To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.trainsOpen lugnet.trains in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Trains / 24727
Subject: 
Re: Compressionism (D&RGW coach set)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains
Date: 
Wed, 30 Mar 2005 19:35:37 GMT
Viewed: 
5301 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Samarth Moray wrote:
In lugnet.trains, Jan-Albert van Ree wrote:

With engines I always try to build to scale as far as possible, with coaches
this usually isn't possible due to length vs curve radius and a few other
practical limitations. Around 50-60 studs would be the max for length of
any rail vehicle. Otherwise you'll get something like this :
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=1135688
The cars look great, but are impossible to run in a miniland layout.

I think it all boils down to what PURPOSE you want your train MOC to have.
Whether you want it to be just a beautiful display piece, to run on a layout, or
hey, even a mixture of the two. A good example of the former would be this model
(IMO) and/or Shaun Sullivan's Hudson (see the .trains sidebar)

Agreed, those models aren't built primarily for their running qualities.

and a good
example of the latter would be Lar's ATSF

Except that I found out (second hand, I wasn't there, I was in S'pore) that it's
not as good a runner as I had hoped. Needs tuning on a big layout... Sigh. I
agree about INTENT though!

or any James Mathis stuff,

Some of JM's earlier virtual only stuff needed tuning when people tried to build
it real world too.

or official TLC stuff too.

Except when it doesn't run well. Sigh.

None of that should be taken as disagreement with your basic point, which is,
WHAT are you building for?


Subject: 
Re: Compressionism (D&RGW coach set)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains
Date: 
Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:28:50 GMT
Viewed: 
5212 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek wrote:

hey, even a mixture of the two. A good example of the former would be this model
(IMO) and/or Shaun Sullivan's Hudson (see the .trains sidebar)

Agreed, those models aren't built primarily for their running qualities.

and a good
example of the latter would be Lar's ATSF

Except that I found out (second hand, I wasn't there, I was in S'pore) that it's
not as good a runner as I had hoped. Needs tuning on a big layout... Sigh. I
agree about INTENT though!

or any James Mathis stuff,

Some of JM's earlier virtual only stuff needed tuning when people tried to build
it real world too.

or official TLC stuff too.

Except when it doesn't run well. Sigh.

Seems to me you have a lot of problem(s) running LOL!

;-)

Legoswami

Highly subtle one, 50/50 chance you'll get it, IMO.


©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR