Subject:
|
Re: The Future of Trains
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego
|
Date:
|
Tue, 2 Oct 2007 12:47:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
18862 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego, Harvey Henkelman wrote:
> No matter how much 'AFOL input' there is, it will be
> the decision of the company in the end (of course)
Actually... that's kind of a good buisness model I'm told.
> And the motors are guaranteed to be underpowered (similar
> to the R/C stuff). Also, battery-operated toys are not
> taken seriously by the vast majority of hobbyists.
I did want to mention two points here. First, battery-powered motors don't have
to be "underpowered". As an example, the PF XL motor or the NXT motors (several
of us have twisted axles with these under stall or near-stall conditions...
short axles, even). And as to "not taken seriously", well... first, is the goal
to be taken seriously, or to have fun in a hobby? And second, I always have to
giggle a little when somebody says that over in a robitcs forum, until somebody
liek Steve Hassenplug (or others of us) kick robot butt with a "cute little
plastic toy":
http://www.robotroom.com/Jet.html
--
Brian Davis
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) The truth is finally revealed (...) No matter how much 'AFOL input' there is, it will be the decision of the company in the end (of course) (...) Exclusively plastic track means reliance on batteries, there is no other way around it. And the (...) (17 years ago, 1-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego)
|
124 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
