Aaron

Just upped my pledge by quite a bit, and I plan to do more next paycheck. Let's hope this last week pushes it to the finish line!

I've been listening to the Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles OST nonstop lately.

I haven't even attempted counting how many bricks I have, although I estimated it to be around 80000, plus or minus about 2000 pieces. Soon I'm going to purge about 80% of what I own in order to pay off some debt. I'll have considerably less afterward, but it'll be more streamlined and specific to what I'm building.

I was mostly referring to the people who have an obsession with having every Star Wars set along with its original box and instructions. They're very difficult to deal with when selling used sets on ebay and craigslist, and don't seem to be able to comprehend that not everybody builds just the sets.

I don't keep boxes or instructions, since the only times I ever buy sets are for parts fodder. Those things are useless to me, and I never understood why people want them when they're buying used sets, though I do understand that most of those people are collectors. The parts are all that matter to be, and in the unlikely event I'd ever want to build the sets, I could just find the instructions online. This may sound harsh, but it's always been my opinion that LEGO set collecting is for people who lack the creativity to build their own things.

I've reached an impasse where even using the old style hinges (or any other existing method) to invert parts won't work in my situation. I'm in desperate need of 1 x 2 plates with studs on the top in bottom, in light bluish gray. I'm surprised that I can't find anything like this, even produced by third party companies. I'm almost certain that the only way for me to do it at this point would be for me to 3D print the parts, or make Frankenlego elements using acetone.

I just pledged $49 for a set of the metal rails, and I plan on doing several more of the same. Also, I'm going to do a $62 set next for the R104 loop. Is it possible to produce these plastic rails in an ABS colour that closely matches the steel rails, such as flat silver or pearl gray?

I'm going to do the $49 option as soon as Amazon decides not to have my payment account randomly disabled. Are there going to be metal R104 curves eventually?

Since I'm in need of a new printer anyway, what would be a decent personal printer for making LEGO decals?

I love this topic.

That's probably what I'll end up doing. Thanks for the suggestion.

What I really need are a bunch of decals that measure 1 brick high and 24 studs long that say "Santa Fe" and pairs of smaller two plate high nameplates with the names 3430, Isleta, Laguna, Acoma, Cochiti, Oraibi, Taos, and Navajo. Then, of course, two of the sleepers have smaller "Santa Fe" nameplates on either side. The diesel A and B units need some rather complex decals--the dimensions of which I haven't worked out yet--but I'll worry about that later. This is probably the best reference I have:

Those themes are hardly inappropriate for children. In today's world, it's not uncommon to find children who play games like Grand Theft Auto and Call of Duty, do drugs in elementary school, and become parents before they've even become adults. LOTR, The Simpsons, and Back to the Future are very very mild compared to, well, most things. If anything, they're imaginative, humorous, and witty enough to actually be a good influence on children. As an atheist, I find many of the arguments about "Satanic material" or "offensive content" to be outright insane and nonsensical.

104 stud radius curves should definitely be the top priority, with the other values descending in order or priority, and 56 studs as the least attractive candidate. I'd prever 9v purely for the aesthetics of the metal.

Thank you for this information. Most of my rolling stock is 80+ studs long, so this is definitely something I need to experiment with. I've always wanted wide radius track, and it's incredibly silly that the people who initially produced it gave up because of the lack of 9V functionality. To me, power functions trains are superior in every way due to the flexibility, and the fact that they function more like real trains. I seriously wish I would have bought some ME Rails while they were still in production, but I think this could be a viable alternative. I'm tempted to just ditch all of my normal LEGO track and do it entirely using this method, so that I don't even have to worry about conversion pieces. I'm going to experiment with single tiles, and try to find a way to make them work.

While I'm not impressed at all by this set, I think some people will find it fun for its playability. I just hope this doesn't become a trend for UCS sets from now on.

I'm going to add ballast to some enlighten rails to see if it looks nice. I ordered a bunch of black 1 x 1 and 1 x 4 tiles, as well as reddish brown 1 x 2 and 2 x 4 plates. The brown rails resemble many of the slightly rusted ones I see everywhere where I live. The only thing I hate is that it's a shade of brown that doesn't match any official LEGO colour. I'll scrap the idea if reddish brown looks too silly. I have a hunch it just might look decent, though.

My wish has been (partially) granted. I sincerely hope they release some of these in trans clear, because they seem absolutely perfect for the long train windows that would normally have two panels placed side-by-side or a 1 x 2 x 3 snot'd, and while the panels with side supports give nice definition to the windows, they only look accurate side-by-side about 20% of the time. I've always wanted 4-long panels with side supports, and they have now become a reality. Now I'm crossing my fingers for more train sets this year. Maybe they'll incorporate some of these.

You could always buy the straight/flexible pack and sell the flexible rails on ebay...

Time to sell one of my kidneys so I can buy a 3-D printer!

Power function switching rails without the unnecessary curved bit would be a godsend.

It depends on the arrangement of the underbody detail. It can be moved or rearranged if necessary, but in most cases the levers pass completely underneath the train cars. The cars also have attachment points for underbody skirting, but it's avoided if the train has to do switching. Otherwise, the cars themseleves have no problems. On my layout, I simply remove the switching track handles, and I don't have to change anything. The switching track can still be used with ease this way. That's the same way I see it. I just choose to do 10 wide coaches because I've always wanted my own (real) passenger cars and it's the closest thing I can get. They started out as 8-wides, 56 studs long, but after toiling for hundreds of hours, I managed to develop the techniques to make 10-wides, 80+ studs long work.

I don't think anyone said that it was 5 studs. It's 1:38 scale, in which standard gauge would be the equivalent of 4.7083 studs. If you look at the gauge measurement diagram I posted, it shows the correct way to measure gauge. LEGO track is pretty much spot-on. My 80 stud long cars can handle curves and switches without any issues. What size a group decides to build in is completely up to that group, though to ultimately say that one scale is better or worse than another based on what a group decides is flawed logic.

Flanges hardly make for any visual difference, considering the amount of wheel exposure is altered very, very slightly, keeping in mind that most of the wheel is still above the head of the track. To most observers, a 3 stud diameter wheel will be a 3 stud diameter wheel regardless of how high it sits on the track. If I carefully look at one of my coaches, and then carefully look at a real one, the wheel massing is virtually indistinguishable from one another. As far as minifigures are concerned, I have not found a reason to use them as a point of reference, since their height is arbitrary. Anything narrower than 1:38 is justified by practical and cost-related reasoning, completely unrelated to scaling. 6 wide is the preferred size for TLG's models because of its ease of function, and because larger, costlier models would likely be unprofitable. As far as MOCs go, there is no reason they should be limited to any size, so long as the trains function with the track as intended. I only wish it were in my power to dispel the myth that 10-wide is untouchable and unfeasible, but unfortunately I feel that 8-wide maximum has forevermore become the status quo, due to misjudged reasoning. Any way you look at it, L-gauge is intended to be 1:38 scale, and I am satisfied with what I have created so far reflecting that concept, even if it's something that's not commonly accepted.

Widths beyond 8 studs are not only very possible, but the correct scale for some train cars. An 8 wide LEGO train would be the equivalent of 2438.4 millimeters (or 8 feet), since the standard LEGO scale is 1 stud = 304.8 millimeters, or 1 foot. The gauge of LEGO track is just a hair under 5 studs, which is virtually equal to standard gauge. On top of that, the 3 stud wide LEGO train wheels are perfectly scaled to the wheels of most train cars, and I have reason to believe that all of this was intentional. 8-9 wide is perfectly scaled for most European trains, whereas 10 wide is perfectly scaled for most American trains. Anything less than 1 stud = 304.8 millimeters (1 foot) is a compromise, and not truly scaled.