Review: 10361 - Part 2 - Holiday Express Train
Posted by FlagsNZ,
At about this time of year, LEGO releases their next instalment of the Winter Village collection.
This year's offering released under the Icons theme is 10361 Holiday Express Train.
Read on as I review this year's seasonal offering.
Summary
10361 Holiday Express Train, 956 pieces.
£109.99 / $129.99 / €119.99 | 11.5p/13.6c/12.6c per piece.
Buy at LEGO.com »
Nice decorative train for the holiday season;
- Nice colour scheme
- Inflation proofed price
- Includes innovative 3D-printed part
- Small driving wheels
- Flaws in the engine design
The set was provided for review by LEGO. All opinions expressed are those of the author.
The box
The front of the box shows an image of the 10361 Holiday Express Train snaking along a track towards the viewer. There is a small platform off to one side.
A female minifigure is walking towards a special LEGO element: the 3D-printed blue train.
The rear of the box shows the track made up into a full circle with the platform connected to the track. An image shows one of the special features of the train: as it is pulled along, the polar bear sitting on the carriage rings a bell.
Powered Up
To motorise your 10361 Holiday Express Train, you will need to purchase these three Powered-Up parts:
My experience of going online to search for these parts on LEGO.com was that these parts are either available, on back order or a retired product depending on which country I used for the search.
3D printed train
Showcased on the box are several images of the 3D-printed train. You can check out a review of this special element in Part 1 of my review of the set.
The parts
The parts come in six paper bags.
The 3D printed train is packaged in its own gift box.
The four bundles of curved track elements are loose in the box. This is enough track to make one complete circle.
Printed parts
10361 Holiday Express Train comes with these four printed elements. The set comes with two Holiday Express name plate printed tiles.
There are no stickers.
Minifigures
10361 Holiday Express comes with four minifigures.
- A male minifigure passenger
- A female minifigure passenger
- The engine driver, and
- The train guard.
At the time of writing this review the complete parts inventories for this set are not live on Rebrickable. The parts inventory here at Brickset is not complete.
I suspect that the printed torsos for these four minifigures are new for this set, but I am unable to confirm this.
The male train passenger is wearing a tri-coloured puffer jacket. You can catch a glimpse of the collar of a jersey underneath this jacket.
This minifigure head has an alternate expression.
All four minifigure heads have been seen in numerous sets.
The female train passenger is wearing an Olive Green hooded duffle coat. You can catch a glimpse of the fleece-lined duffle coat hood.
She has an alternate expression, too.
I have removed the engine driver's red scarf to showcase this minifigure.
The engine driver is wearing blue denim overalls with adjustable shoulder straps. He has a pen and some notepaper in the bib pocket.
He is wearing a dark brown cheesecutter that is sometimes called a flat cap. This part has been seen in only five sets.
The train guard is wearing a vintage paisley waistcoat over a white shirt. The shirt has some gold collar detailing. His tie is held in place with a gold tie pin.
The train guard has a gold watch fob and the waistcoat has a buckle on the back.
New track
With the release of 60470 Explorer Train, two new track elements were added to the LEGO parts inventory:
Another new mould for an existing part is the curved rail section which appears in 60470 Explorer Train as well as this set.
The image below highlights the three differences. (The new element is on the left while the traditional element is on the right).
The new element has:
- Semicircular tubes on the 2x8 Sleeper in lieu of the plastic tags
- A slight hollow where the tracks fish plate would be.
- A slightly different female clip where the tracks join together.
The new track design is completely compatible with the existing element. The new element is on the left while the traditional element is on the right in the image below.
The 60470 Explorer Train comes with straight track sections, but these use the existing mould and not a refreshed element.
Bag 1
Bag 1 assembles the small train platform which attaches to the train track. The platform has a bench seat and a black lampstand.
There is a Light Royal Blue trunk that has a microscale winter village on the lid.
Some ice cream and carrot elements in earth green are used as trees in this scene. This is the first time carrots have appeared in this colour.
The trunk has an airmail envelope attached to the side.
The box opens and highlights the red ribbon that surrounds the box.
There are three microscale modules and the 3D-printed blue train. This sits on the microscale village layout.
There is a yellow excavator.
There is a microscale ship that reminds me of 10210 Imperial Flagship.
The helicopter looks like it could be part of the Jungle Exploration theme.
Bag 2
Bag 2 begins with the assembly of the engine body.
The engine cab has a pressure gauge, spanner, and some other controls over the fire box.
Bag 3
Bag 3 builds the two train engine bogies.
The bogie for the leading wheels has some foliage in lieu of a pilot or cowcatcher.
The axle meshes with a cam that operates the play feature of the smokestack or chimney.
Here is a close up of the smokestack or chimney.
This sits in a tube with the red pushrod threaded through the turntable under the chassis.
The driving wheels bogie is a much simpler design.
Using the Whyte notation of classification for steam locomotives, this engine would be classified as 4-4-0 meaning there are:
- Four leading wheels,
- Four driving wheels, and
- Zero trailing wheels
Looking at the side of the engine you can see that there is a large gap between these two bogies. You can also see the small size of the driving wheels.
Bag 4
Bag 4 assembles the engine's tender.
The tender is decorated with a wreath on both sides. A small brick-built parcel sits on the top.
This tender is hollow as it would be the space to accommodate the 88009 Hub should you choose to motorise your train.
Bag 5
Bag 5 assembles the feature carriage. There is some complex SNOT techniques used to assemble the polar bear which may have led to this set's 18+ age designation.
This is obviously a Northern Hemisphere winter Holiday Express Train. Polar Bears are not found in the Southern Hemisphere – you find penguins instead!
I feel as if the polar bear has a very sad expression on its face.
The polar bear has a two-tone green scarf.
As the carriage is pulled along, a mechanism connected to the rear axle causes the bear to ring the bell held in its right hand. The left arm pivots and the bear nods its head as well.
The arms pivot a quarter run with each rotation of the carriage wheels.
Bag 6
Bag 6 assembles the decorative brake or guard's van.
Continuing the red ribbon theme, there is a big brick-built red ribbon tied with a bow knot around the guard's van.
The roof of this carriage lifts off easily. There are two chairs and a table set with two dark pink cups inside the carriage.
Completed model
Here is the completed model.
The smoke stack or chimney lifts up and down as the train rolls along the track. There is a plume of white steam/smoke puffing out of the chimney.
The smoke stack has a tapered spark arrestor included in the design. This makes this train more likely to be modelled on an American design: American trains typically used chopped wood as fuel which often produced sparks, while coal was the preferred fuel used in Europe which does not produce as many sparks.
The carriages are connected using Technic connector pins. This is the same way that the carriages were connected in the 10254 Winter Holiday Train.
These trains with short carriages look better on circular tracks.
Compromised design
I'll try and describe in detail some of the engine design features in an attempt to explain some of the design challenges of this model.
Let's look at the primary play function of the engine: the moving smokestack.
To enable the smokestack to lift up and down, the cam that pushes the smoke stack up and down must be centred directly underneath the smoke stack. This makes the axis of the smoke stack the pivot point of the leading wheels bogie (the turntable element shown below).
From this point, there must be a compromise in the wheel design as the driving wheels bogie (the rear bogie) needs to be capable of being modified to accept the Powered-Up 88011 Train Motor.
As a result of this compromise, it is not possible to have the larger diameter train wheels, normally found on older looking steam engines, as driving wheels.
Therefore 10361 Holiday Express Train uses the smaller train wheels as the driving wheels which I feel just looks wrong.
This is further highlighted by that wonderful printed name plate. These items on real trains are sized to be the diameter of the larger driving wheels of these steam engines. So, the size of this curved name plate conflicts with the small diameter of the engine wheels.
It also means that there is that large gap between these two engine bogies.
So if you are willing to forfeit the bobbing smoke stack then you could install the Powered-Up 88011 Train Motor on the front bogie and have a pair of the larger train wheels as driving wheels similar to how 10254 Winter Holiday Train is designed.
Price comparison
The comparable LEGO product is 10254 Winter Holiday Train. This set was released in 2016.
10254 Winter Holiday Train has 734 parts and 10361 Holiday Express Train has 976 parts.
| Set | No. of Parts | GBP | USD | Euro | Price per part | ||
| Winter Holiday Train | 734 | £ 74.99 | $ 99.99 | € 89.99 | £ 0.10 | $ 0.14 | € 0.12 |
| Holiday Express Train | 976 | £ 109.99 | $ 129.99 | € 119.99 | £ 0.11 | $ 0.13 | € 0.12 |
So, despite that in the intervening nine years, with the United Kingdom leaving the European Union and the uncertainty of recent global trade tariffs, 10361 Holiday Express Train is almost the same value for money and has not been affected by inflation.
Winter Trains - side by side
As suggested in the comments, below, here is images of 10254 Winter Holiday Train and 10362 Holiday Express Train so that you can make an informed comparison.
I really like my 10254 Winter Holiday Train. It is on display from early December each year as I lay the track underneath our Christmas Tree. It is motorised and I usually run it on Christmas Day. I have to say that this model is quite dusty. I have got it out of storage for this comparison.
Also commented on below, the carriages of 10254 Winter Holiday Train are connected using the magnetic coupler.
Overall opinion
10254 Winter Holiday Train is a cute and popular little train that wizzes around the track. It was always going to be hard for any new design to improve on this set.
10361 Holiday Express Train comes close; I like the potential of this set but believe that a few modifications are required.
I do like the two-tone blue colour theme and trains with short carriages always look good on circular tracks.
87 likes
56 comments on this article
Replace the polar bear car with a car full of gifts like previous iterations. It’s not a Christmas float, it’s a working man’s holiday train, we got presents to deliver.
Currently the Brickset Review link on this set's page links to the Part 1 of this review, for the 3D printed part. You might want to consider linking this part instead as it's probably more relevant to those looking for a set review.
Very detailed review, I like the attempt to look at historical pricing as well, will be interested to see how this looks for other sets.
For the engine, other reviews have noted that when modified to take the Powered-Up bogie, the battery box is in the tender, leaving very little weight on the power bogie, so the engine struggles with grip, especially on the circle of track. If I was going to modify this, I'd probably enlarrge the tender so the bogie would fit under it, and with the battery pack on top it might improve the grip.
The engine has a really odd looking profile. It feels like there is too much space between the bogies and the bottom of the boiler. With wheels that size, the whole thing should sit lower.
The polar bear is different and animation welcome, but the caboose could also have a rotating ribbon on the roof and slightly longer to allow more space for the guard. I like the 4 handy blasters in case of any attacks from abominable snowmen. I miss proper 6-wide magnetic buffers though as Technic connectors look a bit amateurish.
This strange extra height is to accommodate the train motor. This can only be avoided by having the motor in a far larger tender with battery on top, or using a large motor hidden in the boiler (like the motorised Emerald Express). This extra height does allow larger driver wheels, so pity this option to improve the design was not preferred, leaving the smaller wheels as spares for the powered-up motor.
The powered-up controller is not needed as can just use the usual train app. Although it would be great to have a version which included all these parts as although a higher price, still likely to be lower than buying all parts separately (if you can find), and the design looks strange for no reason if not motorised.
Personally, I wouldn't put the 3D printed part in the positives column but that's the reviewer's opinion. Great review anyway.
It doesn't convince me this set is worth getting though, despite having the other Winter Village sets from 2014 onwards.
Very detailed and thorough review. Photos and explanation are outstanding. Sadly, it only solidifies my resolve to NOT pick this set up. I dislike all of the elements of this train - from the goofy engine to the oddball polar bear "float" as somebody above mentioned. I like the idea of the package caboose - that is neat, but even that execution isn't the greatest. But everything seems really off scale or just off-putting. I don't want to disparage somebody's design and effort to make this set - not my intention. I know a lot of work and planning went into this model and redoing the past by making the same exact train isn't worthwhile. But this train design just doesn't work for ME. :(
Ain't no review like a FlagsNZ review - detailed, thorough, insightful, and always something to learn.
For me to potentially modify, realistically we're talking Powered Functions battery box, motor and separate receiver, then the parts to extend the tender. Larger train wheels for the engine, and magnetic couplings to make it compatible with my exiting Power Functions trains. So the question for me is whether I can be bothered with the additional expense. Still a nice set though!
Do we know why the track elements have bee updated? I have a few train sets and have never had issues with my track elements; although they haven't gone through extensive wear and tear. glad the new tracks are compatible with existing track elements.
@shaase said:
"Do we know why the track elements have bee updated? I have a few train sets and have never had issues with my track elements; although they haven't gone through extensive wear and tear. glad the new tracks are compatible with existing track elements."
I'd bet the mold probably needed replacement and they just decided to update it while doing so.
Seeing something with tiny driving wheels and calling it a "4-4-0" just... looks wrong. I get why the compromise was made for motorization but it's not a great look. This isn't some small switching locomotive, tiny wheels looks like a joke on it.
To me, everything about this looks ugly as heck. The colour scheme doesn't evoke any Christmas feeling in me, the engine and the polar bear imho look dreadful, and the less said about the 3D printed part the better.
Add to that the price, which, even if it isn't inflation-hiked, still feels far too much for what you get.
Easy pass.
The helicopter is cute. Not "pay $130 for a train when I'm not really a train guy" cute, but still cute.
can you make a photo side by side with the old winter train??
As a big train fan I’m not impressed by this at all. The blocks of colour on the locomotive seem quite amateurish in their arrangement, and the construction of the front bogie looks dreadfully crude. Something like this really needs some kind of valve gear, as it looks quite odd without it; granted, the last holiday train went without that as well, but the overall aesthetics of that set helped to make up for that a little.
Trains just don’t seem to be something Lego consistently nails nowadays, at least at lower price points. There always seems to be some kind of compromise in the design, and this is a particularly bad example of that.
This is an amazing review! All the links to help explain what things were are great too. It really helps solidify that this set is something I gotta get to go with my Winter Holiday Train!
Looks more like a kiddie train in a shopping mall than an actual train.
To anyone who knows something about steam trains this engine looks as clumsy as the old Hogwarts Express sets. To anyone else it's a cute choo-choo.
The "platform" is a bit of a joke, especially without straight track.
Taking inflation into account, which you really should, this train is actually cheaper on a PPP ratio than its predecessor, @FlagsNZ.
Although it’s a nice concept to make another holiday train, this set is leagues behind 10254 . The colour scheme is both too subtle and incredibly garish. The polar bear looks depressed and out of place on a train, and the 3D-printed part looks like a Chinese knock-off. Four mini figures in a Christmas set is too few.
The carriage is wide open, so the passengers might as well be standing on a flatbed. The attempted Hogwarts Express style looks like a joke, reminding me of all the early attempts to make the train. And, to top it off, a price tag only £15 less than sets like the Viking Village. It’s a joke really.
2/10
The bear should have had those round 1x1 printed eyes.
Fun fact: The Galapagos penguin lives in both southern _and_ northern hemispheres. Barely.
Also, while I understand that trains in the undeveloped west would have more easily been fueled by firewood, one of the two engines that met at Promontory Summit to complete the Transcontinental Railroad was indeed coal-fired. The most powerful engine ever put in service (the Allegheny) was specifically designed to haul loads of coal over the Adirondack Mountains, so it would have been silly to fuel it with firewood when it was regularly near a supply of Kentucky coal.
Also, I’m not understanding why the cam system means the rear bogey can’t be converted to steam drivers if the same PF motor would be used. Or do the wheels need to be positioned differently? I know the Toy Story train has a driver bogey design that’s compatible with an RC/PF/PU motor.
I thought the bear was Snoopy, just with a short nose.
Then I read the review and realised it was a bear.
I wouldn’t have known about the flaws in its depiction in trainishness, so I appreciate the detailed review. I still think it’s cute, although given the excellent range of Christmas kits this it’s unlikely this will win out over the gingerbread options, and neither budget nor space is likely to allow for all of them. I do miss the big drive wheel and since I’m unlikely to ever want the powered option it feels like a compromise made for things which aren’t even included and is therefore for a minority of the customer base, and I’m not sure that was wise.
(Also, I’m wrestling with myself over getting the old sleigh kit, which I like very much, so that’s an additional item to weigh.)
May I suggest a small correction: 10254 Winter Holiday Train does have magnetic couplings from the tender to the caboose; only the locomotive and tender car are connected with Technic couplings.
To me, the engine looks like a diesel shunter dressed up as a steam locomotive.
And a 3D printed element for the first time in a commercially available Lego set? Meh.
If you don't have a Lego winter holiday train set yet, by all means get this one, but if you already have the 2016 set there's no need. I certainly won't be spending my money on this one.
No magnets or steam driving wheels? Yuck.
A diesel dressed up as a steamer? Double Yuck.
3D prints in a LEGO set? So much yuck it makes me sick!
Yes, sure, the bear looks miserable. You'd be miserable too if you were displaced by climate-change. Some day soon you'll look back on this day and discover that Depression Bear was your spirit-animal, all along.
Eventually, we are all the ugly bear.
Bummed that we got another train, even if it has roughly the same value the 2016 version is superior in most ways. Does this mean we’re getting another train station next year? Hope this price increase doesn’t stick, but if it does, I hope the line still retains the value it’s known for.
I am going to install a 9v bogie instead and run it on my 9v Christmas layout. Also going to change the polar bear head into a snowman head as no polar bears in NZ. ;)
@Mister_Jonny said:
"As a big train fan I’m not impressed by this at all. The blocks of colour on the locomotive seem quite amateurish in their arrangement, and the construction of the front bogie looks dreadfully crude. Something like this really needs some kind of valve gear, as it looks quite odd without it; granted, the last holiday train went without that as well, but the overall aesthetics of that set helped to make up for that a little.
Trains just don’t seem to be something Lego consistently nails nowadays, at least at lower price points. There always seems to be some kind of compromise in the design, and this is a particularly bad example of that."
Whenever I see 'Lego' and 'compromise' in the same text, I'm always wondering whatever happened to 'only the best is good enough'.
As usual, I love the review. I just don’t agree with the takeaways.
IMO, the design is poor, the price is poor, the lack of any straight tracks is poor, the coupling decision is poor….
I’m starting to wonder more and more if LEGO is quietly directing its folks to greeble up a set to feed the PPP / Inflation mythology.
"I feel as if the polar bear has a very sad expression on its face."
Oh, did the bear just buy this set from his local Lego shop?
I'm a big fan train, but I don't like this.
I had this same problem with the Winter Holiday train (which I did buy). These engines don't look like organic parts of a Christmas/winter village environment. They just look like toy trains. There's a disconnect. The very first Christmas train 10173 -- sure, it took some liberties, but it actually looked like a steam engine with a train of Christmas-themed carriages.
Don't get me wrong, I love the fact that there's no stickers (and for a train set, it's surprisingly good value). But the locomotive just looks dreadful. I get the compromises they had to make to include the action feature -- but was the trade-off worth it? Personally, I don't think it was.
The polar bear is a nice design, but couldn't they have included 2 extra pieces, to give the poor creature eyes? Would that have been so difficult?
And I actually really like the ribbon-design on the guard's van ... but as a carriage, it's absurdly-small. It's only two studs longer than the tender. 10 studs does not make for a carriage (I have narrow-gauge engines that I've build, that are longer than that).
If this train floats your boat, I have no issue with that. But as a train fan, and as a fan of winter village sets, I will absolutely be passing on this. It feels like, once again, Lego has had to make more and more compromises on the design, and it -- proportionately -- looks worse and worse.
I honestly couldn't care less about the 3D printed part. People were making such a big deal about that, and to me it felt like criticising the china patterns on the Titanic. There are much bigger problems here.
@PurpleDave said:
"Fun fact: The Galapagos penguin lives in both southern _and_ northern hemispheres. Barely.
Also, while I understand that trains in the undeveloped west would have more easily been fueled by firewood, one of the two engines that met at Promontory Summit to complete the Transcontinental Railroad was indeed coal-fired. The most powerful engine ever put in service (the Allegheny) was specifically designed to haul loads of coal over the Adirondack Mountains, so it would have been silly to fuel it with firewood when it was regularly near a supply of Kentucky coal.
Also, I’m not understanding why the cam system means the rear bogey can’t be converted to steam drivers if the same PF motor would be used. Or do the wheels need to be positioned differently? I know the Toy Story train has a driver bogey design that’s compatible with an RC/PF/PU motor."
I actually stuck the big wheels on the motor for the TS train, AND my model of Casey Jr, which is Powered Up. I don't see why that'd fail here.
@GBP_Chris said:
"Ain't no review like a FlagsNZ review - detailed, thorough, insightful, and always something to learn."
I was a bit surprized to see that @FlagsNZ was doing the review. I mean, aside from one of the microbuilds, there's nothing nautical about this set at all!
Using price per piece is not the best comparison. I’d probably use price per gram instead
I have both previous winter village trains. This one is significantly more expensive than the last one and is significantly smaller and less impressive than both
@pazza_inter said:
"can you make a photo side by side with the old winter train??"
Good idea. I have added a new section in the narrative in the review.
@SlimBrickens : Yes, you are right - the carriages on 10254 use the magnetic buffers. I have added a comment in the new narrative to reflect this.
@TheOtherMike: I have a huge LEGO Train collection.
The engine looks stupid. But I've already got a decent winter village train so I wasn't going to buy anyway so I don't really care.
I feel this train is far below the level of 10254 (and 10173, though officially not a Winter Village set). The new one has a lot of unrealised potential, but a lot of modifications are required to get it to the necessary level for my Winter Village. I dislike the miniature carriages. It makes me feel like you need two sets and some extra parts to make one decent train.
Not particularly keen on this as a model train to run around the winter village, but as a toy train to run around the Christmas tree it's pretty perfect!
@FlagsNZ said:
" @TheOtherMike : I have a huge LEGO Train collection."
But does your house smell of rich mahogany?
Is the new curved track shorter than the old one? The side by side picture makes it look like it is, but maybe it's just the way the tracks are positioned?
Not impressed by the lower price per piece (PPP). I strongly suspect it's because there are a lot more small (less expensive) parts in this set compared to 10254. Lego has been moving in this direction for some time. Increasingly we are getting a LOT of small parts in sets, which increases the part count and keeps the PPP number down - but results in a lot of (what I call) micro-builds in a set. I also suspect Lego may be doing this because they know most reviewers of Lego sets use the PPP metric as a measure of the set's value.
@dougts said:
"Using price per piece is not the best comparison. I’d probably use price per gram instead"
Cost of plastic is one of the least significant contributors to the cost of putting a set on the shelf. Might as well start comparing Price Per Employee Restroom Break.
This train is pathetically small, as was the 2016 one seemingly beloved by so many here. 10173 from 2006 is the only Holiday Train worthwhile for me. I modified it for 9V use and it's still great. That's just my opinion. The price per piece metric is completely meaningless to me.
@KeithB said:
"Is the new curved track shorter than the old one? The side by side picture makes it look like it is, but maybe it's just the way the tracks are positioned?
"
While it does look smaller I think it’s an optical illusion because it looks exactly the same size in the photo where the new piece is connected to the old piece.
@PurpleDave said:
" @dougts said:
"Using price per piece is not the best comparison. I’d probably use price per gram instead"
Cost of plastic is one of the least significant contributors to the cost of putting a set on the shelf. Might as well start comparing Price Per Employee Restroom Break."
Sets would be cheaper if so many employees didn't have IBS.
I wonder if the locomotive is intended to be more of a 0-4-4-0, where some examples actually have really small drivers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0-4-4-0
I personally consider the 10254 Winter Holiday Train the best one. I really do not understand this positive review whereas Lego raised the price from 100 to 120 (e) with the excuse of having added some pieces ... but above all considering also that Powered-Up parts seem to be not all available!
While the smokestack of the train looks like what you’d find on old American steam engines, you would NEVER find a curved nameplate like the one in this set on an American train.
This train appears to be a mish-mash of ideas from the master builder’s imagination and not based in reality at all. The set suffers as a result.
My 7 year-old son LOVES, LOVES, LOVES trains. He’s obsessed with them! …but he doesn’t like this one.
@PDelahanty said:
"While the smokestack of the train looks like what you’d find on old American steam engines, you would NEVER find a curved nameplate like the one in this set on an American train.
This train appears to be a mish-mash of ideas from the master builder’s imagination and not based in reality at all. The set suffers as a result.
My 7 year-old son LOVES, LOVES, LOVES trains. He’s obsessed with them! …but he doesn’t like this one."
"Father, why have you given me this train? Have I upset you, father? Have I disappointed you so? Father, I am merely seven years old, but today is the day my childhood dies. Today, I am become the ugly bear. We are both the ugly bear, father."
@domboy said:
"I wonder if the locomotive is intended to be more of a 0-4-4-0, where some examples actually have really small drivers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0-4-4-0"
Thank you for that link - I would never have known they existed. Very informative and improves my view of the kit.
@PurpleDave said:
" @dougts said:
"Using price per piece is not the best comparison. I’d probably use price per gram instead"
Cost of plastic is one of the least significant contributors to the cost of putting a set on the shelf. Might as well start comparing Price Per Employee Restroom Break."
Theoretically true, but you're also missing something. Since Lego parts are predominantly hollow, part surface area scales roughly linearly with volume of plastic used. As surface area increases on a part, the injection molding dies get more complex, and thus significantly more complicated, and it becomes harder to avoid bad shots and warping during cooling.
The cost to store, package, and ship is based heavily on mass and volume, and due to the hollow nature of the parts, volume usually scales pretty linearly with mass, at least for complete sets.
This means that while the cost (and thus mass) of the plastic feedstock is a small portion of the production costs, it still scales at about the same rate as the actual production costs, making price per gram a better proxy for production cost than price per piece.
@Hiratha said:
" @KeithB said:
"Is the new curved track shorter than the old one? The side by side picture makes it look like it is, but maybe it's just the way the tracks are positioned?
"
While it does look smaller I think it’s an optical illusion because it looks exactly the same size in the photo where the new piece is connected to the old piece."
The new track is exactly the same size and fully compatible with the old system.
@FlagsNZ said:
" @Hiratha said:
" @KeithB said:
"Is the new curved track shorter than the old one? The side by side picture makes it look like it is, but maybe it's just the way the tracks are positioned?
"
While it does look smaller I think it’s an optical illusion because it looks exactly the same size in the photo where the new piece is connected to the old piece."
The new track is exactly the same size and fully compatible with the old system. "
It's a famous optical illusion, but you can just use your fingers as calipers.
As an avid WV-collector/builder, to me it is a possiblity to add carriages to the train of 10254, although with some alterations to make them slighty larger (as I did with the ones of 10254 itself). The loco is just meh to me; unsure if just getting the parts for the carriages would be more economical (and I would need the printed parts for the loco too as they are about the highlight of the set for me).
Motorizing 10254 using the front bogie never turned out that well for me, as the power of the motor would mostly make it slip. Using one of the carriages as a drive unit also didnt really work as it would derail the bogie of the loco. I should really get some of those weights to weight it down and motorize the bogie - did you use those @flagsNZ?
@gearwheel said:
" @PurpleDave said:
" @dougts said:
"Using price per piece is not the best comparison. I’d probably use price per gram instead"
Cost of plastic is one of the least significant contributors to the cost of putting a set on the shelf. Might as well start comparing Price Per Employee Restroom Break."
Theoretically true, but you're also missing something. Since Lego parts are predominantly hollow, part surface area scales roughly linearly with volume of plastic used. As surface area increases on a part, the injection molding dies get more complex, and thus significantly more complicated, and it becomes harder to avoid bad shots and warping during cooling.
The cost to store, package, and ship is based heavily on mass and volume, and due to the hollow nature of the parts, volume usually scales pretty linearly with mass, at least for complete sets.
This means that while the cost (and thus mass) of the plastic feedstock is a small portion of the production costs, it still scales at about the same rate as the actual production costs, making price per gram a better proxy for production cost than price per piece."
LEGO set boxes are oversized, so the volume of plastic has little bearing on how much product can fit in a shipment, and shipping prices are usually calculated by weight, not volume. LEGO molds have gotten incredibly high-tech, as have injection-molding machines, so the chances of getting a bad shot have largely been eliminated _except_ during startup or when something goes wrong and needs human intervention to continue. Part complexity also does not scale cleanly, as dual-molded parts are usually smaller elements, preassembled chains are some of the most complex parts they produce, large parts make it easier to control and predict material flow patterns, and really large parts simply get more inflow gates (check a 16x16 plate sometime to see how many studs have pips).
To give you an idea how much the industry has advanced, I went to a trade show once where they had these sealed tubes full of some sort of liquid/gel/colloid, which could rapidly transfer heat from one end to the other. This allows the manufacturer to near-instantly cool a shot to the point where it’s ready to eject from the mold, while simultaneously also making it possible to quickly reheat the mold to the ideal molding temp before the next shot gets injected. Using stuff like this, cycle time gets incredibly short, to the point that the shot spends less time in the mold than the mold spends getting reset for the next shot. And this was a new technology over two decades ago. Dual-molding was in its infancy at the time, consisting solely of injecting two different colors and/or materials into the mold simultaneously, and resulted in an uncontrolled weld line between the two flows. Now it involves at least a two-stage shot cycle, and is apparently inexpensive enough that it’s commonly seen as a viable alternative to printing details on certain elements.
Storage is about the only thing you mentioned that truly scales 1:1 by volume, and even that depends on what quantity limits they set on individual elements in the Cathedral. If a minifig head is only allowed to half-fill a tote, it may require as much storage space per element as a 2x2 brick, if that’s allowed to 3/4 fill a tote. But we don’t know this numbers at all, so it’s hard to say.