Subject:
|
Re: Studless Technic models
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.technic
|
Date:
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2004 20:44:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3363 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.technic, James Loewen wrote:
> I didn't say that studless designs were totally incompatible with bricks,
> only that compatibility is greatly diminished. It is true that technic half-
> pins can be added to studless beams, but this takes a lot of pieces and
> these two techniques still don't solve all the compatibility issues.
Building with the old style of pieces required a lot of pieces to do anything
just to strengthen the design enough that it wouldn't rip itself apart. Why is
it so much worse that the modern pieces require a few extra pieces if, and only
if, you want to make them fully System compatible? That's like saying you'd
rather ride a tricycle because a bicycle isn't self-powered.
> I wasn't really trying to make a financial argument, I was just saying that
> Lego has said recently they are taking steps to go back to the basics, and
> changing a building system so drastically doesn't seem to fit with that.
They just said that within the last year, and the stud-free beams have been
around for about 6-7 years now. You're saying that like they just started
tooling them up yesterday.
> I just don't see the need to completely remove the studded beams from new
> Technic sets.
Once you really get used to working with the modern beams, you realize that the
old pieces don't really have anything to offer mechanically except in cases when
you absolutely need to attach a TECHNIC construction to a System one, or when
you need to attach a TECHNIC-incompatible Mindstorms device (which really makes
no sense at all). Aside from that, the only real advantage you get from them is
that they allow fully System designs to be upgraded a bit with TECHNIC gear
systems for steering and such.
The truth of it is that the old TECHNIC pieces required lots of System pieces to
be fully compatible with themselves. The modern pieces can be used to build a
100% TECHNIC construction without requiring the addition of any System pieces.
I think probably what some of you are afraid of is the implication that the
modern pieces render System bricks obsolete. Especially at a time when the
question of color incompatibility has been brought up, that's probably not a
happy thought.
> In my experience, the only real advantage of the studless beams over studded
> beams is their slimmer, lighter design,
There's also a much wider variety of shapes, ranging from single-bent parts, to
double-bent parts, to the new tri-beam.
> and I don't see that as a big enough incentive to completely remove the
> piece that has long been the cornerstone of the technic system.
Who said they were getting rid of the axle?
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | 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: 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Studless Technic models
|
| (...) I didn't say that studless designs were totally incompatible with bricks, only that compatibility is greatly diminished. It is true that technic half-pins can be added to studless beams, but this takes a lot of pieces and these two techniques (...) (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
60 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
|
|
|
|
