zephyr1934

That is the train number not the locomotive number and back in the day it would be changed on each run. Since restoration, it is usually "X4449" indicating roughly, "train number: eXtra, pulled by locomotive 4449", following the convention of back in the day.

The easiest route would be conventional model railroading decals from a hobby shop, not as durable as lego stickers, but they look good and are available in a wide variety of liveries.

You might want to try the o-ring solution for the older RC/PF train wheels (btw, I think the problem has been solved in more recent production). However, the o-rings are thicker than the PF lego bands, so they might lift the 9v motor too high and interfere with the contact. Also, the 9v wheels might be smaller, so taking a motor with you to the hardware store might not be a bad idea. It would take some experimentation.

Fine, go throwing gauntlets at me (grin). When I talked about the idea of valve gear with Cale, I was thinking I could come up with some "standardized" set of valve gear that many people could use. I have seen just how varied different designers build their engines (e.g., the numerous new rods I recently added with unusual spacings). To keep the design "light" I was assuming I would need to develop my own hinge mechanism. With all of the degrees of freedom, there is no way I could come up with a standardized design. I have about 20 different rods in my store for this very reason. It is unlikely that there will ever be such a large selection of rods without using a similar fabrication technique. The two examples from Sergio are fantastic, but if you look at them you will see that they are vastly different. They really underscore the fact that the valve gear design cannot be decoupled from the locomotive design. So in response to the renewed interest in valve gear, I started tossing around different ideas to put an additional attachment point on the rods and let the individual builder take it from there. But nothing really struck me as being robust enough. Then I realized that the narrow rods open up a whole new dimension. Where previously large engines would have all Lego rod assemblies that would be two studs wide per side, each side can now be just one stud wide. So using that second stud space previously needed for the rods, I could put the valve gear. Borrowing ideas from Carl's design (most notably, omitting the eccentric) I've come up with the following quick model. It uses a 3 long technic pin off of the main driver and rods that are already available in my store. You should be able to see the whole gallery once moderated. I recommend loading up the first four pictures and step through them to see the mechanism at work (hint- be sure to step through them a second time since the first load time might be slow while buffering). There is also a blurry video. This design is not the end all, but it shows what can be done. If there is interest, I can put it in to LDraw (sans custom rods and I'll explain whatever is not included). If there is sufficient interest in valve gear I would probably make thinner rods for the valve gear (that would take a major redesign but is doable). At this time I'd keep the pin connectors, so the ends would be the same size. If you are interested in playing with your own valve gear ideas, I'd suggest using full technic beams to build a prototype model like this one and work out the lengths needed (e.g., imagine this little model only with full width beams in place of the rods). My rods can fit a little tighter than technic beams since the mid-rod is narrower (I don't think this particular design would work using all lego, even if you did not care about the overall width of the model). ========= PS, here's an animated gif...

Just to clarify for someone who is getting into the hobby, the 9V motors collect their power from the rails, which is why they won't run on the plastic track. Unpowered 9V trains will run on any track and there were several train cars that came from the 9V era (e.g., the TTX freight car) but since these cars do not have a motor the track power is not an issue. As Duq noted, at least some of the powered 9V locomotives can be converted to PF (the most likely scenario for someone just starting out) and I THINK all 9V locomotives can be converted to 12V if you have the 12V motors.

Yeah Cale, I might have enough rods in that photo to equip your active fleet (grin). Valve gear is still on the horizon. Certainly if there is interest from others, speak up. What would valve gear have to have to be of interest? My current thoughts are to modify a rod to have the eccentric come off, use features similar to a lego bar to get up to the valves. I already have around 20 different rod designs without the valve gear (everyone puts the wheels in a slightly different place). So with the complexity of the valve gear, I would want a one size fits most solution for the vertical and horizontal displacements. What might be best is to figure out how to do a mostly lego valve gear design so that individuals can scale it up or down as they need too, and then just figure out what features the rods would need, e.g., adding a clip point for the eccentrics. Would simply incorporating a clip point on the rod be sufficient and the rest could be lego? Benn PS, and thank you to everyone who has encouraged my efforts with the rods either on or off line.

I've finished my latest fab and have packed up orders tonight. They should hit the mail Fri. I've also just added five new rod configurations to my store. All of the additions are slightly unusual lengths or spacings, e.g., note how the middle hole in this example is 1/2 stud off-center.

Here's a question for you, with two Horizon Express sets back to back (and all the brick built walls), do you think one PF motor at the front (the apparent design) will be enough to power this 6 unit train? Or will a user need to get a second motor and a polarity switch to slip a second motor under the lead car/engine to make this train go?

Neat idea. The blue track connected with two studs and could pop apart too easily. The gray track had clips that would break. So I think Lego doesn't want to go back there. But retooling the straight rail would be great for niche places. It would also let people extend the indiana jones track a lot easier. One nice thing about the current mold is that it is exactly 16 studs long. So perhaps keep the notch (so that it can fit in with the lego track pieces) but leave off the tab that extends beyond 16 studs. Though in either case you've given up any clutch in the last stud of the rail (a situation worse than the blue track- in contrast, ME Models uses the last three studs for connection). So inexpensive track like in the mine set would require more parts. We probably have the 16 stud rail only because they have the old molds that they can reuse.

I was thinking it would be nice if the low end city train was a full train, without track. Kind of like 3225, but with no motor. Though the contents should be revised, e.g., take next revision of the city passenger train that already has no doors and make sure the set keeps the train baseplates, couplers, bogies, etc. so that AFOLs will also see benefit in the set. This set could sell at TRU, target, or ??? Like the Horizon Express, the purchaser will not appreciate the need for track and propulsion until after it is built. Then have a few on-line only supplements. The on-line version supplements could be S@H exclusive or also available from the big box retailer's web site too (depending on what the retailer wanted). The last page of the instructions could mention the availability of the supplement (e.g., as is found in Maersk and the Emerald Night for the PF components- note that these sets could be found on store shelves but the PF components are generally only available on-line and it seems to work). They could go one step further and even print that on the side of the box, "works great with ___ available on-line". Then Grandparents can get the train and parents can get the supplements or vice versa. 1) a PF power pack, e.g., an update of K5300 (note that this set is really a bundle of three existing sets). 2) a basic oval track set, an update of K4516 (again, really just a bundle of three existing sets) 3) at least one more complicated track set that includes switches, e.g., K4515, K4519, K4520, and K4531 (all just combinations of multiple track packs). I think having the supplements as one click items would greatly help the newcomer (or the gift giver who doesn't know). I don't think the supplements have to be on the shelves, they will do the job just fine on line (or perhaps a half page in the lego holiday catalog too). Still keep the larger city train(s) as all in one. But move the lowest end train to a cheaper entry point, aim the main set design at kids, but again, keep the train parts interesting enough that AFOLs will see sufficient reuse to buy the set too. I think that perception is accurate. There are many many specialized parts. I remember when inverted slopes were revolutionary. Much beyond the headlight bricks and jumper plates of the first generation of space, the sets became more model like. I look at my son's basket of lego and I can't build anything out of it (well, okay, I can to wimsical combinations of weird pieces, but...). To sell to kids and parents, Lego is producing sets that look more like the real objects. Lots of snot work in even the city sets at the cost of strength and stability. But they look good on the box and that's what makes the sale. (Whatever loss of quality Lego may have taken, the competition has similarly slipped- the Walmart effect- how do you turn a profit if the price point is so low?) I think the Creator line was meant to be a throwback to the old style of building. So I am a little weary of the fact that the Horizon Express is being labeled a Creator set. The first Creator sets didn't have any minifigs. Then they added simple ones to give a focal pont to the houses, now it looks like Creator will lose its distinction of classic brick building styles. Which is too bad, since the Creator sets really symbolized, "building/rebuilding" rather than a model. The Horizon Express has a single model you can build with it (or three single models if you count each car separately), which doesn't fit the Creator theme. I hope the non-Expert Creator stays true to its roots. The thing that really drives me crazy though, is the fact that the brick buckets have 12 colors in them. Up to a certain age, kids don't care about colors, but then it becomes important. Make a bucket only red and blue, at least then I can build a one color model, e.g., blue cat or a red house. The only folks who can really make use of the multiple colors are the resellers. I think they should still have all the colors distributed across the buckets, but limit each bucket to just two or three colors. So the small box would be yellow and blue, medium red and black, large tan and gray, etc.. Then shuffle the combinations around every year. Yeah, this paragraph is drifting off topic, but it probably has the same roots as the "if you want straight track you also have to pay for this track you don't want."

Good to hear. The half length rails have been a big help for my 9v layout and I've been looking forward to the prospect of the larger radi curves for some time. Any chance you could up date the metal rails update that aims for an end of summer availability? Benn

Looks good (though it would be nice to replace that black on the nose with green, maybe a green cheese and 1x2 tile?) Here's my C&O E8 You might find a few ideas to borrow- in particular, I used empty wheel holders for the third axle to facilitate running on lego track. I think you could easily fit the PF receiver and battery inside your loco, then just use the PF train motor for power. If you need more power, use two motors, you can do that on one locomotive (just remember that you either need a polarity switch or the wires have to leave the motors from the same end- so you'll likely need a hole above the rear coupler for the wire to come in). Looking at my C&O folder you can also see one of the problems with such a long loco, it makes the super chief repaint cars look stubby. I may some day rebuild the C&O cars to be 40 studs long. If you are aiming for a proper BN passenger train, you could do a combination of predecessor roads (there were few all cascade green BN passenger trains before Amtrak, and you'd see GN, NP, and the Q schemes on Amtrak until the late 70's). I did a studs up BN hockey stick on a super chief repaint with this objective in mind for my big sky blue GN train set, though your snotted version is a lot better. Or you could do the Metra bilevels (sigh, the last class one E's).

This thread really hits on one problem with the lego trains, unlike most themes, they are not a system. If you exclude the level crossing, station and things that are not really trains, lego does not have a $5 set, a $20 set and so forth. The cheapest train is $120. I doubt that situation will change any time soon, but I still like the idea of making the low end train set be unpowered (then offer a S@H bundle with all of the parts you'd need to power it). I know my kids much prefer pushing trains around then running them remotely. Save money on the set by excluding the PF and make more later when someone upgrades at the retail PF prices. Do double duty by putting enough generic train bits in here (couplers, wheels, bogie plates, and bases for three cars) that it could also serve as a train parts pack too (i.e., don't cut costs by cutting out wheels or couplers, then such a set could also replace the train base set ca 2000 for AFOLs). Even better if the track were separate too (buy a S@H bundle of track packs comprised of N straight packs and M curve packs, etc to make a loop). Though I suspect the PF and track are "value added" upgrades that don't actually cost Lego that much when included in a set. You could address the different regional issues of trains by making it a 3 in 1 Creator set.

Hey hey hey, BBB's track looks fantastic, but talk about the details this other thread. (having been guilty of wandering off topic myself in other threads, I just have to grin). BBB's track should be fantastic for the heavy duty users. But 90% of the people who buy a train set have no idea about the on-line community and will be looking for an all Lego solution at the start. Still others will want an all Lego solution even if there are superior options at similar prices. So my point is that Lego needs to offer simple options that allow users to build or extend loops of track. While I would love new track designs, I'm trying to stick within the confines of what Lego is presently offering. I have not even said anything about price. Clearly Lego was originally willing to sell the plastic track at half the price of the 9v track ($16 for 16 segments). Maybe they've pushed the price up to $20 for 16 segments these days, fine, as long as it is all one type of track. It needs to be available from Lego or there will be few new train AFOLs.

If you've never done so, thumb through 7777, the train idea book from 1981. Gold indeed.

Lego can make money selling train sets, Lego can make more money selling fire truck sets. So we see more of the latter and fewer of the former. To compensate, the train sets are mostly limited to high end items and Lego probably charges a premium on some of the parts (e.g., track). Lego does appear to listen. Several years ago, on the Ambassador forums I had posted a long wish list of parts from the Lego train fans. Basically these were parts the train community wanted to see produced (they could appear in non-train sets, as long as they were available). Although I never got any feedback from Lego, many of these parts did eventually appear (off the top of my head the re-release of back 6x28 baseplates, the train windshield in other colors, the dark gray sliding doors). We've also seen parts deliberately aimed at the train fan come out in non-train sets (e.g., the black cowcatcher used as a radar dish). Whether Lego listened to the feedback from the ambassador forum or these were obvious choices, Lego is still sustaining the AFOL train fan within the constraints of their business model. My guess is that Lego is ultimately aiming to use Cuusoo to serve niche markets like AFOL trains better (smaller run sets that still make whatever the target profit margin is). In the mean time, Lego should offer a strictly straight track pack, and a strictly curved track pack at S@H. The easier it is for a customer to get the track they want, the more trains Lego will sell. These packs would sell on their own, but then for the person just starting out or the person giving a gift Lego should offer a couple of simple layouts on-line that are constructed with N of the straight packs, M of the curve packs, and P of the switch packs. These bundles would simply be a few more options in the trains category at S@H without being any additional space on the warehouse shelves.

Now that more details than a photo are out, apparently yes! Getting back to the topic, however, Ben's tracks are probably for the serious AFOL. Lego still needs to make tracks easier to get for the casual AFOL.

They look fantastic and well thought out (no surprise there). It would be nice to also have transition pieces that would allow you to mix the new rails in with Lego track (especially 9v, since you could just jump a one stud gap for PF). I suspect the design is superior for AFOL needs, but I would want to try it on the curves first before I went and replaced all of my straight segments. This approach would allow a user to make the transition over time and then after transitioning, to be able to interface with the lego track (e.g., not everyone in a club has to use one track system or the other). Yeah, the incorporated ties are great, but now it is difficult to ballast (I actually like this design better, but others might not). I like your idea Mark, though going one step further, fetch the grinder and convert all of your heavily used Lego parts to ballast (reduce, reuse, recycle). Some folks have already used loose 1x1 plates for ballast, so that would also be an option. I suspect narrow gauge would require new ties to be easier than gluing rail to tiles. But if the standard gauge sells well enough, perhaps narrow gauge would be in the future. January should be an interesting month. Benn

Another neat thing about Lego compared to conventional model railroading is that if you change your mind, it is fairly easy to tear apart and rebuild. If you are new to building Lego trains, it will take you a few models before you find your grove, e.g., it wasn't until my 3rd or 4th steam engine design that I had something I liked and that ran reasonably well. So don't worry too much about getting it perfect out of the gate (you probably will not, but it also will not be that hard to go back and rebuild later to fix whatever troubles you). My first passenger cars were largely repaints of the Santa Fe passenger cars. They are proportioned well for the Lego curves but they are stubby for standard gauge passenger cars (the LGB effect). Using 6 wide = 10ft, I came up with 52 stud long passenger cars (see the Sperliner article in Railbricks 10). They are well proportioned, but are very heavy and have a lot of drag on the tight Lego curves. I'm settling towards 40 stud long passenger cars as the trade off. I actually picked this length before building the Superliners when I rebuilt my CNW bi-levels from 34 studs to 40 studs long. If you are modeling narrow gauge, then the Lego proportions probably are less of a hassle. For steam, I think getting the running gear working well can be the trickiest thing. You definitely want to build working prototypes of the mechanicals to make sure everything works and so that you can revise your design early (you don't have to use the colors/bricks you need for the final model, just something that will get the wheels, rods, and flex points where you plan them to be). Then the next trickiest is figuring out how to make a round boiler with square bricks. While most of my cars are 6 wide, I've found that 8 wide is a LOT easier for steam engines (with 6 wide boilers and running gear that extends beyond 8 wide). I then step to a 7 wide tender before hitting the 6 wide cars. I'd guess that your wheel selection and boiler options will determine what size to build everything else in, but there will be compromises and clever tricks. If you are jumping head first in to Lego trains, I would recommend that you get familiar with LDraw, especially if you do not have a huge stash of parts. There are a couple of good books on the PC software (although several years old, much of what they say still holds) as well as some good on-line tutorials. It is a lot easier cleaning up virtual bricks than real bricks. One word of caution though, if you are building virtual models that you some day plan to turn in to real models, keep an eye on the bricklink prices. Parts that you would think should exist don't or might be very expensive when they do exist. And your first few LDraw models will likely have a few parts that float in thin air or otherwise violate the laws of physics. So all the more important to remember- still build the mechanicals in real bricks before you get too far.

So on the cuusoo front, in no particular order, there are advance train track system, which has some neat possibilities, probably would never be realized in full, but perhaps the best nuggets could be adopted. Superelevated curves (with a few variants). Return to the old 8 straight + 8 bonus curve track pack (better then the current offering, but not as good as just straight separate from just curve) Larger radi curves, which are something that many AFOLs seem to be asking for. The last one, we see two different third party manufacturers on the verge of offering these options: ME-Models still delayed R2 (and subsequent R3 and R4 that were proposed long ago), and more recently Big Ben's forthcoming curves. Nothing seems to get Lego's attention more than a third party producing a successful product (Big Ben's wheels, Brick Forge Cows and other assorted animals, etc). If the AFOLs prove there is demand, Lego might just enter the market. As 9V was being discontinued, I was arguing with Steve Barile that Lego just needs to produce a "sleeper" (aka railroad tie) that is compatible with some standard model railroading rail. I now think that there probably is not enough demand for lego to do that, but it could be a niche for someone to serve the AFOL market.

In the Horizon Express thread I started discussing the need to support the other areas of AFOL train needs, chief of which is making track more readily accessable. Lego turns like a battleship. I think Lego corporate is listening to many channels of feedback, including keeping an eye on forums like this, watching the survey responses, seeing what comes in through cuusoo, talking to fans at cons, etc.. Case in point, Lego cut costs by just tossing the instructions and stickers loose in the box. After enough AFOLs complained, they started shrink wrapping the instructions. It took about 10 years, but Lego responded to the feedback. I've seen many other smaller examples where it looks like Lego is responding to the feedback. Lego is still supporting AFOL trains, so they have chosen to invest in this segment. We need to give proper feedback as to how they can best serve this segment. They may or may not respond, as consumers we certainly do not see all of the trade-offs. But we can keep asking for track packs and maybe some day they will deliver.

More of a PF tour de force, but who's quibbling (grin).

Railbricks is the best starting place I can imagine (grin). There are also some nice instructions on LGauge (most are North American designs) and I THINK James Mathis had instructions for some of his models on brickshelf. Click the passenger folder, then poke through the designs.

Very cool, can't wait to see more details. Hopefully they will be compatible with the existing lego track.

I would agree with you with regards to serving the existing AFOL train builders. However, if Lego only serves the existing population without providing an attractive avenue for new builders to enter the hobby, our numbers will dwindle, sales will fall off, and Lego will stop making trains for AFOLs. I spent the 1990's looking at the train sets aimed at kids and sighed, "why didn't they have those in the U.S. when I was a kid?" As an adult I never once thought of buying one of those sets for myself. If you are reading this forum you are an AFOL and you probably have 10+ lego train sets or at least know that you can go to bricklink to buy just the parts you want. If you are new to the hobby, you might not have anything. Put yourself in the shoes of a newcomer who might be a railfan and have a passing interest in Lego. You see the Horizon Express and it gets your attention, but as someone new to the hobby it is not clear how you would buy a loop of track. The only obvious path to curved track at S@H is buying one of the City train sets. Even if the $3/segment price was not an issue, most newcomers would never dig deep enough to discover that that you can buy curved track from PAB. Lego needs to provide an easy and straightforward avenue for the newcomers to the hobby to get a satisfying loop of track or a segment of straight track to display the set on. It needs to be simple and obvious (e.g., a track bundle) or Lego will turn away a lot of potential AFOL train builders who are not currently in the hobby. So yes, it is fantastic to see a new AFOL train set, but this release is also an opportunity to fix a problem with track availability that has lingered since the end of the 9V era (remember you could order one of several different track combinations back then, or simply a box of 8 straight segments). The fix for the newcomers will also serve the existing AFOL builders and kids with a City train set better. The high priced track bundles that include parts that you don't want are a disincentive to entering the hobby. Like the S@H PF component exclusives, lego should have a plastic wrapped pack of straight track available, and separately, a plastic wrapped pack of curved track available.