Subject:
|
Re: My experience at Legoland USA
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Mon, 5 Jul 1999 22:37:15 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
[johnneal@uswest.net]StopSpammers[]
|
Viewed:
|
1578 times
|
| |
|
|
Having just returned from LL, I can say that Lar is right-- more like G
scale. I can also say that the trains were probably the biggest
disappoint of the park. Whoever built them knew little or nothing about
engines and it showed:-( The rolling stock was okay, but at that bigger
scale I expected *much* better detail on the Locos. Even the scale was
off-- the engines looked Lionel-ized-- too wide and not high enough. If
I had had more time, I would have taken measurements to verify my
observations.
As for the purity issue, guys (and gals), I would say that whatever is
good enough for TLG (only the best is good enough;-), is good enough for
me. [1] Their trains use beaucoup NON-LEGO parts, particularily the track
and wheels! I was shocked;-) The couplers were straight metal rods
connecting the cars with *no* attempt at modeling realism. You could tell
that the emphasis of the harbor theme was on the apparatus and the ships,
not the trains:-(
[1] my vindication for using non-Lego parts, if I ever decide to do so;-)
-John
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> I'd put Miniland scale at more like G... what we do is fairly close to
> O, inasmuch as you can say that we work to any scale in particular.
I would put it closer to S.
> Carrie Whitcher wrote:
> > There is a huge train layout,
> > much larger than the stuff we do. It is probably in O scale.
>
> I'd say that PNLTC and GMLTC layouts are no slouches, sizewise.
>
> --
> Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
> - - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
> fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ Member ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to
> lugnet.
>
> NOTE: I have left CTP, effective 18 June 99, and my CTP email
> will not work after then. Please switch to my Novera ID.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: My experience at Legoland USA
|
| I'd put Miniland scale at more like G... what we do is fairly close to O, inasmuch as you can say that we work to any scale in particular. (...) I'd say that PNLTC and GMLTC layouts are no slouches, sizewise. (25 years ago, 1-Jul-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
