 | | Re: Building Philosophy: Bricks vs. Beams (was Re: Technic's Dead)
|
|
(...) Yes, that's true. It's disappointing to get a set with little or no Technic bricks in it. I think one frustrating thing about the new pieces (and I'm thinking of studless beams as well as liftarms, or 1/2 width "beams") is that because there's (...) (22 years ago, 5-Aug-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic's Dead (was: I need Technic)
|
|
Ralph Hempel wrote: >[...] (...) On the contrary, Ralph, that's fascinating! Thanks. -Suz (22 years ago, 5-Aug-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic's only in a coma (WAS Re: Technic's Dead )
|
|
In lugnet.technic, Tim Courtney writes: One of the most-asked questions at our train shows is 'are these (...) Wouldn't it be brilliant to fake a lego box of a large, obviously one off Moc, set it up at a public show and everytime your asked that (...) (22 years ago, 5-Aug-02, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Building Philosophy: Bricks vs. Beams (was Re: Technic's Dead)
|
|
(...) I completely agree that bricks have there own place and can be very useful, but I do believe the style of rounded beams and liftarms are a better means for technical modeling then the Technic brick. I still use bricks in all of my models, but (...) (22 years ago, 5-Aug-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Building Philosophy: Bricks vs. Beams (was Re: Technic's Dead)
|
|
(...) I totally agree! I think I overdid it. I totally agree that beams and bricks have their uses, I just don't like how Lego is making the beam 'superioir' these days. The thing that ticks me off, though, is flex axles and 'styling panels.' I just (...) (22 years ago, 5-Aug-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
