| |
In lugnet.general, Øyvind Steinnes writes:
>
> "Allan Bedford" <ExpertBuilder-DELETE-TO-REPLY@apotome.com> wrote in message
> > This is a disaster.
> > Frankly, I don't even see a fire truck in that picture. If you removed • the
> > label and asked people to identify it, I'll bet you wouldn't get 'fire
> > truck' as your first answer more than 1/2 the time.
>
> Well, not a disaster. Airport firetrucks (some one mentioned crash trucks,
> is that the same thing?) does not always looks pretty. They dont need to,
> they only need to go fast over all terrain and be efficient. :)
Sorry, I didn't mean to give the wrong impression. I'm quite fond of the
'real' crash trucks. I think they are a wonderful blend of function vs.
form. They are superbly rugged looking... something the LEGO model lacks
woefully.
It wasn't the type or style of truck that I was complaining about, rather it
was the way in which this type of truck was rendered in LEGO. Based on the
backhoe I honestly believe they could have done better with the ARFF.
This makes me all the more interested in rebuilding a crash truck that I
started about 3 years back. I had a large yellow 4 wheeler that I was quite
happy with, other than all of the upper equipment and fine details. I will
have to revisit that project and see what I can come up with.
All the best,
Allan B.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: TECHNIC IS NOT DEAD!!!
|
| "Allan Bedford" <ExpertBuilder-DELET...otome.com> wrote in message news:H87rMF.3Ay@lugnet.com... (...) I totaly agree. I take 3 of that one, please! :) Can anyone see if there is a pnaumatic tank in there some place? I dont have one yet... (...) (...) (22 years ago, 5-Jan-03, to lugnet.general, lugnet.technic)
|
44 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
