Subject:
|
Re: cramming details into 6 studs
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Tue, 15 May 2001 14:30:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
512 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
>
>
> Bryan Kinkel wrote:
>
> > I have been gathering photos of commuter trains in order to build SEPTA
> > (Philadelphia transit) cars for my layout. While I have not actually sat
> > down to build, I have been doing a lot of thinking on 6 vs. 8 wide and how
> > it will impact my design.
>
> > Doing my cars 6 wide certainly has advantages as far as brick usage, etc.
>
> 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.
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
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: cramming details into 6 studs
|
| (...) 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: cramming details into 6 studs
|
| (...) 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)
|
13 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
|
|
|
|
