Jump to content

Conchas

LEGO Ambassadors
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    504

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Conchas

  1. Conchas
    Well, it seems I did, indeed!
  2. Conchas
    How if 42023 Construction Crew does not have a B-model ?
  3. Conchas
    And the 42039 fenders are still 3D print prototypes. We can see the typical texture for polished/unpolished 3D prints.
  4. Conchas
    Yes, you're right! Doing some experiments with real bricks, 3x9 is now my bet as well.
  5. Conchas
    Yes, calculating the geometries from the front, it is 25 wide. No less, no more!
  6. Conchas
    Well, actually a 5x9 panel fills a kind of natural gap in the new panel system...
  7. Conchas
    I was imagining the beam underneath as 5L. But now I agree it is 7L so the panel must be longer. Then they are probably 5x9 panels, instead of 3x9. Shades in these images can be really misleading...
  8. Conchas
    Don't think so! To me they look panels #3 and #4 (3x7). Pretty sure!
  9. Conchas
    Very old SYSTEM part actually. :) Very common in trans-black but think it is a first in trans-clear. http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=30602
  10. Conchas
    I've found also a reference to 42031 Hubarbeitsbühne, which should mean some kind of elevation platform.
  11. Conchas
    This design has the advantage to allow cable routing underneath the SBrick. It could be particularly useful in trains and to pass PF lights cables to the front or rear side.
  12. Conchas
    You're right! I was thinking strictly in terms of gear reduction but didn't formulate it very well. There is definitely a movement reduction. I might revise that text! As for the challenging build, I can't think in terms of ourselves but the target group. Everything is relative even for the target group. If we think about the average reader here, probably it would be quite difficult to identify many sets which are really challenging to build. Nevertheless there is always a judgement range variance.
  13. Conchas
    Thanks Jim! It is amazing how we all find different details to highlight in our reviews, always! Keep the good work too!
  14. Conchas
    Later than usual, but here it is my review for this set. http://www.technicbricks.com/2014/08/42030-Review.html
  15. Conchas
    The last hit was at TechCrunch http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/30/the-sbrick-expands-your-lego-universe/ It probably explains some new bakers.
  16. Conchas
    As far as I was told it is or it will be possible to group outputs, so this is the feature you're asking for.
  17. Conchas
    This is like the return from the old Control Center!
  18. Conchas
    Just giving my two cents here. While you raise a valid point, I believe the option made by SBrick team also have several logic reasons behind and yes you will need an extension wire for each SBrick. - Inclusion of the extension cord built in with SBrick will definitely increase the production costs, will require more materials, additional molds and tools for the contacts in the plug. This should increase the product costs quite substantially and almost certainly should have pushed the KS first monetary goal much further, making this also more unlikely to happen. - Inclusion of the cable and respective PF plug could significantly increase the risk of IP conflicts with LEGO. Realize how the plug patterns design in SBrick was made different as possible from the original PF connector. - This way you can also choose between two different LEGO extension cable lengths available, according to your specific needs, although you could always extend the original cable if there was one. All in all the decison taken seems very clever to my eyes, and not an oversight at all.
  19. Conchas
    IMO this a fair remark, but a tricky topic. While 9V compatibility is a nice to have feature, PFS compatibility should above all. And if TLG didn't made the PF IR Receiver directly compatible with older 9V power sources, it was for a reason! Although it is a decision exclusively from the SBrick team, I'm afraid that making SBrick compatible with old 9V system ouf-of-the-box may compromise PF bus integrity. And consequently compromise the higher aim of achieving TLG certification (might be very unlikely but still a possibility). There are several methods known to overcome this limitation and I'd prefer to use one of them, than jeopardize with the SBrick design and full PFS compliance. http://www.technicbr...f-receiver.html http://www.technicbr...f-receiver.html http://www.technicbr...f-receiver.html And you efforts with BricksTer are of course very well appreciated too! Another approach for those who do not fear to play with the soldering iron themselves.
  20. Conchas
    The point is valid, although you may realize this also intends to be a "direct" replacement of LEGO IR Receiver, which is also 4x4 and has very similar form factor. So it might be easy to integrate with a wide variety of trains, like LEGO is doing with the IR receiver in their latest RC trains. Then you need to integrate also the battery bos, like LEGO does. So this is better suited for 6-wide compartments or above. It is correct it may be not that easy with some very complex steam engines, but the availability of SBrick in black color come handy here! Even if it needed to be place into a 4-wide section (you must hide the PF connectors somehow...). Battery box can always go in the tender. :)
  21. Conchas
    Yes it will! One SBrick includes 4 ports, so you can control 4 devices with each one. Either motorized track switches, semaphores or whatever. :) And of course you can control up to 16 SBricks with the smartphone app.
  22. Conchas
    WOW that tires rock! It demands for SBrick!
  23. Conchas
    Although from the pictures it looks you already have the mold for the stair case design. Is that it is not suitable for large production runs or the higher costs arise from additional tooling for the electrical contacts?
  24. Conchas
    Really awesome model!!! Great work from Bruno and Eric!
  25. Conchas
    Really awesome!! :)
×
×
  • Create New...