Subject:
|
Re: 8 vs. 6 (was: Excited to Finally be here...)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Wed, 9 Feb 2000 10:31:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1768 times
|
| |
|
|
On Wed, 9 Feb 2000, John Neal (<38A0EF13.EBC9F60A@uswest.net>) wrote at
04:38:22
>
> My 8 wides are *more* realistic than 6 wides, but are still "minifig scale" and
> are functional inside as well as outside, separating them from prototype
> modeling as in the Model Railroad hobby world which concentrates on the external
> appearance of models.
This is my point, really. It may just be that I've read things
incorrectly, but it appears that many people want to do scale models
with LEGO proportions (ie. 6-wide), but it's just not possible.
--
Tony Priestman
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: 8 vs. 6 (was: Excited to Finally be here...)
|
| (...) I 100% disagree. John Neal's 8 wide trains are lovely creations indeed, but I'll put some of my 6 wide stuff up against anything I've seen yet. I built a Milwaukee Road Diesel, you can see the nose of it here: (URL) built it from a picture on (...) (25 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 8 vs. 6 (was: Excited to Finally be here...)
|
| (...) I would qualify that by saying one can't if one uses set designs rather than MOCs (or maybe that is what you mean here). (...) I disagree, or maybe I'm not getting your point. Even when I build 8 wide, I am not striving for perfect model (...) (25 years ago, 9-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
|
|
|
|
