 | | Re: Bogie design (coupler)
|
|
Tim David <talltim@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:Hp3116.1Cp@lugnet.com... (...) 1 (...) right (...) between (...) Train (...) stud (...) the (...) 2 (...) that (...) I think it is time that I give my point of view here. I made some tests using (...) (21 years ago, 1-Dec-03, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Bogie design (coupler)
|
|
Instead of a bogie plate you can always use a Tile, Modified 2 x 2 with Pin [LDrawPart 2460:0] This gives you more flexibility with how you attache beams etc. you alos don't have to have the pivot poit in the centre of the bogie. Tim (21 years ago, 1-Dec-03, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bogie design (coupler)
|
|
(...) Yep. I actually use this in MTW-1003 because I want the wobble this gives you (it's a bit taller of a pin than a normal bogie plate's pin which fits into two plates worth of space, this is a full brick thick or 2.5 plates) but the flexibility (...) (21 years ago, 1-Dec-03, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bogie design (coupler)
|
|
(...) Maybe you could lengthen it with part #2905: Technic Triangle, if you don't mind that somewhere inside or under your nose it's sticking out sideways [LDrawPart 2905:7] (...) I have absolutely no clue what you're talking about here, we probably (...) (21 years ago, 2-Dec-03, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bogie design (coupler)
|
|
(...) Ah, suddenly I do understand what you ment here, but unfortunately this would not fit. A 4263 Technic Plate 1 x 4 with Holes under the 2711 Technic Rotor 2 Blade with 2 Studs (with one hole and 2 studs overlap, and only the other hole (...) (21 years ago, 3-Dec-03, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Bogie design (coupler)
|
|
M. Moolhuysen <moom@NOSPAM-chello.nl> wrote in message news:HpCB4D.F1D@lugnet.com... (...) the (...) would (...) Rotor 2 (...) hole (...) Plate (...) the (...) as the (...) around (...) I am sure there is a way around that problem. I just need to (...) (21 years ago, 4-Dec-03, to lugnet.trains)
|
