Subject:
|
Re: 8 vs. 6 (was: Excited to Finally be here...)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Tue, 8 Feb 2000 19:33:51 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
JOHNNEAL@antispamUSWEST.NET
|
Viewed:
|
1685 times
|
| |
|
|
Mike Poindexter wrote:
> 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.
Ouch. Comparing to Lionel;-(
> The last time I was in a train store (1 week ago) I looked at the "O" scale
> and Lionel trains they had. They were the size of 8 wides. Lego trains
> *should* be 8-wide. Of course, the Lego Millennium Falcon should also be
> made with bricks and plates and the McDonalds Drive Though set should be
> bigger than a Fotomat.
>
> Lego had to limit the size of the trains to 6 wide for purposes of expense
> control. Many people don't get into Lego trains because the sets are so
> expensive. Imagine if the Metroliner was 1,200 pieces instead of 700, or
> whatever it was. Even the best train they made for sale in the US would
> hardly have sold - it would cost too much.
Which is fine with me. I don't run any out-of-the-box stuff anyway. What
kills me is when they produce elements that *restrict* me to 6 wide
(windshields, sharp curves, etc).
> Lego trains came out in the late 60's, before minifigs. They were 6 wide.
> In the early 70's, the town sets were using the 1x3x4 doors and trains
> looked to be in scale fairly nicely with them. Now, town scale has been
> increased. The minifig is everywhere and town doors are 1x4x5 - a decent
> sized increase. But Trains never grew larger. I have seen lots of 6-wide
> fire trucks around. A fire truck is not as wide as a train.
>
> The most frequent scale I hear people throw around is one stud equals one
> foot. That holds true only on a couple of minifig body measurements.
Mike and I have discussed this issue elsewhere and I feel that by rights 1 stud
should equal 1 foot for two reasons. One, that would make a minifig 5 feet
tall (width notwithstanding;), and more importantly it would make the gauge of
the track (the distance between the rails) 5 feet (which is extremely close to
4' 8 1/2" or standard gauge). Since most train cars and locos are around 10
feet wide, that would suggest 10 studs wide would be the proper width.
BUT.....having said all of that, given the ridiculous curves with which we have
to work, and the expense of building that large, 8 wide is a good compromise
and works out wonderfully:-)
> Since
> minifigs are not even to scale with themselves, I would never use them for
> the yardstick against which all other measurements are based. Try using 1
> stud = 1.25 feet, which is an 8 wide train. Build the entire town to that
> scale and a train should be 8 wide. If you want to use 6 wide trains, build
> with a scale of 1 stud = 1.5 feet. Mixing the two scales just makes things
> look out of whack.
Agreed.
> People say you can run either scale of train on the same layout. True, the
> track doesn't change, as they both use Lego track. But the scale of the
> train is different and that makes things look different.
>
> If people want the most realistic looking layout, they need to stick to one
> scale, and that scale should be based on a 1:48, 1:56, 1:anything. It
> should not be based on "the measurement of a minifig XYZ" because that is
> not an accurate scale.
I'd say one would have the best shot at "realism" in 1:48.
> Lego has kind of put us AFOLS in a pickle here, because they mix scales
> constantly. Some things are bigger than they should be, some are smaller.
> They both look fine individually, but put them together and they look wrong.
> Maybe a little, maybe a lot, but they are still off. Rounding everything in
> the real world to the nearest 15 or 18 inches would make things look weird,
> but shrinking this arbitrarily and randomly would make things look even
> weirder. Most train layouts I have seen try to stay away from looking
> weird.
>
> 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.
That's why we love'm (except Timmy;)
-John
>
>
> 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...)
|
| (...) Perhaps in P:48 :) There is no functional difference between 2mm(Fine Scale, UK), S4 (note, not P4, which has manufacturing tolerances, but S4 does not),P:87, P:48, ScaleSeven. None, except the actual size of each model, and the fiddlyness of (...) (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
|
|
|
|
