 | | dear lego...
|
|
Please take all your marketing department and middle managers and lock them in a room with nothing but jack stone sets to play with. Mabie then they will realize how CRAP they are... Its quite clear from things like the train designer interview and (...) (23 years ago, 24-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: You have to love the product
|
|
Dave: Re: (URL) the change of heart? Not that I disagree with you, just curious... I realize that you like the Mutant Squid set best amongst the AT sets for 2002, but isn't it also comprised largely of useless elements unless you are trying to make (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | You have to love the product
|
|
Dear TLG, I'll keep this short and sweet. It's abundantly clear from the cluttered, busy graphics and poor set design of the new Alpha Team sets and MANY other themes that a significant percentage of the people in your organization don't play with (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: 2002 Alpha Team too close to Jack Stone
|
|
(...) I wonder if it could be a patent issue? Frank (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: 2002 Alpha Team too close to Jack Stone
|
|
(...) I'll agree with everything except the arm pieces. I don't like the Arm pieces because they don't have any means by which to attach other pieces, except at the wrist. Why aren't there any studs or technic holes on the sides of these things? No (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | Re: Hey Brad! Why not rerelease an *unpowered* monorail set?
|
|
(...) (snip) (...) I agree mike- $79 is a bit low for a set of that size. However, I think a push version would sell fine- after all, no batteries for parents to buy. Hell, i'd be happy if they would sell the track again, and build my own (push or (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Hey Brad! Why not rerelease an *unpowered* monorail set?
|
|
(...) I am sure that there are enough of the non-lugnet public that have purchased any of the monorail sets when they were first out, or that have purchased the monorail motors on e-bay. So in that respect I think there are more of the general (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Hey Brad! Why not rerelease an *unpowered* monorail set?
|
|
"Benjamin Medinets" <bmedinets@excite.com> wrote in message news:Gq1rtt.7x4@lugnet.com... (...) [ ... snipped ... ] (...) I think a price point of $79 is unrealistic even without a motor. My 6399 (which I bought used for $200) has a TRU price tag (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Hey Brad! Why not rerelease an *unpowered* monorail set?
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:Gq1s8E.9JL@lugnet.com... (...) that the (...) are (...) push (...) with (...) easy (...) set (...) motor/gearing (...) Ondrew (a fellow NILTC member) and I have had this thought after (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Hey Brad! Why not rerelease an *unpowered* monorail set? + 'Future City'
|
|
(...) This little Aussie would like to agree here! I think those of us who do not ave this set would drool over the chance of picking one up, motor or not! Just not at the expensive prices that they are going for on eBay etc etc. For me, Lego has (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
