Subject:
|
Re: Most redundant Lego part
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 24 Oct 2004 19:38:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
800 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Gerhard R. Istok wrote:
| |
Any other redundancies folks can think of? (Except of course for those 1x1x5
and 1x2x5 bricks.)
|
Hi Gary,
if you stack 5 bricks together it will not be quite stably, so the 5 high bricks
make a sence for me.
But i cannot see any sence in this two bricks:
 and
Specially if you stack 3 2x2 bricks together it will be very stably, so here
were parts just invented for juniorisation.
Ronald
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Most redundant Lego part
|
| (...) I used to think the same, until I came to build the drawbridge mechanism. (URL) stack of five 1x2 bricks has 4 more "ridges" than a single 1x2x5 brick which puts just enough extra friction on the beam that it will not fall under gravity. So (...) (20 years ago, 24-Oct-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Most redundant Lego part
|
| Do you ever wonder sometimes why Lego developed some particular part and say to yourself "what were they thinking?". The one piece that comes to my mind is the 1x4x2 arch. I mean it is virtually identical to the 1x4 arch plus two 1x1 bricks attached (...) (20 years ago, 24-Oct-04, to lugnet.general)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
