To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.trainsOpen lugnet.trains in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Trains / 7334
7333  |  7335
Subject: 
Re: Another German MOC: BR 361 of DB
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains
Date: 
Tue, 12 Sep 2000 16:32:24 GMT
Reply-To: 
CMASI@CMASI.CHEMstopspammers.TULANE.EDU
Viewed: 
1840 times
  
John Neal wrote:
> 
> Reinhard \"Ben\" Beneke wrote:
> 
> > In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
> > > Wie schön!  Ben-
> > > 
> > > Which makes me think:  Have I ever seen a *bad* looking 8 wide?  No, I
> > > haven't, and I think part of the reason why is that the proportions work
> > > *for* an 8 wide builder, and conversely, I think 6 wides work against a
> > > builder.
> > 
> > Right, since every train is wider than the track....
> > But I think with the small radius of track 8-wides in curves (especially when
> > they are a little longer) look not too good.
> 
> Oh, I'll give you that.  But remember, even if prototypes *could* negotiate tight
> curves like that, they would look as ungainly doing it.
> 
> > But I don't want to restart the 8-wide discussion. I have decides to build on
> > in 6-wide, because Lego did so,
> 
> Yikes.  Need a better reason than that! :-)
> 
> > all my stuff has ever ben 6-wide and most
> > important argument:
> > The train-wheels of Lego (especially 12V) are to small for 8-wides.
> 
> Actually, the wheels are a bit large (if we are talking about standard rolling
> stock).  I try to compare 8 wides to "O" scale (1:48), so you get:
> 
> Width: Same
> 
> Wheel size: LEGO rolling stock slightly larger.  All other wheels such as drivers
> which are larger are obviously inadequate in LEGO because all the wheels in LEGO
> are basically the same size.
> 
> Figures:  Basically the same height, but minifigs are about twice as wide:-)
> 
> > >  What I mean is that building 8 wide liberates me to more
> > > possibilities for detailing and such.  When (however rare) I build 6
> > > wide, I feel constrained and restricted.  I know that some relish this
> > > challenge to build within such restrictions, but for me it just seems
> > > silly that, for example, my passenger train walls together are half as
> > > thick as my seating area....:-/
> > 
> > I never "play" with my trains: so it is unimportant how many minifigs can take
> > seat inside my trains.
> 
> ????  You are really missing out, Ben.  (Dreamily) Ah yes, I'll never forget the
> feeling I got after having built my first restroom in a passenger car....<sigh>

John,

Hey, I am not that happy with the W.C./head/toilet/potty/pot/whatever in my
caboose...you got any pointers?

Chris

> 
> > > That is not to say that I feel *completely* liberated by 8 wide-- we as
> > > train builders could use about a dozen or so specialty elements of train
> > > items not easily constructed from bricks.  For me, there is definitely a
> > > tension between utilizing available bricks in creative fashions, and
> > > wanting specialty bricks which render all of that creative effort moot.
> > > Sounds like I'm advocating Town Jr, so I'll don my asbestos suit now:-)
> > > 
> > > -John
> > 
> > Just grinning about this point of view.... ;-)
> 
> Glad I could make you smile:-)
> 
> -John
> 
> > 
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Ben


--
PGP public key available upon request.



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Another German MOC: BR 361 of DB
 
(...) Oh, I'll give you that. But remember, even if prototypes *could* negotiate tight curves like that, they would look as ungainly doing it. (...) Yikes. Need a better reason than that! :-) (...) Actually, the wheels are a bit large (if we are (...) (26 years ago, 12-Sep-00, to lugnet.trains)

13 Messages in This Thread:




Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR