Duq

It seems to be based on vehicles like the Robel 54.12 or 54.17: [link] [link]

For the 6V controller I would suggest contacting the seller. Sometimes those circuit boards do need a certain minimum voltage for certain components to work. For a tenner I'd give that Subaru a go. Worst case you have a cheap toy.

You're probably looking for something like this: http://www.maplin.co.uk/motor-speed-regulation-unit-9312

Haven't built the station but it looks nice and does indeed look like 3 baseplates, nicely modular. The outer ones will be eachothers mirror image. Are you going to buy the instructions or just build it from the image you posted here? Can't be too hard....

If you connect them using the extension wire they'll be in parallel so the voltage stays the same. You do want to make sure the polarity switch is set the same on both boxes or else you're shorting them which will result in empty batteries and possibly a fairly hot extension cable.

Benn, thanks for taking the time for a detailed reply. I tried both your troubleshooting setups and both work, allthough with the custom rod facing the wrong way it feels like it would take very little to make it snag on the pin cuff that now sticks out the back of the rod. With the full-width technic beams there's no room for twisting as the rods are touching along nearly the whole length (hope that makes sense). Reading back through the thread (which I should have done before...) I noticed you explained the reason for the width in your opening post. Oops. I measured the custom rods at 3.2mm which would be the same as a plate. With the coupling rod 'floating on the pin cuff' I'm not sure the 2mm rings will fit. The second solution, with a ring as thick as the pin cuff on the back of the peg hole, would be more to my liking as it would also stop the pin cuff 'peeking out' at the front end. Daedalus, thanks for your suggestion. There's a significant difference between our engines: you use M-wheels where the crank offset is smaller than on the L wheels. As a result the end of the connecting rod does not get above the coupling rod. I understand what you mean about turning the 1/2 pin around. I had tried that already but as it allows even more play in the connection with the piston rod it didn't solve my problem. Just to make clear what I'm trying to do (and to show off ;- ) I made this picture: Custom Rods by Duq, on Flickr

Most of us worry about where to hide just a single battery box... I haven't tried it but I can't see why it wouldn't work; just hook them up with the extension wire.

I'm working on a new engine that should be using the custom rods. I've already got the rods in the correct length but now it turns out that my design doesn't work... Let me try to explain. What I'm trying to do is like Cale's Reading above but with four axles. The connection between connecting rod and piston rod sits beside the coupling rod, rather than in front like on the Reading. As a result the smooth toggle joint goes on the outside of the connecting rod. Now the problem is that there's enough play in the connections for the connecting rod to wobble a bit and catch the coupling rod, jamming the whole thing. I can't think of a way to stop the connecting rod twisting. I could go for a setup like Cale has on the Mikado but that would make the train 10 wide on the cylinders and that would keep it from running on most layouts. So I've two questions (or three actually): Ben, why are your rods narrower than the technic half beams? I think that I wouldn't have this problem if they were the same width. Could you make them thicker/wider? Does anyone have any other suggestions to resolve this problem?

You found the image on eBay so maybe you can contact the builder there? Other than that my advice would be: find some photos from different angles and just try, fail, try again. It's way more fun than just following instructions.

Damn! You beat me to it! The BR78 has been on my todo list for ages... You've done a great job on it. I've got my work cut out now...

Cute and Clever!

No instructions but it wasn't that hard to do. Here's a picture of my version of the Ghost train running with a 9V tender: 9V Ghost train by Duq, on Flickr

Interesting idea. It also makes a nice shape for the old ICE.

Not sure what you mean by binding up. Do you mean the pins in the wheels snag on the chassis or do you mean that the beams connecting the wheels go off-horizontal and lock up? If it's the latter then you probably haven't "quartered" the wheels. Basically, if on one side of the engine the pins are at 12 o'clock then on the other they should be at 3 o'clock, not 6 o'clock like the pedals on a bicycle. I hope that makes sense?

It's an original idea. I just see one problem. The engine in your video has parked the wagon but how is it ever going to pick it up again? That wagon will never pass the decoupler in the other direction. It's like a diode for train cars...

The principle will work with any type of hinge. Just a bit of trial and error to find a combination that gives you the length and angle that you want. Technic pieces can also be handy, like these:

Asking for instructions in your very first post is not a great introduction. How about you tell us a bit more about yourself, then show what you've tried sofar, then maybe we can help you improve.

Doesn't category 3 include categories 1 and 2? Rolling stock is all locomotives, coaches, freight cars and whatever else runs on rails right?

I saw the title of the topic and knew it had to be Esben. Well done! Very clever mechanisms and very well executed.

Cool! A counterpart for the electric steam engine that was mentioned a while ago:

That's an interesting way of doing the cab.

I don't know how many of you have noticed but there's a problem with the current batch of train magnets. As you know the design had to change because of health and safety. The new design has a clever housing that allows the magnet to turn around inside it. Unfortunately the supplier seems to have made a change to the magnets, making them a fraction larger. The result is that often the magnet inside does not flip. The magnets appear to couple, but once the engine starts pulling they let go again. I recently came across a video that shows the problem quite clearly. Have a look at this video from 08:00 onwards: .I've reported the problem with Lego and their response was: people need to report this to customer service. So if you experience this problem please do report it to customer service. If they send you a replacement it'll be just as faulty as what you have now but until a lot of people start reporting the issue nothing will change...

To answer the question in the title: yes. Is PF the perfect solution for every scenario? No. Yes, PF is more challenging when you're building smaller engines. In America everything is bigger and that goes for trains too. Tank engines are rare, and tenders are big enough for a battery box and two XL motors. In Europe engines are smaller but as has been pointed out it is possible to build small PF engines. Holgers BR80 is a work of art and my own KoF is about as small as it gets on PF. I must admit it doesn't run for very long but it does the job. And it takes regular rechargable 9V batteries. Where I think PF has the edge over all the other systems is that like in real life you can build horses for courses as they say. Real life shunters have a low top speed and high speed trains aren't used for shunting. So you can build a shunter using an XL motor and/or gearing for low speed and lots of grunt. You can use the standard PF train motors or a few M motors if you want speed for your intercity train at the cost of low speed accuracy.

Have a look at his Flickr stream. I'm sure the internals of this one very similar to the older version of this engine with the smaller wheels.

Great build of an interesting looking train!