 | | Hey, Joe. What doors do you use on your caboose
|
|
Joe, Love your models. I was curious about the style of door you use on your caboose. Since the picture is a side shot the doors cannot be seen. Also, I would love to hear your comments on whether or not you think the doors that you chose are (...) (26 years ago, 27-Apr-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: YOU be the designer
|
|
(...) Even though this set seems good I do not think LEGO would sell it for $160. This set would be bigger than the current big set, 4565 Freight and Crane Railway, and your set would include a transformer. I know, I am nitpicking. From the original (...) (26 years ago, 27-Apr-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: YOU be the designer
|
|
(...) Hmmm. I'm not a trainhead by any stretch, so let's see what I come up with. I envision an Old West train, done right.[1] It would not have to be prototypical, but the more prototypical it is, the better. I'll describe a configuration, I hope I (...) (26 years ago, 27-Apr-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: YOU be the designer
|
|
(...) Oh, yeah. That's right. I made a really killer Chessie last year. Wow, that had totally slipped my mind. Weird. Steve (26 years ago, 27-Apr-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: YOU be the designer
|
|
(...) Well couldn't they just sell the train or maybe just the individual cars by themselves? I don't need any more curved track or another controller. I would like to see a good diesel engine and a box car. That way I could buy one or two engines (...) (26 years ago, 27-Apr-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: YOU be the designer
|
|
i think the reason we are not seeing any decent trains lately is because by their nature train sets cost more than other legos because of the motor,track and controller. (26 years ago, 27-Apr-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: YOU be the designer
|
|
It would cost less than $150 and it would be a typical U.S. freight train, except only one of each car (including the engine). Track would include enough to do a loop and several straight sections in case someone wanted to run a train on the floor (...) (26 years ago, 27-Apr-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: YOU be the designer
|
|
Well, what would be more prototypical than 8 stud wide trains with tight curves.... to me that sounds like narrow gauge. Although I'm not a big fan of narrow gauge, it would seem to me to be the perfect application. [1] [1] OTOH the minifig would (...) (26 years ago, 27-Apr-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: YOU be the designer
|
|
John Neal wrote: <larger radius curve> YES! How did I forget? Also shorter segments to allow more layout variety. <8 stud rant> I thought long and hard about 8 stud. I do understand why it would be desirable scalewise but I think 6 stud is the way (...) (26 years ago, 27-Apr-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: YOU be the designer
|
|
Most of that sounds good, although I'd like to see TLG make the jump to 8 stud wide cars and engines which allows for more room and better modeling IMHO. If you are going to take the time and effort to overhaul the theme, why not do it right? What (...) (26 years ago, 27-Apr-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
