Subject:
|
Re: Question for the true train enthusiasts?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Wed, 8 Aug 2001 02:32:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1956 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
>
>
> Josh Baakko wrote:
>
> > In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
> > >
> > >
> > > Josh Baakko wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > a space of 3's good for modern US rolling stock, with the 5 springs (3 on
> > > > outside).
> > > > Josh
> > >
> > > Nope. A wheel is 3 studs wide; if you check the measurements on a typical US
> > > truck, you will find that the space between the wheels is less than a wheel width
> > > wide. And there are 2 springs visible from the side, which can be simulated with a
> > > stack of 1x1 rounds...
> > >
> > > -John
> >
> > 100 ton trucks are the same width between as the wheels are. and there are
> > 3 visible. the ones with 2 springs visible are 70 ton trucks.
> > ;-) can't fool me,
> > Josh
>
> Ah, well, I guess I was referring to older, lighter trucks, which probably comprise
> 95+% of trucks made over the years. But here is something to think about, Josh. Even
> if a 100 ton truck does measure out to be 3 studs between the wheels, what you have
> done is to recreate those dimensions as in the prototype. But would you also reproduce
> the other dimensions faithfully as well (without compression)? Some of those cars
> would be over 100 studs long.
>
> My point is that even if you are modeling newer cars with 100 ton trucks (and
> especially if you are modeling 6 wide), you most certainly already *are* compressing
> the car in other places, and so it might look better proportionally if you compressed
> to a 2 stud gap as well.
>
> To Justin:
>
> As you can see, there is no "correct" answer to your question. It is up to you as the
> modeler how/when/if you will compress the proportions of your creations. Look at
> prototypes and try to get a "feel" for its dimensions and have at it.
>
> BTW, here is a pic of a bettendorf truck from my 14 wide section on Brickshelf,
> probably the most common type in the US:
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=322
>
> HTH,
> John
well yeah, 100 ton trucks are a newer inovation, seen since the 70-80's? I
didn't think about 6-wide, your 8-wide has completly changed my thinking :-)
I've also learned slective compresion (that darned modelers licence :-)). i
guess with 6-wide a 2 stud space would be enough. Most of my 8-wides stick
around 40-50 studs long, i figure maximum of 65.
Josh
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Question for the true train enthusiasts?
|
| (...) Ah, well, I guess I was referring to older, lighter trucks, which probably comprise 95+% of trucks made over the years. But here is something to think about, Josh. Even if a 100 ton truck does measure out to be 3 studs between the wheels, (...) (25 years ago, 8-Aug-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
13 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
