Subject:
|
Re: 8 vs. 6 (was: Excited to Finally be here...)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Tue, 8 Feb 2000 19:30:34 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1740 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Mike Poindexter writes:
<<<SNIP>>>
> I would suggest that you pick a scale, then do the math and figure how many
> inches each stud equals. Stick to that scale for everything you build,
> including your trains. If the minifigs don't quite look right in that
> scale, that is fine. They don't look quite right in any scale.
I was thinking of setting up an amusement park train with a technic figure
as the driver, and minifigs as children. It would work great in either 6 or 8.
But in either case would look VERY WRONG when run along side other lego trains.
> Mike Poindexter
>
>
>
> Nick Goetz <ngoetz@iquest.net> wrote in message
> news:FpMDtF.EGC@lugnet.com...
> > I have a question about the 8 vs. 6 wide. It revolves around the track
> > width.
> > Given that the 8 wide is approximately related to O scale, what width • do
> > the tracks suggest the scale to be? Personally, I have never seen a train
> > that was only as wide as the outside rails of a track. (Maybe I have bad
> > eyes.) They always seem to stick out a bit on either side. To me the 8 • wide
> > seems to be the appropriate scale given the fixed width of the track and
> > obviously the fixed width of the wheels. (This is not even mentioning that
> > with 25% more width you can put more detail and accuracy into your model.) • I
> > am having a hard time understanding the two opposing arguments. Why • doesn't
> > everyone embrace the 8 wide idea? Comments? Answers?
> >
> > -Nick
> >
> > (As an aside, did you notice that by changing the subject heading, someone
> > is no longer excited to be here? I guess the 6 vs. 8 debate brings out the
> > worst in all of us.<g>)
> >
> > John Neal wrote in message <38A03351.D47A285A@uswest.net>...
> > > Carrie-
> > >
> > > I thought that you might think Scott's admonition rather cryptic so I • thought I'd clarify
> > > for you. But first, welcome! I think it is an exciting time to be a • trainiac:-)
> > >
> > > Now, about the 8 wide crack;-) some of us aren't happy with the toyish • scale of the LEGO
> > > trains. I mean come on, a train that is only 1 minifig wide?!! In order • to correct that
> > > some, I build my LEGO train 8 studs wide, which gives IMNSHO a better • looking and better
> > > proportioned train car. By doing so, the scale *roughly* comes out to be • 1:48 or "O" scale
> > > to Model Railroaders. It's still minifig scale with a little more • breathing room;-)
> > >
> > > A few examples of my 8 wides can be found on the GMLUG site: • http://www.gmlug.org/j2/
> > > Whether you build 6 or 8 wide though doesn't matter, just build{:^D
> >
> > <cut>
> >
> >
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: 8 vs. 6 (was: Excited to Finally be here...)
|
| (...) This will eat your bricks! Has anyone practised 'selective compression'. This is where you build something to scale but 'selectively compress' some aspects or items to reduce space/cost/bricks etc. In most cases this applies to train and (...) (25 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 8 vs. 6 (was: Excited to Finally be here...)
|
| The width of Lego track is almost exactly the same as Lionel, which is about equal to "O", or close enough for all intents and purposes of this discussion. The last time I was in a train store (1 week ago) I looked at the "O" scale and Lionel trains (...) (25 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
40 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
|
|
|
|
