fred67

I have the US version of the speed regulator. My regulator is labeled 9-12V (meaning, I assume, you can use anything in that range, although 12V will give you more power with the dial set to full). The wall adapter is labeled 12VAC and 7VA. I'm not an electrical engineer (not even a proper hobbyist), but I think that means you're looking at around 580mA, so the adapter you've chosen theoretically doesn't work well (only has 300mA). If the adapter exceeds the amps you need, you're OK. I think this one (also on Amazon) might be a more appropriate substitute, and it's the same price. EDIT: For the record, the tip itself is correct (not sure about the polarity, but I've used similar adapters for musical instruments with my LEGO stuff and it's fine). You're looking for a 5.5x2.1 (outside/inside diameter), it's pretty standard.

"Yay! More Nexo!" said no one.

Actually, I have thought about that quite a bit, but the geometries have been difficult, IMO testing, just to even have guide wheels instead of posts. HOWEVER, on that last day of testing (Sunday, so I had all day to play around - almost), if finally realized that Masao was using 1x2 technic bricks with two holes (or 1x1) to offset distance between gears mounted on "standard" technic bricks. That's the only reason the newer one (pictured) works at all. I'm convinced that the higher center of gravity might give it lean, but not wobbles - that it's the drive wheels going straight in the curve. There is, actually, a bit of the fact that - especially on the smaller tires, there is some inconsistency in the tires themselves, but I don't think that's the bulk of the problem. I may just order new ones (I even had ones that were dried out). I think I may have a work around, but I packed up all my bits and pieces for a while - I can still come here and post, but I won't have much "play" time for a while. I may roll this suggestion back into my thinking, I'd already given up on it. EDIT: and yes, LegoMonorailFan, I agree (wheels need to be closer using that configuration), but there's also the guides themselves - if they are too far apart, they won't fit on the track well (they will be tight, if they fit at all), because they aren't swiveling, either (which is why I made mine swivel, and it helped a little bit, anyway). It's obviously why your swiveling tire-gear-guide solution works so well. The reason the wheels need to be closer, given that configuration, is exactly because it's in a turn, and the farther apart they are, the harder it will be for them to turn in unison. Your original idea works great because of the single drive axle being turned along the curve by the two cars. I ultimately just want to have an engine and be able to add and remove cars - like a normal train. However, I would be thrilled to have one like yours running in my city in the meantime. EDIT2: BTW, one of the ideas that I think you may be interested in is to, more of less, use an engine configuration like you did for the train in the first post of this thread... and then link it to another similar to what you did with the cars. So you would have a fixed swivel between the two motors, but then you wouldn't need the fixed swivel between them and the cars - which means you should then be able to incline.

I don't know. I've read the LDPE was good, and it turns out that's what I'd been buying (I did intentionally get thicker than "sandwich bag" plastic).

I'd like to understand this a little bit better. Does the IR receiver require more than the two outer power lines to function? That is getting power to the receiver, obviously the control lines are used on the connections to motors. Because my 9v battery adapter doesn't seem to have a problem being used this way.

I like these a lot. It's a shame the way TLG sells these, and it makes creating a big city way more expensive and, as usual, you typically need more straights than anything else. Not sure I would take this path, but I think it looks great, and I wouldn't be adverse to it at all. Definitely something to keep in mind.

That's cool; I'd thought about "dummy" batteries hooked up to an adapter for this game my son had (I can't remember the name). The thing burned through 6AAs in less than an hour, and it wasn't even mechanical. Must have been the absolute least efficient way to use the current. I think it's great to alleviate the need for batteries, in any event, but also want to go small - although I suspect I could have something like this mounted under the table for the layout, which is how I was planning on running wires anyway.

Well.... I could wait for a new castle line if they were to do a feudal Japan line, but that's a tiny fraction of the "Asian Market." I think we all need to just keep in mind that it doesn't matter if medieval themes are "evergreen" in the non-LEGO world; with all the fantasy worlds, books, shows, and modern historical dramas, there is always interest in "castle." The problem for us is that it doesn't have to be popular for TLG to make a castle set, it has to be MORE popular than whatever else they come up with. More or less, they can only make some fixed number of sets every year. There's production capacity, limited store shelf space, and tons of other reasons they can't just make everything for everybody. Understanding that, then you understand they would rather make another "Nexo Knights," even if it only sells even 5 or 10% more than a traditional "castle" theme. Some argue TLG is abandoning it's roots with all the licensed themes, but as long as you can buy a box of bricks there will always just be just plain old building with LEGO. That doesn't mean they aren't alienating some customers - I feel like they may be losing hardcore fans for fleeting ones, which will bite them in the long run but, again, what do I know?

And speed regulators cost twice as much as a 9V DC wall adapter. Also, things continue to get cheaper when you use non-LEGO cords for extension, to reach the far areas of my city, for example.

So I'm on the right track, then? I have those amazon items in my cart, I just want to make sure I'm on the right track.

So I know that, in this forum, most of you are concerned with mobile models that require a battery to use, but I also figured this would be the best forum to ask these questions as the people here seem more likely to know about stuff like this. In order to not have to build around a battery box, I've been using 9v batteries and one of these: And it occurred to me that, for my table top PF builds (in this case a track switcher for trains, or an elevator in a building), I could have an AC power adapter wired to a PF connector. So I'd buy a PF extension, cut it in half, and connect it to these: https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B01GPQZ4EE/ (female adapter cables) and https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B012VQ5A7S/ (9v DC Adapter, 1000mA with 5 male plugs) I could instead get a 500mA adapter, but I figure AAA are 1000mA, and have been using the AAA battery box).

I can't tell you because I've never run something long enough to see. I will be honest, when I have my winter display up, in my living room, I walk by and play with the trains for 10 minutes, then walk away (they're 9V anyway). If I had a complete LEGO city (which it looks like I may actually be able to make a "permanent" layout sometime this year, finally), I would still play with it for a while and then walk away. My kids are grown. When we have guests with young kids, then I may get a chance to see how long they last. In any event, here's what I have at the moment (still wobbly, but no more so than Masao Hidaka's): I ultimately had something similar to Masao's, but some changes from his - I could simply not make a horizontal motor work the way I wanted to (last test fell off the rail, and to keep it balanced the engine needed to be too long), so I went vertical. He used only three wheels across so that his gear - offset by a half bushing, wouldn't rub against the tire. I kept all four tires and, instead, added another gear in-between. By eliminating his whole central section, I was able to make my engine three studs shorter. That makes the guides fit better through the curves. There's still a couple of things I'd like to do - I think I can go a little (perhaps two plates) shorter by using 3/4 pins to hold the motor. EDIT: still frustrated at how wobbly, I tried the bigger wheels and even added an extended double-swiveling guide system. Still wobbles. I'm pretty sure this is due to the wheels wanting to go straight, but my whole test layout is on a curve - the wheels don't swivel. I don't think I can make the drive wheels swivel without making a monstrously large engine (given the scale). Sorry - I don't know why EB puts that huge gap after the link to flickr for a movie file. I will now be packing up what I have so far - I'm actually not thrilled, but happy enough with the latest engine, but I'm not going to have a lot of time to play with it for a while. Keep up the the great work, guys.... I'm glad you made me interested again. And one last edit - I've been running all my tests with same, charged once, 9V battery. I think they can last quite some time. I bought a four pack, and the charger can charge like 8 of them at a time.

Next time I have something that actually runs (I've gone through about a half dozen tries with various gearing and "stabilizers," which I think I've got right now) I will take a video of it. My curves are not sharp - I think we discussed it before, I use about twice as many 2x2 segments as you in my curves. I'm also using full bricks (2x2 and 1x2) and not plates, although I'm looking into it to make the "rail" not so big. I don't mind it the way it is, but I wouldn't want it bigger and might want another layer for stability. I also use this: So that I don't have to carry around a full battery box. I bought a handful of rechargeable batteries and charging station that will charge them all at once. https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B01DZ8JSYC https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B00RL7E2MC

Hmmm.... that "solorail" one seems very interesting to me. The technic one is really interesting, too. I haven't commented here in a while, but I've put a lot of effort (and bricklink orders) into trying to make something I'd be happy with. My biggest complain about my own monorail is how roughly it seems to run, and I actually see a similar problem with pretty much all the ones running on the "stressed" 2-wide rails that we've created out of 2x2 and 1x2 bricks/plates. The technic one is actually very intriguing; I'm more concerned right now about getting something to run smoothly than look nice. The problem with the technic one (not to take anything away from how great it is), is that it neither runs particularly smoothly, nor does it really look that great (it wouldn't fit with a minifigure city, IMO). The solorail one looks like it runs really smoothly, and it also looks pretty good (although I think both the track and train could be improved, maybe eliminate the gliding parts and use wheels). Until I saw LegoMonorailFan use 1/2 bushings as rims, I wouldn't have known you could do something like that - it could possibly be used in the solo rail style. I am considering going back to the full tire, though. I don't seem be getting anywhere with the smaller size and low profile I've been trying to get. And it's amazing to me how so many things just don't work by a fraction of a mm - if the gear was a tiny bit bigger, or the axle a tiny bit shorter....

Yes - a decent representation of the Hogwarts Express could satisfy both train fans and HP fans. I've said it before, I'll say it again - I did the "Ruby Red" mod of the Emerald Night, and it's a better Hogwarts Express than any set they've ever released. A few mods and it could be perfect. If I recall, EN sold for $US100. Adjust to maybe $120 for inflation - that's really NOT out of line, and it could even include a car. Add a separate set for extra cars, and they could have a real winner. I think it would work; I realize they were not happy with the Sante Fe car sets (those were three in one), but I don't think LEGO trains were given adequate marketing at the time - I didn't even know about them, as I was just getting back into the hobby at the time. If I'd have known about them, I would probably have a dozen in my collection. I ended up getting a used Super Chief and bricklinking the cars. There's always a bunch of us that complain we missed out on stuff and now it's too expensive, there's always huge after market demand, so I don't get how they don't sell well enough to make it worthwhile for TLG.

Lestranger Absurde.... you are a LEGO savante. I am going to admit, having gone through your Flickr stream, I often look in bewilderment at what's possible with the right parts and the creativity to put them together the way you do, and I often ask "how the f#@ did he do that, it's not possible!" and when I look close I think "mother f#@34, he's a genius." Sorry for the language - it's normally reserved for intense reactions, and I'm not exaggerating, here. I can build things; you're an artist.

I want to add on to this. Way back when, in the stone age (2010-2011), there was a LOT of discussion on EB about the likelihood of a LOTR theme - even long after the 3 movies were released. None of us, nobody, thought they would actually do it - we mainly discussed if such a thing were tenable for TLG, and we greatly wanted them to do it. In discussing the violence, I came clearly down on the side that it would work based on the sets they had already released for Indiana Jones (think of the Flying Wing scene in Raiders.... what happened to the big German soldier, and TLG actually made a set of that scene) and Star Wars (think of Darth Vader's transformation, for example, and again TLG made a set of it). In any event, at the time, we had Fantasy Era castle. I think this is very important, if you bear with me. Again, AT THE TIME, TLG did not have a LOTR license - but they were doing Fantasy. IOW, IMO, they were doing a generic fantasy theme that we could use as LOTR if we wanted, but were not pigeon holed into LOTR... it could be anything we wanted, LOTR or otherwise. I cheered when they announced LOTR (I think I still have the Frodo with the Ring poster). I was supremely disappointed in the sets, on the whole, but you did get figures anyway. In any event, the point is that, before those licensed sets, they played on the popularity of the theme in pop culture, without actually having to give us something specific (and problematic for LEGO, like GOT would be). And I think, after reading all of these replies, that this is what people really want - a generic theme that we can apply to whatever we want, be it our interpretation of an existing fantasy world, or our own imaginations. I know a lot of classic castle fans did not like the fact that the opposing forces were humans and goblins (orcs, really - we all thought that), but they also had dwarfs and, IMO, if they didn't get the license they would have released elves. But the classic fans didn't get opposing human factions, and that was a problem, I guess. So I really think they could make everybody happy by revisiting Fantasy, but having two human factions in addition to the fantasy factions. That could be as evergreen as city.

OK, I knew what you had was different, I was just showing an example. I'm just saying it happens, and that TLG will just consider it the same part.

And here's what I discovered late last night while actually trying to work - instead of having containers of colors, I should have containers of specific parts, possibly sorted by color if there are enough of one color to warrant it's own bin. I then have (as I have now) plastic shoe-box storage for overflow of a given part. I was working on something and needed 2x6 plates. I didn't care which color (to an extent), but didn't know which color I had the most of, so I had to go bin by bin - and in my case, using the Stanley organizers, I often have several organizers for each color that I have a lot of, and whether the part was in the large or small case depended on if I had a lot of them (large case) or few (small case). Back to the drawing board, I guess. It will be a long time before I have time to re-sort. Bottom line: If you really want efficiency, then it comes down to how you build. I think most MOCs end up being mostly one color, which would make my current system more efficient.

The only possible problem you would really have with an "illegal" technique is that, if you had an Ideas project reach 10k, they might have to "fix" the connection to make it valid. The only other problem, as LegoMonorailFan mentioned, is that if a part is under stress then it might eventually break or fracture.

I've had sets with different style arches - exactly what you are describing with the 1x6x1: It doesn't seem odd, in my case, because it was during crossover times. According to bricklink, the top version is used in sets up until 2011; the newer version started being used in 2009. So, in my case, it made sense - it's when they were transitioning from the top (older) one to the bottom (newer) style. Now they are perhaps transitioning the 1x6x2 in a similar fashion?

Very cool.... off to add minifig head with brain to my wanted list.

With some ongoing back-and-forth on Reddit trades, I finally took pictures of a bunch of sets I'm interested in selling or trading. The Flickr Stream is here. Please peruse and make reasonable offers. Here are some highlights:

Ahhh.... I did a LUG event once; I'd like to do a lot more, but work/life gets in the way. They did an event last month and I was away on business that weekend. That's how it usually seems to work, unfortunately.

Now that we've conflated the issue of how the tracks are bent, I was going to suggest flex track - not having any (I was actually kind of repulsed by them when TLG started pushing them), I'm wondering if flex track gives enough latitudinal flex to be used for an incline like the heated track used for the roller coaster. EDIT: BTW, those white supports they use in the roller coaster... like $0.69/each on S@H. I could quote bricklink prices, but nobody has a significant number of them - not that I can see, for less than that anyway. Looks like you can order up to 200 of them from S@H. That means they are using over $1000 worth of supports. That's a lot. Obviously. I'm wondering if there's a third party something like that is available from - like AltBricks girders ($35 for 200 of them, but they are only 1x3x2, and only gray).