| |
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> I was fortunate enough to get a pre-release copy of this set, and I have
> reviewed it. My review is posted at the ILTCO site:
> http://www.iltco.org/library/articleShow.php?articleid=51
>
> Enjoy.
Larry,
Thanks for the write-up. While I dig the idea of being able to slot different
axles through the motor (possibly for uses other than trains), the idea of only
being able to pull a couple of cars bums me out. Still, I won't know for sure
until I get one for myself.
-Elroy
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Elroy Davis wrote:
> Thanks for the write-up.
no prob.
> While I dig the idea of being able to slot different
> axles through the motor (possibly for uses other than trains), the idea of only
> being able to pull a couple of cars bums me out.
Me too. I think one reason for the large nose, thinwalls for windows, and large
roof pieces is to save weight.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Elroy Davis wrote:
> In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > I was fortunate enough to get a pre-release copy of this set, and I have
> > reviewed it. My review is posted at the ILTCO site:
> > http://www.iltco.org/library/articleShow.php?articleid=51
> >
> > Enjoy.
>
> Larry,
>
> Thanks for the write-up. While I dig the idea of being able to slot different
> axles through the motor (possibly for uses other than trains), the idea of only
> being able to pull a couple of cars bums me out. Still, I won't know for sure
> until I get one for myself.
>
> -Elroy
Thanx for sharing.
I like the possibility to use it with technic, but why not recievers on both
sides or radio-control?
Theories?
/Andréas
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Andréas Rootzén wrote:
> I like the possibility to use it with technic, but why not recievers on both
> sides or radio-control?
Sorry if I was not clear, it does have receivers on both sides of the unit. But
there still are blind spots like when it is edge on to you.
|
|
|
