XG BC Posted January 4 Posted January 4 honestly the only thing you could improve is make thinner cables (i.e. fewer wires), but that would require changing the protocoll and stuff that will make These motors and components more expensive. as much as id like for 9v to come back, for a toy train system aimed at kids, with the protocoll being open and with it being used across various themes its the best. Quote
Kalahari134 Posted January 5 Posted January 5 On 12/29/2024 at 12:13 AM, dr_spock said: I wouldn't mind LEGO going back to PF or 9V. It was simpler and more practical for GBC modules with those stackable connectors. I liked the stackable connectors, but found infrared to be too unresponsive compared with bluetooth, so I only use it for static models like the fairground rides. The best of both worlds would be great. Quote
Space78 Posted January 6 Posted January 6 It will be interesting to see if Lego changes Power Up in some way or moves to a new system, which I think is unlikely. For the "train user" the main advantages I saw for PUp vs. PF are: 1. not needing the IR receiver in the engine or whatever was being motorized. 2. Bluetooth instead of IR, which is more reliable for making a connection, and can use a phone or tablet to control a motor instead of the remote. Honestly, I had forgotten that last one when I put a PUp motor/controller in the Christmas Trolley this year. We've been using the remote, but could have just used my phone, which my 7 year old daughter would have found much more fun! For regular trains, I'm sticking with 9V for two reasons. 1. I already have a lot invested in track and motors. 2. Thinking about battery power and the battery level every time I run a train is unpleasant. I also worry about leaving batteries in an engine for too long, fearing battery leakage. Couple that with the fact that you have to partially disassemble the engine every time you have to change batteries, AND that those small batteries are not the easiest to get out of that poorly designed (IMHO) battery box. Given all of that, I really have no interest in powering my train layout with anything requiring batteries. The larger the layout you have, the less it makes sense to be powering it with batteries. For my 2 cents, Lego really needs a better way to power trains. I understand that cost is an issue for 9V tracks and the 9V train system; however, there clearly continues to be interest amongst Lego train fans in this system (FX Bricks). Given the dominance of Lego in the toy industry, and that they are likely making (ever increasing) profits year after year, I feel Lego could afford to "give" something to the Lego train fan community - even if that means a power system that is designed specifically for trains and does not readily extend to other "powered" Lego systems. Just think of the number of new elements Lego has produced the last several years and the cost of each of those for comparison. Quote
LegoAlf Posted January 7 Posted January 7 (edited) I tried a lot to be happy with Powered Up (and my own replicas with ESP32 super mini and libraries for hub emulation). After many attempts, I am now back on the path to using 12V (blue) as the system for my railway. I never was a friend of 12V grey, I always found the color of the track system very ugly - although the trains and accessories are quite attractive and I have some of the rolling stock from the 80s in my collection. I usually don't take part in any exhibitions with my locomotives (because I prefer 6W or max. 7W trains and my builds are more 60s or 70s style). Therefore, the system used is only relevant to me personally. The advantages that I see with Powered Up and other battery-operated systems (several trains at the same time, modern options to control the system, no problems with the power contacts, easier laying of the tracks, larger radius on curves and switches, to name just a few) fade into the background when I consider the advantages of 12V: - No batteries needed - never ever. Yes, I have to clean the tracks from time to time. I will build a 12V and a battery driven "cleaning loco" for that purpose and see if that helps a bit. - No empty batteries or LiPos - never ever. I turn on my transformer and I'm ready to go. - No additional space needed for receivers and batteries. I just use a motor with 12V pickups and don't have to worry how to install this damn fat hub-box in my locomotive. What more can you ask for? - Track material is cheap and still easily available - at least in Europe. - Motorized switches are available and manual switches can be motorized without much effort, if you use a micro motor. I have some locomotives which use the old 60s/70s motor, They still run quite well. But I don't use the 12V motors from the 80s because the engines often run very poorly and you cannot get any spare parts for them. "But you can't buy any new 12V motors!!!" I hear you say. Good point. I mostly use modern motors (PU, PF and RC) and install my own power pickup system - it costs approx. 3 to 4 Euro max. and takes about 30 to 60 minutes of work (which I actually enjoy because I like crafting). Even at slow speed the motors run quite subtle and smooth. As much as I would like to use the old Lego 742 transformator (I grew up with this as a kid and have some of these in my collection), I don't use this old kind of power supply anymore for track power. Instead I use the Kato power pack for the Unitrack system which has a nice handling option for speed and direction and a modern PWM control for track power - and the Kato system offers some nice turnout controls for the switches. Yes, 12V might not be the ideal system for modern kids. But for a 58 years old kid like me (which grew up with that stuff) it's almost perfect ;-) After all, I have to admit, It's good to be back on 12V. Edited January 7 by LegoAlf Quote
KotZ Posted January 7 Posted January 7 From my experience, I prefer SPIKE and it's coding with the Mindstorms app (rather than the SPIKE app) over PU, but SPIKE is absolutely awful when it comes to trains due to the hub being so massive and the ports on the side. They do have smaller battery hubs, but they don't work with the Mindstorms app, only the SPIKE one, I believe, depending on what software version you are using. It's a shame because the Mindstorms app with SPIKE is incredibly powerful and fairly easy to use once you learn it. Quote
Lok24 Posted January 8 Posted January 8 13 hours ago, KotZ said: It's a shame because the Mindstorms app with SPIKE is incredibly powerful and fairly easy to use once you learn it. What ist the essential difference between Mindstorms App and Pybricks or Spike App ? Quote
KotZ Posted January 9 Posted January 9 On 1/8/2025 at 12:34 AM, Lok24 said: What ist the essential difference between Mindstorms App and Pybricks or Spike App ? Not sure about PyBricks, but spike and MINDSTORMS don’t play well with the hubs depending on which version you have updated. Whatever software update changed it will have where anything after that only spike will work and before that I think only MINDSTORMS. For me Spike wasn’t laid out well and I never really learned it and just stuck to MINDSTORMS. Quote
Vilhelm22 Posted January 10 Posted January 10 (edited) I’ve taken quite a different approach to most people in the LEGO trains community. Other than the motors, I’ve ditched LEGO’s systems completely. For control, I use a more traditional RC system first piloted by @garethjellis in the United States with Texas Brick Railroad, explained here: https://brickmodelrailroader.com/index.php/2019/03/07/deltang-an-alternative-to-standard-lego-control-systems/ And for batteries, I’ve gone with LiPos - far more powerful for their size and fast charging, and can run constantly at a show for extended periods of time. A good guide is here, by Monty Smith (also in the US): http://montystrains.net/workshop-blog/2020/6/1/using-lipo-batteries However in the UK in LUKR I know quite a few people who use LiPos as well and they’re very efficient - an excellent investment in my opinion. Both the RC system and LiPos require a larger spend at the beginning to get the remote, charger etc but well worth the money as the performance stats are exemplary. It also requires a bit of soldering in the process. However, I can now run trains at high speeds for long periods of time, and I have a range of 90 metres, plus there’s no interference to the signal - try using bluetooth at a huge convention with thousands of people in the room all with phones with bluetooth. The club layout is big as well - we need the range! At the other end I use PF motors with a spliced PF adapter cable with a JST socket. I can see the advantages of PU, but this has been amazing for me, and what’s more I can run it on the club layout which isn’t 9V, and uses a lot of Trixbrix R104 geometry. This probably isn’t for everyone, but it’s mine :) -William Edited January 10 by Vilhelm22 Quote
dr_spock Posted January 10 Posted January 10 On 1/5/2025 at 11:40 AM, Kalahari134 said: I liked the stackable connectors, but found infrared to be too unresponsive compared with bluetooth, so I only use it for static models like the fairground rides. The best of both worlds would be great. After our LUG's train guys started doing longer tunnels and larger layouts on our events, I switched to PU to run my PF train motors. Bluetooth is great, I don't need line of sight. Physically, I prefer the knobs on the PF speed remote over the buttons on the PU remote. One day I will go down the rabbit hole of Legoino and connect a rotary encoder to an ESP32 module. Quote
zephyr1934 Posted January 12 Posted January 12 On 1/6/2025 at 9:30 AM, Space78 said: 2. Bluetooth instead of IR, which is more reliable for making a connection, and can use a phone or tablet to control a motor instead of the remote. Honestly, I had forgotten that last one when I put a PUp motor/controller in the Christmas Trolley this year. We've been using the remote, but could have just used my phone, which my 7 year old daughter would have found much more fun! It's all a matter of personal taste and mine lean the other direction. At shows the bluetooth of PU can fail miserably. I like the fact that a dedicated controller is available- sometimes you don't want to have to use your phone to run the train and sometimes it is incredibly handy to do so. But I suspect Lego is done with dedicated controllers. Quote
bondp99 Posted January 15 Posted January 15 (edited) Seems like the New education Plattform will feature USB-C type motors. https://education.lego.com/de-de/lego-education-science/ especially this pic: Edited January 15 by JopieK Fixed the images :) Quote
Lok24 Posted January 15 Posted January 15 3 hours ago, bondp99 said: https://education.lego.com/de-de/lego-education-science/ Or just a micromotor with integrated hub and battery. Quote
JopieK Posted January 15 Posted January 15 15 hours ago, bondp99 said: Seems like the New education Plattform will feature USB-C type motors. https://education.lego.com/de-de/lego-education-science/ especially this pic: .... Thanks for sharing. Now I need to find an excuse to let my school buy them ;) Or just a micromotor with integrated hub and battery. @Lok24I think that might be the case. Also very useful for us trainies though! Quote
Toastie Posted January 15 Posted January 15 50 minutes ago, JopieK said: trainies How about the trainers = you? Best Thorsten Quote
Mr Hobbles Posted January 15 Posted January 15 In one of the higher resolution pictures there are regulatory markings on the side of the motor suggesting it has a battery. From the details, the new components are: * Controller * Single motor * Double motor * Color sensor My theory is that every component has its own battery, and components talk wirelessly. So the controller can control the motors, no wires anywhere, and everything is charged via USB-C. They also detail that "connector cards" are included - these seem to be color coded from the pictures. I wonder if these are used to control the color sensor. I wonder if everything uses LPF2 LWP to talk to each other and is therefore technically Powered Up compatible. Quote
Toastie Posted January 15 Posted January 15 1 hour ago, Mr Hobbles said: no wires anywhere, and everything is charged via USB-C That would be really cool! Total freedom ... 1 hour ago, Mr Hobbles said: everything is charged via USB-C ... and boom. Freedom limited by the battery lifetime of the motors, I guess? They should suckup the most power when operated? So motors are better freely accessible for attaching USB-C cables. Hmm. We'll see. Should the motors be as smart as the LEGO LiPo, then each motor needs a USB-C cable/charger for prolonged stationary operation ... and will work for some time, when the power goes out. Hmmmmm - I guess this is then more for - well, as promoted, the educational sector? 1 hour ago, Mr Hobbles said: LPF2 LWP That sounds "doable", doesn't it? It's all in there ... We'll see! Very interesting. Best, Thorsten Quote
zephyr1934 Posted January 16 Posted January 16 The webpage is also in English Click on "what is included" and you get this list 8 hours ago, Mr Hobbles said: n one of the higher resolution pictures there are regulatory markings on the side of the motor suggesting it has a battery. From the details, the new components are: * Controller * Single motor * Double motor * Color sensor It says available in Aug. Looks like the motor fits in a 6x6x3 bounding box. Quote
Mr Hobbles Posted January 16 Posted January 16 (edited) A couple of new pictures from an event at Lego HQ, taken from Boone Langston's Instagram. https://imgur.com/a/HRjhk6e What we can see is the pairing light and USB-C charger on the controller, which suggests an internal battery, instead of replaceable batteries like on the existing Powered UP remote. Along with a better view of the dual motor component, which seems to be 10x6x3, not including the sticky outy rotaty bits. Additionally, this picture is weird:https://imgur.com/a/KcKyQ7o Why are they holding the connector card up to the motor? Can it "read" it somehow? Edited January 16 by Mr Hobbles Quote
Space78 Posted January 16 Posted January 16 (edited) Both motors appear to be 6 wide, so not useful for standard 6 wide train dimensions. Also, the controller looks to be two rotating three-position switches, so presumably ON (forward)-OFF-ON (reverse) functions with no speed control. So to me, this system does not look usable for trains. However, what is interesting is battery/controller/motor technology seems to have advanced to a point where 1. battery, motor, wireless communication are all in one box. 2. rechargeable battery life is sufficient such that it can be sealed in the motor box and charged via USB, like a cell phone. So..... the question is, will Lego switch all of its power systems to this new system or will it maintain two completely different power systems (this new one for Education and Power Up)? I'm very skeptical that Lego will maintain/market two completely different power systems. However, to use this new system for trains we will need a variable speed controller, and a 4 wide motor with two axles (in black of course!). Maybe that's coming too?? By the way, the U.S. Lego education press release has a clear picture of the kit showing the two motors from the top, the controller and the separate sensor. https://www.lego.com/en-us/aboutus/news/2025/january/lego-education-science?locale=en-us The motor with the "transverse" axle is 6x10, while the smaller motor with the longitudinal axle is 6x6, but it really looks like it is 4x6 with two 1x4 technic bricks molded into the sides. So, the functional part of the motor which houses motor/battery/controller is really only 4x6. It would seem to be very easy for Lego to make a 4x12 train motor with this system! Edited January 16 by Space78 Quote
JopieK Posted January 16 Posted January 16 16 hours ago, Toastie said: How about the trainers = you? Best Thorsten Haha. Splendid alternative! We should open a poll about that :p @Space78 finger crossed but I like the idea. Quote
Stereo Posted January 16 Posted January 16 (edited) 5 hours ago, Mr Hobbles said: Why are they holding the connector card up to the motor? Can it "read" it somehow? That's how I expect it works, the light over the USB port that shows what "channel" it's on is also a light sensor. Though it still leaves some questions about pairing things, like what does a light sensor+motor do? Brighter light faster motor? Can you pair 2 single motors to the controller at once, or do the sticks only both work with a 2-motor brick? If Pybricks can communicate to them over bluetooth they seem pretty useful, since the motor brick is now the complete package (bt/battery/motor) in 6x6x3 form. As for fitting that in a train, 9 plates high fits in a 4 wide space when it's on its side, so it'll need a little more vertical clearance than a plain PU battery box (4 bricks tall = 12 plates vs. 6 studs wide = 15 plates), but not much, and since parts of that are 1x4 bricks on the sides, that can be channeled downward inside a 4-wide frame. Edited January 16 by Stereo Quote
XG BC Posted January 16 Posted January 16 honestly that would be kinda cool, if it is as large as a normal train motor, but it limits the lighting and other functions options kinda. Quote
Mr Hobbles Posted January 17 Posted January 17 (edited) 18 hours ago, Stereo said: If Pybricks can communicate to them over bluetooth they seem pretty useful, since the motor brick is now the complete package (bt/battery/motor) in 6x6x3 form. As for fitting that in a train, 9 plates high fits in a 4 wide space when it's on its side, so it'll need a little more vertical clearance than a plain PU battery box (4 bricks tall = 12 plates vs. 6 studs wide = 15 plates), but not much, and since parts of that are 1x4 bricks on the sides, that can be channeled downward inside a 4-wide frame. Unfortunately I'm skeptical that Pybricks will be able to work on these. The most recent hub (The Technic Move Hub, included in the Porsche 42176) requires signed firmware, to which only Lego have the signing keys. The Pybricks team have said they will not be able to support Pybricks on it. If that is the case with these new components, then Pybricks may be out of the question also. I hope for at least LWP3 protocol support, so we can control them remotely. EDIT: I just saw you hope that Pybricks can talk to them remotely. Yes, I hope for this also - but that requires LWP3. Fingers crossed. Edited January 17 by Mr Hobbles Quote
Lok24 Posted January 17 Posted January 17 5 minutes ago, Mr Hobbles said: I hope for at least LWP3 protocol support, so we can control them remotely. There are examples on github .... Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.