Lego really needs to do is beef up 10178 (leave in the motorized PFs) and mark it up to $300. Note: 2008’s 10178 $130 MSRP is about $150 after inflation.  If the PF elements were left out, then the AT-AT can be larger.

heck, just about AT-AT can be the basis for a UCS one.

No remake... And it looks smaller than 10129...?

Edited February 15, 20178 yr by mauro23

May 4th release then?

Wow. Solid.

It seems mid-size as it's quite a few studs smaller than 10129. Yet another half-arsed utter disappointment from the deteriorating LEGO company. I'm no longer excited about the new "UCS" MF and I think 10179 owners are now safe. Diehard fans want bigger and better, not smaller and poorer! LEGO is going down the pan and, for that reason... I'm out!

1 minute ago, TabbyBoy said:

It seems mid-size as it's quite a few studs smaller than 10129. Yet another half-arsed utter disappointment from the deteriorating LEGO company. I'm no longer excited about the new "UCS" MF and I think 10179 owners are now safe. Diehard fans want bigger and better, not smaller and poorer! LEGO is going down the pan and, for that reason... I'm out!

Fully agree...

1 hour ago, JeffProbst said:

 

Woo nice Jeff, thank's for sharing. where did you see this, :))

It was posted in Ozlug (FB group)

It is definitely more accurate than 10129 at least, the shape is much more in line with the movie version. It's not going to be that much smaller, maybe six studs across.

 

 

I like it but i have nothing to compare it against.Will be adding to personal collection when its launched

I think this set is alright, not outstanding though. Good ratios, not oversized while maintaining enough detail.   

1 hour ago, JeffProbst said:

Compare the pair.

1 hour ago, kurnitb said:

Woo nice Jeff, thank's for sharing. where did you see this, :))

Someone created a Lego Leaks named Facebook account,

I like it! The shape, the larger windows, the front-opening of the engines... I am most definitely going to buy this set!!!

I cannot really understand, why to make UCS set from such marginal machine. For me UCS cathegory is for big machines, buildings and legendary items. Snowspeeder is not in such cathegory. What would be the next UCS set - landspeeder, or Rey speeder? And they are making this UCS set already for SECOND time !!! We have had already UCS snowspeeder, why to make another UCS from NOT-legendary machine, while we have still a lot of items, which were not created as UCS and are much important in SW space - A-AT, Jabba palace, Trade federation battleship, etc. If doing UCS remake, lets make just legends - falcon, DS II, ISD, etc.

Another bad point of this set is downsizing - the way how to keep same prices but for less pieces (another ugly method can be seen with DS - fake retirement and quick small update for bigger price). So we cannot expect miracles with new, rumoured falcon - they will not produce a set with more than 5000 pieces for just 500 bucks, but increasing the price to 600 could be risky. So they will produce something in range 3000-3500 for 400 bucks, or 4000-4500 pieces for 500 bucks.

Edited February 15, 20178 yr by fantomas007

New one is certainly more accurate.  Why would anybody want a less accurate screen version?  

Just now, fantomas007 said:

I cannot really understand, why to make UCS set from such marginal machine. For me UCS cathegory is for big machines, buildings and legendary items. Snowspeeder is not in such cathegory. What would be the next UCS set - landspeeder, or Rey speeder? And they are making this UCS set already for SECOND time !!! We have had already UCS snowspeeder, why to make another UCS from NOT-legendary machine, while we have still a lot of items, which were not created as UCS and are much important in SW space - A-AT, Jabba palace, Trade federation battleship, etc. If doing UCS remake, lets make just legends - falcon, DS II, ISD, etc.

What planet are you on (not Hoth anyway)? The Snowspeeder is an iconic set from one of the coolest scenes in all of the movies, just because it didn't have much on screen time doesn't make it any less cool. Slave-1 got very little time in the OT too, do you think that's not iconic enough either?