Subject:
|
Re: Studless Technic models
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.technic
|
Date:
|
Sat, 17 Jan 2004 21:48:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2611 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.technic, Jindrich Kubec wrote:
> As I've built Backhoe yesterday, I still don't get that Lego move. Why
> did they replace _ALL_ technic bricks with studless beams?
Let me just start out by getting a few things out of the way. I'm not
unsympathetic to your view. I also build primarily with BIONICLE parts and
stud-free beams, so I realize I might not have much credibility with you.
One thing that I'd like to bring to this discussion is an apparently overlooked
difference between the old and new beams. Some of you have mentioned the
difference in height, and the freedom that can provide. What about the
difference in length? The old bulky beams are always one stud longer than their
newer counterparts because the pin holes have been squeezed between the studs.
Newer beams, having no studs, have no such restraints, so the ends require 1/2
stud less clearance for placement. Due to their rounded shape, they require
nearly a full stud less clearance for movement. Add this to the significantly
reduced weight per piece mentioned in other posts, and the requirement of bulky
(and therefore heavy) strengthening ties to hold the old parts together, and
it's clear that they offer major advantages in certain aspects of robotics
construction.
In my personal experience, I've also found that they offer options for sculpture
that were not previously available. When it comes to sculpture, old TECHNIC
pieces are insignificantly different from basic bricks. Stud-free beams offer
different possibilities for shapes that allow otherwise-impossible sculptures to
be made. This also expands the possibilities for non-sculpture constructions,
as it allows them to have more sculpted profiles than before.
When you get right down to it, it's not really a matter of which system is
better than the other; it's a matter of which system is better for each
individual. You prefer the original TECHNIC beams because they work better for
your preferred type of MOCs. I prefer the new TECHNIC beams because they work
better for my preferred type of MOCs. I don't like the idea of my enjoyment
being made possible at the expense of someone else's, and I hope you'd feel the
same way.
> But the traditional approach of building from bottom to top (few technic
> bricks, some plates, some additional bricks and 90deg beam connections
> is IMO much more logical _and_(!) in line of previous Lego experience of
> the builder. This studless way of building is IMO much more complicated
> and completely different when compared to traditional Lego brick
> building.
Which is easier, learning to ride a motorcycle, or learning to drive a car?
Driving a car doesn't build much on previous bike-riding knowledge, so wouldn't
it be more sensible for people to use motorcycles instead of cars because it'd
be easier to learn and build more on previous experience?
It's more complicated if you only have prior experience with a different style
of construction. Once you get used to the new parts, they open up whole new
realms of posibility. If you have no prior LEGO experience, as is the case with
much of the younger crowd, the two options probably offer an equal level of
difficulty.
> 2) Have anybody tested backhoe on animals^H^H^H^H^H^H^H children? Is it
> really possible that 11 years old could assemble it without problems?
I can't speak for the backhoe, but I do run a BIONICLE news site, so I hear
quite a bit from young kids (and their parents) who love building the more
advanced BIONICLE sets. And before you dismiss them as "juniorized" TECHNIC,
you should realize that some of the larger BIONICLE sets (especially
Muaka/Kane-Ra and Cahdok/Gahdok) have some really ingenious mechanical systems
that aren't possible without stud-free beams.
> 3) Have anybody of you tried to build studless MOC?
Plenty. Here are just a few of the more interesting examples that I've posted
online:
http://www.maskofdestiny.com/archiveimage.asp?i=1333
http://www.maskofdestiny.com/archiveimage.asp?i=1287
http://www.maskofdestiny.com/archiveimage.asp?i=2079
http://www.maskofdestiny.com/archiveimage.asp?i=2434
A few of my MOCs use a handful of studded pieces when absolutely necessary.
They don't always use the old TECHNIC bricks to attach them, though:
http://www.maskofdestiny.com/archiveimage.asp?i=2241
http://www.maskofdestiny.com/archiveimage.asp?i=2988
If you want to see stud-free mechanical designs instead of sculptures, the
Mindstorms crowd might be more helpful, but I hope this gives you a small
glimpse into what's been made possible with the array of stud-free pieces.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Studless Technic models
|
| Hi, last of my today's spam flood ;-) As I've built Backhoe yesterday, I still don't get that Lego move. Why did they replace _ALL_ technic bricks with studless beams? I think that the beams have 'right to live', for styling the outer parts they're (...) (20 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
60 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
