Subject:
|
Re: Ross Neal's ISCC Contest entry: BN EMD GP-50
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Wed, 20 Nov 2002 20:53:42 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
897 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Very impressive model. Of course building it 8 wide and making it
> proportionally long (to match the width) highlights the limitations of using
> a fixed wheelbase motor I guess. Those trucks seem out of proportion to the
> rest of the model (too short, wheels too small, etc).
I'll bet you are responding to the straight side shot:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=276112
I'll admit that that is probably the least flattering pose for that MOC for the
very reason you mentioned-- locked-in wheelbase for the motor unit. Ross built
this train to *run*, but know that if he were creating a static display, he
would have abandoned the motors in a NYM and created his own trucks. I know
this because I just finished building some Gunderson Maxi-stack III container
cars and needed custom trucks for them (the LEGO ones were too high and they
rubbed). I built some, Ross saw them, built his own version of my version, and
now I am using *his* version, and will use his version on *all* of our TCLTC
rolling stock. I will have to get some shots of them-- they are really nice.
He did, at one point, look at somehow attaching gears to train wheels he had
pulled out of the holders, but I don't know what came of that.
> I wonder how this model would look in 6 wide? I wonder if Ross is a good
> enough modeler to get anywhere close to that level of detail and accuracy if
> working in a size that better matched the trucks? I bet he is, even if his
> father perhaps (we can't say for sure) isn't. :-)
I believe that the wheel height is about correct for "O" scale (at least the
outer flange)-- I know that the regular LEGO train wheels are actually *larger*
than "O" scale. So going *down* in scale would heighten that problem, along
with the fact that the track gauge is wider than "O" gauge as well...
In the end, it is all about trade-offs. Yeah, Ross' MOC might look funny from
the side, but not more than a 6 wide does from the front or back (compared to a
prototypical engine). I think 8 wide provides the *least* proportion-related
problems *when trying to model prototypically*.
BTW, WRT to the wheelbase of the motor-- that distance works like a charm if
you are attempting to build a 6 axle loco as I am right now. I am doing my
best to keep up with Ross! :-)
-John
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Ross Neal's ISCC Contest entry: BN EMD GP-50
|
| (...) Please do get some shots. Custom trucks are a big interest of mine. Until we get to see the pics, how did he mount the wheelsets to the truck. Do the trucks (that is couplers) work out to a standard height- all of my attempts end up a little (...) (22 years ago, 20-Nov-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Ross Neal's ISCC Contest entry: BN EMD GP-50
|
| (...) Very impressive model. Of course building it 8 wide and making it proportionally long (to match the width) highlights the limitations of using a fixed wheelbase motor I guess. Those trucks seem out of proportion to the rest of the model (too (...) (22 years ago, 20-Nov-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
33 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
|
|
|
|
