 | | 2002 Alpha Team too close to Jack Stone
|
|
Dear TLG, The 2002 Alpha Team sets initially had me very excited. I loved Aquazone and was looking forward to some cool new subs and a base. Upon getting a closer look at these sets I was disappointed at the lackluster design and even more upset by (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Hey Brad! Why not rerelease an *unpowered* monorail set?
|
|
In lugnet.dear-lego, Steve Bliss writes: (snipped) (...) Why so? The studs could be different from the original version: instead of pressed from the top (of the stud), both halves of the mold could press the studs sideways (note that I am referreing (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Monorail track molds? Factory visits?
|
|
You might be right if the molds are rigid. It could be done in 2 parts if the mold is flexible like vulcanized rubber or silicon (or low-tech like Knox gelatin and anitfreeze, or even hot glue). They were injected from the center top, you can see (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Hey Brad! Why not rerelease an *unpowered* monorail set?
|
|
"crunch-o-matic" <naughty.monkey@verizon.net> wrote in message news:Gq5016.G01@lugnet.com... (...) studs. (...) a (...) .... only thing is the studs on the sides of the monorail track are the hollow type which accept things the size of minifig (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Hey Brad! Why not rerelease an *unpowered* monorail set?
|
|
You could get around that by running your seam down the ceter of the studs. There would still be no undercuts. Thus a 2 part mold. Probably too large a piece with no retun on investment gaurantee. Still sounds fishy to me. (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Hey Brad! Why not rerelease an *unpowered* monorail set?
|
|
(...) Well, the track segments are fairly large parts, which means (I think) the cost of developing the molds is higher. And the track would require at least a three-part mold, because there are studs facing left and right. (...) True. Steve (23 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Hey Brad! Why not rerelease an *unpowered* monorail set?
|
|
(...) Maybe a little over the top or expensive, but a solar powered kit would be interesting. The monorail could run on a smooth strip that clips to the sides of the track like a T-shape track. This could be considered a far more modern and advanced (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Hey Brad! Why not rerelease an *unpowered* monorail set?
|
|
(...) I don't think racks/teeth on the monorail track will fit with current LEGO gears. Those monorail teeth might be too small to make into a plastic gear. I'm not sure about the practicality of making a metal(tooth) gear that fits onto a technic (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Hey Brad! Why not rerelease an *unpowered* monorail set?
|
|
(...) The motor itself is highly unlikely to be the issue. As I have mentioned before, every LEGO motor other than the micromotor I have had the opportunity to look at looks the same shape and size, and I've seen non-LEGO motors with the same shape (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Hey Brad! Why not rerelease an *unpowered* monorail set?
|
|
I think I recall Brad saying something about not being able to make the track anymore as well. That doesn't make any sense to me though. A very easy mold with no undercuts. The points might be a real problem as they are fairly complicated (as they (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
