supertruper1988

I have to level with you. His is better than yours first and foremost because it is actually built. Your design looks good but the fact he used a couple of the same parts you did while also clearly using a lot of his own ideas is how it works in LEGO. there are only a few ways to create some shapes so the execution is to be expected to be the same. Add in the fact it navigates LEGO track with all that beautiful cowling makes it very impressive. I have seen you on here for years being a general snob about all things trains but to what end? You dont even like building LEGO because it "hurts your hands", nor have you ever once showed that any of your designs are actually buildable, let alone look as good in the brick. Why are you here? What is your goal? Is it to just troll all of us? You act all mighty train builder but where is your proof? In your mercury thread you ask basic questions about powering models and gearing. Happy to see you got the help you needed, but at the same time, that same lack of basic knowledge doesnt reinforce that you are the god of LEGO trains.

You will need to go through your list and look for expensive and rare molds. LDD is horrible at this. Bricklink also interprets 1x1 tiles as the non-groove mold from the early days of tiles. It takes time to learn the finicky parts of BL but I am happy with all the various tweaks over the years and I just use "auto select" in the USA or north america these days. The tip about expensive stores being added to the "disliked stores" list is a good one. Some sellers have high inventory and prices so they get picked by the algorithm but they arent the best price. Those kids of places get put on the dislike list.

We can offer it. Just shoot us a message using our contact form.

I know this has been mentioned many times, but there is a very strong need for a single axle pickup as well. If you are replicating the wheels and pickup of the 9V system for your new motors, will there be an option to purchase those at the component level to integrate in a DIY fashion or even available to order in quantity to produce a single axle pickup outside of the FX development path?

https://www.facebook.com/bricktrainawards/posts/274299224318483 Is this not your design submitted by you?

It has been mentioned but more than one motor will be the crux for many to even consider switching. One of the big sells of PF and its vast acceptance is the fact that the motors are multiples sizes and can be fit into many MOCs so getting power from the rails to the motors, with or without a PFx (or other controller) will be a big deal.

For the negative cant, any chance you have some time to ballast and attach to base plates in a 90 degree arc? I have even had some TLG track that had a negative cant bu as soon as it was ballasted and put on base plates, the cant was gone.

what scale? the two listed are common in the US because they are based on US train dimensions.

I actually spoke to Ben of Big Ben Bricks and he had the same feedback about the .5 being included in the name. I was only rounding down because one of the original ideas was to start at the smallest size, #2 on the current chart, and call that a #0 then up from there as it is 1 stud (8mm) + the number of plates to get the size. The 8mm wheel is the smallest size that is feasible to be a driven axle with a gear in the frame, thus it made a good starting point. Ben also suggested we number them by stud diameter so it would start at #1.0 then #1.4, $1.8, #2.2, etc. Then he finally pointed out that the angled technic connectors have a number on them that is arbitrary. The point being that, if a system of arbitrary names or numbers is designed and accepted then that is the system and its meaning is easily communicated in a standards document (or chart) of some kind. The more I think about it, I want the name to be the size of the rolling diameter in a LEGO unit of measurement so studs or plates. That is what will help people become easily familiar as they are already familiar with the LEGO system. Also the last point I wanted to make was that now that I understand what you wanted for a "spacing guide" something similar should be simple to added to the chart.

First off sorry for the late reply. Holidays put a hold on my LEGO time. For all of these wheels, except the 7750 wheels, would call those "S" sized. They are essentially the same design and diameter that has carried through to the current wheel designs. The sizes in the chart are the "nominal" sizes. The actual wheels from 2820c01 and 2820c02 are just under 17mm but are still "S" sized. The 7750 wheels are "M" sized as they are not quite big enough but the centers are mounted 1 plate higher than the other wheels of the time. This fits the original design pattern from Big Ben Bricks. Now to get to what @Cale, @coaster and myself feel is the final version of this chart. We heard the suggestions for exact sizes in millimeters and also pondered the problem of "what to do with the sizes in between?" For the naming convention, the .5 being omitted is purely for easy of conversing. The inclusion of it feels off when conversing about because there is no XX.0. Additionally, from a production stand point, the current sizes have to be mounted at 1/2 plate higher or lower than its neighbor. Anything less than that change is going to require some advanced SNOT to get at the "correct" height. I use quotation marks here because as soon as a traction band is added, the effective rolling diameter is changed slightly so any change less than 1/2 plate gets negated in the band diameter. We feel that anyone looking for that fine of detail in a model made of LEGO bricks is also advanced enough to print their own wheels that would not likely be produced on any scale. As noted above these are the nominal sizes so a change of a millimeter or two still fits in the system. We also added some scale guides for those modeling in the two popular scales of LEGO train building. @zephyr1934 asked about a spacing guide and while that is something that is feasible, it also will greatly depend on the prototype being modeled and will be unique for each model and builder. Here is the final size chart we have come up with and I have reached out to BBB about his thoughts.

I have found that before closing studio, you have to exit the instruction maker portion back to the building portion, then save, then exit the program.

There are definitely valid points to both sides but to Jeff's point, he did say December and its now *not* December and at some point saying "We are having some delays in the supply chain will update again soon" builds the idea that they are, in fact, coming. Currently its all the idea that its coming but nothing outside of a few test samples. Also knowing about how the process works here, when you have samples in hand, there is already most of the process figured out so why is there no product 18 months later?

Just a quick look at your image host and there is a section at the bottom: You will need the "BB Code" link Then you get this:

As zephyr said nothing wrong here, just asking questions is totally fine. I was not trying to shut you out in my reply, I am sorry it made you feel that way. I was just clarifying that the point of the chart, especially in regard to the wheel size, was about about the size. The LEGO® wheel sizes listed are there for reference as a size not a mounting style, nor was this list meant to be a totally exhaustive list of all wheels offered at this time, which numbers in the hundreds.

that is really of no consequence the chart is more about diameter than mounting style. the mounting is variable because all of these sizes can be 3D printed with any mounting.

I hadnt considered this point because as one of the creators the .5 in the size is intuitive to me but may not be for someone new. Then the wheel sizes beyond this chart, which, to me, would not make sense as they do not fit in the "system" but there are new and creative possibilities with 3D printers becoming less costly every day. I will propose this change to those that helped ideate it and will likely be back with an updated chart.

Those sizes are what prompted the discussion actually. What do we call them? So we decided numbers were better than letters because they could be related to the actual Size instead of arbitrary letters.

Hello LEGO Train fans! @Cale, @coaster, and myself were recently discussing the confusing nature of the naming convention we have adopted for train wheels. It made sense for a time when only a few sizes were available. We came up with this solution where the size becomes a number. All of the wheels are XX.5 plates in diameter so the number would be whole integer number of plates that corresponds to the wheel size. What are your thoughts? We will also be reaching out to Big Ben Bricks if this sizing scheme seems reasonable to most.

First day on the internet there bud? You revived a thread that hadnt been posted in for 4 years to ask for instructions. That is considered bad form. To go along with that, the original thread is 5 years old and the original person who posted hasnt visited these forums in 3 years. No one can email him for you. You will have to go on pictures alone. Hope this helps you learn about the way the internet works.

Since you are a new member, I dont know if you can see a DM sent to you. I will DM you now. Please report back if you get it.

I too am sorry, I looked at this and even tried my hand at self compiling a solution to no avail. What I did find was the if the rendered assembly image is large enough, it will still be cropped on a multi-step page. I proposed a solution to Trevor, but he mentioned he had handled it in a different way in 2.4.0 Here is the relevant git ticket https://github.com/trevorsandy/lpub3d/issues/412

What kind of error? Blue Brick is a portable so if you are having an error, download it again and try to run it from the new download.

They are not "losing" anything. They are a business. They know kids want to build their favorite IP from movies. They sell a TON of IP related sets for this reason. The only people "losing" are the consumers who care about some perceived value based on the price per part ratio or the physical size or nostalgia or what ever else. LEGO is a toy company that sells to kids primarily. They know the numbers, they do loads of market research. If bringing back classic space was a wise financial move, they would. Instead, they choose to put their efforts on things that make them money. This whole thread is getting ridiculous IMO. Basic business 101 is make money selling goods/services. They arent a charity, they arent beholden to every consumer and them not making exactly what you (nebulous you not @Scene specifically) is not "wrong" or "bad" in any way. The beauty of LEGO is that its LEGO. There are INFINITE ways to put bricks together. Instead of ranting and raving about what they don't do, instead take your time, grab some bricks, and build what you want. - "But I can't build good MOCs" Guess what? Neither could anyone of us at first. There are TONs of MOC guides and technique breakdowns out there. Look at some, build some sets from LEGO, all of this will teach you some cool ways to put bricks together. take those skills and mash them together. The only way to get better at something is to practice it.

From what I remember R56 wasnt even in his plan until he showed up at BrickWorld with his presentation and Andy said, I sell 4 times as much R56 than any other size.

New render looks great! Im pretty sure that LDCad has that info if you click on the little "i" in the lower right of the build pane.