Subject:
|
Re: GATS Tampa Show...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Wed, 22 Dec 1999 05:10:00 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
johnneal@uswest.net(SayNoToSpam)
|
Viewed:
|
1168 times
|
| |
|
|
John Warren wrote:
> I'm starting to be pursuaded that 8 wide is indeed superior to 6 wide. I
> may even build my next passinger train in that scale. But first I'd like to
> see some models that have been built in the 8 wide scale. Do you know any
> websites that show models in this scale.
Mine, if I ever get it up;-) Actually, I don't know of a lot of people who
consistently build 8 wide as I do. Oh, I have *some* 6 wide stuff, but only to
run on the GMLTC layout because 8 wides can't fit around the track in certain
areas. There are pics of some of my stuff at our website:
http://63.74.171.239/gallery_main.asp Specifically, here is one of my
Milwaukee Road Hiawatha passenger cars:
http://63.74.171.239/gallery_show_detail.asp?id=33 , and here is one of my 40
ft. boxcars dwarfing some 6 wide diesels around it:
http://63.74.171.239/gallery_show_detail.asp?id=34
> Also I'm worried about the fact
> that if you widen a car then you would also have to lengthen the car to keep
> the scale accurate. To me this would end up causing even more problems with
> track curve radiuses due to the length. Heck, I've already noticed that the
> majority of us build our 6 wide models shorter then actual prototypes for
> this same reason.
Of course it creates problems, but not insurmountable ones;-) My passenger
cars cut a nasty corner, and I can only pull 4 at a time (2 motors pushing, 2
pulling works best; four pulling work fine through one turn, the second turn
causes too much drag. Unfortunately, these cars are so long that the train is
almost always in a turn at some point on my layout).
As far as my boxcars are concerned, I think I could pull a lot of them.
Currently, my freight line has a 1 plate per track incline grade and 1 of my 2
motor 8 wide diesels can pull 7 boxcars. Maybe more; I only have 7 currently
built at the moment...
-John
> John Warren
>
> In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
> > Seriously, what are you going to do when TLC introduces their new line
> > of 8 wides trains? It's inevitable. Evolution and all that jazz... I
> > mean, if TLC would get serious about producing model train sets, would
> > you want them 6 wide and toylike? Why bother with gentler curves, added
> > realism, etc., if you are going to keep the scale of a toy? By rights
> > they *should* create a newer, scale minifig but I'm certainly not going
> > to hold my breath. I can live with the wide little fellows quite
> > easily, but not with their narrow 6 wide trains....
> >
> > -John
> >
> > Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> >
> > > Never pass up an opportunity to promote 8 wide, eh?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
> > > - - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
> > > fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to lugnet.
> > >
> > > NOTE: Soon to be lpieniazek@tsisoft.com :-)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: GATS Tampa Show...
|
| I'm starting to be pursuaded that 8 wide is indeed superior to 6 wide. I may even build my next passinger train in that scale. But first I'd like to see some models that have been built in the 8 wide scale. Do you know any websites that show models (...) (25 years ago, 21-Dec-99, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.trains)
|
18 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
