| |
In lugnet.trains, Jonathan Reynolds wrote:
> In lugnet.trains, Jason J. Railton wrote:
> > In lugnet.trains, Derek Lim wrote:
> > > Forgive me if it has been covered before, but the primary question I'd like to
> > > ask is whether TLC will continue to produce the old 9v track and 9v motors - and
> > > then, if so, will new sets be released based on those old units?
> >
> > There's still no definite answer. LEGO might not be willing to commit
> > themselves. Think about it - if they said they'll supply 9V track forever, they
> > can't keep that promise. If they say they'll make it for 2 more years, there'll
> > be uproar that that's not long enough. What can they say? The only thing they
> > could say is that they'll make it whilst there's still a profit to be made from
> > it. How much are you going to be buying?
> >
> > As for new units, I don't think there's any point asking for that as there's no
> > great need. For 9V you only need 5 units - straights, curves, points, motor and
> > regulator. Everything else (and all future train sets) are compatible - just
> > plug in your choice of motor.
> >
> > I'm just disappointed there's no stand-alone version of the IR unit. Kids
> > absolutely love little 0-4-0 and 0-6-0 engines, and this setup rules them out.
> >
> >
> > Jason Railton
>
> I'm no expert on the manufacturing process but I'd like to know if they have
> altered all the moulds for the track pieces and the clip-on motor frames. If
> these are completely new moulds then it shows there is a future supply potential
> for the 9v track-powered range. If not, we will have to rely on existing stocks
> until they run out.
>
> Although I welcome the new trains my gripe is similar to Jason's and I cannot
> see why someone starting with the playtrains would be persueded to part with
> serious £s to buy a new motor, regulator, metal track etc. in order to
> 'upgrade'. In this respect, it is more a one-way compatibility.
>
> Jon
To play devil's advocate for a moment - how is the situation different from the
conversion from 4.5V to 12V? That needed conductor rails, points, crossing,
motor and transformer.
In cost terms, including average inflation of 3% for 16 years (prices up by
60%), the conductor rails 7854/7855 cost about two thirds the price of 9V metal
track 4515/4520, £4.83 per box as spares in 1990 compared to £11.99 now, though
the cost of conversion was reduced by re-use of the rails. A pair of
unmotorised switch points 7856 cost £18.56 then, 4531 costs 22.99 now. That's
cheaper by 29%! The transformer costs about the same now as then (£40), so it's
cheaper by 37%. A train motor cost £19-£20 then, £22.99 now, cheaper by 32%.
Therefore all the more expensive items are cheaper to upgrade and the basic
straights and curves were artificially cheaper as a benefit of the versatility
of the old track.
For those who develop a serious rail interest and have a significant quantity of
LEGO plastic track and train-related sets, the question is whether the
conversion would be more worthwhile than a move to conventional model railways.
The new motor could be re-used to boost power to a long train, but this
mitigation depends on how much train-related LEGO the child has.
Would a child converting to the hobby train miss the horn? At least that would
still work from the remote control :-)
Mark
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Mark Bellis wrote:
> To play devil's advocate for a moment - how is the situation different from the
> conversion from 4.5V to 12V? That needed conductor rails, points, crossing,
> motor and transformer.
In the past 4.5V trains could have short baseplates with a 4 or 6 wheeled
motor only. The now IR trains can only have 8 wheels and only a 30 stud long
baseplate.
In the past even 12V trains could be converted to 4.5V. Now not all 9V trains
can be converted to IR trains, only those with a 30 stud baseplate.
Why would someone convert a 12V train back to 4.5V? During the upgrade from
4.5V to 12V many people still used the 4.5V trains mixed with 12V. Sometimes
mayby want to exchange motors to have an 4.5V train run on 12V and a 12V train
converted back to 4.5V. So both trains can be on the tracks.
Now this is not possible to convert evey 9V train back to IR.
Niels
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Niels Karsdorp wrote:
> In lugnet.trains, Mark Bellis wrote:
> > To play devil's advocate for a moment - how is the situation different from the
> > conversion from 4.5V to 12V? That needed conductor rails, points, crossing,
> > motor and transformer.
>
> In the past 4.5V trains could have short baseplates with a 4 or 6 wheeled
> motor only. The now IR trains can only have 8 wheels and only a 30 stud long
> baseplate.
> In the past even 12V trains could be converted to 4.5V. Now not all 9V trains
> can be converted to IR trains, only those with a 30 stud baseplate.
>
> Why would someone convert a 12V train back to 4.5V? During the upgrade from
> 4.5V to 12V many people still used the 4.5V trains mixed with 12V. Sometimes
> mayby want to exchange motors to have an 4.5V train run on 12V and a 12V train
> converted back to 4.5V. So both trains can be on the tracks.
> Now this is not possible to convert evey 9V train back to IR.
>
> Niels
Moving from 4.5v to 12v had 'added value' in providing better control, many new
features such as electric points, crossings etc. but more than anything else, it
was the new expanding range which provided the most promise. If there is no 'new
and exciting range' in the 9v rail-powered system, then there is no incentive to
shell out big sums of money to change over.
Jon.
|
|
|
