Subject:
|
LEGO® Train Philosophy
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:30:58 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
390 times
|
| |
|
|
During my first year of being a LUGNET member, I have noticed that people
usually take one of two approaches when building their train MOC's. Either
they are as realistic as possible, or they are representational. Realising
that you can only include so much detail in LEGO®, I am approximate when it
comes to fitting all the pipes, levers, ect. on my models. I figure that
exacting detail is the domain of the NMRA, NEM, and similar organizations.
When I was an N scale modeller and had bought Roco's model of the DB V188
diesel, I
didn't 'feel as close' to it as I do my LEGO® version. Perhaps it's because
I built it with my own hands. Even though my level of detail will never
approach that of Roco and similar model manufacturers. I've been trying to
get a friend of mine into LEGO® trains for a while now, but he just doesn't
see the advantages of 'build it your way'(his interest is in Hornby and
Bachmann OO, by the way). Maybe when he visits me this summer, I can point
him to all the great work here at LUGNET and change his mind. -Harvey
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LEGO® Train Philosophy
|
| (...) I tend to be like you. I just approximate and include the details I can/want to include. That doesn't mean I havn't fallen into the trap of trying to be to precise. For example I have a model that I call a Boston and Maine GP40-2: (URL) think (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
