Lego Trains getting lighter?

[Brickviller V2]

Hi everyone, 

I recently was holding my Horizon express train and noticed something. The cars (so not the engine) were very light, even so if I didn't know better, would think there weren't a lot of pieces involved. I had the 2006 High speed passenger train 7897 and noticed also that the car was very, very light. Same with the other two recent passenger trains, and the passenger car from the Emerald Night. 

On the other hand, as a kid a friend of mine had some cars of the Santa Fe Super Chief, and they were kinda heavy (in my memory that is) compared to my own 7897. Looking up the instructions of some of the older trains I also noticed it almost seems more pieces were involved. I'm kinda sad by this, since I think the cars of a train are just as important as the main engine of it. 

So my question is, does anyone who owns several trains of several eras also notice the difference in wheigt between the passenger cars? And what does that mean for you?

[pirzyk]

7 hours ago, Brickviller V2 said:

So my question is, does anyone who owns several trains of several eras also notice the difference in weight between the passenger cars? And what does that mean for you?

Longer trains!  Better battery life.   The SantaFe Superchief cars are quite heavy.  Most of the time I can't pull all 5 cars with a single motor.  I can pull 5 EN style cars with the aforementioned engine.  The weight issue is also a big reason I have not gone to 8w, I like my really long trains (15+ cars).  I am in the process of trying to rebuild all my shipping containers to use the corrugated wall panels instead of the 1x2 brick with groove, once LEGO produces them in more colors.

[dr_spock]

It could also be that the current generation of LEGO bricks are lighter than the older bricks.   Lighter weight means it would be easier to carry boxes of trains from my car to the display area, less wear and tear on the old guy body. 

 

[Toastie]

There is this "price per piece per model" figure of merit being tossed around now and then to judge the "value" of a LEGO set. Which does not always make that much sense, but:

Do the weights of LEGO cars/trains scale with simple piece count? Don't know, nor care as I like or don't like a particular set.

The other thing is: How many super-integrated pieces rather than HoMa-style brick-build shapes are used in the model of question? A nose consisting of one thin-walled injection molded one-piece (ugly) bit weighs nothing compared to a brick build complex shape. Which in turn is then naturally reflected in the piece count. So in essence "price per piece per model" may actually be a valid figure of merit for "weight".

Nice question by the way.

Best
Thorsten        

[Paulbricks]

The plastic of the original LEGO brick were heavier in the early days and toxic! Well that was from a report that early lego bricks before a certain date contained lead, Cadmium and other toxins!

The plastic was changed and I noticed now it is "different" and feels lighter. Might weigh the same bricks, early and later versions and see what the difference is...

toxic toys

 

[Toastie]

I believe we can relax. With regard to the article cited by Paulbricks:

X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy means that you are using highly energetic, potentially >deadly< radiation to find the toxic elements in an otherwise, that is in a reasonable, normal, everyday, completely secured plastic environment. Here is the thing:

"... that could be chewed by young children."

Let us investigate: Chewing AND swallowing is required to get bodily access to the toxins - they call it bio-availability. Don't be alerted by the chewing: The amount of any toxin released by chewing is next to nothing. We won't have any technique capable of detecting that amount; not even X-ray stuff. Swallowing is apparently the next escalation step. Now, regarding the structural stability of even early LEGO bricks, I'd say you have to swallow the whole brick in one piece. Chewing is really irrelevant (I tried to get pieces apart when I was young by using my teeth - as you can tell by >tooth marks< on old bricks I still have - but I was simply unable to bite off pieces off bricks. Try it. Try it on old bricks: It won't work OR you have super strengths). Now, swallowing a brick may be serious, as the >sharp edges< may - may! - hurt and even affect bodily tissue - mechanically. But: The plastic material ever used by TLC, never >dissolves< and thus becomes bio-available - by bodily fluids - neither in your stomach nor in your intestine - not to any appreciable extent. They will come out as a whole. Try it. Use a 1x1 round brick (will never hurt your interior by scratching or cutting) - and find it later - totally unaffected - in the toilet.

There is even more: The "toxins" used in the olden days are very powerful coloring agents. The amount of bricks you need to swallow before any adversely affecting concentration is reached in your body is ... unhealthy. You'll have serious - maybe deadly problems - because of 1000+ pieces in your stomach.  

The thing is: When I would use X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy on your body: Sorry. You are toxic. There is Barium, Lead, we will find Phosphorus, Tin, and so many other "toxic" elements. Which is perfectly fine, because we need them to live. Toxicity is a matter of how much.

Don't worry is all what I want to say. Not when it comes to low-concentration chemicals safely contained in polymers like ABS or poly-ethylene (i.e. the very old brick stuff).

All the best
Thorsten

[Hod Carrier]

I would say that lighter trains aren’t necessarily a bad thing. Lighter cars with heavier locos (PF helps with this) means longer trains.

[zephyr1934]

Well, unleaded bricks have been shown to be lighter than leaded ones (grin)