CMF-1138

The black 4.5V train motor and light gray curved rails are the only parts you have shown so far that came in 7720. (EDIT: Sorry, originally thought the curved rails in the photo were blue!) The black one-piece wagons with red wheels appear to be Part x487 (Train Base 6x12 with Wheels), which came in 12 sets (but not 7720). The electrical bits in your last photo appear to be a light sensor and touch sensors, most likely from a ROBOLAB set

I don't disagree. I understand and respect the design decisions you have described, and I think we can all acknowledge that LEGO design necessarily involves compromises. I guess I only mean to suggest that the visual impression of the back end feeling too short when it is, in fact, built so close to scale might instead be the result of visual imbalances elsewhere in the model that have resulted from various design decisions. You, of course, get to be the final arbiter of where that balance should be for your model. In any event, as previously mentioned, your latest rendition looks closer to me.

Tremendous work modeling a complicated prototype. Stud-counting and precision overlays aside, your latest rendition (lengthened by one stud) looks closer to me. To my eye, however, it is the height of the fairing wheel arch and the visual weight of the front end that is creating the imbalance. I don't know if it is possible to tuck the drivers up one plate higher under the fairing (combined with going back to the original length). They do look small compared the prototype, but I think that may be because they are fully exposed. Alternatively, can the rear arch of the fairing be moved forward by one stud without interfering with the driver or running gear (maybe in combination with going back to the original 2x4 wedge plate)? That would give you another stud of fairing between the rear driver and the cab and visually stretch out the back half. In the front, it feels to me like there is just too much fairing down by the pilot wheels. To my eye, that visual weight makes the back half seem shorter than it is. The front end of the fairing on the prototype looks almost like a raptor's beak to me. The shape isn't quite there in LEGO, at least to my eye. Perhaps the 2x3 wedge plate can be replaced with a 2x4 and the rest of the arch slid forward by one stud? It also looks to me like the front end itself could be one stud too long in front of the pilot wheel, but it is hard to tell. Strictly my opinion, of course.

That looks fantastic! Really nicely done!

That is looking really sharp! Can the cab windows and roof be lowered by one plate? This would reduce the step-up from the firebox and make the model seem a little longer in proportion, consistent with the prototype (at least to my eye). Just a minor thought for your consideration. I think it does look much more balanced with the longer wheelbase, as long as that runs smoothly for you.

I think keeping the current wheel spacing is certainly a reasonable compromise. In that case, if you are able to shorten the cab, you might consider pulling the entire boiler and firebox back by one stud (rather than lengthening the boiler as I originally suggested). To my eye, shortening the overhang in front of the drivers might help deemphasize the shorter wheelbase by balancing the entire locomotive over the drivers. For the cab windows, you could consider using a plane window (60032/2377) for the frame. Because it is a panel, this would leave you with a front-facing window (albeit a glassless one), similar to the Emerald Night's cab. Looking forward to see what you come up with!

That's a really nice start, and I like where you are going with this. I agree with your assessment that the proportions seem just a bit off. Here are a few ideas that you might consider. I'll use the rearmost set of driver wheels as my stationary reference point. 1. Can the front two sets of driver wheels be moved forward by one stud (keeping everything else as-is)? Looking at the OO scale model as a prototype, it looks like the spacing is not the same between the front and rear sets. This, of course, introduces at least two more problems: negotiating R40 curves and switches and what to use for coupling rods. The former problem might be addressed by using a F-F-B arrangement for the drivers, rather than F-B-F. 2. Can the front of the cab be shortened by one stud? If you eliminated the brick/SNOT tile forward of the window, you could pull the firebox back by one stud (keeping the firebox at its current length), add one more stud of length to the boiler, and move the sand dome back over the middle set of drivers, as @zephyr1934 suggested. To my eye, this could help with the lengthwise proportions from the side. 3. The running board is tough. You could consider going 7-wide in order to get it one plate lower. Another idea would be to try building it upside down. You could use inverted 1x2 curved slopes for the splashers with a 1x2 cheese slope to get down around the flange. This might allow you to get it one plate lower while keeping it a 6-wide build. Something like this: Just a few ideas to help you brainstorm.

This is really fantastic! Thanks for making your code available. My coding and Arduino skills are pretty rudimentary in comparison, but projects like this and @Toastie's Crocodile point-to-point controller are inspiring me to dig in and learn more.

That makes sense -- thanks. I like the idea of moving the motor into the boiler in order to clear up the cab.

Updating this for the Mac users out there. My workaround solution seemed a bit kludgy, so I poked around some more and found that Studio stores the custom part data in a hidden folder. Here is how you can access that folder and copy the data directly, rather than having to go through PartDesigner. From the Finder, select Go -> Go To Folder (Command+Shift+G) Type in "/Users/YOUR_USERNAME/.local/share/Stud.io/CustomParts" Copy the files from the downloaded "parts" subfolder into the ".../CustomParts/parts" subfolder. Copy the files from the downloaded "collider" subfolder into the ".../CustomParts/collider" subfolder. Copy the files from the downloaded "connectivity" subfolder into the ".../CustomParts/connectivity" subfolder. Hope this is helpful.

OK by me, although I should note that I am relatively new to using Studio, so there may well be a better/easier way. I sent you a PM with some suggested edits for the Read Me.

Nice! The minifigs are both improved to my eye, although it is your opinion that counts! I think the trolley looks more like the prototype without the trolley poles, as well.

Thanks so much for doing this and making the files available! I am running Studio 2.0 on a Mac and had to jump through a couple of hoops with PartDesigner to get everything synced up, but the wheels look great. There may be other ways to do this, but here is what worked for me: Hope this helps, and thanks again to @ScotNick for doing the work on this.

And now I see why @Toastie wears sunglasses... R56 is the largest radius I have room for, so my R40 curves are used for an inner loop. I also, umm, "modified" a few to add some flexibility to my switches.

Thanks -- I agree that the dark green looks sharp. There would be some disappointed Potterheads in my house if I don't build this in Hogwarts Express livery though! On the color variation, my recollection is that LEGO made a minor change to the dark red color circa-2010. Not as drastic as the shift from old gray to bluish gray or brown to reddish brown, and they kept the same internal color code (although they did change the name to "new dark red"), but I have several dark red parts in my collection that stand out as far more "red" than the others. Some variation is to be expected, of course, and as @Hod Carrier notes, it can be used effectively for weathering or to add depth/texture. My concern is that it will just look "off" on a build of this scale, depending on the number, size, and placement of the parts at issue (hence my earlier concern with the large curved slopes for the boiler). Really, the only way to know is to see the pieces in person. In any event, substitution in this instance is partly for convenience, since I am placing an order with LEGO Bricks & Pieces and they don't carry the 1x1x1 panel.