Pretty plain even by Tiny Turbos standards.

@Zordboy said:
"Someone give Huwbot a thump, he's stuck on Racers again. "
Statisticians call it a clumping illusion.

@Vladtheb said:
"Pretty plain even by Tiny Turbos standards."
That’s because this set was a polybag. It’s basically a slightly stripped-down version of sets like 8657 or 8122.

Well, at least it's not crashing into a flat road.

@Norikins said:
"Another blue and white car. And despite not being based on anything, it's 1:55 scale?"

I noticed that too...

Does anybody get police car cross Batmobile vibes?

I don't see any redeeming qualities in this set.

@Lego_lord said:
"I don't see any redeeming qualities in this set."

It has at least one: being a free gift with the Daily Mirror. Who doesn't like free LEGO?

@Lego_lord:
I mean, it does net you a complete set of wheels and tires, as well as two blur brackets...

@CarolinaOnMyMind:
I think it would make me cry, to know that someone deemed the large version worth accurately recreating as a LEGO set.

A while back, I decided to build this set using my spare parts I had lying around. I still have it built to this day.

@bric_2roc said:
"oh crap huwbot is doing it again. first it was bionicle now its racers. my question is how do you pick random set of the day?"

Sometimes you have to make it less random to appear more random.
- Steve Jobs

Random doesn't mean the next pick is definitely from another group. Random means random.

@Galaxy12_Import said:
" @Lego_lord said:
"I don't see any redeeming qualities in this set."

It has at least one: being a free gift with the Daily Mirror. Who doesn't like free LEGO?"

It comes with a copy of the Mirror, I’m failing to see a redeeming feature there!

Shame the headlights and side panels have fallen off the cousin of 8122.

Not a programmer but I recall reading years ago that part of random number generation is partially attributed to the computer/server as well as system clock. Seeing as Huwbot is always run on the same server and at generates the random set at the same time of day; this could help explain the partial tendency of sets from same theme coming in batches.

@shaase:
I remember from my Basic computer class that there were two ways to generate random numbers in that programming language. The first would give you a “random” number, in sequence, from a list that was permanently coded into the computer somewhere. Every time the program requested a random number, you got the next one from the list, which meant it seemed very random the first time, but quickly proved that it was anything but if you ran the program from the start repeatedly. The other method ran a calculation that incorporated a reading from the system clock as a way to scramble the output. The clock reading is measured to some tiny fraction of a second, so even if you hit two keys at the same time and ran the readings through the exact same calculation, just a microsecond difference in when the computer registers the key presses will yield completely different results.

For the list of faux-random numbers, I have no idea how they were compiled, if it was cultivated or if the numbers were originally selected in a random order some time in the past. All I remember is that my computer teacher had us all request a random number at the same time, and we all got the same response (I think it was “3”, but it’s been a few years...). He had us repeat it a few times so we could see that it wasn’t some crazy fluke. Then he explained how we could get a legit random number.