Subject:
|
Re: New Poll
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Tue, 7 Jan 2003 22:54:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1701 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke writes:
> In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
> > In lugnet.trains, Kevin Loch writes:
>
> > Nine would be okay, but going odd width all of the time is a pain, so I stick
> > with 8 wide. As long as you are willing to go up to 7 wide (more odd • widths),
> > why not just add the extra stud? There *can't* be that much difference in
> > weight or brick count.
>
> I have do disagree somewhat, John!
>
> There IS in fact much difference. At least in one point which is quite
> important for classic Eurotrash: ask for e.g. Dirk 'Rollingbricks' Meyer for
> his problems with 8-wide 2-axle cars (as they have been and partly still are
> very common over here).
Dirk? Wo sind Sie? Lassen wir sprechen!
> In 7-wide I am able to build my cars up to a length of 20 studs which means I
> can make 4-wheelers (with 8...9(10?) studs space between wheel blocks) without
> any trouble in curved track.
> For any longer waggon you have to add a steering mechanism which affords more
> height, more weight etc. At least my way of 7-wides is differing not too much
> from most official 6-wides, so it is in fact a bigger jump to 8 (wider,
> higher + much longer) than to 6 (only somewhat narrower and shorter).
>
> But I am sure, there are ways to build heavy 7-wides as well as lightweighted
> 8-wides. But 95% of all 8-wide builders around try to press as much details as
> possible into their models, that these are at least twice as heavy than my
> models.
Proof! I need proof! Weigh your 7 wides against any 8 wides (but be sure to
weigh the same lengths (2 8wides vs 3 6wides, for instance).
> And we have lots of 8-wide fans here in the FGLTC - I could mention more
> builders of 8-wide than 6 wide now.
I must say that the coolest designs of LEGO trains come out of Germany-- you
guys rock!
But Ben, I have to ask you-- what does *width* actually have to do with trains
being able to negotiate turns? As you said, it is about wheel placement. If
you put wheels the same distance apart as Dirk does, wouldn't you experience
the same complications?
Now if you say that your trains are *shorter* than his, then I say that you are
making an unfair comparison. Perhaps you have elected to selectively compress
your MOCs length-wise and Dirk has chosen to follow scale. But what is
preventing you from compressing your MOCs length-wise and *still* make them
8 wide?
JOHN
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: New Poll
|
| (...) G' Morning, John! (...) I'm not Dirk, but I can try to tell him, you asked for him. He announces on this board now and then, so he might follow anyway... [length, width, weight]. (...) I would tend to compare even 3 waggons against 3 waggons (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-03, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: New Poll
|
| (...) widths), (...) I have do disagree somewhat, John! There IS in fact much difference. At least in one point which is quite important for classic Eurotrash: ask for e.g. Dirk 'Rollingbricks' Meyer for his problems with 8-wide 2-axle cars (as they (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jan-03, to lugnet.trains)
|
27 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
|
|
|
|
