fred67

"Golden Age?" Not IMO. RC did suck, but while PF motors may have improved, the sets, IMO (that is, the complete train sets, with tracks and motors and so forth) are not that good, by comparison. The new trains pale in comparison to some of the older sets, both 12v and 9v. It's true that the "hobbyist" sets are really amazing, but while the EN offers a lot of cool detail never before seen in a LEGO released steam engine, the overall levels of the sets are comparable to the BNSF (which is very close to the Maersk), the Sante Fe Super Chief, and the Hobby set. Moreover, you could do a lot with the Hobby set, and TLG group offered a lot of options for rolling stock (especially for the SFSC) that you don't see now. Right now you need to be a good builder and have access to a lot of pieces in order to make decent rolling stock - and it costs more to do so than it would be to buy in a set. While you may have a lot more options as a LEGO modeller, most of us either aren't that creative, have the time, or the extra money it takes to make them. The Sante Fe cars had multiple cars with different configurations; the EN had one car with no more available separately - and those pieces to make your own are not readily available from PAB in the "correct" colors, and are relatively expensive on BL. Regardless of ability to create MOCs, the "golden age" of LEGO trains shouldn't rely on MOCers, it's up to TLG to make it the golden age - if great sets aren't available to the average LEGO builder, I don't see how it can be the "Golden Age." I could go on about batteries vs. electric rail - both ways have their merits, but "auxiliary" sets were definitely better - stations, 12v electric points and gates and lights... there's no comparison. Lastly, the controls for RC are terrible. With a speed regulator you set the speed and let it go... the new controls you turn and hope that the signal went through. If it didn't you turn it again, and again... the only benefit being that it's "remote." That's not an indictment against battery or remote controls, but the infra red sucks and the way the remotes and receivers works suck by comparison to other remote control systems... it COULD have been so much better. I think they just weren't making a lot of money with trains and had to cut back, and the remotes and receivers they decided to use are based solely on being cheap, not good. Maybe a $200 set to have decent remote capabilities just wasn't viable... but if the operation of the sets sucks because of it, then it can hardly be a "golden age." Might be OK for kids... but I suppose that's the point. On top of all that... (I know, sorry, take a breath), the TRACK options are terrible now. 9v = you could buy packs of straight rails, or you could buy packs of curved rails, you could buy crossings, you could buy switches. When they switched to PF we complained you had to buy curved along with straight, so what happened? Now you can't buy curved at all, and there's no crossing at all. How's that better? I think LEGO train fans are "second class" citizens for TLG, now. I'm happy they still make train sets and tracks and so forth, but I'm certain we're not as big a concern as we used to be. The only reason this "era" even works for me is because of the availability of stuff on BL and because of companies like ME Models. So... no, I don't think of this as a LEGO Train "golden age" in the least. Strictly my opinion, of course, I respect that others are happy with PF - but it's not even really "battery operated" that bothers me - I don't think they did it well, even if the motor itself is good. I don't like the track options, and I haven't bought an R/C or PF "complete" set at all - I just didn't like them. Some of you with kids may have had fun with them, and that's cool - I just didn't like them.

Quite good on it's own right, let alone being made from "scraps." Well done.

The same place people who live near LEGO brand stores buy their sealed boxes... because The LEGO store will not sell you a whole box. Ebay and various resellers online will sell complete boxes, sometimes you can find people on bricklink with them. I bought from an ebay seller (MSRP) and a toy store I found online (can't remember the place), also for MSRP (that is, MSRP for 60 packs).

I kind of agree, but not completely; IMO, as far as model railroading goes, ideally, they should have stuck with electric rail in conjunction with RADIO control (not IR, at least not as implemented). Some enthusiasts have already done this "pseudo DCC" without the cost of DCC (using PF but with charging from the rail). The people who prefer the newer PF motors would be happy, the people who don't like the waste and clunkiness of batteries would be happy, the people who like to be able to independently control trains (and other things on a train - lights, cranes, doors, etc) would be happy. IR with plastic rail could work, but the controller/receivers are not accurate enough, and the receivers are really clunky to try to fit into a model (as if the battery box wasn't bad enough), and even when you can fit it all in you often end up with wires all over. We have to face it that the train system is meant for kids, and while I will insist it's a "real" model train system because AFOLs make it work; it's despite TLG, not because of them. If "L-Gauge" continues on in the future as a "real" model train system, I think it'll be more because of companies like ME Models. I'm not holding my breath, but if they manage to produce a commercial quality motor - or commercial quality pickups to use with metal rail and PF batteries, it'll clinch L-Gauge's place as a "real" model railroad.

My List Updated with Series 6. I would like to remind people to let us know what country you're in; even if you're willing to trade anywhere, others may not be.

I'm one of the people who came to LEGO from n-scale. I got into n-scale before I kids, while I was living in an apartment. After having a couple of kids and moving into a house (not in that order), I finally started building my n-scale layout. My son constantly wanted to play with it - as most of you probably know, small kids and n-scale, especially with how expensive a decent n-scale locomotive is, simply don't mix. When I saw LEGO trains for the first time (the very first time) at a warehouse club in the months leading up to Christmas, I bought two sets (mostly because I'd simply never seen LEGO trains before and didn't know you could buy track separately, but also because I figured we could build our own trains using pieces from the second set). I didn't buy it for the scale, I bought it because I could use it with the kids... I suppose that has something to do with scale, but not entirely... the fisher price stuff just didn't do it for me. Ultimately I gave up on n-scale because I started enjoying LEGO (not just trains) so much. Right now, though, I regret giving up on the N-Scale trains. A similar layout in L-scale would take up approximately 16 times the floor space... even in my house, I simply don't have it. As it is, I only get to make a layout at Christmas. All my LEGO trains generally languish in boxes or on display on my shelves, including some of the things I built to go with it (like a double wide bridge I build, as well as a couple of rolling stock cars). Someday I hope to buy a house with a decent basement for my LEGO trains.

Well, just to add my two cents; when I go to train shows that include a LEGO layout, the LEGO layout is often pretty popular. On the other hand, a lot of vendors often sell other "toy" trains (and other stuff), so a lot of the so-called train hobbyists may still consider LEGO trains just toys. So, the way I look at it, it's very much like other LEGO themes... LEGO makes kids toys, and that's how people perceive it until they see "that LEGO robot!" Suddenly it's toys for "older" kids.. and then there's technic, power functions... when people actually see what can be done with LEGO, it starts becoming less of a toy and more of a "modelling" hobby. Lastly, who the hell cares what everyone else thinks? I started in n-scale and sold just about all of it for LEGO and haven't regretted it... for the same reasons a lot of people here mention... my kids can play with it, we can make whatever we want, and if we don't like it, we can take it apart and make something else.

Frankly, I ask for the narrower gauge not to do narrow gauge, but to do small micro-figure scale trains.

That's the picture I remember - posted from around the time I joined. Looking forward to these monsters myself.

Well... let's see... I've been laid up for a few days... had shoulder surgery (and typing with one hand ). But since you brought it up: Still waiting for a decent set (IMO). A "set" being a complete set with engines and cars and tracks. Haven't seen one I liked since 9V days. The EN and Maersk trains are great; perhaps they should have been part of a complete set. Wish they'd sell more train parts and colors on PAB. Was wondering if anyone's tried narrow gauge using the curves TLG has made with ME straight track. (OT) Wondering what theBrickster thinks about the upcoming creature from the Black Lagoon from the Monster Hunter sets.

I'd say in the neighborhood of $3000, which is less than 2010, but which is way too much. I vow this year to spend a lot less. Luckily, while I will buy all the LOTR and CMF sets, I see little else so far that I will "need."

Like a lot of AFOLs, I have mental problems when it comes to LEGO. First, if I buy a set it's because I like the set. I've only ever bought small impulse sets for parts, but then they are easy to recreate from my collection of parts because there are so few pieces. Other sets I buy to build. It doesn't matter what the theme is, even if it's outside my usual tastes. I have one of these: . I bought it for the linear actuators (at the time, it was the best way to get them, money wise, I think). These sold out really fast, never to be seen again. I could not find another one... so instead of having two linear actuators in my parts collection, I have an excavator sitting on my shelf. Of course, now the actuators are fairly easy to find, so it's a moot problem. So really, if a set strikes me as being great for pieces, I normally would have to buy two. I don't know why. All that said, I have RARELY bought two sets for such a purpose, and yet I have, as I loosely estimate, around 100k pieces for building MOCs (NOT tied up in sets). I've been buying pieces for so many years now - from a couple of buckets I bought when I came out of my dark ages, to bricklink, to S@H pick-a-brick, to the pick-a-brick wall at the LEGO Store (including the occasional "k" box). If I actually had room to put the things I built (as it is, half my sets are still in boxes because I have no where to put them should I build them... I have to make room, like add a new shelf somewhere, before I can build something), I'd be MOCing like crazy (especially wanting to make a permanent train layout and micro medieval "layout"). I guess the bottom line is it's impossible to suggest what to do to somebody else - you have the gamut of replies, here... some people, like me, must build the set and keep it together (even when put away). Some people will build and then take apart for MOCs (I actually did this for the first time ever a couple of weeks ago, but there were extenuating circumstances). Some people will go straight to MOCing.

Of course... otherwise it's sexist. I have a set of collectible glasses; there were four of them: Aragorn, Gandalf, Frodo, and Arwen. Is she really the fourth (or in the top four) most important person in the movie?

Agree with Def... I hadn't seen the sets until the catalog, and except for the figures, they are sets I would buy for myself (given the money); I may buy some for my daughter. She seemed interested in the ones with animals. She's 10, for the record, and builds with me some times (we built a Ferris Wheel over Christmas break).

Agreed... I know you probably meant to build them, but I've been re-boxing. My supermarket recently had a sale on plastic shoeboxes (these are perfect for LEGO, IMO). I bought 10 of them (should have gotten more). I've been using them for other things, but I've been re-boxing. Sorry collectors, the boxes just aren't important to me, but you can always fold them flat after re-boxing if you want to save them. Kingdoms Prison Tower Rescue, The Battle of Endor, Apple Tree House, and Whitecap Bay all fit into shoe boxes (one each, of course). The Black Pearl even fits into one, minus the instructions (I do have a big box where I keep all the instructions). London Escape and Cannibal Escape both fit into one box (I bagged Cannibal Escape in a gallon ziploc to keep it separate). I label the boxes with set number and name, and they take up MUCH less space now. If I can find more plastic shoe boxes at such a good price (they were $10 for 10 at the supermarket), I'll definitely be getting more. None. Really. None.

It does.. it makes my head spin with ideas on using PF to automate things on a LEGO layout.

Amazing layout; not just trains but planes, buses, moving ships, and a myriad of other details. Sorry if it's been posted, or if people are uninterested because it's not LEGO, but I expect a lot of people on this forum are model train enthusiasts who might appreciate it. The site of the people who made it (in German) is Miniatur-Wunderland.de, probably the most useful place to find pictures is here, on their brochures page.

That's a popular meme in the LEGO community, but it's not entirely true. I saw a presentation by the president of LEGO Marketing in N.A., he went into detail about the "abyss" and never suggested SW played any significant role in solving the problem. In fact, SW started in 1999 and TLC were still on the brink of bankruptcy in 2003. Their problem had more to do with trying to do too many non-LEGO things (movies, TV, video games, non-brick merchandising) and trying to compete with people they didn't need to (once they abandoned trying to compete with Mega, profits soared). SW helped... sure... but the changes they made would have pulled them out of the "abyss" anyway. SW was nothing more than a catalyst. Bionicles probably played just as much a role. Back on subject, though, ultimately you guys can complain all you want; the only way TLG will listen is the impact on their earnings. Don't like -> don't buy it. I know this thread is not solely about LOTR, but I guarantee the set of people who will buy LOTR > the set of current castle buyers. That's all TLG cares about. I'm not suggesting every license is a great one, but a lot of them displace nothing, so there's really no valid complaint about those anyway.

Just for fun, use names for your sets that are classic lines from the movies. Instead of "Gandalf vs. the Balrog," it should be called "You shall not pass!" Instead of "Pelennor Fields," it should be called "Ride to ruin and the world's ending!" The "Entrance to Moria," should be "Speak friend, and enter." OK, I'm bored. Sorry.

Holy %$#uj9e!@$! Why have I not seen this before?!?! I feel like I've been living under a rock... what sets is this in? Oh... sorry to go off topic. ... uh... go LOTR!! EDIT: Never mind... Etzel cool and courteous enough to have made it a BL link! Thanks!

What's the new "brick brick?" I don't think, given the obvious size limitation, that they should have even bothered doing two levels as opposed to one level with a rock pieces/ruins in a circular pattern.

Your background is really nicely done!

I think you guys should stop nit-picking. "You can MOC it" is just something to remove the disappointment at sets that you're not happy with, it's not excusing them, although sometimes the phrase is used so loosely it may seem that way.... nobody is happy when TLG releases a mediocre or poor set. Even I often go back and forth between viewing sets from the perspective as an AFOL fan of something, in this case LOTR - which I am also a HUGE fan of, and will complain if I think we're just getting crap. Sometimes I look through it with the perspective of TLG - they can't release 10 UCS sets for every theme every year, and that makes it virtually impossible to give us really impressive LOTR sets besides character oriented sets. When you look at it from the latter perspective, you know in advance you won't be getting what you want, no matter how disappointed it makes you, and the only suggestion anyone can offer up to ease the "pain" is that you always have the ability to MOC it. It's really just the only reasonable suggestion. I'm already thinking of LOTR as a character based theme... I'm planning on MOCing or heavily modding the sets already. I'm happy because I'm not a great customizer, and we'll get all the main characters, which is a great starting point. Yeah... I learned all about cursed Aztec gold and that squid-headed guy (and his kraken) in history. No... I know what you mean, but it's like saying Alien Conquest should be in City Theme because of the setting. Whatever, it seems like a waste to nitpick; the moderators made their decision, they had their reasons they felt it worked, and it's just a waste of energy to argue about it.

Wow! I thought a theme like the show: would be really cool, but this is really neat, too. I'm really the classic monsters! Looks like a shout-out to the Munsters Car: Being brought back into LEGO because of trains, I really love that one, too... continues the seemingly intentional cross-theme draw of the Toy Story 3 train and Hogwarts Express.

But can you buy any of them? It's no longer listed under "Themes" in the shopping section; if you go to "products" and select themes, you can indeed see the sets... but not for sale. Click on "check price" for any of them. Even the joust set, prelisted, is under "exclusives," as there's no kingdoms... try this, too: check the price for the mill village raid, and it'll come up on a page and show that it's sold out, but there's a list of tags on the bottom... selecting "kingdoms" takes me the front shopping page again.