Subject:
|
Re: LEGO trains...The Future of Model Railroading?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Tue, 23 Nov 1999 19:36:03 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
805 times
|
| |
|
|
John Neal wrote:
>
> Frank Filz wrote:
>
> > Some thoughts of mine:
> >
> > A few people have weighed in that no matter what, we should promote
> > _pure_ LEGO modeling. I think this is a wrong opinion. So long as we
> > promote a monopoly, we will get the service a monopoly creates.
>
> I disagree. We are all here because we enjoy LEGO. Trains just happens to
> be one theme in the LEGO family. Why should we rush out and bring in
> non-LEGO material? For instance, I hear plenty of grumbling in .SW about
> the lack of blasters, but I don't recall someone suggesting using some
> Kenner blaster or something. I *have* heard, however, people suggesting
> creative ways to create blasters. And isn't that what it is all about?
I still will respectively disagree. If we refuse to use anything
non-LEGO, my prediction is that we will NEVER get much if anything from
the list? If we grant TLC a total monopoly (which is what you are
proposing) on this type of toy, we will see a lack of innovation.
Do you also advocate running a Microsoft pure computer? (Actually, what
is available for a single vendor pure computer system?) Don't tell me
that Linux counts. Linux is so far from the same concept as being LEGO
pure.
> This topic has been discussed many times, but I'll say it again. We are a
> unique breed playing with a toy exclusively produced by one manufacturer--
> I can't think of another situation (D&D cards, etc notwithstanding) where
> this is true. Or at least to the extent AFOLs have taken the brick.
> Adding non-LEGO elements, to me, is... is uncreative; it's...not LEGO:-p
Right now the ONLY reason I am LEGO pure is that the only non-LEGO parts
which are LEGO compatible and of sufficient quality are the no-longer
produced Tyco. If I start using Tyco bricks, I will be running down a
dead end path of lack of expandibility. If some new manufacturer comes
along with worthwhile products, which meet my needs, I will happily buy
them.
> Getting back to trains, if you really want all of the things the MRR world
> has to offer, why model in LEGO? Why not just model in "O" gauge? There
> are plenty of opportunities to build in MRR, and from scratch-- arguably a
> more creative process than building with bricks.
Because with traditional model railroading, about as far as I got was
building a table and trying to start putting track down. Then I hit the
"things aren't happening fast enough to keep my attention" problem, and
the table sat for several years gathering more stuff on top of it. Then
the table got packed away. Then a couple months later, I was suddenly
into LEGO, and within a month, I had a train table set up with a double
oval of track, and trains running including a MOC engine.
I see the value of LEGO for the ability to have an idea, and be able to
execute the idea in a matter of days or weeks (subject to parts
availability of course). That was not gelling for me with traditional
model railroading. It took me weeks just to get the table built...
I would like to have an HO model railroad also, and will be loathe to
dispose of all of my stuff, but it may be never... (Incidentally, the
last operational model railroad I had was close to _20_ years ago,
though the train table I was just discussing is the THIRD train table
I've built since then).
> > If Mega
> > Bloks were to start selling trains, I would buy them. If they were
> > absolute junk, I would return them, and write them a letter explaining
> > why I returned them.
> >
> > My biggest dream is for a model railroading cottage manufacturer to
> > decide that LEGO compatible trains are a wonderfull niche market, and to
> > start manufacturing a small selection of special pieces which would
> > enhance our hobby.
>
> My biggest dream is for TLC to do that for us.
I wish they would also, but I'm not holding my breath.
> Guess what. They are producing the best stuff they can. Nothing will live
> up to TLC specs and thus you will never be satisfied with their or anyone
> else's quality.
So no one can duplicate TLC's quality? What, do they have some special
dispensation from GOD? Sorry, it is possible to meet TLC's quality. I
think Tyco did, or at least was very close.
> All of your ideas, Frank, are good ones, but I think 1) no manufacturer
> would ever invest as such for such a tiny market and so the point is moot,
> and b) wouldn't it be awesome if TLC did these things? I think *that* is
> where we should be directing our efforts.
If you look closely at the model railroading field, you will see that it
thrives on very tiny markets. There are many special kits with
production runs as low as 500, if not lower. And those have included
cast parts, though I'm not sure about the possibilities of making a cast
for ABS which would have a modest cost per piece for small run parts.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
 | | Re: LEGO trains...The Future of Model Railroading?
|
| (...) 500? 500 kits for some of the UK manufacturers would be a massive run! Lockley only built something in the order of 500 coaches in 50 years! (admitidly, that is building, not kit) But still, that level is much higher than what it takes if (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-99, to lugnet.trains)
| | | Re: LEGO trains...The Future of Model Railroading?
|
| (...) Now youv'e done it, you mentioned the "M" word. Dare I mention Apple. I have stuck with them through the the good, the bad and the ugly. Like them or hate them it is difficult to argue that they haven't been true to their purpose "Think (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LEGO trains...The Future of Model Railroading?
|
| (...) I disagree. We are all here because we enjoy LEGO. Trains just happens to be one theme in the LEGO family. Why should we rush out and bring in non-LEGO material? For instance, I hear plenty of grumbling in .SW about the lack of blasters, but (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
44 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
