 | | Re: Studless Technic models
|
|
(...) than two reissued sets, they were pretty much discontinued in 1997, and with good reason. They have fringed ends, which have proven to be very prone to breaking, if I'm not mistaken. Especially when the fringed ends are attached to studs. And (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Studless Technic models
|
|
(...) Personally I'm happy that they have the studless beams, however, I also hope that they keep having the "old" style stud beams. I tend to stick more to robotics (Mindstorms), my recent trebuchet was a rare deviation away from robotics (it was (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Studless Technic models
|
|
(...) Ahem (URL) (21 years ago, 21-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Studless Technic models
|
|
(...) This: (URL) (21 years ago, 21-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Studless Technic models
|
|
(...) Exactly. And the more reinforcements you have to add, the more _extra_ pieces it requires. To my mind, that's no different than requiring a similar number of extra pieces in instances where you desire full System compatibility. (...) Both (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Studless Technic models
|
|
(...) There's probably no list, but you may guess and check Peeron then. You'll see that: (URL) (Technic Plate 1 x 6 with holes) = dead 1997. (URL) (Technic Bush 1/2 Type 2) = for Technic dead 1997. (URL) (Technic Connector Toggle Joint Toothed) = (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Studless Technic models
|
|
"jrl" <jrl3d@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:Hrrs2H.1Fy9@lugnet.com... (...) only (...) half-pins can (...) Well, it's give and take. Over the years Lego has released hundreds of pieces that take the product line into new territory - and with that (...) (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Studless Technic models
|
|
"Purple Dave" <purpledave@maskofdestiny.com> wrote in message news:Hrt2yu.yKJ@lugnet.com... (...) pieces to (...) Excellent point. (...) studded (...) parts, to (...) What is a tri-beam? (...) ROTFLMAO! (21 years ago, 21-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Cowans Sheldon 60 ton breakdown crane "31"
|
|
(...) LOL! I aim to please! And note the liberal use of both studded AND non-studded technic beams! ROSCO Added .technic cos of the beams thang.... (21 years ago, 21-Jan-04, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.technic, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Studless Technic models
|
|
(...) Building with studded beams doesn't necessarily require a lot of pieces for strength, it just calls for strategic reinforcements. On the other hand, studless designs have requirements of their own because they require a good deal of connector (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
