| |
I agree that the folding legs are the way to go if you want to save space in
transporting them and setting up. I used the "conventional" bolt on legs for
a year and that was all I could take. I was tired of being the last group to
leave the train shows. So I converted our tables to use the folding table
legs:
http://www.ngltc.org/legooutlet2000/setup.jpg
I bought them online for $30 a pair, wasn't bad and they really seem to be
pretty sturdy.
jt
--
James J. Trobaugh
North Georgia LEGO Train Club
http://www.ngltc.org
John Neal <johnneal@uswest.net> wrote in message
news:3AFA123D.6D7C5868@uswest.net...
>
>
> Steve Chapple wrote:
>
> > In lugnet.org.ca.nalug, Michel Magnan writes:
> > > ...The ["standard" LEGO train table] legs are very labor intensive,
> > > and I still haven't finished the legs from the tables I made last year.
> > > I believe that the PNLTC guys have eliminated the attachable legs, due
> > > to the long set up time. If we could somehow use folding legs that • would
> > > save a lot of time, both now and in the future. Steve could you post
> > > to the IOLTC asking them about their current table standards?
> >
> > I did so, and John Neal started to reply, but then figured it would
> > be better to discuss it here so that others could contribute to - and
> > benefit from - the discussion. OK John - you have the floor... 8-)
>
> Ahem, well, okay then:-)
>
> First off, I will say that there is no current "standard". The GMLTC used
> 30"x45" tables for our last layout (actually just a skosh longer on each
> dimension to avoid module buckling). This size is convenient because it • is
> the area of 6 large gray baseplates. For the legs we used regular ol' • metal
> folding ones you can buy at any Home Depot or such for about $12 (for a
> pair). They are 30" high.
>
> I think we used 1/2 thick plywood, but the tables were reinforced with a • rim
> of 2x4s underneath for added stremph. We ran them long ways. Here is a
> schematic of the old layout:
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=2213
> The flared-out modules were the last ones we built and where we got taste • of
> a deeper size with which to work. Our new layout was supposed to be the • same
> dimensions, only turned 90 degrees to make the depth be 45". In fact, we
> even set some standards with the Mike Poindexter of the BayLTC.
> Unfortunately, due to space limitations in our trailer, we had to alter • our
> dimensions. In order to maximize what space was available to us, we • decided
> to go with the tables being 40"x60" (long ways). Conan is having the • frames
> for these modules built from aluminum, so we are digressing away from any
> sort of standard.
>
> Having said all of that, I would say that if there were to be some • standard,
> I would recommend 30 x 45, and have the tables be 30" high. This is what • I
> use for my home layout. Personally, I used 3/4 plywood and no bracing. I
> used high quality plywood (birch, I think), and had Home Depot cut them • right
> there. The other nice thing about 30 x 45 is that you get 3 tables out of • 1
> sheet of 4' x 8' with little waste. The folding legs screw in easily, and
> you're good to go. 30 x 45 is easy to handle and maneuver, and can fit
> through most doorways flat. I run mine 45" deep like the BayLTC layout • does,
> although I am only building up my modules 16 bricks, which is the minimum
> I've found to allow for subway car clearance.
>
> Uh, I guess I rambled on a little more than I had planned:-p Any other
> thoughts about setting a standard for tables?
>
> -John
>
> > L#765
> > StRuCtures
>
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
23 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
|
|
|
|
