| |
I was talking with someone in a Toystore of all places about Lego trains and we
got into a discussion about some of the older trains. While I was driving home
it hit me. While everyone here is a loyalist to lego I want to get everyone's
input as a WHAT IF?
What if Lego went back and put back into the mix limited editions of past
Train Sets. How many of you out there would buy them? I'm sure everyone would
probably buy them.
Has anyone thought of a petition or something? If I get enough response I would
be willing to get one going. While this might be one of those things that
fizzle out it was just an Idea.
Wayne
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Wayne Sardullo writes:
> I was talking with someone in a Toystore of all places about Lego trains
> and we got into a discussion about some of the older trains. While I was
> driving home it hit me. While everyone here is a loyalist to lego I want
> to get everyone's input as a WHAT IF?
>
> What if Lego went back and put back into the mix limited editions of past
> Train Sets. How many of you out there would buy them? I'm sure everyone
> would probably buy them.
>
> Has anyone thought of a petition or something? If I get enough response
> I would be willing to get one going. While this might be one of those
> things that fizzle out it was just an Idea.
>
> Wayne
Perennial topic.
Consensus is that most trainheads would stock up on sets that were reissued at
or near original price. (lots of people could put grey train windows to good
use, for instance) I personally would rather see GOOD designs that were
different. It's funny, the massive buyers all seem to have arrived on the
scene a bit late to have scored multiple copies of 4558 at below retail (Conan
excepted). I sure wish I'd awoke 3 years earlier.
But as long as TLC stinketh trainwise, it gives room for my own endeavours to
flourish. MTW now has 3 kits in its range and as things become more organised
in the basement, the time to do a production run is decreasing, freeing up
time for design work.
As to the petition idea, it also has been suggested. The charter of Lego
Direct seems to suggest some increased interest in our opinions so who knows,
but in the past, not too much has come of petition drives since our share of
the market is rather small.
What may be more effective is to influence bulk parts sales to get the train
parts needed to more cost effectively produce our own designs.
I'm interested in opinions, would people like to see a caboose next from MTW
or an engine, or the doodlebug? If we get TOO markety, better take it to
the .market groups, but I am legitimately interested in what people would like
to see come out of the erecting shops at MTW.
++Lar
|
|
| |
Wayne sardullo wrote:
> I was talking with someone in a Toystore of all places about Lego trains and we
> got into a discussion about some of the older trains. While I was driving home
> it hit me. While everyone here is a loyalist to lego I want to get everyone's
> input as a WHAT IF?
>
> What if Lego went back and put back into the mix limited editions of past
> Train Sets. How many of you out there would buy them? I'm sure everyone would
> probably buy them.
Wayne, to be perfectly honest, I wouldn't buy them. Or I should say, I would buy
them if the price was right (50% off), just like I would any other set marked down
like that. For instance, I own about 7 4565s and about 7 4561s. But those sets
are merely parts fodder like any other set (I own 2 metroliners and 4 club cars--
more unassembled parts fodder). But that's me. I wouldn't keep any train set
from TLC assembled-- they just aren't good enough. Virtually *anyone* can make an
engine, car, whatever, better than an official LEGO set. And that is because we
are not constrained by such issues as costs to mass produce, etc. like the TLC
designers are. So I would rather TLC try and improve the existing line rather
than regurgitate the past.
Here is the catch-22 we as LEGO trainiacs are caught in-- LEGO doesn't see Trains
as a successful theme and so it is reluctant to pour money and energy into it.
And , of course, the neglected line suffers in terms of sales because it stinks.
If there is to be any petitioning, it should be to have them overhaul the entire
Trains theme. New track, new trucks, new points, new wheels, new windows, new
electronics. *That* is what I'd like to see....
-John
> Has anyone thought of a petition or something? If I get enough response I would
> be willing to get one going. While this might be one of those things that
> fizzle out it was just an Idea.
>
> Wayne
|
|
| |
I think if they were to reissue old sets, it would be neat if they changed them
somewhat. I know creating a new piece would add to the cost, but....
just think how many US-centric people would buy a Metroliner with 1x4xTWO windows
in it! They certainly could use the 1x4x2s in new trains, and sell them by the
tens of thousands via S@H.
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.trains, Wayne Sardullo writes:
> > I was talking with someone in a Toystore of all places about Lego trains
> > and we got into a discussion about some of the older trains. While I was
> > driving home it hit me. While everyone here is a loyalist to lego I want
> > to get everyone's input as a WHAT IF?
> >
> > What if Lego went back and put back into the mix limited editions of past
> > Train Sets. How many of you out there would buy them? I'm sure everyone
> > would probably buy them.
> >
> > Has anyone thought of a petition or something? If I get enough response
> > I would be willing to get one going. While this might be one of those
> > things that fizzle out it was just an Idea.
> >
> > Wayne
>
> Perennial topic.
>
> Consensus is that most trainheads would stock up on sets that were reissued at
> or near original price. (lots of people could put grey train windows to good
> use, for instance) I personally would rather see GOOD designs that were
> different. It's funny, the massive buyers all seem to have arrived on the
> scene a bit late to have scored multiple copies of 4558 at below retail (Conan
> excepted). I sure wish I'd awoke 3 years earlier.
>
> But as long as TLC stinketh trainwise, it gives room for my own endeavours to
> flourish. MTW now has 3 kits in its range and as things become more organised
> in the basement, the time to do a production run is decreasing, freeing up
> time for design work.
>
> As to the petition idea, it also has been suggested. The charter of Lego
> Direct seems to suggest some increased interest in our opinions so who knows,
> but in the past, not too much has come of petition drives since our share of
> the market is rather small.
>
> What may be more effective is to influence bulk parts sales to get the train
> parts needed to more cost effectively produce our own designs.
>
> I'm interested in opinions, would people like to see a caboose next from MTW
> or an engine, or the doodlebug? If we get TOO markety, better take it to
> the .market groups, but I am legitimately interested in what people would like
> to see come out of the erecting shops at MTW.
>
> ++Lar
--
Tom Stangl
***http://www.vfaq.com/
***DSM Visual FAQ home
***http://ba.dsm.org/
***SF Bay Area DSMs
|
|
| |
"Tom Stangl, VFAQman" wrote:
> I think if they were to reissue old sets, it would be neat if they changed them
> somewhat. I know creating a new piece would add to the cost, but....
>
> just think how many US-centric people would buy a Metroliner with 1x4xTWO windows
> in it! They certainly could use the 1x4x2s in new trains, and sell them by the
> tens of thousands via S@H.
They are going to wait, Tom, until you have already spent a small fortune acquiring
the 1x4x3 gray ones;-)
-John
>
>
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> > In lugnet.trains, Wayne Sardullo writes:
> > > I was talking with someone in a Toystore of all places about Lego trains
> > > and we got into a discussion about some of the older trains. While I was
> > > driving home it hit me. While everyone here is a loyalist to lego I want
> > > to get everyone's input as a WHAT IF?
> > >
> > > What if Lego went back and put back into the mix limited editions of past
> > > Train Sets. How many of you out there would buy them? I'm sure everyone
> > > would probably buy them.
> > >
> > > Has anyone thought of a petition or something? If I get enough response
> > > I would be willing to get one going. While this might be one of those
> > > things that fizzle out it was just an Idea.
> > >
> > > Wayne
> >
> > Perennial topic.
> >
> > Consensus is that most trainheads would stock up on sets that were reissued at
> > or near original price. (lots of people could put grey train windows to good
> > use, for instance) I personally would rather see GOOD designs that were
> > different. It's funny, the massive buyers all seem to have arrived on the
> > scene a bit late to have scored multiple copies of 4558 at below retail (Conan
> > excepted). I sure wish I'd awoke 3 years earlier.
> >
> > But as long as TLC stinketh trainwise, it gives room for my own endeavours to
> > flourish. MTW now has 3 kits in its range and as things become more organised
> > in the basement, the time to do a production run is decreasing, freeing up
> > time for design work.
> >
> > As to the petition idea, it also has been suggested. The charter of Lego
> > Direct seems to suggest some increased interest in our opinions so who knows,
> > but in the past, not too much has come of petition drives since our share of
> > the market is rather small.
> >
> > What may be more effective is to influence bulk parts sales to get the train
> > parts needed to more cost effectively produce our own designs.
> >
> > I'm interested in opinions, would people like to see a caboose next from MTW
> > or an engine, or the doodlebug? If we get TOO markety, better take it to
> > the .market groups, but I am legitimately interested in what people would like
> > to see come out of the erecting shops at MTW.
> >
> > ++Lar
>
> --
> Tom Stangl
> ***http://www.vfaq.com/
> ***DSM Visual FAQ home
> ***http://ba.dsm.org/
> ***SF Bay Area DSMs
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
> New track, new trucks, new points, new wheels, new windows, new
> electronics. *That* is what I'd like to see....
The point geometry cries out for a redo!
But ESPECIALLY electronics. Just a mod to allow Digital Command Control would
be nice but some major revamping so Ben's april fools stuff could be built
would be better.
++Lar
|
|
| |
Big snip of my own ramblings...
What I would like from LEGO is
1. Better models for me and for the kids/people that would be attracted to LEGO
trains if the models were better. By better I mean 7740, 7742, 7725, 7750, 4558, 4563
better, not PNLTC, WAMALUG, GMWLTC, NGLTC, NCLUG, and GFLTC better. If this means
rereleaseing a few of the classics...hmmm. I wouldn't argue with more 7740's and its
accessories, 7745, or 7725's [1], but since I have a 4558, I would only look at a
4558 as a source of spare parts. The truth is that I would rather see good new sets.
The real good thing about good sets is that they serve two purposes: (1) they are
good sets, and (2) goods sets always have lots of good parts.
2. Wheels. More sizes and colors. (I am really thinking about getting some of those
Playmobile wheels that Ben uses http://www.lugnet.com/pause/search/?query=7725 )
3. Larger radius curves and short segments of track for filling the holes in
mismatched layouts.
4. Points with different geometry. One point that produces two parallel tracks like
now (I wonder whether the tracks should be move closer together or not) and another
that leads directly into a curve.
5. Remote controlled points would be nice, but from LEGO they would probably be very
exspensive.[2] So, I wonder how many I would buy.
So, like John, I would rather see new sets, and I would like to see new hardware, but
only if it was compatible with the current 9 V stuff.[3] DCS would be nice, but with
the price tag likely to be high I probably would not jump right into it.
Chris
1. It is not that these sets are so great; rather, they are sets that I missed out
on. Also, I do not like buying used. I bought an airliner and it was in good
condition, but my sets from the same time period are in better condition. Paying a
premium to buy used can be a letdown.
2. Considering the regular points ar $25+ a pair. How does the $25 price tag compare
with similarly sized, would that be O gauge, model railroad stuff?
3. I wouldn't mind making the tranistion to 12 V motors for better uphill pulling
power as long as the track remained compatible.
John Neal wrote:
> Wayne sardullo wrote:
>
> > I was talking with someone in a Toystore of all places about Lego trains and we
> > got into a discussion about some of the older trains. While I was driving home
> > it hit me. While everyone here is a loyalist to lego I want to get everyone's
> > input as a WHAT IF?
> >
> > What if Lego went back and put back into the mix limited editions of past
> > Train Sets. How many of you out there would buy them? I'm sure everyone would
> > probably buy them.
>
> Wayne, to be perfectly honest, I wouldn't buy them. Or I should say, I would buy
> them if the price was right (50% off), just like I would any other set marked down
> like that. For instance, I own about 7 4565s and about 7 4561s. But those sets
> are merely parts fodder like any other set (I own 2 metroliners and 4 club cars--
> more unassembled parts fodder). But that's me. I wouldn't keep any train set
> from TLC assembled-- they just aren't good enough. Virtually *anyone* can make an
> engine, car, whatever, better than an official LEGO set. And that is because we
> are not constrained by such issues as costs to mass produce, etc. like the TLC
> designers are. So I would rather TLC try and improve the existing line rather
> than regurgitate the past.
>
> Here is the catch-22 we as LEGO trainiacs are caught in-- LEGO doesn't see Trains
> as a successful theme and so it is reluctant to pour money and energy into it.
> And , of course, the neglected line suffers in terms of sales because it stinks.
> If there is to be any petitioning, it should be to have them overhaul the entire
> Trains theme. New track, new trucks, new points, new wheels, new windows, new
> electronics. *That* is what I'd like to see....
>
> -John
>
> > Has anyone thought of a petition or something? If I get enough response I would
> > be willing to get one going. While this might be one of those things that
> > fizzle out it was just an Idea.
> >
> > Wayne
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Wayne Sardullo writes:
> What if Lego went back and put back into the mix limited editions of past
> Train Sets. How many of you out there would buy them? I'm sure everyone would
> probably buy them.
Lego should better release nice new trains with "real" train doors and windows.
The effort do do a good set wouldn't be too high. Just imagine a pair of
green passenger cars. Additional they could sell a brown 3. class waggon and a
dark grey luggage car (all of them with classic train doors and windows.
I wish more colour variations: dark grey roof pieces, green parts like the
frontpart from 4563 drivers cab. I wish there were red and dark grey wheel
sets, red (and dark grey?) 9V motors. Red Metroliner front part, red (and dark
grey) magnetic couplings and buffers. It would be very cool for us to get
models, which contain just these coulour modified pieces (and it wouldn't be
too expensive for Lego).
Only new part I wish to see is a new wheelblock (red and black) with bigger and
open spoked wheels (like the ones from Playmobil). They should offer a hole for
a technic peg to add connecting rods and they should offer a possibility to
drive a technic axle (of course you could drive them with a technic motor then
either...)
Regards,
Ben
P.s.: my most important wish at Lego is them to produce really 100% quality
(like in the 80ies). Some of the newer bricks I bought have had a poor quality
(like Lego clons). Parts didn't fit together and seem to be bended although
they came new out of package....
|
|
| |
John Neal wrote:
> "Tom Stangl, VFAQman" wrote:
>
> > I think if they were to reissue old sets, it would be neat if they changed them
> > somewhat. I know creating a new piece would add to the cost, but....
> >
> > just think how many US-centric people would buy a Metroliner with 1x4xTWO windows
> > in it! They certainly could use the 1x4x2s in new trains, and sell them by the
> > tens of thousands via S@H.
>
> They are going to wait, Tom, until you have already spent a small fortune acquiring
> the 1x4x3 gray ones;-)
Nah, I'm done spending on grey 1x4x3 train windows - I have 37 (maybe more?) stacked
and waiting for me to have time to BUILD with, and I'm not going to think about needing
any more until I use those up. But if someone offers them to me in a trade/sale for a
decently cheap amount, I might still take more, especially if they have the clear train
glass ;-) And I still need 1x2x3 grey windows with glass ;-)
--
Tom Stangl
***http://www.vfaq.com/
***DSM Visual FAQ home
***http://ba.dsm.org/
***SF Bay Area DSMs
|
|
| |
> 2. Considering the regular points ar $25+ a pair. How does the $25 price tag • compare
> with similarly sized, would that be O gauge, model railroad stuff?
Dealing with OO sized stuff, PECO points are from 14-20 CDN each, compaired
with $35 for 2 lego points (so, about the same). Neither are motorized,
although if Lego would reduce the tabs on the points, a $8 "set" could be used
to motorize them using a small Pnumatic cylinder.
> 3. I wouldn't mind making the tranistion to 12 V motors for better uphill • pulling
> power as long as the track remained compatible.
Changing voltage would not affect haulage. You are quite safe to run the 9V
motors on 12 volts, as long as you expect your loco to not make any turns at
all!.
I find that haulage is limited more by couplers than by motor. I could haul
85+ cars with a single motor, and the limit was that the coupler would break,
not the motor stalling (although, you had to pull slack to get the train
moving...that is a realistic effect of a heavy train)
James P
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Wayne Sardullo writes:
> What if Lego went back and put back into the mix limited editions of past
> Train Sets. How many of you out there would buy them? I'm sure everyone would
> probably buy them.
I think the worse thing lego could do is produce some 'limited editions' of
classic sets.
This generally equates to those sets that are rare and expensive on ebay like
4558.
Producing them in only limited editions would only maintain their expensive
position, and I could see many of them ending up unopened on collectors or
investors shelves.
I think most train heads desires would be much better serviced by having
better availability of a wider range of service packs that included windows,
doors and other bricks that are desirable by train builders. not just engines
and wheels. and as part of Lego Direct brick runs of course.
I cant see Lego being motivated much to produce new train sets, or reissue old
ones for that matter. The market is too small. Train looks too 'fiddly' in
comparison to juniorization trends. Train heads are enthusiastic, but a very
small part of the lego market.
regards
lawrence
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Wayne Sardullo writes:
> What if Lego went back and put back into the mix limited editions of past
> Train Sets. How many of you out there would buy them?
I'd certainly buy them! Only hopefully it wouldn't be done with just train
sets; at least some old Legoland Town sets as well, and preferably old sets
from all themes.
> Has anyone thought of a petition or something? If I get enough response I
> would be willing to get one going.
I don't know if it would work, but I'm all for that. I'd be sure to be part of
it.
Tim
|
|
| |
I have to agree with Larry P and others that Lego could better the AFOL
train market by
a) Issuing new train designs that are better than the current assortment
b) Releasing a generous range of train parts through Lego Direct
The idea of reissued sets is an appealing idea, but I would rather spend my
money on a really spectacular, detailed "Ultimate Collector Series"-style
passenger or cargo train.(1)
However, Lego could quench the thirst for a sub-$150 Amtrak passenger train
by issuing an updated design. How about an Acela set to commemorate Amtrak's
new commuter line on the Northeast corridor?
(http://www.acela.com/index1.html) (I think this may have been brought up
before...)
Using Amtrak as a promotion partner could get Lego a lot more exposure for
the train theme and the Lego train hobby in general.
I do see a problem in that Lego already has the current 4651 blue train that
falls into the "weird aerodynamic engine with two passenger cars" category.
Anyone know if this train will be augmented or dropped in 2001?
Just a thought,
Bryan Kinkel
(1) I do like the recent pictures of the Statue of Liberty set. Purchasing a
bulk lot of parts via Lego Direct is fun. But having a model as a starting
point for those 2000+ parts is even better. Perhaps LD could do the same for
train parts and issue a monster six or eight car passenger set that gets you
a ton of train door, window, glass, roof and wheel elements.
"Wayne sardullo" <sardullo@oswego.edu> wrote in message
news:FyJCB5.G8t@lugnet.com...
> I was talking with someone in a Toystore of all places about Lego trains • and we
> got into a discussion about some of the older trains. While I was driving • home
> it hit me. While everyone here is a loyalist to lego I want to get • everyone's
> input as a WHAT IF?
>
> What if Lego went back and put back into the mix limited editions of • past
> Train Sets. How many of you out there would buy them? I'm sure everyone • would
> probably buy them.
>
> Has anyone thought of a petition or something? If I get enough response I • would
> be willing to get one going. While this might be one of those things that
> fizzle out it was just an Idea.
>
> Wayne
|
|
| |
James Powell wrote:
> > 2. Considering the regular points ar $25+ a pair. How does the $25 price tag • compare
> > with similarly sized, would that be O gauge, model railroad stuff?
>
>
> Dealing with OO sized stuff, PECO points are from 14-20 CDN each, compaired
> with $35 for 2 lego points (so, about the same). Neither are motorized,
> although if Lego would reduce the tabs on the points, a $8 "set" could be used
> to motorize them using a small Pnumatic cylinder.
> Thanks, good to hear that LEGO points aren't more expensive than similarly
> sized model RR stuff.
>
> > 3. I wouldn't mind making the tranistion to 12 V motors for better uphill • pulling
> > power as long as the track remained compatible.
>
> Changing voltage would not affect haulage. You are quite safe to run the 9V
> motors on 12 volts, as long as you expect your loco to not make any turns at
> all!.
Running a 9V motor at 12 V for extended periods (say with a heavy load so the
train will not fly off the track) will shorten the lifespan of the 9V motor.
>
> I find that haulage is limited more by couplers than by motor. I could haul
> 85+ cars with a single motor, and the limit was that the coupler would break,
> not the motor stalling (although, you had to pull slack to get the train
> moving...that is a realistic effect of a heavy train)
I thought that voltage would matter. I understand that ultimately the strength of
the coupler will decide how long the train will be, but a 12 V motor should be
able to pull a train of say 12 cars faster than a 9 V motor could pull them.
Since power = current x voltage[1] (work = charge x voltage[2]), one would think
a 12 and 9 V motor should be able to do the same amount of work or generate the
same amount of power. In practice 9 V is not always a high enough potential to
force the required current through the circiut to generate the power to do the
work.
>
> James P
1. power is work per unit time, right?
2. work = charge x voltage comes from -w = nFE° where n is number of moles of
electrons, F is Faraday's constant, n x F is the charge, and E is the potential.
In -w is from the systems point of view, we are talking about the surroundings
point of view so the - goes to +.
|
|
| |
lawrence wilkes wrote:.
>
> I cant see Lego being motivated much to produce new train sets, or reissue old
> ones for that matter. The market is too small. Train looks too 'fiddly' in
> comparison to juniorization trends. Train heads are enthusiastic, but a very
> small part of the lego market.
I couldn't disagree more. I would argue that Trains is the most popular theme
TLC has. Which other theme (besides town [1]) has sustained itself for almost 40
years? Which other theme is so non-violent (besides Model Team)? Trains, in
general, are popular now, and *always* will be popular-- all over the world.
Take a look at the model railroading hobby industry. Show me any other LEGO
theme that has such a legacy. The potential for the Trains theme is so vast that
I can't believe TLC isn't jumping all over it. People love trains, and people
love LEGO. It is a match made in heaven.
Look at AFOL clubs. All of the big ones revolve around trains. And what do
these clubs do? They go around to non LEGO events and lobby for the brick! They
expose tens of thousands of people to LEGO who otherwise wouldn't seek it out.
Any other theme's fans do that?
You can't even compare Trains with other LEGO themes. The closest in popularity
to Trains IMO would be Space. But I find many Space folks are into ldrawing
their stuff, or building quietly amongst themselves, which is okay, but have you
ever noticed-- there aren't any Space clubs. You don't see many "Space heads"
showing their MOCs at Star Trek or Star Wars conventions! It's mostly on line
action. The few times I've seen LUGs show space stuff to the public is dwarfed
by the number of trains shows that LTCs have done over the years.
And Castle? Please, if it were so popular, why would TLC discontinue it for a
time? The same goes for Pirates.
So, personally, I can't think of a *better* theme in which to pour resources and
effort. The dividends would be rewarding, to say the least.
[1] I ruled out comparing Town because IMO there is a very gray area between Town
and Trains among Trains heads. The Trains theme isn't just engines and cars--
it's round houses, sheds, bridges, stations, etc. At least that is what the
GMLTC believes.
-John
>
>
> regards
> lawrence
|
|
| |
> Running a 9V motor at 12 V for extended periods (say with a heavy load so the
> train will not fly off the track) will shorten the lifespan of the 9V motor.
Lets put it this way: I don't think you are going to harm the Lego motor unless
you build it into a special engine that is designed to stand 12 volts around
highly banked corners. I can try it if you want...I have ample 12 volt
supplies and curved track (at present, only curved track...).
> I thought that voltage would matter. I understand that ultimately the strength • of
> the coupler will decide how long the train will be, but a 12 V motor should be
> able to pull a train of say 12 cars faster than a 9 V motor could pull them.
IF the coupler can stand the pull, which it cannot.
The force required to start a train is going to be higher than the force
required to keep it rolling at lego type speeds (say 20 mph at most).
It can be calculated as aproximatly 4 lbs pull/100 lbs of train, on straight
level track.
Pull from a engine can be calculated using 2 formulas, the most relavent one is
that you will manage 1/4th the weight on the driving wheels as a max. tractive
effort.
Assuming you have 4 lbs of weight in your lego engine, and all axles powered (I
doubt your loco is this heavy!), then you will be able to put out a TE of
arould 1 lb, and be able to pull around 25 lbs of load.
Power has nothing to do with this calculation (to this point), in that the
amout of power (force*distance) is 0, up to the point that the train starts to
move. If the coupler is not strong enough, then the limit will be whatever
strain breaks the coupler.
In fact, from a electrical stand point, the most 'power' will flow with 0
RPM...because there is no counter EMF from the motor to disrupt the flow of
electrons-so, assuming a constant voltage source, the most current will flow
through the windings, because the resistance of the windings will be less at
the start.
(hence, the advantage of a Diesel, it can produce all its power at low speed,
whereas a direct drive steam engine has to be moving at a substatial speed to
develop maximum power)
> Since power = current x voltage[1] (work = charge x voltage[2]), one would
think a 12 and 9 V motor should be able to do the same amount of work or
generate the same amount of power. In practice 9 V is not always a high enough
potential to force the required current through the circiut to generate the
power to do the work.
>
> >
Yes, but if the 12 volt is at the source, and the 9V or less is at the motor,
then it will not be able to harm the motor.
(I know, it sounds like I am trying to make a real railway again!...st, I'd
rather do these calcuations for something useful, like my Brit, which, will
haul at least 1000 lbs)
James
|
|
| |
James Powell wrote:
> I find that haulage is limited more by couplers than by motor. I could haul
> 85+ cars with a single motor, and the limit was that the coupler would break,
> not the motor stalling (although, you had to pull slack to get the train
> moving...that is a realistic effect of a heavy train)
One thing I know I would buy, would almost be willing to bet (1) Larry
would buy, and I'm sure others would buy, is if Kadee happened to decide
that LEGO trains needed the benefit of their superior couplers (this
actually could probably be done for a reasonable cost to them, they need
to make just a handfull of special parts - a coupler box with studs on
it to fit an existing coupler, and parts to adapt their uncoupling
magnets to be able to connect to LEGO track). If someone else decides to
make the coupler box instead of Kadee, I'll still buy it (even if I have
to jurry rig up an uncoupler).
This is actually a place where I don't necessarily want LEGO to come in
on (unless they decide the best way to support the serious train modeler
is to partner with Kadee). I don't want TLC's immitation, I want the
real thing. This is just one of the reasons I truly hope to NOT be LEGO
pure in the future - there are other train parts where I will much
prefer that LEGO not have an effective monopoly, DCC is another. I DON'T
want TLC to come up with their own alternative [though if they came up
with an equally flexible alternative which was RCX compatible, I would
accept that].
(1) but I never bet so I'm safe...
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
| |
Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:
> Only new part I wish to see is a new wheelblock (red and black) with bigger and
> open spoked wheels (like the ones from Playmobil). They should offer a hole for
> a technic peg to add connecting rods and they should offer a possibility to
> drive a technic axle (of course you could drive them with a technic motor then
> either...)
Actually, if we onle get ONE new part, I want a metal wheelset with
power connection. I want several new parts, but not a huge number
(roughly in order of desireability):
- Metal wheelset with power connection
- Train motor with jumper between power pickup and motor
- Exchangeable wheels for the train motor
- At least one larger track radius, preferrably two or three
- 9v turnout with 4.5v/12v geometry
- 9v turnout with diverging track one curve (at each curve radius
offered) similar to "toy train" turnouts
- Two part wheelset where the frame detail is a separate part
- US style truck frame for wheelsets
- Half and quarter straight sections (while these are nice, they aren't
strictly necessary with current track geometry)
- Straight track section for 45 degree placement wrto studs
- Ballast sections for all track pieces
- Track with brown ties
3rd party parts I would buy:
- DCC decoder compatible with 9v and some way to connect it to studs and
preferably with LEGO 9v connections
- Kadee coupler box with studs
- Additional specialty wheels
- specialty parts kits for specific prototypes which are in the LEGO
tradition of doing as much as possible with existing bricks
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Frank Filz writes:
> James Powell wrote:
> > I find that haulage is limited more by couplers than by motor. I could haul
> > 85+ cars with a single motor, and the limit was that the coupler would • break,
> > not the motor stalling (although, you had to pull slack to get the train
> > moving...that is a realistic effect of a heavy train)
>
> One thing I know I would buy, would almost be willing to bet (1) Larry
> would buy, and I'm sure others would buy, is if Kadee happened to decide
> that LEGO trains needed the benefit of their superior couplers
I'm not as pure as I used to be(1), I'd buy these. I'd also buy a hobbyist
implementation of DCC as long as I didn't have to do any work to assemble
electronics that involved soldering.
1 - just the other night I *cut* some tubing! :-)
++Lar
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Frank Filz writes:
> James Powell wrote:
> > I find that haulage is limited more by couplers than by motor. I could haul
> > 85+ cars with a single motor, and the limit was that the coupler would • break,
> > not the motor stalling (although, you had to pull slack to get the train
> > moving...that is a realistic effect of a heavy train)
>
> One thing I know I would buy, would almost be willing to bet (1) Larry
> would buy, and I'm sure others would buy, is if Kadee happened to decide
> that LEGO trains needed the benefit of their superior couplers
I'm not as pure as I used to be(1), I'd buy these. I'd also buy a hobbyist
implementation of DCC as long as I didn't have to do any work to assemble
electronics that involved soldering.
1 - just the other night I *cut* some tubing! :-)
++Lar
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
> I couldn't disagree more. I would argue that Trains is the most popular theme
> TLC has.
How do you assess popularity? Number of sets available? Number sold?
If it is so popular, why is the number of train sets so thin on the ground?
And why do shops not stock it?
And why do Lego not even bother importing it into the UK as they see no demand?
You would need to search very hard to find a train set in the UK. And we dont
have shop at home either.
We train heads might be enthusiastic, but I cant see any evidence of lego
being particularly positive about trains, and as for the average person in the
street they dont even know lego makes trains.
>
> Take a look at the model railroading hobby industry. Show me any other LEGO
> theme that has such a legacy. The potential for the Trains theme is so vast • that
> I can't believe TLC isn't jumping all over it. People love trains, and people
> love LEGO. It is a match made in heaven.
But the model railroad hobby industry is NOT legos target market. Go to most
train shows, look at the age of the modelers, then look at the recommended age
on lego sets. BIG difference. Sad but true.
Unfortunately, lego marketing folks dont seem to see this opportunity in the
same way you do.
>
> Look at AFOL clubs. All of the big ones revolve around trains. And what do
> these clubs do? They go around to non LEGO events and lobby for the brick! • They
> expose tens of thousands of people to LEGO who otherwise wouldn't seek it out.
> Any other theme's fans do that?
But AFOLers are very very small compared to the lego marketplace.
Sorry, but lugnet is not representative of legos customers.
Majority of legos customers is grannies buying a $10 set for a grandchild.
NOT AFOLers investing thousands in trains.
>
> You can't even compare Trains with other LEGO themes. The closest in • popularity
> to Trains IMO would be Space. But I find many Space folks are into ldrawing
> their stuff, or building quietly amongst themselves, which is okay, but have • you
> ever noticed-- there aren't any Space clubs. You don't see many "Space heads"
> showing their MOCs at Star Trek or Star Wars conventions! It's mostly on • line
> action. The few times I've seen LUGs show space stuff to the public is • dwarfed
> by the number of trains shows that LTCs have done over the years.
But thats cause train heads LIKE having meetings, and building big layouts for
same reason as other train hobbiers do it with whatever system they use (the
enthusiasm is as much about trains as it is about lego).
It is NOT because train is more popular.
Dont you think Star Wars has sold just a bit more than trains last year?
Lego dont measure set sales, or opportunity for them, by number of meetings.
Its the number of grannies with grandchilden that count, and average amount of
pocket money available to young kids.
Sorry, but I am a lego trainhead who's enthusiasm is dented by the knowledge
of how big business marketing works. (but I would like to be proved wrong -
thats part of the problem - no real evididence of market size etc)
regards
lawrence
|
|
| |
John Neal wrote:
>
> lawrence wilkes wrote:.
>
> >
> > I cant see Lego being motivated much to produce new train sets, or reissue • old
> > ones for that matter. The market is too small. Train looks too 'fiddly' in
> > comparison to juniorization trends. Train heads are enthusiastic, but a very
> > small part of the lego market.
>
> I couldn't disagree more. I would argue that Trains is the most popular theme
> TLC has. Which other theme (besides town [1]) has sustained itself for almost • 40
> years? Which other theme is so non-violent (besides Model Team)? Trains, in
> general, are popular now, and *always* will be popular-- all over the world.
>
> Take a look at the model railroading hobby industry. Show me any other LEGO
> theme that has such a legacy. The potential for the Trains theme is so vast • that
> I can't believe TLC isn't jumping all over it. People love trains, and people
> love LEGO. It is a match made in heaven.
One of the things I often point out as to why trains should be so
popular is that it is really the only model of a real life SYSTEM which
can be so completely simulated. RC boats, cars, and planes are lots of
fun, but mostly all you will ever simulate is races. Also, they are much
more fiddly. Trains also have the advantage of being able to nearly
invisibly deliver power so you don't need batteries (though in exchange
for this nearly invisible power delivery, you lose the ability to easily
have reversing loops, or have to deal with the fiddlyness of overhead
wire - which also limits your simulation to electric trains, note also
that it is possible to have a very nearly invisible third rail which
then allows you to have reversing loops).
I see another place where AFOL interest will develop into clubs and
meets, and that is LEGO wargaming, either Brickwars or Evil Stevie's
Pirate Game. This will bring in some number of new fans since it will
occur at non-LEGO gatherings (in fact, the game with the strongest
history has only just now started to appear at LEGO gatherings - the
Pirate Game, though Brickwars is developing nicely also, of course, if
TLC doesn't start producing ships again, the growth of the Pirate Game
will be severely limited). Interestingly, wargaming is the other hobby
where real life is so extensively simulated with models (I'm discounting
software simulations here, they in the end will eventually become the
most complete simulations, but despite that, I expect the modeling
hobbies to continue so long as individual personal space allows, we
humans seem to have a real attachment to real physical models, software
can only go so far [though I guess if we ever develop a complete
computer/brain interface, physical modeling could take a steep dive, but
then I still expect a certain population will even STILL prefer physical
models even when they become less complete than the software model]).
FUT: lugnet.off-topic.fun (while I find this angle of this subject
interesting, such discussion should rapidly diverge from being
appropriate for trains - please follow me for more discussion, I'd love
to see some other opinions).
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
| |
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> I'm not as pure as I used to be(1)
Now is that Larry or his evil twin double speaking... Must be his
double, Larry would never make the misteak of posting twice posting
twice...
FUT: lugnet.off-topic.fun
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Lawrence Wilkes writes:
> Dont you think Star Wars has sold just a bit more than trains last year?
> Lego dont measure set sales, or opportunity for them, by number of meetings.
> Its the number of grannies with grandchilden that count, and average amount of
> pocket money available to young kids.
And I should add, whatever the latest successful book/film is.
What we need is a blockbuster film about trains!
regards
lawrence
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
> Which other theme is so non-violent (besides Model Team)
Good point there. Most of the themes, especially recent ones, are centered
around violence.Pirates v. Islanders/Imperial Guards. Good knights v. bad
knights. The whole wild west theme was centered on a good guy/bad guy
emphasis. Samurai v. Ninjas. Johnny Thunder v. Sam Sinister/Palomar/Baron/
etc. Star Wars-Dark Side v.Rebels. The new race sets- a battle for the ball.
Throwbots battling each other. Cyber Slam. A little violence is ok. But when
practically all themes are based on violence, that's when it's time to shape
up and get some more non-violent themes in.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Lawrence Wilkes writes:
> What we need is a blockbuster film about trains!
Be careful what you wish for. There's a film coming out any day now that may
well be a blockbuster (although I have my doubts)
Are you sure you want to see a line of tiny blue engines with grey faces on
the front, and frowning green ones, and self important red ones? Not me,
man... take that eurotrash outta here and give it to James Powell!
++Lar
|
|
| |
Timothy Jones wrote:
> In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
> > Which other theme is so non-violent (besides Model Team)
> Good point there. Most of the themes, especially recent ones, are centered
> around violence.Pirates v. Islanders/Imperial Guards. Good knights v. bad
> knights. The whole wild west theme was centered on a good guy/bad guy
> emphasis. Samurai v. Ninjas. Johnny Thunder v. Sam Sinister/Palomar/Baron/
> etc. Star Wars-Dark Side v.Rebels. The new race sets- a battle for the ball.
> Throwbots battling each other. Cyber Slam. A little violence is ok. But when
> practically all themes are based on violence, that's when it's time to shape
> up and get some more non-violent themes in.
Even Town, which would seem innocuous, is swarming with nar-do-wells robbing
and pillaging all over the place. The crime rate in Town is far higher than in
New York City;-)
I'm surprised that the set designers didn't pollute the Trains theme with train
robbers long ago. Maybe *that's* what it will take to get them to invest in
Trains;-)
-John
|
|
| |
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.trains, Lawrence Wilkes writes:
>
> > What we need is a blockbuster film about trains!
>
> Be careful what you wish for. There's a film coming out any day now that may
> well be a blockbuster (although I have my doubts)
TLC may not be in bed with Britt Allcroft, but can you say "Hogwart's
Express"? Actually, a member of the GMLTC (who is offline) has already built
that train....
> Are you sure you want to see a line of tiny blue engines with grey faces on
> the front, and frowning green ones, and self important red ones? Not me,
> man... take that eurotrash outta here and give it to James Powell!
Easy on Thomas, Lar. You know as well as I that at train shows, the one engine
that the kids go bonkers over is Thomas. Now that J-1 has an Alps printer, we
need to get those Thomas engines decaled up!
-John
>
>
> ++Lar
|
|
| |
I say, that the trick would be accesories, as it alreasy goes here.
I'm personally into 12V as 9V doesn't have remote points etc. That would be
needed before I start using 9V tracks.
Also a set of other track parts, such as 1/2 lenght (or 2 1/4's = the same).
I guess that the market is to small for this unfotunately.
For rolling stock:
Yes a motor. How about the current motor, but with 2 or 3 different wheel
sizes (technic connections and 3 positions for the wheel? with pistons of
course!
I guess smaal sets of doors etc would not pay of for TLC, but then some
larger sets of doors&windows, other pieces like roof parts, chairs (!),
wheelsets (larger ones) and related stuff.
A set of other accesories - lamps, head lights.....
As for the sets, yes I might buy some - but I would like sets from the real
world. Like the Re460 for instance and other types that are widely
represented.
Rgds
Sonnich
----- Original Message -----
From: Frank Filz <ffilz@mindspring.com>
> Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:
> > Only new part I wish to see is a new wheelblock (red and black) with • bigger and
> > open spoked wheels (like the ones from Playmobil). They should offer a • hole for
> > a technic peg to add connecting rods and they should offer a possibility • to
> > drive a technic axle (of course you could drive them with a technic • motor then
> > either...)
>
> Actually, if we onle get ONE new part, I want a metal wheelset with
> power connection. I want several new parts, but not a huge number
> (roughly in order of desireability):
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
> Even Town, which would seem innocuous, is swarming with nar-do-wells robbing
> and pillaging all over the place. The crime rate in Town is far higher than
> in New York City;-)
True. That's why half the citizens are police officers:)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Wayne Sardullo writes:
> I was talking with someone in a Toystore of all places about Lego trains and • we
> got into a discussion about some of the older trains. While I was driving home
> it hit me. While everyone here is a loyalist to lego I want to get everyone's
> input as a WHAT IF?
>
> What if Lego went back and put back into the mix limited editions of past
> Train Sets. How many of you out there would buy them? I'm sure everyone would
> probably buy them.
>
> Has anyone thought of a petition or something? If I get enough response I • would
> be willing to get one going. While this might be one of those things that
> fizzle out it was just an Idea.
>
> Wayne
What would really be nice is if LEGO would update all their old sets to 9v
standards.But otherwise I fully support you about the idea of a petition.I was
too young(and unaware)that Lego even made the 4.5v and 12v line of trains,but
adapting these would be a fun challenge(if this comes to pass)...
-Harvey
|
|
|
