Subject:
|
Re: I thought as much
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.technic
|
Date:
|
Tue, 6 Aug 2002 17:33:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1259 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.technic, Steve Bliss writes:
> In lugnet.technic, Steven lane wrote:
>
> > http://www.lugnet.com/quickset/search.cgi?q=1221,1&w=0
> >
> > This scan shows an old accessory pack of (pre studless) Lego elements.
> >
> > It cleary describes them as beams. So can we stop calling beams, bricks,
> > when they're obviously beams, and can we call the new imposters studless
> > beams therefore creating a clear naming convention and avoiding confusion.
>
> That set description was supplied by LUGNET data admins, not by TLC.
> The curly brackets indicate this.
>
> AFAIK, the traditional TLC name for those parts with studs and pin holes
> are "Technic Bricks".
>
> But "beam" has been commonly used for some time, so things are confusing
> with two types of 'beams'.
The scan is german and the part name translates as 'bar'. I'd say that was
closer to beam than brick.
Steve
http://world.altavista.com/tr
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: I thought as much
|
| (...) That set description was supplied by LUGNET data admins, not by TLC. The curly brackets indicate this. AFAIK, the traditional TLC name for those parts with studs and pin holes are "Technic Bricks". But "beam" has been commonly used for some (...) (22 years ago, 6-Aug-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
9 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
