 | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) An AFOL already made some headway on that one, way back in '05.. (URL) (17 years ago, 4-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) 1x8s instead of 2x8s, and spaced every other-- more prototypical that way. In any event, well done, Kenn! JOHN (17 years ago, 4-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Doesn't look like it would work out as nicely. The connectors have two metal tabs on the bottom that appear to line up nicely with the studs that were cut off the 2x8 plate. Switch to a 1x8 plate and you'd have to cut away part of the base and (...) (17 years ago, 4-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) sleeper like Ken's modified 2x8 plate, bundle it with the 3rd party connectors and rail stock, and voila - hobbyist track kits! All things considered, this won't happen, for a lot of reasons. But an AFOL can dream... Steve (17 years ago, 4-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) (SNIP) (...) Hi Steve I even would guess that a special sleeper plate with flat bottom (to float on studs beneath), with 242 studs on top and a kind of retaining clips to fix the metal rail would be an option for any "third-party producer". (...) (17 years ago, 5-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Amen, Bruder! You and I are so in our thinking, Ben; as if only 1 stud apart;-D JOHN (17 years ago, 5-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| In lugnet.lego, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote: <snip> (...) I've looked at this and a few similar options. Wether or not BBB could achieve it at the $0.30 per piece range (preferably less) is a matter of quantity. I'd much prefer to be closer to $0.10 (...) (17 years ago, 5-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) I am sorry to hear the news, but I am not surprised. There are two things Lego can do to help the transition on those of us with a large investment in the 9v system. 1) the most consumable element in the 9v system is the train motor. But in (...) (17 years ago, 7-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Talk to Ondrew Hartigan. He's already tracked down a company that can provide an replacement, even if they're not the company that manufactured the original units. (17 years ago, 7-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Hi Ben, I do not see so much need for a full system: the biggest need is for straight track and possibly new curve radius. The aftermarket will offer used 9V switches for the next 20 years. Some people will switch to the new battery trains. (...) (17 years ago, 7-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| Again I may be missing something, and perhaps the future of LEGO's solution, as yet unknown looms as a possible roadblock--but why for example could not the various train clubs come up with a standard piece--get together--gurantee a certain number (...) (17 years ago, 7-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) I did some research on this several years ago. At the time it was to pursue the idea of wider radii curves. But now it's of even more interest with the 9v track going away. I drew up several different ideas, and even contacted someone in a (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Benn- In my experience keeping SCLTC trains running for the last 6 years (including a 10 week, 6 day a week show every year), what kills the train motors is erosion of metal contacts that pick up electricity from the rails. The contacts wear (...) (17 years ago, 10-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| |
