 | | Re: cramming details into 6 studs —John Neal
|
| | | (...) Not as many as you might think. Most people build 6 wide because it is the norm, not because of economy of bricks. Remember, a 6 wide is just an 8 wide compressed by 2 studs sideways; it's not really that many bricks. (...) Then why do it? (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: cramming details into 6 studs —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) Not everyone shares that opinion. I tend to hold the opposite view. To keep the proportions right, in many cases you need to increase everything by a third, not just the width. Not always, but in many cases. ++Lar (24 years ago, 15-May-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: cramming details into 6 studs —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) You mean that a 6 wide is *stretched* to get an 8 wide? (...) Well, that's the point. The proportions are *wrong* to begin with in 6 wide-- if you are trying to model to scale. But that's okay; I mean, compression happens;-) It's just a (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: cramming details into 6 studs —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) Again, I disagree. The body to truck proportions are wrong, yes. But, at least in my models, the LxWxH proportions are more or less correct. Sometimes the height is a bit too high for the width (maybe in the 'bug, for example) but not always. (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: cramming details into 6 studs —James Brown
|
| | | | | | (...) You could mostly avoid this (seeing the side wall through the back window) by using a thin wall immediately behind the window. That would mean that to see the wall through the window you'd need to be straight on to the car, *and* squinting. ;) (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: cramming details into 6 studs —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | (...) That's a good option. I bet there are some SNOT methods also - in fact, how about a 1x2 clear brick on end, studs out. Cap it with a tile and attach it with to a 1x plate on the bottom (against the door). The 1x plate and the tile form the (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: cramming details into 6 studs —Bryan Kinkel
|
| | | | I knew this would start a 6 vs. 8 debate... But that was not the goal of the initial post. The goal is to get some feedback on how this can be done in 6 wide. If there are no creative, cost effective solutions, then I will probably settle for a less (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: cramming details into 6 studs —Sonnich Jensen
|
| | | | Bryan Kinkel <helpdesk@loseyourmind.com> wrote in message news:GDDvG2.Lrv@lugnet.com... (...) the (...) there (...) a (...) my (...) 6 studs is the standard and I like to stick to that too. But in between they can be both 5 and 7 wide to fit (...) (24 years ago, 16-May-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: cramming details into 6 studs —Harvey Henkelman
|
| | | | (...) I build European prototype equipment, and to me 6 wide is just fine. I don't strive for lifelike realism in my MOC's, for this is one of the reasons I left N scale to begin with. The NMRA (and NEM) is full of those persons who wish to achieve (...) (24 years ago, 17-May-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
