Subject:
|
Re: Another 6wide/8wide ramble was: Re: Future of LEGO Trains ? was Re: Model Railroad Scenery
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Thu, 24 Feb 2000 05:32:59 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
johnneal@uswest.&IHateSpam&net
|
Highlighted:
|
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
3512 times
|
| |
|
|
Ben Fleskes wrote:
> Your right, I'm against 8 wide and havn't built any 8 wide. Why not? Lots of
> reasons:
>
> 1) 8 wide demands larger scenery and buildings. If your logic for building 8
> wide is because LEGO minifig trucks are 6 wide then you should make all your
> buildings and such that much larger. Don't use any of the LEGO trees, they
> would be too small.
What is wrong with larger scenery and buildings? You should check out Legoland
sometime;-) Seriously, you don't have to build ginormous structures-- we are
still talking MF scale here. I will now *have* to take some photos of my double
stall engine shed for 8 wides to show you what I mean. As far as LEGO trees go,
they make fine shrubbery and saplings...
> 2) I like to see the wheels underneath the car. 8 wide tends to obscure
> them.
In real life, one can barely even see the wheels for the trucks anyway.
> 3) Bigger does not mean better in terms of detail. Detail is usually
> accomplished by what is put on the side.
Ahh, but you conveniently didn't mention the *inside*. My cars have 2 row
seating, aisles, AND lavatories:-)
> And in that case it doesn't depend
> on how wide. Although a 8 wide chassis with side detailing is approaching 10
> studs wide.
Just as a 6 wide with detail approaches 8.
> 4) Wider trains need to be proportionately longer. The short radius of track
> does not support longer cars very well. And I see no hope of LEGO releasing a
> different radius. They have had the same radius of track for over 30 years.
"No" hope? Come on, Ben. The winds of change are blowing...
> 5) While I do not care for much of the LEGO stock rolling stock, some of it I
> do like and would like to include it without modifying it (The crane car for
> example). Personnally I do not like the metroliner or club car. Even though
> I have three 4558s I have none assembled and use them only for parts. I much
> prefer my custom Amtrak Coast Starlight train. But it does use some custom
> six wide windshields that would make it impossible to build as an 8 wide and
> still look as good.
>
> 6) LEGO trains have always been six studs wide (with the exception of a few
> 4.5v trains that have the battery box in the engine) I see no reason to go up
> to 8 wide.
>
> But this is just all my opinion. You build what you want, and I'll build what
> I want and in the end, we'll both admire everyone's creations.
I know you feel that LEGO is just a toy, Ben. And if that were my attitude, then
I would have no reason for building anything wider than 6. But what folks like
Mike P. and I and others are calling for is the creation of a new genre of LEGO
train-- the LEGO *model* train. A type of train that would feel more comfortable
with model railroaders than with town juniors. What we are talking about here is
elevating the theme of Trains to hobby status. Although I am perfectly willing
to retain the venerable MF, I think we should shed the toy image of LEGO and take
on the hobby image. Look how quickly the robotics folk took off-- I know a lot
about LEGO but I don't know crap from kiwi wax when it comes to what they are
doing.
> I've stayed clear of the 6w/8w debate. But thought it time to put in my $0.02
> worth.
I'll admit that building 8 wide isn't for everyone. Building that size allows
for a lot more freedom which translates into needing more specialty bricks which
take time to acquire. I currently have over a dozen different cars/locos in
various stages of completion because of the length of time needed to obtain the
necessary parts. I had to buy $2000 worth of 3225s to get enough roof bricks for
my engine shed-- That's a hassle selling off 1000s of bricks from those sets to
get your money back. Thank God for the likes of Julie Krenzilla, Jon Kozan at
BAYLIT, Gene at The Brickyard and others who make 100,000s of bricks available so
that building this size is easier and even possible.
If and when bulk becomes available, I think people will be bored with 6 wide,
because the opportunities to build better will become a lot more plentiful. But
then again there will be people whose wildest dreams will be owning a Metroliner,
or building an entire train 14 wide--to each his own;-)
-John
> Ben F
>
> >
> > I say that people who are against 8 wide have, for the most part, not spent
> > any time making them. Try to make a few cars. Start by expanding an
> > existing car. Then add more detail in the extra space. After you have made
> > 4-6 cars, then decide if you want to go back to 6 wide. John Neal and I
> > have built a lot of 6 wide trains. He has built a lot of 8s and I have
> > built a few. We have seen both sides and I feel that is the best way to
> > look at an issue. Build a few 8 wides. Sure, they are bigger and take more
> > bricks. But Model Team sets have those same properties and from what I can
> > tell, people love them. Given the choice, would you rather have a lot of
> > models that look like this?
> > http://www.lugnet.com/pause/search/?query=6425
> > Or a few models that look like this?
> > http://www.lugnet.com/pause/search/?query=5542
> >
> > I would opt for something that would impress people. If you are planning to
> > go to a train show, people love detail. Show them trains that look like
> > Model Team. Whenever I see a person get compliments on a train, it is most
> > often about how well detailed it is. How would one best be able to do that?
> >
> > Mike Poindexter
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
85 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
|
|
|
|
