coaster

I'll figure out a way to get it to self-center. I'm sure an elegant solution will present itself if I keep hitting my head hard enough against the table.

The shipping costs outside of the US are brutal. I try to absorb some of the cost to help you guys out, but there is nothing I can do about the VAT. Even with EU distribution, you still will pay the VAT. It would, in theory, help the shipping cost though to ship a bulk package, trimming that cost a bit. I've not had any luck sourcing an EU distributor. So if anyone wants the job, shoot me a line.

No, I wouldn't make the R40 9V curves. At about $0.50, no way I could make them for that.

Ah, but that's because you don't have one of these: It's an early version (don't have a picture of the current one), but you could use this to power your PF motors, creating a hybrid PF/9V system. You can supply constant power to the track, and then use the IR receiver to independently drive the trains. Not that we're working on such a device...

Yeah, I've given up on the magnet idea and have been looking at a small wireform spring. Thanks Fred! We are a bit fringe, aren't we?

No disagreement. The really big curves are a pipe dream right now.

Thanks everyone. Kinda where I was as well. 9V could very well change the dynamics of this though (a 4x 9V straight would be amazing!!!!). We'll hold the course.

Some of those may be tough, not because of geometry constraints, but demand. For the R104 switches for instance, I'll need to sell about 1500 of each left and right to recoup the tooling costs. I'm all for wide curves though, and the R200 is definitely on my "really want to do" list. Yep. Stay tuned!

Nothing is off the table as far as sizes and geometry goes. Small straights, other radii curves, and switches are all in the works. I have quotes on all of the above, so right now just trying to feel out what's a priority. Obviously switches, but that's a big investment, so looking for small things to build on in the meantime. However, I think I can get even more backing on things if I offer a 9V version as well. Stick around, I'll have some news in the next couple months.

Toying with the idea of making 2x and 4x long straights. Thoughts? Unfortunately, break-even point compared to normal LEGO straights is about 1.6 miles of each. And by the way, 9V is very much not dead. ;)

The speed is your problem. The train motors are capable of pulling much heavier loads, and so under light load go too fast for the LEGO curves. Your options are to slow down or get some 3rd party wider curves.

Don't use 2mm rods. Get some centerless ground (sometimes called precision ground) 5/64 (.078"/1.98mm) rod. That's what I use, and then you don't have to do any other finishing and they'll fit perfectly into the bearings.

I may have made a few: Old LEGO ones are 1.98mm, new LEGO ones are 2.00mm. These are made back to the 1.98mm. Not sure how many I have left. I found that even in the standard wheelsets, mine roll better than the LEGO ones, so I've been replacing all of mine.

Understandable, and yes, we strive for professionalism. We aren't promising parts or other deliverables, nor taking any orders, until we have actual product on the shelf. We're investing in the development of these tracks on our own, and understand not all roads will get us there. It's quite possible this proves to be untenable, but we won't know nor will we quit until we've exhausted all possible alternatives.

I (BrickTracks) have been working to develop the 9V product line for some time now. The roadblock has consistently been tooling costs. To do it the way LEGO did requires a progressive die stamping for each rail, which cost about $25k apiece, so doing the R104s and R120s in 9V in exactly the same way would cost over $100k in tooling for the rails alone. But, we are exploring several other options, and we'll figure it out. The key for us though is quality: the tracks need to blend seamlessly in both function and appearance with the LEGO ones. That's one of my 2018 resolutions: bring 9V tracks to market.

Build it all in white and say it's covered in snow.

@DeGobbi, thanks! The white sprue marks are an unfortunate reality here. These are molded in the traditional injection method, where the sprues are cut off after each shot. LEGO utilizes what's known as a hot runner manifold for injection, and their injection points are up on the top of a couple studs (you can see them if you look closely enough). I'm not exaggerating when I say doing this would have been 20 times more expensive. As for the easement, you're referring to an e-curve. I'll have to play with it to see if/what fits nicely.

Thanks Dave! Not sure I follow what you mean by creating easements, can you clarify a bit? And I always look forward to pictures! EDIT: Speaking of pictures, I've had a few people ask for pictures top and bottom of each track. Happy to oblige, so here you go: R104: R120: Don't they look tasty? :)

What you've described is very close to an R72 (by the math, works out just shy of R70). If you were to alternate curve-straight-curve-straight, you would be right in between an R72 and R88 (effectively an R80).

I'm not all that wild about the Kadee ones. I've used them on other trains, and they fit well into that prototypical look, but they also look totally out of place on a LEGO build. It would also cost less to start from the ground up rather than try to shoe-horn in a Kadee coupler. From a design standpoint, my objective is to always "LEGO-ize" the design, such that custom parts need to fit seamlessly into the LEGO environment. "How would LEGO do this?" is my design mantra. For this coupler, I've based the design not only on actual couplings, but was also using the mini-blaster assembly as a form-and-function reference: My target price point would involve a quantity break, such that a pack of just (2) couplers would be around $8, but a box of 50 or 100 or so would work out to $5 or so/pair. Something along those lines; cost dependent, naturally. As mentioned, thus far, this has just been a design exercise. They obviously would have be robust enough to hold heavy loads, but also tolerant of going over very uneven track surfaces.

@BurkusCircus, that is correct. The lengths of straights we're investigating are 1/4x, 1/2x, 2x, and 4x (or some combination thereof). Straights will be dependent on a number of factors, the biggest being, can I produce a 4x straight for less than the cost of (4) LEGO straights? If the answer is no, then it's going to be a tough sell. The switches will be R104. On top of this, don't forget, I am working on a 9V solution as well. As I personally am still entrenched in 9V, I have a strong motivation to figure that out. I have some prototype 9V curves in the work, and if I can get those hammered out, all of the above will also be available in 9V form.

It makes it much more difficult to uncouple each car, but yes, for long, continuous displays, that's what's typically done. Couple reasons: First, you can't 3D print magnets, and even if you could the cost to 3D print copies of the existing part wouldn't gain you anything. Second though, there are still the issues of them decoupling under longer/heavier loads. Target price would be around $4-5. I've been looking at a centering spring, but it becomes dependent on you setting the spring properly when you snap it into the plate with the hole. Could be problematic. Plus, I couldn't work out an elegant way to install said spring. One of the problems with the magnet though is keeping it retained. As these are technically toys, there are safety regulations I must adhere to. This is one of the reasons LEGO changed the coupler and has moved to an encased magnet.

@knotian This could help in that regard. Since the pawl release is on the bottom, something as simple as a sliding cheese slope could pop the release and open up the coupler.

@ScotNick, I'll reply here, so as not to derail the ME thread, even though it's probably already dead. In regards to making 9V straights, it will depend on what our cost to make the 9V tracks overall is. We don't have the luxury of volume LEGO does, so the R104s and R120s in 9V will probably end up in the same range as the normal LEGO 9V straights. Same thing with the double length straights. We've looked into molding 1/4x, 1/2x, 2x and 4x straights, just a matter of determining if it's cost effective. I'm not sure I could do normal straights as cheaply either, But, walking before running. Let's see how the curves shake out and we can go from there. For anyone that hasn't seen, we've been collecting some great pictures from various layouts: (photos courtesy of Anthony Sava/TBRR and NILTC for letting me shoot their layouts)

That is something I have been considering. Certainly would simplify the tooling. @Cale, I know you're lurking here, would that solve your mounting issue, using a 1/2 pin?