zephyr1934

Interesting to see the HP train... aesthetics are better than the last one but not significantly. Good to see track included, who can't use a few more sections of straight track? One interesting feature I see is that the top of the driving wheel flanges are hidden behind the runningboards. That's a nice touch, wonder what part that is they used for the effect. (day job has died down just a little and now I have time to catch up just a little)

Okay, so you take a clone brand build of a great MOC and then you turn it up to 11, amazing. But then you go further and change the laws of physics? So that entire massive train is being pulled by four tiny circuit cubes motors? That's insane! Do you know what voltage and current it takes? I assume you would need something with more power than the circuit cube controller to do this (you clearly show that you use your own batteries and controllers, I'm presuming that is a necessity rather than an option)

Nice. And if you redo the cab you might want to see what it looks like with the 1x3x3 windows

At least part of your problem was probably the mechanical design of the 10219 unpowered trucks. The wide spacing between the axles, the use of technic axles, and the rubber bands on the wheels all create A LOT of resistance (respectively: binding in curves, high friction no matter what, and wheels on opposite sides fighting to turn at different rpm while both having good traction). Simply replacing that truck with a second motor (forgetting about the added power and only thinking of the removed drag) probably saved you a ton of resistance.

Stellar work on each generation of the locomotive, top notch work

As I think I've said a couple of times in this thread, simply amazing work!

At this point, Lego probably hasn't decided if it will be a broad gauge display piece or an L gauge operable set. Some of the ideas sets come out the other side looking very much like the submission others come out completely different. If you know a lego ambassador, try to get your suggestions in (there's a very small chance the comments might reach the right person). Given the fact that they now have extremely large train wheels, I would suspect something similar to the jumbo HP set. However, it would be great if they anticipated the segment of AFOL's who know how to use R88 and above and made the build so that it was not too hard to regauge it to L-gauge. Yeah, that is too much to ask of a modern set, but I can dream In the age of the LTC (2000-2010) lego recognized that AFOL trains were a loss leader- (i) AFOL's will buy a ton of lego to landscape behind/under/around the train and (ii) the moving trains are part of the glue that makes a large public display pop. I think some of that thinking remains, but it has been augmented by, (iii) if the train parts are available the train builders will make great MOCs so we don't need to worry about it any more. As a result, we don't get nice AFOL sets but they keep making train parts.

Wow, that's a surprise. Hope #1: Lgauge compatible (R40???) OR they introduce a wide radius curve (yeah, never gonna happen) Hope #2: the make it a single car per set but provide enough of the rare colors (e.g., windows) so that it could easily be modified into different cars (sleeper, coach, etc)

That's why you need to be careful when cleaning old bricks, always wash in cold and use color safe bleach.

Party like it's 1985!!! That layout is amazing, impressive work

Looks amazing, the curves are impressive

Nice work and I love all the 70's era printed bricks

Oh, even better... but I THINK they said that BOTH models had to be built or significantly rebuilt in the time window. Was I wrong about that or did they change their position? Otherwise, if I was right and it still stands, I bet with just a small amount of effort you could update your old "new" model with plenty of time.

That looks really good

That looks fantastic, you've packed a lot of detail in a small space

Yep, you totally copied that... and did an amazing job realizing it in lego. Great work. You know, with just a small amount of extra work you could make a much younger twin and have an entrant in the OcTRAINber contest.

Thank you both for sharing your experiences. I bought 10 ball bearings so far. Not completely sure what I want to do with the the technic axle versions, but they strike me as perfect for non-lego gauge builds (O and G), and of course steam engines. So far I have only modified one of my Maersk mods. Now it actually rolls after you push it (the original that still has the technic axles stops dead as soon as you stop pushing). Definitely not as good as the ball bearing wheel sets with the metal axle using the MR52 bearings. Might not even be as good as the discontinued lego wheel set with the metal axle, but it is probably in the same neighborhood. That is still helpful though for the times when you need a different wheel. The performance difference could be bad bearings, but more likely slop in my build. For example, the inner radius on the MR85 is 5 mm but the technic axles are roughly 4.8 mm so already they have flexibility within the bearings. My mounts are also a little loose. Damn that entropy!

That's really great work. With 5 posts you are at least new in these parts, have you been a train builder for a while or are you just a natural?

I'm starting to explore using MR85 for technic axles and I am wondering about the size consistency across manufacturers for these tiny ball bearings. So far I have only bought one set. The ones I got seem to be about 0.1 mm smaller than the specified 8mm x 2.5mm. Which I can totally live with. But I am wondering if that is typical of all manufacturers. I can easily work with "consistently 0.1 mm too small," but it would be an ugly surprise if MR85 from another supplier (or a different lot from the same supplier) might wind up being larger than specified, e.g., 8.1mm in outer diameter. I'm curious what others here have found about ball bearing size consistency, I know many folks are using MR52 for metal train axles and I am particularly interested in your experience.

Exactly. There are two delays. When the train gets to the end it looks weird if it immediately goes the other way, so I have it pause for 2 sec before moving again. Then, when the train starts moving it will either be over the original "stop signal" or possibly just past it. If the sensor turns on too soon it could see the original "stop signal" and never leave. You could use two different colors, e.g., red and green for the opposite ends of your layout to do away with the timer but then (1) your code doubles in length since you have to have "do something" -> "wait for red" -> "do something" -> "wait for green" and (2) you always have to start heading the same direction since it will always search for red then for green. My version could start either direction and work the same. Oh, BTW, experiment with the colors, the sensor responds to different colors better than others, depending on the speed of your train and the processor you might need a longer strip of color to ensure the sensor always detects it, and obviously you want to avoid the background colors that the sensor will see between the ties.

This is a great and quirky prototype, also well executed. The strangest bit is that the bridge apparently is a hot spot for wedding photos. "Honey, remember how we got married on a bridge at the golf club? Turns out it was a train car."

This puts all of the Lego ghost train sets to shame, very creative and what I like is that you did not dumb down any of the train features.

That is a crazy prototype (firebox in the front and a coal burner) and several impossible build techniques. Even from here I can see you bending the laws of physics. Great work!

Here's what I did with PUP sensors on a trolley to do why's on either end of a straight track, very simple coding, you would need 1/2 of that to ping pong https://brickshelf.com/gallery/zephyr1934/PCC/mvi_1164.mp4 The full gallery is here (but is probably now down for moderation because I just uploaded the code)

Amazing work, the 1980's never looked so good!