roamingstudio, on 28 November 2012 - 04:49 PM, said:
Coming back to middle wheels for PF motors; the question is how would you attach Zephyr's custom rods? I too would love to reuse this design but I fear that BBB wheels (small size) dont have an attachment point for a connecting rod; which would mean that you would need to create a custom wheel; or use a CAM shaft brick. So Zephyr / BBB: Any chance of making a wheel set for PF motors which would allow a middle - and suitable connecting rods.
As skaako demo'ed in this old thread
@Zephyr: Actually seriously thinking how much would such a custom mould cost - I could easily see myself helping to set up some production of these as im sure there would be plenty of trainheads taking benefit. Perhaps even a custom deal with Ben Fleckes?
monai, on 28 November 2012 - 05:42 PM, said:
For the moment I do not have an eloquent way of attaching rods to the small train wheels that come with the PF motor. Short of drilling a hole for a technic pin in the wheels (I'd do it from the backside, using 60483
connected to the existing axle hole as a guide), the best I've got is using a 2 long thin technic beam, e.g., LEtsGO's drivers
above or a technic crank e.g., my little Porter
(I borrowed this idea from someone else).
I MIGHT be able to figure out some way to clip on to BBB small wheels, but that would be a lot of work to get a satisfactory connection so it is way down the road. I doubt there would be much demand though, since you lose the traction of the bands on the lego small wheels.
Modified BBB medium wheels solves the connection point problem, but still does not address the traction problem (some folks have machined a grove into the BBB wheels but it is non trivial).
As for the rods, I already have the solution for BBB medium drivers. I made a 4 hole 10 long connecting rod (do not adjust your set, yes, this is in white, it is for a customer who wanted to paint it). This design is not yet in my store since I have no idea how to keep from confusing customers with the subtle differences between my normal rods and this thin design (and whenever it does hit my store it will be in gray).
and it can also be fabricated without the thin grove, yielding the middle rod in the picture below,
Note that this wheel spacing only works if you modify the BBB medium wheels as was done in bricklink user ulimy's example noted above
(ulimy does some great work). These rods can be fabricated with larger spacing between the holes for non-modified wheels as well as the larger wheel designs (e.g., here
Returning to the small wheels for a second, while talking about three axle trucks/motors, recall when the RC motor first came out the bands would slip. Then Cale/SaveTheAggie solved this problem using thicker o-rings purchased from a hardware store. Although it would appear that lego has solved the slipping band problem that the original wheels had, with three axle trucks the thicker o-rings still offer an advantage when placed on the outer axles. I used this technique for the powered 3-axle trucks on my SP Pacific
tender (with wider wheelbase than you would have in a PF motor) and it lifts the center axle (without the thicker o-ring) sufficiently off the track that I have not had problems in curves or switches.
Commander Red Hat, on 28 November 2012 - 09:53 PM, said:
There are some very useful ideas in this thread and I love the way your custom rods look!
I do think the price is slightly steep, if you need a few rods to upgrade one big steamer then the total runs up quickly.
But I understand that making these costs time and effort, which of course makes a price. Maybe it would be possible to give a bit of discount when somebody orders 6 or more for a single model, kits for particular engines perhaps?
In some pictures the finishing of the rods looks a bit crude, will the final product have a smooth finish?
Oh, I totally hear you. I would agree that the prices are high, but that is where they need to be. I am able to distribute the fixed fab costs over many rods by fabricating a lot of rods at one time, but even totally eliminating the fixed costs, the unit cost of fabrication per rod is still high. Not to mention the time put into design and finishing. I am not getting rich. So these rods are for the individual who is looking for that detail on their locomotive.
This is the finished product, so yes, the surface is matte and a little grainy when viewed close up. I wanted to show the detail shots so there would be no surprises. Given the price, I want to do all that I can to ensure the customer is getting what they expect. I personally think it looks tons better than pinning together a bunch of shorter technic half beams (which is why I made these for myself in the first place) and they are particularly handy for the long spans past 7 studs where you previously had few alternatives this thin.
No problem if these rods are not for you. If you are on the fence, I'd suggest starting with a single locomotive, e.g., as Duq did
, and see how you like them. Then, if you find you do like them and have big ideas, certainly we can talk off-line.
Locomotive Annie, on 29 November 2012 - 01:54 AM, said:
Zephyr's rods have a very fine granular surface because they are made by 3D printing, but crude they certainly are not. These rods are very precise in their sizing and look absolutely spot on in every way. The price is what is is because they are a low volume production item and considering the wide range available; - which includes some fairly uncommon spacings and offsets as well as the more usual types, - I think they are very reasonably priced.
Thank you Locomotive Annie. I would agree with both you and Commander Red Hat on this one.