 | | Re: A few requests to enhance the System
|
|
"Brian Davis" <brdavis@iusb.edu> wrote in message news:IDHwn5.114G@lugnet.com... (...) stud. Do (...) Indeed we do! Thanks for discovering the error in my description. What I meant to say was that if you place a studless beam next to a studded beam (...) (20 years ago, 18-Mar-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | 18 March 05 - International Day for LEGO Enthusiasts
|
|
Greetings, Earth-Mortals! Once again this year, I've declared 18th March to be the International Day for LEGO Enthusiasts - IDLE time! Please build responsibly, and call for a ride to a friend's toybox if needed. Thanks! Peace and Long Life, (...) (20 years ago, 17-Mar-05, to lugnet.fun.holiday, lugnet.announce, lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A few requests to enhance the System
|
|
(...) I must be missing something here. When I place a studless beam beside a normal Technic beam, the inter-hole spacing is exactly the same - one stud. Do you have the same parts I have? (20 years ago, 17-Mar-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: A few requests to enhance the System
|
|
(...) are (...) Good question! It's because on the studless beams the holes are right next to each other, whereas on the studded beams the holes have a much larger space in-between. Dave S. (20 years ago, 17-Mar-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: A few requests to enhance the System
|
|
(...) Tis true. What I was trying to say (I thought I did tho) was that the studless beams are typically odd 'lengths'. Since the holes are (presumably) between the (imaginary) studs, then there would be an even number of holes. In most Technic (...) (20 years ago, 15-Mar-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
