text:
Does LEGO make a electronically controlled pneumatic valve bank?
I've decided to try my hand at building a working LEGO Concrete Block Making Machine, as shown in this picture:

with the idea being that the machine will be controlled by both manual and automatic input. The machine will be controlled by a pneumatic air system using various cylinders.
The manual control is the easy bit, as it's just a bunch of levers next to each other. The problem comes in the form of the automatic system whereby the Technic controller needs to be able to control a pneumatic valve bank in order to run the machine.
My question is this, does LEGO make an electronically controlled valve bank? If so, where can I find one? If not, what would be the best way in accomplishing this?

What do you mean by "Technic controller" ? One of the many remote controls lego has released, a recent example of which is Powered Up Bluetooth Speed Remote Control Unit ? Or one of the several programmable bricks, a recent example of which is Powered Up Large Hub ? Or something else ?

Apologies. I meant the RCX Controller V1.0.

LEGO pneumatics are not really precise. You might want to consider using mechanical operation with linear actuators.

@Alex, by linear actuators, you mean things like mechanical pistons? The type that doesn't use hydraulic or pneumatic?

Yes, mechanical pistons without any sort of pneumatic or hydraulic stuff. I mean this small linear actuator, bigger one and the largest.

Thanks @Alex. Will definetly look into this.

I don't know of any electronically controlled LEGO pneumatics.
However it's not too hard to get the needed functionality. I see two main parts to the equation :
Controlling the pressure in the system
LEGO have released several pumps over the years. A recent example is Pneumatic Pump Small (6L) V2 with Reinforced Cylinder. A pump like that can relatively easily be driven by a regular motor (by transforming the motor's rotary motion into a linear back and forth motion - using a cam mechanism eg.), which in turn can be controlled by your controller of choice.
Note, you can make this as complicated as you want, with features to protect your motor from overload, to more evenly generate pressure, etc. Many examples of varying complexity can be found on the internet.
Controlling the direction of air flow
LEGO have released several switches over the years. A recent example is Pneumatic Switch with Pin Holes and Axle Hole, which has a convenient axle hole to allow it to be driven by a motor. Ideally a servo motor, but a regular motor can be made to act like a servo motor if needed.
Some example solutions (mostly using the older style switches that didn't have an axle hole) can be found in How to motorize a LEGO Pneumatic valve?.

Thanks Sander. Really appreciate the detailed answer. I have a design for pressure regulation, but the directional air flow is something I will most definitely check out. I had no idea parts like this existed. I just have one question though. These designs are calling for LEGO Power functions, can the controller/receiver be programmed for automation?

@GipsyD : no, Power Functions does not include a programmable brick. Most designs you'll find will indeed use more recent generations of motors, but it should just be a matter of adapting the designs to suit the different form factor of your older 9V motors that can be controlled by your RCX Controller. Alternatively, you can control Power Functions motors (apart from the servo motor afaik) with your RCX Controller by using the right extension wire.

That's a win all things considered. Thanks for the link. Got some planning to do.

There were a few sets with pneumatics and compressors available from the early '90's, my sister had the 8868 Air Tech Claw Rig which came with a 9V motor to keep the compressor working to provide the pressure to move the various parts around

Sadly though as you point out, the switching was at that time all manual.

The B model of that set did feature valves that were actuated by other pistons though. Still not electronically controlled (and technically not even controlled at all, as it ran automatically in a loop), but a neat and unique feature.


text:
Building advice for "hunched" mech lower torso design?
Another mech based question, let me clean up as best I can...
So, in LDD, I'm working on an Evangelion Unit from the popular manga and anime, Neon Genesis Evangelion, and have decided to build EVA Unit 01 (Picture here).
I've built the entire legs section ("lower" quarters) of the Unit, but am having difficulty capturing the "hunched" nature of the mech in Lego, let alone LDD. I don't even know where to start.
I did find this image online to try and assist me in replicating something similar, but it hasn't been of much use (here). But this image should give a general idea of what I am hoping to achieve in LDD.
Any advice would greatly be appreciated.
As always, thanks for viewing!

Hi GipsyD! I'm afraid I can't see any questions in the text, aside from the one in the title which is unfortunately too broad. Could you please edit the question to include one question whose answer can reasonably fit in this QA format?

@zovits, Unfortunately, I think this is as simple as I can get it without sounding completely obscure. But never fear, I have found a solution to this question, of which can be found below...

This answer is pretty long and complex, so bear with me.
After a couple hours of toying around with LDD, I have finally come up with a design that suits my needs fully within the realm of "traditional" Lego Building techniques.
After digging around in the sub-categories in LDD, I stumbled across this block (here). This brick is essentially what made this entire build possible, as it allowed for the "hunching" for the lower abdomen to be captured.
To capture the hunching nature of this mech, I constructed 3 of these shapes to serve as the building blocks for the lower abdomen.

In the middle of the piece referenced above, a short staff was passed through down the centre of the piece in the hole provided in the centre. This assembly is then connected to a 1x1 brick with studs on all faces except the base. The piece of the staff that is sticking out at the back is covered up with a 1x1 cylindrical piece, making room for the "spinal" assembly of the mech. The entire assembly is then covered up with decorative assemblies and facades, as seen in the picture above.
The result can be seen below --

Unfortunately, no LDD file is provided, only images.
UPDATE
As requested by Aziraphale, here is a breakdown of one of the assemblies making up the hunched nature of the Evangelion Unit. Note the short staff going through the piece reference above, mounted to a 1x1 brick with studs on all faces, before being finished in a 1x1 cylindrical piece with a 1x2 detail plate.

Hi GipsyD, can you please show how the "spinal" element is connected to the surrounding purple elements? This seems to be useful also for other cases with odd angles.

I'm assuming you mean the white piece at the back of each section?

The "spinal" element is the white piece at the back of each assembly, which is connected to the assembly via the 1x1 cylindrical piece, fitted with a 1x1 round piece with a hole in it.

No, I mean how the grey hinge piece is connected to the black and to the purple parts. An exploded view drawing would be very helpful.

@Aziraphale, of course, will update the answer ASAP

Wonderful! The staff is a "bar, 3L", right?  Does it sit tightly in the hinge piece, or does it move?

You would be correct. The bar that connects the hinge to the assembly is a 3L Bar, this is the shortest bar that can be used in normal models before descending into minifigure scales. As the rigidity of the finished assembly. I would imagine that the assembly would sit tight, as it does make use of friction to hold it's form, but it is extremely flexible and moveable, going to become poseable

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
Will the Duplo train track extension set 10872 work with Duplo train set 2700?
I am thinking about buying the Duplo train expansion set 10872 Train Bridge and Tracks for my niece, but her primary Duplo train set is actually a vintage 1983 2700 Freight Train set from her father's childhood.
Will these new tracks work with the old train and tracks? I've been looking at pictures and the tracks appear identical except for color, but considering the 37 year difference, I wanted to check with the experts first. I am aware the musical actuator almost certainly will not work with a 1983 train. I'm really asking whether the tracks will interconnect and whether there will be problems running a train from one era on tracks of the other era, or if, as I suspect, they follow the same standards and any differences are cosmetic only.

From a train point of view those wheels will fit happily within the guides of the bridge, and the connections on the tracks should just about fit as well.
I'm fairly sure we bought our bridge when we were staying in a holiday cottage that had a load of the old black track, and it connected to the track successfully, but you may need to work with some curves to find the ideal length as the black ones tend to be slightly longer than the newer grey ones.
LEGO Customer Support have the following to say on compatibility:

DUPLO® train tracks haven’t changed much over the years, so older tracks are fully compatible with the current ones. You can tell old and new tracks apart by the colour: the older ones are black, while the tracks we currently make are grey.
While the different tracks can be used together, we do recommend alternating between them since the older, black tracks have less grip. If you’re building a track with a bridge, we’d suggest using newer rails around the slope.

Their recommendation for using grey around the slope may be aimed at the motorised options so that the train isn't slipping in the build up to the ramp, or skidding at the bottom.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
LEGO Technic Interface A
A few days ago, a friend offered me one set 9750 LEGO Technic Interface A with the Interface Card and Cable (IBM compatible) but without software.
Can someone share the installation software (LEGO Lines, LEGO TC Logo or Logowriter Robotics) or where can I download the original software for IBM PC-DOS??

I had already found the site mentioned by jvd. It contains lots of useful information about the Interface A.
What I wanted was to find the original software, especially the LEGO TC Logo for IBM (MS-DOS).

If you goal is only to be able to use it, it seems faster to hack it using an Arduino and than control it through USB.

This link to a google drive ZIP file seems to be the ISA card installation documentation and PC-DOS application you are looking for.
More information on using the LEGO Technic Interface A with an Apple II or Commodore 64 can be found here.

There was at one point also an interface for the ZX Spectrum too although I realise this is not too relevant to the original question however mentioning it as other 8 bit systems were also noted.

There was an interface for the Sinclair ZX it just wasn't made by the Lego Group. It was made by Datel Electronics Ltd (UK) in 1984 called the Datel Robotek. A companion book "Make And Program Your Own Robots" by William Clark, Lionel Bender was also published.

Thank you for the correction. I see you are completely correct now.

The software for Technic Interface A is said to be the same for the lego DACTA interface (aka 'interface B').
Try this download link for lego DACTA control Lab
This eurobricks thread may also be of some use

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Is there a functional difference between bricks w/ and w/o bottom tubes?
For instance:
3040a - Slope 45° 2 x 1 - without Bottom Tube
and
3040b - Slope 45° 2 x 1
Are both of these always interchangeable? If not, what are the cases where you would absolutely need no bottom tubes?

Parts with and without bottom tubes are nearly always interchangeable in normal building scenarios.
However, there is definitely a functional difference. Not having bottom tubes generally does the following:

Reduces clutch power. There's one less surface for the stud to produce friction against.
Allows for lots of different connection points along the bottom edge rather than just at both ends. This can be useful in places where you aren't always working in whole numbers of modules. For example, here's one way that you could build a wall at 45 degrees to what you would normally build by exploiting 1x2 bricks without bottom tubes:

Accepting this answer just because it was the first and it has the most upvotes. All entries were great additions. Thanks to all participants!

jncraton and CreationEdge have both explained what the tubes are for and mentioned two advantages to not having them: nicer-looking clear parts, and connections that aren't aligned with the system stud grid. The main advantage to having them is the clutch power it adds: in a 2x2 brick such as the slope with no tube, each stud touches two walls, but with a tube each stud also touches the tube, so 50% more clutch.
As I explained in this comment regarding a pizza tile that had a variant element with a tube, the tube is a useful attachment point. The inside of the tube is a stud-hole so you can put a stud there, and this can be used to great effect with the right pieces. In the case of the pizza element, a minifig hand can be placed in the tube to hold the pizza centrally from underneath. Similarly bricks with tubes can be placed on half-stud offsets from other bricks using the tubes.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
How to clean dirty white tiles?
I ordered a couple of tiles from bricklink.com, but they arrived a bit dirty. I'd like to make them look shining new before using them for my creation. Is there a quick and reliable way to do it?

Have you checked out the responses to: LEGO Cleaning Techniques and Tools?

Check out this previous question. There is a solution called "retr0brite" in which you make a chemical compound that you apply to the yellowed bricks, leave them exposed to light for a while, and the bricks will come out clean white. However, I have recently read (but cannot find the link right now) that this retr0brite method might not work forever, and that with reapplication the duration of the whitening reduces every time.

Yes. I like to clean my LEGO bricks with warm water and a washcloth. If it is dusty, it will come right off. If it is dirt it will take a couple seconds of rubbing gently to get it off of the LEGO bricks.


text:
What to do with old LEGO Magazines
I'm in the process of moving, and I have come upon my old collection of LEGO magazines. All from the early 2000s, I have the LEGO Magazine, the Mania Magazine, and a bunch of Shop-at-Home catalogues.
Are these of any value? I checked e-bay, and I saw a few lots of maybe 10 or so, but nothing seemed to be moving. I've sitting on close to 100 of these things. I need to get rid of them, but I'd hate to just toss them. (I may give them to a neighborhood kid, but his parents might get a bit overwhelmed with 100 LEGO magazines suddenly showing up on the doorstep!)
I'd appreciate any feedback from y'all. (I live in Boston if anyone else is nearby.)

You might consider donating them to your local library, or an after-school program. Kids love to flip through them!

They are listed on bricklink, they seem to be sold from time to time. I estimate for about 30 cent each on average...
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?pg=1&catString=462&catType=B&v=1


text:
In what colours can I build my whole model?
Is there a tool which, given a list of parts, will tell me the common colours, i.e. the colours that all the parts are available in?

Can you add more detail about the model? Do you have a set number, a plan or an image of it?

I guess you are not looking for the part-by-part solution that Bricklink provides?

I could not find a tool with this ability, so I made one using the Rebrickable API. You can find it here:
https://gist.github.com/ali1234/836ba792390c1a5feca9a3dcb35c14af
It parses an LDraw file and selects all the bricks of a specified colour (by LDraw colour number, eg yellow = 14), then for each unique piece it requests all available colours. Finally it calculates the intersection of all colours and prints a list.
Optional rarity parameter can be used to avoid very rare parts.
Example output:
./colourswap pirover.ldr 14
Parts:
3665, 2730, 3660, 3455, 3005, 3002, 3702, 3703, 3700, 3701, 3895
Common Colours:
Blue, Yellow, Black, White, Light Gray, Red, Light Bluish Gray

./colourswap pirover.ldr 14 20
Parts:
3665, 2730, 3660, 3455, 3005, 3002, 3702, 3703, 3700, 3701, 3895
Common Colours:
Black, Red


text:
The 75192 Millenium Falcon is available again!
Or not? This evening, around 10 pm (in Germany), I noticed that the set was available. It is 11 pm now, and it returned to the "temporarily not available" status. Can it be sold out within one hour??
In the initial selling phase in 2017, the set had been available for some weeks. The buying limit was 3. I think it was limited to VIP members, but I think everyone who bought something directly from LEGO is a VIP member.
Anyway, according to some rumors, the set would be available again in February. So I expected LEGO to produce as many Falcons as they can to flood the market after building up tension and demand. It seems, however, that 75192 will remain a rare set that will be sold out most of the time.
What I am really asking is this: Do you know or remember the situation regarding availabilty of similar sets in the past (e.g. the 10179 Falcon)? Does LEGO have a different selling strategy with the 75192?

Can it be sold out within one hour?

Probably. If they sell all they have available, it would be "temporarily not available" again.
This set has been known to sell out the same day it becomes available in other countries.

I was surprised because in the initial selling phase in 2017 the set was available for several weeks. I expected that LEGO would flood the market with the sets after building up demand. Now it seems that the Falcon will still be a rare set.

Aziraphale, where are you from? Here in Belgium it sold out within minutes on initial launch online, also the physical lego stores had queues before opening time...

Here in Germany it took a while. In the end, I didn't buy one, but I had it in my virtual shopping cart.


text:
How to check the missing pieces of a given set?
I have a collection of LEGO sets, from which only the B model is assembled and the remaining pieces have been lost.
What is the easiest way to figure out which pieces are missing from these sets?

You can use the Compare Sets function on Rebrickable for that (if the B model is an official model or a MOC on Rebrickable).
Here an example for both official models from the 42069 set.


text:
Brick-built sails for a pirate ship
I am building a Sea-Cow(70810)-like ship that of course needs sails. The sails should be larger than the Technic fairings used in the LEGO movie set, but I want to avoid cloth sails and strings.
My idea is to connect rows of white 4x6 modified tiles with studs on edges (part 6180) with hinge plates. That would give a curved rectangular sail. However, sails usually are not rectangular.
Do you have experience with sails made out of tiles or plates? How do you create the shape/curvature you have in mind? I appreciate any ideas.
EDIT:
After very useful suggestions by @jncraton I was able to create a prototype of sail. I found some hinges (4275/4276) to connect the rows of tiles. The brown plates are not the final solution. Now I still have to figure out how to make the sail less rectangular.

Side note: I am not the only one who misses the old finger hinges: see this question

Great question. It sounds like you are building a fairly large ship. If the scale is large enough, brick-built sails can look quite nice. You can add shape, contour, and texture using various building techniques.
If you want to keep things simple, you could just use a single layer of bricks as was done in this basic sailboat model that was an in-store build back in 2009:

That example obviously isn't the most detailed. It's challenging to develop sail-like contours with studs on top.
Here's one example just using plates that is similar to what you mentioned in your question:

Notice how it uses wedge plates to round off the square corners of the sails. Wedge plates come in a variety of shapes and sizes, so that gives you some flexibility in the shape of your sail. Here's another shot showing that technique more clearly:

Here's a second example of that technique in a physical model to try to show how the sail sections can be connected using hinges:

Here's another where layered plates are used to provide more depth and contour:

And one more example of the same technique:

I personally like the aesthetic of studs showing in those examples, but you could also smooth your sails out using tiles and curved slopes if you'd prefer.

Oh come on, did you really edit in the same example I wanted to add, while I was writing my answer? :D

@zovits :D That's certainly what it looks like.

I've reverted my edit now that you've added this set as a separate answer. I think it works better as a separate answer. You have my upvote. :)

Thanks, but you really shouldn't have :) This question is linked from the recent Pirates of Barracuda Bay question, and the Creator Pirate Ship is a trivial association to this topic. Whether a long list or multiple single answers is better, I can't really decide, so let's leave it like it is :)

An official example from 2020 is seen in the 31109 Pirate-Ship using plates and curved panels:

I haven't seen this set until now. Very simple sail construction. Interesting timing by TLG to release this shortly after the Barracuda Bay 21322 (cloth sails). I had to abandon my ship project for a "while", but with all the new pirates in the LEGO world I feel that now is a good time to get it done.

authors: Юлія Захарчук


text:
How can I connect the LEGO Mindstorms NXT with an iPad?
I'm looking to take advantage of the older generation LEGO Mindstorms NXT robots by developing a companion app for the iPad. I'm aware that non-jailbroken iPads cannot communicate with the robot via bluetooth, but is there a way to send code from the iPad to the NXT robot through the USB port?
Is there another way to have kids write code from the iPad which makes it onto the robot without using another computer?

I'm going to guess that USB would most likely required a jailbroken iPad. The NXT uses a custom USB protocol, so you would need raw access to the USB via IOKit.
If neither Bluetooth nor USB works, then there is no alternative other than using another computer to communicate to the NXT.

You could implement a server somewhere which uses bluetooth to talk to the NXT (assuming NXT has no Wifi capabilities). Give this server a web interface and then use the iPad to connect to this interface. That should allow you to remotely control the NXT. LeJOS might be a good place to start should you want to pursue this. I used this approach for my (still unfinished) native Scratch to EV3 software (using EV3's WiFi capabilities with an external dongle).

How close does a server need to be to connect with the bluetooth of a device?

Bluetooth range depends on the actual location (e.g. how much interference is there?), but a typical range is about 10 meters (30 feet).


text:
Different surface roughness of tiles. Quality issue?
Recently, I filled a PAB cup in the nearest LEGO store. Among other parts, I also took a lot of light bluish grey 2x2 tiles. The following image shows some of these:

However, reflected light reveals that the surface of the tiles can be quite different. This image (same parts as above) shows that there are obviously two types of tiles. One with a really smooth surface, with the stud ring on the underside visible from above. And one with a rough surface similar to brushed metal:

I am a bit surprised to see LEGO products with their sub-micrometer precision molds showing such behaviour. Are different production lines mixing here? Have you experienced other parts with different properties that should be the same?
Update:
Alexander O'Mara suggested to examine the underside, and indeed there are some patterns. First, the smooth tiles:

Now the "brushed" tiles:

You notice the groove above the word LEGO on the smooth tiles that the brushed tiles don't have. The number 3068 is of course the same on both. There is a lot number (?) in the format XX-YY with YY being underlined.
The smooth tiles all have XX-57 with varying XX (right hand side), the brushed tiles all have XX-49 with varying XX (lower side, next to the "3068").
So, what does that mean?
EDIT:
One observation: inside the bottom tube, the surface shows a structure in the smooth tiles, but no structure in the "brushed" tiles. This could mean that the 3068 tile consists of two pieces that are hot-glued together in the process: One part covering the upper surface and sides, and another piece with the bottom tube and inside. The upper, covering part (from which small pieces are stamped out) may itself have an upper and lower side with slightly differing roughness. Maybe the production process doesn't prefer which side is up, so sometimes a rough side can be seen, and sometimes not. This is only a theory.
Can someone point towards an answer?

Do the undersides between them distinguishable at all? I wonder if there are different versions of the mold.

Good point. I will have a closer look and update the question today.

The XX-XX numbers I believe identify the mold that made the piece (so if they get defective ones, they know which mold has a problem). Possibly The second half of the number identifies a version of the mold? I wonder if perhaps one version is/was used for painted or sticker pieces (I know it seems weird to have a different piece for stickers, but I've seen them provide smoother roof tiles for stickers, sometimes with a mix in the same set).

Do you mean slope bricks or tiles that are used on roofs?

I mean the sloped bricks.

That is indeed interesting, because most of the slopes with stickers have the usual grainy surface of slope bricks. Do you mean that there are e.g. 45 2x2 slope bricks with a smooth surface?

Not entirely smooth, just about half the texture of the regular roof tiles (unless all roof tiles are like that now, I'm not sure). I remember the Dino Attack Iron Predator having 4 2x2x3 slopes, 2 with less texture, to which the stickers would stick better (the other 2 did not get stickers), though the instructions did not mention it.

Interesting. I looked at my sorted Tile 2x2 in light bluish gray and all have smooth tops. Mold numbers are XX-47 (without slot above logo) and XX-53 (with slot above logo).

From TLG Customer Service (emphasis added by me for one possible explanation):

I truly appreciate that you sent this to us so that we could see the variation
  in the parts. Being able to see the numbers on the inside was very
  helpful!
We haven't had any reports about quality issues with this element for
  any of the pressings. I've actually taken the link you provided and,
  as you know, the LEGO® Quality Team takes the quality of our products
  very seriously, and our team will now be able to look at these images
  in the post and make further evaluations. It could be that the mould
  was changed and the new mould hasn't worn smooth yet but I can't say
  for certain that that would be the cause of the variation in the
  texture on the top of the tile.
Please make sure the user doesn't delete the post so that our Quality
  Team can take a look.
Thank you again for passing this important post along to us. We really
  appreciate it!

I didn't know that TLG is so responsive to these kind of questions. I assume that you will post the final results? Does TLG even have a user here??

I'll definitely update this answer if I hear any more details. TLG takes quality very seriously. I've never seen anyone post here officially representing TLG, but I'd certainly be happy to see that. It's tricky on their end, as there is significant media training that employees need to go through to speak publicly for the company.

Have you heard any news from TLG?

@Aziraphale Nothing since I've posted this, I'm afraid.

It seems that TLG didn't come to a conclusion, or it was not important enough to get back to you.


text:
Combine Duplo feet with regular LEGO
I would like to place this Duplo pig directly on Lego bricks/pieces. I tried an intermediate Duplo 2x4 plate with Lego bricks underneath, but it doesn't look good. The problem is that Duplo feet surround the studs. Therefore, Duplo feet don't fit onto Lego studs. Is there an elegant way to connect Duplo animals' feet with the Lego world?

@Uli found promising solutions, one of them is to use the Technic Engine Piston Round. It has some clutch power and at least transfers the issue into the regular LEGO world. Now I have to find a way to connect tow ball pieces to the rest of my MOC, Uli has provided some ideas.

Scientific progress goes OINK!

This is an older DUPLO pig from the 70's, and its different design offers us some new possibilities.
For example there's a rectangular hole below the neck.

Now before we go any further, the LEGO policeman would like to remind everybody that stuffing plates into rectangular holes or jamming them between studs isn't exactly HIS cup of tea. Thank you very much.

That said, a one-by plate and tile will fit tightly into the hole under the neck. The tile allows for further details, more on that in a moment.
The one-by plate is then attached to a jumper plate. So this will be a snout, sorry, SNOT thing of a sort.
A wedged plate that sits between the hind legs will add some lateral stability.

Alright, so here's piggy (sporting a black Colin Furze style tie/ tile) now safely tied onto some crazy contraption.
And here's piggy sticking his (red tile) tongue out at our LEGO purists.

THBPBPTHPT!

EDIT: As it turns out, a piston has the right size. Conveniently, it can be attached to any tow ball piece.

EDIT: Added a close-up

It might not be a solution for pig in question, but it was fun to read.

I like the facial expression of my pig. This post makes me think. Maybe SNOT is the answer to my question.

@Aziraphale Following an edit by Uli I did test this with couple of Duplo pieces I have and can confirm that Technic Engine Piston works fine, not too tight, not too loose.

@Alex, you are right, see updated question. Uli, how did you find this solution??

@Aziraphale pure coincidence, tested out every stud shaped bit of LEGO I found in my bins.

@Aziraphale Added a close-up...

I am still waiting for the bricklink delivery with 27448 tiles that Alex suggested in one comment of his answer. Therefore, I tried a less subtle solution:
This is the starting point: A DUPLO pig that needs to be put directly on LEGO pieces.

I decided to cut a DUPLO piece to regular LEGO size. A DUPLO 2x2 brick was converted to a ...

... 4x4 tile, modified, with 2x2 DUPLO studs. My methods were crude (metal saw and cutter), but it worked quite well. There is only little height difference to the surrounding LEGO plates, and the clutch power is really good:

This is an approximation of the final goal to use the DUPLO pig as a figurehead in a LEGO MOC/MOD:

Edit: The 27448 tiles finally arrived, but there was no way I could get clutch power. I measured 9.3 mm for the diameter of the tile ring, and 9.4 mm for the DUPLO stud. This difference is enough to loose any clutch power. Even with 4 tiles combined there was no binding strength at all. Other DUPLO animals showed same results. A DUPLO human figure, however, could at least have a little bit of bonding when the ring is pushed into the toe area.

whoa, nice work! but it will make the purists squirm :)

@htmlcoderexe I know, this is a beyond-illegal technique. Hopefully, I can leave this path when the 27448 tiles arrive.

How much space there is between front/back legs? Uli's answer gave me an idea about using 4865/4865b part between the front/back legs. Either one (pig would be slightly of centre line) or both (would be centered) might fit into that gap.

@Alex the distance is something between 18.0 mm and 18.1 mm.

Don't have too much experience with DUPLO, so my suggestion is based on my limited knowledge.
I'm not aware if there a way to attach pig directly to LEGO bricks, however I thought of a workaround. Here, green DUPLO figure legs represent your pig feet.

As mentioned, I did exactly that, but I want to avoid any extra Duplo brick or plate in my build. There must be some other solution. There must be LEGO pieces that somehow fit into Duplo feet.

Without seeing an example, you've described in the question, it wasn't very clear what kind of solution you have already tried. I've figured out whichever LEGO piece or assembly, that should be used to connect feet of a pig to LEGO bricks should be 12.8mm, 8 units or 32LDU in size.

I agree, normally the DUPLO plate solution is fine. However, this particular pig is going to be a sort of figurehead with as little as possible material underneath it.

My assumed size was a little wrong. Not entirely wrong, but won't dig much into details for now. So it turns out I got couple of DUPLO pieces. Caliper measured DUPLO stud diameter is 9.39 mm. Closest LEGO sized part I found for now is https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=61485 where middle ring is 9.30mm (visually, both are same diameter). There are two more similar looking parts, however I don't own any of them to check dimensions: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=3403 and https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=27448

LDraw parts used in LDCad show that 61485 and 27448 have inner ring of the same diameter, while 3403 has larger ring. And I just though 61485 part (if it fit) won't work for you, since you cannot fit two legs side-by-side using it. So 27448 is the only suggestion for now. I'm unable to test and confirm if this works and how good is the clutch power since none of my DUPLO has single stud connections.

Alex, thank you for the effort. Currently, I like the 2x2 modified tile (61485) more than the 4x4 turntables because it would fit under the pig, even if I can only attach one single leg (or maybe one front and one back leg). The 4x4 turntables would extend to the side (if I understand correctly that the middle ring acts as Duplo stud under a foot). Fun fact: 61485 only comes in white color.

I meant 27448, not 61485, of course.

I ordered some of the 27448 tiles to test this solution. If you want you can post it as separate answer. If it works it will be interesting for everyone.

Just share your results here. And if that works I'll amend answer with this suggestion to use 27448 part.

Alex, I just tried your solution with the 27448 tiles. Unfortunately, no success. See my own answer with the sawn up DUPLO brick for details.

@Aziraphale, oh well, at least we now know 0.1mm is a lot to get the right clutch power.

Since Duplo is a 1:2 scale to Lego, I figured any Lego element twice the size of a regular stud would work. I tried out the pistons and piece 61485 (turntable) before I saw this page, and I saw that it worked so I went online to investigate to see if anyone else had had the same idea. I also thought of the 27448 piece and your post confirmed it. Just in case you didn't know, I found out that a Technic pin - preferably 6558, 32054 (don't know about the friction-less or shorter ones) - is able to fit in a Duplo figure's hand, being that it is double the width of a bar piece.


text:
Custom extension cables for Light Stax?
Recently, I got the S-12012 Light Stax kit with 50 (!) light bricks. They are different from those described in this question, but they are much cheaper, colorful and with blinking/pulsating effects. However, there is one disadvantage: all bricks have to be attached to each other to lighten up. So if I wanted to light up different areas of my set I would need several of the 4x4 battery bricks (there is only one in each kit).
My question: Is it possible to to connect/solder wires between the bricks to extend the range?
The lights are LEDs, and it does not matter how the bricks are connected as long as one stud is connected to the underside of the next brick. There are contacts on all studs and undersides. I want to avoid damaging the bricks with my limited soldering skills.
I tried to use the 8886 PF Extension Wire, but that did not work.
The contacts don't match.
Pictures 3 and 4, respectively, are close up photos of the studs and undersides of the bricks. Does this help to tell how extension wires could be attached?

Is there a single LED in a 2x2 and 2x4 brick? How do you change the effects?

lightstax.eu sells single extension cables ranging from 10-80cm for little money. You could cut the leads and adjust their length, rather than modifying some LEGO plates to act as sockets. Just an idea...

@Uli Ha, I wasn't aware of the cables, thank you for the hint. This doesn't answer my question but it definitely solves the issue very nicely. The effects are triggered by pressing or holding the button on the battery brick. It is also supposed to react to sound but I haven't figured out how.

@Uli Yes, there is one LED in each brick. Most of the bricks in this set are semi transparent, a few are clear transparent.

However, with each brick being THRU as well, these off-the-shelf extensions are even YY cables. Still, is it possible to tinker one? Both pins sit on a single stud. That's tricky!

@Aziraphale: "It is also supposed to react to sound but I haven't figured out how." - it doesn't become quite clear from the instructions, but when you cycle through the modes up to the last (fourth) mode, the lights will be off unless you create a loud noise near the battery brick. That is, if you clap or yell "hah!" or something, the lights will briefly light up for the duration of the sound. At least, that's what it works like with ours.

I have also little soldering experience, but I managed to create custom extension cables:
First: open the cover with a small screw driver:

Remove the PCB by lifting the small notch to open the light block

Then you drill a small hole into the opposite side of the metal plates, insert a small 2-wire cable (~0,25mm) and solder it to the PCB.
The outer ring is Vin and the inner ring is GND.
Then put it together and have fun.

This is straight forward. Did it work on first attempt?

Do you have pictures with soldered cables?

Unfortunately, I cannot share pictures of the soldered bricks but the final result: https://imgur.com/a/Gqt8y3c. Otherwise my little one will kill me if I destroy his steam train

The battery brick can still be recharged. The most tricky part was the plate with bar to get two tiny wires in it without getting a short circuit

LIGHT STAX have their own extension cables in 10, 15, 30 and 50 cm lengths.
With 2 x 2 brick bases:

With 1 x 2 brick bases:


text:
Do clear transparent pieces suffer from a yellow tinge over time?
Any idea if clear 1×1 round plates suffer from color differences? I recently got a bag of them and they appear to have a yellow tinge.

Yes, this has been a known issue. I'm not going to post this as an answer, as I can't remember where I read about it, and thus can't include references, but it has been discussed in a number of LEGO fan forums.

One forum note that I found: https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/topic/52672-transparent-part-yellowing/

I have found that the clear pieces depend on the piece. Some of the thinner ones do yellow, but I have 2x4 Clear bricks that are not yellowed. I think it depends on the thickness of the ABS that was used.


text:
How to open Duplo train base 2961b?
How can I open a Duplo train base 2961b without destroying it? It is not working despite fresh batteries. There are no screws.

This part wasn't meant to be taken apart,
but it is possible.

Source with more text and images
also this (very dark) video tutorial
and another video tutorial

Thank you for your answer! I managed to open the train base using the poorly illuminated video tutorial and three kitchen knives. It is surely the easiest, but also most dangerous way to do so. The train did not work because of a loose contact to the motor.


text:
Why are these bricks slightly shorter than normal?
I have two red 1×6 bricks that are slightly shorter than normal and also a bit deformed. For comparison, I here show them together with regular 1×6 bricks (the regular brick is the top one of each pair):

These bricks are shorter to the extent that considerable force is needed to connect them to regular bricks (note how much they are worn down).
I suspect that they are rather old and made from some different material, however, I have many older bricks which connect considerably better to modern standard bricks.
Thus I wonder and ask: What could be the deal with those bricks? They are part of a huge connection containing second-hand bricks, so I cannot say much about their origin, except that they are from the last century.

Any idea on the source of the "shorter" ones?  Just a guess on the "why" - they're knock-offs that completely violate/disregard Lego trademarks?  That might explain the poor attention to detail on the length quality.

@SammyB: See my edit.

For starters, having that as a production error is completely impossible, given the industrial precision of our beloved bricks.  The LEGO group has been incredibly careful for decades about the tolerance of their bricks' dimensions:

You can read this WIRED article where the author compares old and new bricks' dimensions (TL;DR: they have been making really precise bricks for decades).
Their current standard for tolerance was 10 micrometers in 2009 - see page 20 of official LEGO documentation.

I think we can discard that option.
As @SlicksterTheBrickster said in his answer, the shorter bricks seem warped.  The most plausible explanation is that extreme heat made the ABS plastic bend and get a little thicker on the walls or a little taller (floor to studs distance).  ABS is a thermoplastic polymer (as opposed to a thermosetting one), meaning that it cannot withstand intense heat and it will melt.  As an example, it's normal to wash and disinfect bricks with water at 40°C, but if you increase that to maybe 60°C or 70°C the plastic will start getting "plastic" (i.e. moldable). ABS is an amorphous material, meaning that it doesn't have a proper melting point and it transitions slowly (like glass). I would say that you can get the effect that you show by building a model and leaving it e.g. in a closed car under very hot sun with some pressure on the sides or strong torsion, or maybe close to a stove.  The bricks will slightly bend and/or deform after the episode.
If you are curious, get a caliper and measure both bricks' height and width at several points all along their length, and do the same with the walls' width.  I'm almost certain that the shorter one will have a significant variation in those values.  If your question is "But where did that material go?", it went into slightly swelling the walls.

My thinking is that since the older and shorter brick looks a little warped, perhaps it was exposed to heat which caused the plastic to melt a little. I can't say this would be a production error as the pieces are injection molded and imperfections are kept down to a fraction of a millimeter.

Thank you for your answer. Can you elaborate why melting would shorten the brick? Also, did you really want to state “I can't say this would be a production error” instead of “I can say this would not be a production error”?


text:
Sharks with frickin’ laser beams attached to their heads

The Lego Movie does not only feature sharks and lasers but also laser sharks:

However, a Lego shark only has one place where other pieces can be attached and that’s located on its belly.
Hence, I am asking: How can I attach a laser beam (or anything else for that matter) to my shark’s head?
In the above still, the shark’s jaw seems to be detached, but that does not seem very healthy and still it only provides little space to attach anything.

@Zhaph-BenDuguid: I am pretty sure. I extracted it from the movie myself. It’s in the scene where Metalbeard describes how they tried and failed to enter Lord Business’s tower. (Here it is on YouTube.)

The LEGO Agents Speedboat Rescue (8633) set has a set with laser sharks. The set uses a new version of the LEGO shark with two studs on the top behind the head.

Sadly the shark only appeared in two sets, this one and Brickbeard's Bounty (6243) and because of their limited release they are very expensive on Bricklink.
For the original shark you could use a small Technic rubber band (or any small rubber band) to attach a laser.
In the example below, The body of each laser uses a Technic pin joiner, the rubber band runs along the slot in the brick so it's kept in place. The back end of the laser is joined together with a flexible rubber axle connector.


text:
What is this 2×8 plate slotted, rectangular studs and a hole in the middle?
Please help to identify this part. What is its use?

This is
Part # 767 : Train, Track Sleeper Plate 2 x 8 without Cable Grooves
or
Part# 4166 : Train, Track Sleeper Plate 2 x 8 with Cable Grooves
depending on the cable grooves.
It is used  to attach train tracks

You can see the cable grooves in the image.


text:
How to disassemble this small Technic turntable, combination of parts 99009 and 99010?
How should I non-destructively disassemble the following parts, when they are newly assembled?
99009 Light Bluish Gray Technic Turntable Small Bottom

99010 Black Technic Turntable Small Top

These parts do not come apart. They are designed to be clicked into place and then remain connected. I have not found nor heard of a way that these can be separated without damaging the plastic and hence the functioning of the part.
The assembled component has part number 99009c01 - Technic Turntable Small, Complete Assembly with Black Outside Gear Section.

So, Part 99009 together with part 99010 will be one of those brick paradox (can be assemble once and cannot be disassemble)?

Not sure if it's a "paradox", but yes, once assembled the end result is a new part that cannot be returned to its original components. The new part's name is 99009c01. I've added this info to my answer.


text:
How to disassemble this Technic combination?
How should I disassemble the axle (7) attached in this model?
(I tried using a brick separator but failed to remove it.)

Simply use the longest technic shaft you have, and use it to push the #7 shaft out just enough to where you can finish pulling it out with your fingers. Then pull out the long shaft.

I'd suggest using not the longest axle; but an axle 8 with stop - easier to remove afterwards. Also, the yellow beam looks like it should be easy to remove beforehand.

authors: Роман Шевчук


text:
Can using a hex key to disassemble LEGO Technic pieces cause damage?
Does using the right size hex key (Allen key) to speed up the disassembly process cause damage to the LEGO Technic pieces?

In my experience, growing up with them, you can always make a Lego disassembly tool out of more Legos, and then take the tool apart.  You might need to be clever with some of them, but there is always a way.  And you don't risk damage by using a harder material.  You can still bend things though, or break them if your tool isn't designed very well and you use too much force, so you need to be careful with that.


text:
How do I robustly tilt a strength-1 wall?
Background
I am still working on my model of a ride-on mower, which has a seat that looks like this:

As you can see, the seat is mounted onto an inclined surface, which I realised to my satisfaction and which causes the seating area of the seat to be inclined as well. However, this means if I build the back of the seat in a rectangular manner, it will be inclined forwards, which is unrealistic (and uncomfortable for the driver). Therefore I need to tilt it backwards.
Goal
I have a 6×1 wall mounted onto one side of a regular 6×n plate and want to tilt it by at least 10° and at most 40°. With regular hinges, this looks like this:

However, if I use regular hinges, the result is not very robust and the wall falls down easily. I am therefore looking for a more robust solution.
Some specifications:

Whatever is needed to tilt the wall may not extend below the plate. (I need that place for something else, namely the complicated mounting.)
Whatever is needed to tilt the wall may extend somewhat forward (onto the plate) on the sides (resembling the above seat) but not backwards.
All components should be available in black. (I used red in the examples for better visibility.)
The inclination may begin somewhat above the plate.

My best solution so far are minifigure legs (which are pretty robust on their own) combined with a clip tile to hold the wall in place:

I propose a slightly different solution for the chair: Use Technic bricks.

In this picture I have used 32526 Technic 5x3 bent 90 pieces, with 43857 Technic Beam 2 and 32523 Technic Beam 3 pieces to make the chair uniform. You can make one or two attachment points to ground by either utilizing 64276 Technic Beam 2 Liftarm with Straight Ball Joint as in the picture below, or using 3651 Technic Axle and Pin Connector with a friction pin instead. For optimal reproduction of the original chair, you might want to use two of these supports in your model (my image only shows one).
Then, tilt the chair lightly back on the ball joint or connector, and use 4274 Technic Pin 1/2 together with 1x4 and 1x3 tiles to create horizontal and vertical armrests just like on the chair in your picture. You could even combine the new 1x2 tile with rounded edge with a 1x2 or 1x1 tile, mounted on a 1x3 or 1x2 plate, to create a curved top and bottom edge. Note that in the picture above I have offset the vertical tile by half a stud to make it fit more nicely.

Thank you for your answer, but I have already devised a complicated mounting of that seat, which I am quite satisfied with (with shock absorbers and the option to half-unmount the seat and turn it forward – all of which you can do with the original seat). This mounting is what happens under the 6×n plate in my setup and requires that the seat is inclined forwards (because it is mounted on something which already has to be inclined).

You could still use the above design, by making a rotating joint at the front instead of at the back using the aforementioned 3651 Technic Axle and Pin Connector.


text:
How can I emulate this wheel from the mowing unit of a ride-on mower?
I am trying to build a model of a specific ride-on mower with Lego and I cannot find a satisfying solution for the wheels supporting the mowing unit.
This is what they look like on the original:

Note that the bottom of the wheel is below the bottom line of the unit that it supports.
The scale on which I am working and my best solution so far is this (the front part):

The wheel nicely extends below the structure it supports, but:

horizontally, it extends rather far from the structure,
it builds up quite high vertically,
the construction is not very robust.

Thus my question is: What other part or combination of parts could I use to emulate this wheel? I prefer if the required parts are easily available in red, but I appreciate other suggestions as well, as I may have missed something that I can do with the parts at hand.

My first thought would be to try and build this using 2x 32017 - Technic Liftarm 5 Thin and the following combination of a 1/2 bush and a tire (same tire you have on the wheel on the black part of your build, though the front tire might fit too).

If you use a 2L axle (in red!) this should look quite sleek. Not sure if the tire is going to be tall enough to support the mower, but it would definitely be sturdy, given that you're using Technic.


text:
Can I take an old LEGO winch apart?
I have an old LEGO winch that looks like #73037

It has been "restrung" but it is very stiff and it looks like it has some of the old string stuck between the rotating and non-rotating parts. It also feels a bit gritty so there might be dirt stuck in there.
It looks like the top on each side might come off and if so I would be able to remove the stuck string and clean it.
Does anyone have any advice about taking it apart without damaging it?

You just can't. This part is fused together with sound-waves so it doesn't separate anymore.
Source and more info: fusing Lego together

Thanks for the advice. The winch may be too old to have been fused by this process but I can't know for sure. Nevertheless, I'm not going to try and open it!


text:
When was the pink brick released?
I am a student researching Lego for an essay. I was looking at when the first pink bricks were released.  I have researched and found that they were initially released between 1949 and 1956 and were discontinued and then reinstated around 1978, but other sources have said they were released in 1994.
I would like clarity of what actually happened.

There are two shades of light-pink in LEGO's history that were included in official sets. (Please note that there are other, rare shades of pink that never made it into mass production but were used as test colors or for special projects.) The older light-pink is simply called "pink" in the BrickLink Color Guide, and also often referred to as "Paradisa Pink", as it was in the LEGO Paradisa line where the color was most prominent. It is a softer, lighter shade, and was produced between 1991-2006.
The current light-pink is referred to as "bright-pink" in the BrickLink Color Guide. It was introduced in 2003 and is produced to this day. It is a much brighter and bolder color.
Besides these two light-pink colors there are also darker pinks: the older medium-dark-pink (1992-1996), the current dark-pink (1994-), and also current magenta (2000-).
You can find detailed information on them in the BrickLink Color Guide, and you can see sample parts in each color here: BrickLink Color Guide with Images.

Paradisa Pink (17 Rose) was the first in 1991. BUT, Lego used Medium Dark Pink (16 Pink) in Modulex parts as early as 1983!
There is also 9 Light Reddish Violet, which replaced 17 Rose in 1994, before being replaced in turn by Bright Pink (222 Light Purple) in 2004. This middle pink was close to Paradisa Pink, but less yellow.
There are officially two versions of Dark Pink: 22 Medium Reddish Violet and, after 2004, 221 Bright Purple. These are almost identical.
Clikits used 295 Flamingo Pink for a few parts in 2006. It's too bad that they didn't make more parts, it's really a nice color!
I have a fleshy-pinkish Automatic Binding Brick from the early 50s, but this was before Lego started giving their colors names and numbers.
Barring transparent or more purplish/reddish colors, that's all the pinks I know of. I'm curious about your sources for the 1949 and 1978 dates. I've been trying to compile all color information here: http://ryanhowerter.net/colors


text:
How to estimate the pieces of a construction from just one photo?
My teacher is handing points to anyone who could guess how many pieces are in the construction shown below. I’d say there are about 350 but most people are saying thousand or more, which is insane to me. The only clues are that it is 43 cm long and 24 cm wide.

How can I best go about such a task, i.e., how can I best estimate the number of pieces from a single photo?

It's not a set. Only the person who designed it knows how many pieces are in it.

I get it, but I just want someone with an actual knowledge on legos to make a good guess

Welcome to Bricks SE. I took the liberty to make the question more general. On Stack Exchange we hate to do your homework for you, but we may tell you how to do it yourself.

What have you tried so far? I think your teacher would be more interested in the methods you've taken to work out the problem as much as the final guess you give.

She sent us a video as well, showing all sides of it. She just wants us to guess; the one who gets closer to the answer will have the extra points. So far I've meticulously tried to count (approximately) the pieces and I'd say there are about 619. Tomorrow we'll know who's won.

Is it hollow or massive?

So...who won? Did the teacher give an actual full total, or her own guesstimate? Was it more about methods of estimation, or something else? The suspense is killing me!

In this case, knowing that the model is 43 cm long and 24 cm wide isn't particularly information. It's very difficult to give a rough average of parts when all the parts vary in size and the model isn't in a single primitive form (cube, sphere, pyramid).
With the exception of the eyes and mouth, this particular model appears to be built almost perfectly symmetrically. If you can imagine a flat plane bisecting the model in two vertically you can count the bricks on the visible side (minus the details) and duplicate that number to get a rough guess.
The model could be mostly hollow, but there are bound to be certain pieces that you don't see on either side of the model that add to the physical structure. In particular the bricks that attach the eyes and mouth and the SNOT details on the arms.
In some places it can be a bit hard to visually count the bricks (particularly around the mouth). You can use basic image editing software to sharpen the image and get a clearer idea of how many parts are used.
There are also some unusual aspects in this model where three pieces have been used where a single 2x4 brick would do as shown at the top of the front side of plant pot.

Couple of observations:

I do not understand your teacher's motivations in giving out this exercise. There is too much guesswork involved to make the exercise of any educational value. Example: there is no visibility into the internal frame of the main "stem" of the cactus, which is clearly a SNOT build made of several layers of plates mounted on an (invisible) core supporting structure.
Luckily, just putting in a guess is going to give you points, as the exercise is "My teacher is handing points to anyone who could guess how many pieces are in the construction shown below". Nowhere does it state that points are only handed out for correct guesses, so just guess any number and you should be fine.
You have no insights into the back of the structure. This could be a mirror of the front (as suggested by @Ambo100) but it could also be constructed differently, without any way of telling. Similarly, you don't know if the pot structure is hollow or solid, or if the reddish brown earth is one plate or several layers thick.

In conclusion, either the teacher is trolling you, or you are trolling us with this question.

Probably just a fun extra credit exercise

My son had a similar exercise this term to "Estimate the number of people in a crowd" with a fairly poor quality, black and white photo of a football stand. The goal was more about showing reasoning, and realising what was a reasonable estimate. There is educational value in this sort of task :)

@Zhaph-BenDuguid At the same time, people are all roughly the same size, and generally distributed rather uniformly in a crowd, so there are approaches which can leverage that. Neither applies to a Lego construction, so I see much less value in this guessing.


text:
Can I safely dissassemble a 74569 motor (the old, fast 9v one)
I have an ancient 74569 motor:

Unfortunately, it's broken: The shaft spins freely by hand, but when I connect power to it, it doesn't spin at all.
I would like to see if I can just open it and place a new DC motor inside, but without breaking it if possible – has anyone opened one of these before or posted instructions as to how?
I was thinking something like this motor:

would fit inside it, but of course I would check the dimensions first and make sure it's not a bad solder joint or something else.
I see Philo has disassembled its replacement here, but I don't see anything similar for the 74569.

Well, I opened it up without much success, and took some pictures of the process:
At first I tried pushing/prying the light grey tabs away from the dark gray "bottom", but those weren't budging

So plan B: wedge it apart:

It was opening, but I was also distorting the plastic in the process - perhaps if I had a hot air station or something, I could have of softened it, but eventually it gave way:

I didn't open it just yet, but rather went to work on the other side - I made my way around from the front/back, as it seemed easier than going at it directly from the side. Anyways, it was much easier than the first side, and I got it open:

Nothing fell out, and I didn't rip any wires out by opening it, so I proceeded to take out the motor:

This is where something finally fell out - there was a little "spacer" disk (visible in the top-left) that was between the end of the axle and the back side of the plastic housing.
After that, the electrical connection assembly slid off easily - not sure what the component is or how to test if it's good, but it seems like it was made such that it's replaceable - no solder was used, just metal "crimps"

This is where I found out that the motor itself is good if I just connect a battery to it directly, so I think I may end up drilling some holes and have a DIY wire coming out the back - all the contacts on the inside seemed good and clean, but unfortunately the bottom seems to be rusted to the point of not making contact anymore.
I think it will snap back together just fine, but it will have scars from the surgery.
For anyone curious, the motor itself is a mabuchi 70586, but any FC-280 motor should fit.

You were lucky that the snap fit joints didn't break. I attempted basically the same thing in order to strap a PF plug to such a motor and broke about half of them in the process. Had to use super glue to put everything back together.

Some precisions: the shiny disk is a resettable thermal fuse aimed at limiting current in the motor if it is stalled for a long time. The black cylinder is a 15V surge suppressor, limiting voltage spikes caused by motor brushes.

authors: александр шлыков


text:
Tools to unbuild a model more easily?
Are there any good tools out there to help unbuilding a model, for example removing axles from beams?
Something like the famous brick separator, but for Technic models.

back in the day, I used to use dental floss to split parts by getting in the 'seams' between them. It really depends on what parts. I suspect a small nylon spudger would do too.

Actually, the brick separator is a very versatile tool for disassembling Technic. The end of the wedge can be slipped into the slot on the side of several pieces to help pop Technic pins out from behind (I also use it like a screwdriver for aligning Technic pins while building). It can also be used to separate stubborn beam connections.
I've also got a 1:6 axle attached to the little axle pusher using an extender (sorry...I don't know the actual names of these things and I don't have time to look them up right now). It works great for pushing axles through deeper sockets, or for popping pins out from behind.
Other than that, I've never really had much trouble pulling Technic parts apart. I'm sure there are other uses I've yet to need, but that little orange tool has been a godsend for my sanity and fingertips. :)


text:
How much current do the LEGO motors draw?
I'm building a project with Raspberry Pi and some other electronics driving the LEGO Power Functions M-Motor (8883) and I need to know how much current those motors draw under load.
Has anyone done tests and put together a spec sheet for these motor's electronic characteristics?
This is my first post here on Bricks.SE!  Hopefully sharing this is welcome.

YES!  Philippe Hurbain (Philo) has put together a great and very detailed write-up on those and many other LEGO 9V electric motors.
You can find it here:  LEGO 9V Technic Motors compared characteristics
Your current draw for that specific motor @ 9V is:
No load:              65mA
Loaded (3.6 N.cm):    310mA
Loaded (6.0 N.cm):    480mA
Stalled (11 N.cm):    850mA

I was about to ask this very question when a friend pointed me to this write-up.
Hopefully someone else will find it as useful as I did.

I found his web site very helpful when I had do find a fitting H-bridge  to control LEGO motors with my arduino

Can you share the make & model of the H-bridge that you used and where you got it? I have a similar project involving littleBits, See here for details.


text:
Lego Pneumatic Engine: Possible Damage from Baking Soda and Vinegar?
I have a question on Chemistry.SE about secondary reactions producing something other than CO2, and from a bit of discussion there, the answer seems to be that there aren't any, but some of the original ingredients can get splashed up into the LPE.
So, has anyone tried doing that?  If so:

What was your setup?
How did you clean the LPE afterwards, if at all?
Was there any damage after a few days?

I'm thinking about a 3-step process, but I'm also wondering if it's even necessary:

Run it on Baking Soda and Vinegar as planned.
Run it on Water to rinse out whatever raw ingredients might have gotten into it.
Run it on Air to dry out the water.

The water is probably from a garden hose, with the unsolved problem of how to hook it up to a Lego hose.
The air is probably from a shop compressor with the regulator turned down.  I have a bicycle pump for testing, and a sports inflator needle to make the connection, but I don't think I want to pump it that much!

The reason to use Baking Soda and Vinegar at all, instead of just using Air in the first place, is to have a compact, self-contained system that can run itself around a track for a while, and be able to start and stop on command without over-pressurizing for lack of use or running out from constant use.
So, I've rigged up a pressure-regulated, motorized air pump to displace vinegar out of one small plastic water bottle, and into another that has the baking soda, which then creates the working gas.
I've seen a big bank of pre-pressurized soda bottles on an LPE-powered car, but that's just too bulky for what I'm doing.

Some pictures may help:
The water bottle sits horizontally, under the black "hold-down bridge", with the bottom against the RCX.

"Steam" locomotive with Walschaerts valve gear.  And yes, it runs.  :-)  Both directions.
(Wires and sensors are in false color to show the connections.)
There's also a tender car with the other water bottle and the air pump to displace something out of it.

Is the use of a separate component dedicated for filtering out fluids and solid particles out of the question?

@zovits No, I could do that.  But it would have to be fairly small if I'm going to avoid another redesign.  About the size of 2 Lego air tanks side-by-side, and 2 more single air tanks in other places if I get a little bit more creative.  I could also put something inside the reaction vessel, which is a 0.5L water bottle on its side with hose connections in the cap.

What is the orientation of the bottle like, is it horizontal or vertical? If the latter, does the cap point down or up? Will the orientation change during operation?

@zovits I added some pictures.  The orientation won't change, but it'll probably slosh around a bit.

I wonder why you are going such complicated way (and, potentially, damaging yor pneumatic pistons) with chemicals. It seems to me it would have been easier, safer and have a consistent pressure using motorized LEGO Pneumatic pump. No overpumping could is also achieveable.

@Alex Ideally, I would use a motorized Lego pump to provide all of the working pressure.  But LPE's need a lot of volume!  And that volume also has to be at a fairly high pressure if they haven't been pried/cut open, drilled out, and re-lubed like mine haven't.  (nor do I intend to)  I think the closest I'm going to get is a Lego air pump to displace one chemical into another, so that the reaction can produce far more gas than the pump can.  A "chemical amplifier", if you will.

I see two main problems that need to be adressed here.

Intrusion of liquids into the pneumatic system
Intrusion of solid particles into the pneumatic system

To filter out solid particles, namely baking soda, a fine mesh could be used, either alone or in multiple layers.
To get rid of droplets, some absorbing material such as cotton could be inserted before, after or rather between the layers of mesh.
So if we can suppose that the bottle will have an exit point that is always clear from the liquid-solid phase (based on your comment "with hose connections in the cap"), we can imagine the following filter system built inside a small diameter tube (like a plastic straw), where # denotes layers of fine mesh fixed inside the pipe, capable of holding back both baking soda dust and the loose cotton swabs:
 ________________________________________
/                                        \
|                                         \
|                                          \
|                                           \___
|                                               |
|            #cotton#cotton#cotton#cotton#======+
|                                            ___|
|------------------------------------------ /
|    o     8      O   Ö    *     0    .    /
|  °    vinegar + baking soda   :    ö    /
\________________________________________/

Or if you need to fill the bottle more than halfway, but can ensure that the sloshing will not reach the top of the laying bottle, then you might be able to use a doubly-bent straw:
 ________________________________________
/                                        \
|        #cotton#cotton#cotton#cotton#=\  \
|                                      \\  \
|                                       \\  \___
|----------------------------------------\\-----|
|  :         *           ö                \=====+
|       o      Ö    0        8     O    .    ___|
|   °                 Ö                     /
|    o     8      O        *     0    .    /
|  °    vinegar + baking soda   :    ö    /
\________________________________________/

But as MaxW has noted on your question over at Chemistry.SE:

You won't get pure CO2 out of an aqueous solution. There will be water vapor in the CO2.

So your metal parts will definitely be exposed to a (probably highly diluted) carbonic acid, that "can corrode, rust or pit steel but the extent of those effects depends upon the chemical composition of the steel. Stainless steel, in contrast, resists general corrosion caused by carbonic acid." (Source)
How fast of how much will the parts be corroded? I can't find a definitive answer for that, but in the end, it all comes down to three, highly variable factors:

The exact composition of the steel used in your pistons (pretty much unknowable, especially since the particular pistons are about 20 years old)
The concentration of carbonic acid in the generated stream of CO2 (depends on the filter, the water content of the vinegar used and probably other factors as well)
The duration of exposure (that can be minimized by applying the cleaning steps outlined in your question, but consider that rinsing with water brings another set of problems, like limescale or rusting - so if I were you, I'd skip step 2 and only run it on warm, dry air to remove any moisture from the system)

Looking forward to read your experience!

+1 Just because of perfect ASCII art.


text:
Dichotomous key for identifying / discovering LEGO pieces?
Is there a dichotomous key available for looking up LEGO pieces by progressively answering information about their characteristics?  It doesn't necessarily need to fit the strict definition of a dichotomous key (namely there being only two choices per stage of identification).
For example:

Does it have studs?  Yes
How many sides have studs?  2
How many studs are there total?  6
What color is the piece?  Gray

might yield part number 4277927

Additional characteristics such as estimated date of manufacture or whether a piece is counterfeit may be discerned by applying the same method to non-functional features such as the font of the logo.

s/bump/stud/G :) But I like this idea.

Not quite (although it would be a fun project... :-)

Closest thing that I know of is the peeron site - you can use google to search only peeron by adding "site:peeron.com" or you can use the peeron website to find the part.  Start by looking at the part list for a few sets you have (or see for sale) and then when you get used to the terminology you should know how to search for the unknown part.  It lists all sets/years that the part came from, and all colors it is available in, and uses Lego part numbers and set numbers (it ads an extra digit to set numbers that have been reused by Lego)
brickwiki says:
Peeron is a set database with set inventories and an instruction scan repository (PICSL1) run by Dan Boger, with the help of a number of volunteers (Clark Stephens, TWS Garrison and a number of developers).
[ . . . ]
Peeron is one of the three major sources (with BrickLink and LDraw.org) for nomenclature and classification, it maintains a color list, and assigns (in cooperation with LDraw) names and numbers for parts that haven't yet been named.


text:
Is there a guide on how to code custom blocks for NXT?
The answer to a previous question pointed to "custom blocks for NXT". I am not talking about creating "My Blocks" in the "Custom Palette", but code blocks that can be imported into LEGO Mindstorms NXT.
Are there tools to code these custom blocks available to the public? Where can I get them?

Custom blocks are created using National Instruments LabView software. The instructions for how to do this are still available at https://download.ni.com/evaluation/mindstorms/NXT_Creating_MINDSTORMS_Blocks.pdf.
After some digging, I was able to find https://forums.ni.com/t5/NI-Labs-Toolkits/NI-LabVIEW-for-LEGO-MINDSTORMS-LabVIEW-Module-for-LEGO/ta-p/3516439?profile.language=en which looks like it still has download links that work.
I haven't actually tried installing and running anything though.

The link for LabView is a dead end but I found it here: http://www.ni.com/download/labview-development-system-7.1/3578/en/


text:
How do I build this robot car?
I want to start using more LEGO Technic, but I'm not sure what the best way is to buy the parts without breaking the bank.
I'd really like to make a robot like the ones shown in this video.
Making Lego Car CLIMB Obstacles

They identify these parts:
SBrick https://www.sbrick.com/sbrick.html
BrickController 2 app (Android)
PlayStation 4 wireless controller
But where do I get the rest?  Their channel recommends BrickLink, but that mostly seems to be individual pieces and vintage bits of Lego (unless I'm using it all wrong?)
Is there a low-cost way to buy most of the things shown here?  Should I buy a kilogram of used Technic elements on eBay and hope for the best?
Which motors, gearing systems, and batteries are they using here?  How are they connected to the SBrick? Is there a single kit that gets me 90% of the way there?

I think it would help if you could clarify a little what precisely you are looking for. For example: Are you looking for resources to show you how to use Technic parts? Are you looking for sources of third party kits like that particular model? Are you looking for more information about how to identity the parts in a model and how to source them on sites like BrickLink?
Speaking of BrickLink, some sellers do offer custom kits though it's a little buried in the interface. You are correct that the primary trade is in individual parts though.

good point - added some definition at the end

One more thought, I tracked down the actual video on Youtube and checked for more information and the About text for the channel explicitly says they don't publish building instructions, so it's unlikely you can contact the creator and get a parts list that way.

There are several ways you can start with LEGO Technic.
If you have no elements whatsoever the best (cost-efficient) approach is to buy a set that contains most of the parts. Or a couple of sets. Bulk lots could also be useful, however, they may not contain the most expensive elements (like motors). Specific elements could be acquired from Bricklink or BrickOwl.
It is also cost-efficient to buy sets that contain electronic elements already since these are usually more expensive when bought individually.

Which motors, gearing systems, and batteries are they using here?

Motor - Power Functions M-Motor (as a "set") or Electric, Motor 9V Power Functions M with Dark Bluish Gray Bottom (as an "element")
Gears - multiple have been used in a video. You can find all of them in the Technic, Gear section. These are used in the pictured model:

Technic, Gear 24 Tooth (2nd Version - 1 Axle Hole)

Technic, Gear Worm Screw, Long, Axle Opening Type II

Technic, Gearbox 2 x 4 x 3 1/3

Technic, Gear 40 Tooth

Battery - battery box used in the video is Electric 9V Battery Box Power Functions (Rechargeable) with Dark Bluish Gray Bottom. It is rather expensive and I suggest much cheaper and commonly found Electric 9V Battery Box Power Functions (Non-Rechargeable) with Dark Bluish Gray Bottom instead.
Please be advised both motors and battery boxes belong to the Power Functions system which has been recently discontinued by LEGO.

How are they connected to the SBrick?

SBrick is a controller and has connections compatible with the ones used by the Power Functions system. Each motor has a cable with a connector, so no extra cables are needed here.

Is there a single kit that gets me 90% of the way there?

The Pictured model doesn't use a huge bunch of elements, so it is rather hard to define what 90% is. Personally, I would probably look for some used sets with motors and battery box. And acquire the rest from Bricklink.

Great answer  - much appreciated!


text:
Is the Lego Duplo Track System being discontinued?
Our child recently got the Duplo train starter set 10507 as a gift. The box indicates an extension pack with more tracks, so I was confident our child would be able to extend the (sorry) somewhat boring little circle out of 12 curved track parts from 10507.
On the official Lego website, however, I am seeing now that the only two Duplo train sets still being offered now are the aforementioned 10507, as well as 10508, the huge Deluxe Train Set, as well as 10810, a push-train.
With 10507 and 10508 having appeared in 2013, only 10810 having been released in 2016 (and this set being rather "simple" - no motor, no switches, also just one straight track per set), and the latest tracks pack, 10506, not even available any more in the official store ... does this mean I should start hoarding compatible Duplo tracks now, before I also can't get any on Amazon and in toy stores, either?
Note that I'm not asking whether anyone can see the future. I'm asking whether TLC has made any public announcements on their future plans for Duplo railroads, or whether there are at least any known sales numbers for Duplo railroad sets that indicate they are/are not a commercial failure these days.

It hasn't been officially announced yet, but there are at least four large LEGO DUPLO train sets coming this summer. This includes two extension train track packs with straight tracks, curved tracks, switches, bridges, and train crossings. The two full train sets will include more of the same tracks. The set numbers for the extension packs are #10872 and #10882, and the new train sets are #10874 and #10875. The official set names are prices are yet unknown. I would suggest to wait until the summer, unless you can get the older sets for a very good price.

Excellent, that sounds promising. Where does one learn about that kind of information? Only as/via an "insider"?

LEGO fan sites, forums, and social-media groups are good sources of early info on upcoming sets. There is not one source, but coming from all over the place; LEGO themselves through their own channels (some intentional, some accidental), LEGO partners, LEGO retailers, news channels, insider info, etc. You can always ask here, and if some info is known already, someone will let you know. Or, you can just wait until LEGO announces the new sets officially. The big releases with a wide variety of sets are at the beginning of the year, and in the summer, with a few smaller releases in between.


text:
Why was monorail offered the way it was?
There have only been 3 + 2 official monorail sets by Lego. Three monorails:

(Space, Futuron) Monorail Transport System
(Town, airport) Airport Shuttle
(Space, Unitron) Monorail Transport Base

And two boxes of extra tracks:

an older, Space-themed one
a newer, town-themed one

(For the track boxes, the theme is mainly influenced by the monorail set they were released together with. The tracks do not have anything that makes them special for one theme or another.)
Other than these, a couple of single replacement parts could be ordered, as well.

The above three monorail sets have several features in common:

They contain a rather long (especially the Airport Shuttle, but also the Unitron monorail) track.
They contain a motorized train.
They contain two full-fledged stations.
In the case of the Space monorails, they even contain an extra vehicle.

As a result, all three sets were among the biggest and thus probably most expensive ones in their respective theme.

This always struck me as odd: When I was a kid, I loved the Airport Shuttle, but I was unable to buy an extra station or train, because there simply wasn't any. Likewise, the Airport Shuttle was the only monorail set I happened to get1 - and I presume there are plenty of children who would have liked some monorail, but never had a chance to get any of these really huge sets due to their sheer price.
In particular, I contrast this with Lego trains, which have always been offered in quite a different way:

There have been train sets of different sizes, in particular "starter sets" that only comprised a small oval of tracks and a short train.
Train sets that brought trains would usually only include a rather minimalist station (for passenger trains, often just a simple platform that did not even span the entire length of the train), thereby keeping set size a bit down.
Single train cars and engines were offered as separate sets.
Stations of different sizes were offered as separate sets.
At least in earlier years, there were also completely unmotorized trains as an alternative to the motorized ones, which further helped reduce the set price.

Hence, I am interested in the following: Is there any knowledge on why TLC decided to use a different pattern for monorail sets, by only offering very few, very big sets without any real extension sets (save for tracks)?
1: Although, I admit, this wasn't entirely the fault of the effect I focus in this question. The Futuron monorail was simply a tad too early and I "missed out" while it was still available, whereas I considered attempting to get the Unitron monorail, but ultimately did not like the set as it was designed - what's the purpose of that train (maybe that makes for a good separate question), transport its own cockpits? That seemed pointless, so I discarded the idea, hoping for the next monorail set ... that never came ...

Why design the core monorail hardware this way?

This is hard to answer without a degree of speculation, but I assume that the core reason behind the decision to design the monorail this way likely came down to cost and engineering challenges. TLG wanted to allow for a monorail train to be able to navigate inclines effectively. This required:

A cog system
An additional degree of freedom between cars compared to trains (vertical movement as well as lateral)
An additional degree of freedom between wheel sets and cars
More specific power to weight requirements to maintain speed on inclines

Ultimately, TLG landed on the fairly rigid system of a central motor and couplings that create the necessary degrees of freedom with a car on either side. This likely required the smallest number of new parts and showed implicitly that the monorail motor isn't designed and tested to work well pulling more than two cars.
Why offer only large sets and not just a basic oval?
The core features of the monorail system that differentiate it from the regular trains of the era became:

Inclined and elevated track
Stopping at particular track segments rather than being controlled remotely

Given these features, it makes sense that any complete monorail set would have at minimum:

Elevated track including ramp sections
At least 2 monoswitches. Technically, you could just have one, but that would really limit play value since the train wouldn't have any destination other than its starting point
A point of interest at the monoswitches for play value

Unless these features are included, the set might as well just be a regular train set. While you are correct that the later sets were more complicated, 6990 was basically just an oval of track with a pair of ramps and two monoswitches. I believe it included just two straight track sections in addition to these.
Given the inflexibility of the overall system (e.g. you can't just add one more car), TLG decided to include both cars in each complete monorail set and not offer any as add-on sets.
Comparison to 9V train sets
While there were many small train-themed sets in this time period, I'm not aware of low-cost starter sets. You could certainly buy a pack of 9V curved rails and a motor and work your way up from there, but the three complete sets released between 1989 and 1994 were actually fairly expensive:

1991 Metroliner (4558) - $149
1991 Load and Haul Railroad (4563) - $120
1994 Freight Rail Runner (4564) - $134

Compare these to the complete monorail sets of the same period:

1989 Monorail Transport System (6990) - $155
1994 Monorail Transport Base (6991) - $178
1990 Airport Shuttle (6399) - $140

The difference in price between the cheapest monorail and train set from the era is only $20.
Why no add-on sets?

When I was a kid, I loved the Airport Shuttle, but I was unable to buy
an extra station or train, because there simply wasn't any.

While there weren't sets that included additional cars in the same way as regular trains, the monorail sets were generally part of larger themes that had additional sets available and were marketed together. For example, there were aircraft of different sizes and an airport marketed alongside Airport Shuttle:

The Futuron theme had many sets available as well, including another base:

Just in case my answer didn't make this clear, I really like the monorail theme. However, while being great collector's items, I believe that the monorail theme is generally considered to be a business failure. Offering two completely separate train systems at the same time with slightly different features ultimately didn't pan out well for a lot of the reasons that you cited.

Thank you for the extensive answer. Just a few comments: I am aware monorail trains are not as flexible as regular trains when it comes to adding cars. Even so, I would have hoped for at least an additional three-piece standard train (motor + two cars) as an extra set. Also, note that new monorail parts were designed later on, at the time of the Airport Shuttle (the switches, 2890 and 2889), and seemingly just "for variation", so an alternative, shorter car base may not have been totally impossible. ...

... You are right in that 6990 indeed featured just a rather short track. I also agree there must be at least two stops, but I find it questionable that in all cases, each of these stops was so large it could have been a good space base/town monorail stop set in its own right (compare again the minimalist platforms often included in train sets). Indeed, all train sets after the discontinuation of motorless trains were rather expensive, but at least you could buy an engine like 4551-1 (or even just 4546-1), tracks, ...

... some cars and a station separately. To adult collectors, it may not matter, but for a child, it can make a crucial difference whether there are several distinct sets (that are used together, but are bought by different people, e.g. parents, grandparents, or (for smaller sets) friends), or whether there is one huge set that all these people have to team up to buy together. Lastly, I don't quite buy the explanation that the monorails were embedded in other themes - that reasoning would work equally well for offering only a single, complete train set and saying it's embedded in town, anyway.

I agree that it would have been nice to have separate cars available. The motor was actually available as a service pack (5040), but it's really only useful as a replacement for a lost/broken motor without the cars. Regular trains were designed and sold as a much more flexible system.

Not really an answer, just a small point of fact.....  There were actually 4 Monorail Trains planned, a Futuron Space-Themed one, a Unitron Space-Themed one, the ever pleasant Airport Shuttle Town-Themed one, (good for cities, even by today's standards, as building a large scale Monorail using brick-build tracks and Power Functions is a little too labor intensive, and, in some cases, expensive, for some buyers), and the last one, a Seatron Monorail.  Seatron was unfortunately unreleased, as Lego's own higher ups thought that it wasn't the right time for aliens, which if you know Lego Prototypes, you know Seatron had aliens.  Ultimately, as Seatron's Monorail was unreleased, it is unknown just what size of track it had, or if it had the long or short car couplings, (yes, there were two types of coupler), but what is known is that it was a very large train itself, despite not knowing the piece count on the train itself, (of which, it may not have had the highest piece count for a monorail train), it did have one of the largest finished product sizes I've seen, including a very large globe-style cockpit on either end, a small, (about 10 studs long), presumably passenger compartment, and, most of all for those of us in the MOC community using these old trains, the central motor cover was featured in yellow, (currently, only Airport Shuttle's train had a central motor cover, in red, which has severly limited the creation of new trains with the cover outside of red-colored engines).  The Seatron was also the widest monorail, as it featured a pair of Part 2466 on either side, making the train about 8 studs wide, in comparison to Airport Shuttle, which was only 4 studs wide with the doors closed.  Either way, poor Seatron never had the chance to shine, it would've made for some pretty impressive MOCs, and overall would've made, just as it was, a futuristic cargo or construction themed monorail.  But, alas, Seatron never got to show us her glory, and thus Monorail #4 never saw the light of day outside of the set design lab she was created in.  I'm certain old Seatron, of, as I call her, #4, is currently sitting in Lego's own archives, gathering dust, she'll never move again.  Sigh, oh well, why am I telling you this?  Just look for yourself t the glory of Monorail #4, Seatron:

BREAKING NEWS!  Straight from the minds of Lego Developers, here be Monorail #5, I think....  Tell me what you think....  Hmm, kinda interesting to see the Buffaloes again.  Also seems kinda interesting that there are two different engines pictured, and both are Steam Engines, which really differ from the Engines #1-#4.  (noteworthy, there are some referances to attempts to build Steam Monorails in the real world, just like these, over-rail too).  Although, the site I got this from, Eurobricks, seems to have a link to Brickipedia, and as somebody who's browsed more prototype over on the old Brickipedia than most, I find it odd that I never saw this image, otherwise I would've remembered it....  Here you go:

Check that, Monorails #5 and #6 are seen, weird, two trains, one track, huh?

That is some sweet, sweet Lego history right there. That underwater monorail looks awesome. Definitely some MOCing inspiration from that.

That Wild West photo is an excellent find - after reading WJW's answer, I was actually contemplating asking a separate question about this, and still am (because I think it is somewhat marginal here, but deserves its own question, which would also make the information easier to find by future visitors). Would you mind posting that image as an answer if I create a separate question and ping you with a link over here?

@Craig: An interesting detail is that it actually seems to be an amphibious monorail.

There were more than 5 monorails planned actually. The fifth one was a Wild West themed one. It used the same track but had a different motor. I’m surprised that it gets overlooked since an image was released of it for brick-journal

Could you please add the image to your answer? I bet future readers would love to see it as well :)

Yeah, picture, quick please?  At least a scan?  Kinda weird though, I would have expected Wild West to have more of a 12Volt or 9Volt Style Steam Train, not a Monorail, unless, of course, it was some kind of gold mine like set with a emphasis on runaway mine trains rocketing through the mine out of control.

Hmm, you know, even better, which issue/year of brickjournal was it pictured in?

Hold on, I think I just found it...  Maybe, doesn't really like a Monorail, but I could be wrong.....  Here, I'll add another answer with the image I found, maybe that'll get some conversation going.....  (I would just add the image to this comment, but I don't exactly see a button for it, soooo....)

On second thought, I'll just edit my original answer, and see what new info comes from it.  Have fun, also, why is there no edit comment button?

@Brickticks Comments don't support images (if you don't count hyperlinks pointing to images) and can only be edited in the first 5 minutes after being posted. After that they can only be deleted.

I'd also like to see any picture for this

authors: Игорь Григорьев