 | | PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) I agree, I think the subject line could have been chosen a bit more clearly. I also have a question about the images of the different radii track? Are these new images or just recolors of the images that Ben Fleskes did? If they're new, how do (...) (20 years ago, 16-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek wrote: <snip> (...) That's my huge hang-up. Why is it so impossible and dangerous to make an investment into the Trains line, yet at the same time some completely clueless individual or group convinced the right (...) (20 years ago, 16-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
In lugnet.trains, John Neal wrote: Interest in trains will go away. Sorry. Meant to say, "Interest in trains will NOT go away" JOHN (20 years ago, 16-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) Well I suppose I should not expect LEGO to make any moves towards providing tracks that would, I think, be a worthwhile investment. Silly of me to expect others on LUGNET to agree that new track geometry would be something worthwhile and (...) (20 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) No Gary not silly at all we have just echoed what the general public ask us at our train shows (how many was it 120,000 over 3 days) I would imagine that the Melbourne Train show get the same questions. not to mention the States as well. (...) (20 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) I still think this is a valid observation, helping readers figure out what something is about is a good idea. (...) I am still interested in the answer to this question. (...) Unfortunately, I think you shouldn't expect that, for reasons that (...) (20 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
Gary, Don't get all disappointed. It was me who originally made the post about the subject of the message. I was catching up on emails, LUGNET posts, etc and saw the "New Lego Track!" subject. Of course it was not what I expected it to be. If my (...) (20 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) Those were deemed too complicated and that's why they're not in the 9V system anymore. (20 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
Too complicated for adults? Or too complicated for children? Did LEGO determine that the automated parts were too complex for their target audience (children?) Assuming it is *financially viable*, why can't LEGO have introductory train sets for (...) (20 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) How's this for a "big risk": I say, scrap the 9 volt system, and produce specialized train parts (from the trucks on up) that are to scale with "O" gauge. Have AFOLs use existing trucks, motors, couplers, and track currently used (and already (...) (20 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) They already do that. Duplo trains for children, 9 volt for those up to 11 or so. After 12, it's all rock 'n roll, girls, and video games, and girls. "Adults" are supposed to move on to model railroading;-) JOHN (20 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) Been there, done that... didn't like it, came here instead. (20 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) I have a stack of Lionel & RailKing catalogs that I use for building inspiration. If I start ordering things from those catalogs, I will be in real deep with my wife! -- Bryan "John" <John@TCLTC.org> wrote in message (...) (20 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) Adults weren't even considered a market in those days... (...) Logistics, cost, risk and it not being a core market. Nothing else. (20 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) You mean to say that, given your LEGO habit, you aren't there already??? Slacker. :-) JOHN (20 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) Degenerate. ;-) JOHN (20 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) Yep-did HO for years--too much time and not enough fun. I'll stick with the "L" gauge now :) Dave K (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) Accepted, I'm somewhat less disappointed now! (...) Yes, and a good start would be a larger radius curved track (had to add my plug) (...) I don't think its a risk rather than a lack of will (only my opinion) (...) True, and may I add (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) I was sent an email from somebody not associeated with Lugnet. It was a brickshelf reference about something that was repeatedly talked about by members of the public at our recent public train display. I don't know about you but juggling the (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
I've snipped all the rest away because I agree with it, close enough, and I want to focus on one thing... (...) THe following is my view but I believe it's pretty widely shared. LUGNET is (especially when it's working right) a meritocracy. You get (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) Australia is definitely not the unique case, but more likely the typical case. In the US, most consumers can only buy Lego trains online or from S@H. During the holiday shopping season, TRU may carry trains, but other than that, trains are (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) The big question is, why arent LEGO trains available on the retail shelves? I suspect part of it is because LEGO trains as a rule are expensive. Expensive compared to other LEGO sets (due to the cost of the electrics) And more to the point, (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
In lugnet.trains, John Riley wrote: <snip> (...) They are in the new greys--I bought the Harry Potter motorized Hogwarts package--the track that come in the Hogwarts box are the new dark grey. The funny thing is I bought the 'big package' from (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) Is this actually true? I think you need to compare to LGB, Lionel, or quality HO or N gear rather than comparing to Bachman or Tyco stuff (or the equivalent low quality Oz brands). In that case LEGO stuff is cheaper. At least the starter sets (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) Hmm, you need to be careful in including Bachman in the list of cheap trains... Bachman has remade itself and is now a purveyor of reasonable cost high quality trains... I agree though, LEGO trains are of comparable cost to comparable quality (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
I've also snipped all the rest away because I agree with it, close enough, and I want to focus on certain things But if I get it right, what your trying to say is that posting in newsgroups etc is easily overlooked and taken for granted so it is (...) (20 years ago, 19-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) Beause it is just getting BORING (...) Cheers Champ well done "Trains Rule" Peter #348 (20 years ago, 19-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) Complicated --- hrm. I was a child in the 80's and absolutely loved those. They certainly weren't too complicated - and remember that they were provided with the same kind of instructions (excellent, that is) as other Lego sets. If (...) (20 years ago, 20-May-05, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
Juhana Siren wrote: [SNIP] (...) It's easy to get by in Europe, I know several folks who are switching to 9V to be able to participate in events. But the signals usually don't change hands, since those can be modded to work on 9V too ;) As for the (...) (20 years ago, 20-May-05, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) Yep; just change the one resistor... oh well... no such events in .fi, although you do see some Lego trains in the bigger stores... (...) And it's a damn shame, when Lego could be changing the times instead... :P OR at least they could be (...) (20 years ago, 23-May-05, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track!
|
|
(...) LEGO had remote controlled locomotives back in 1968. Blow the whistle (included in the trainset) and the train went forward. Blow the whistle, the train stops. Soon a new version was introduced, which also supported the train going backwards. (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.trains)
|
