MOC Widths

[garethjellis]

What is your preferred MOC width?

6, 7 or 8 stud?

[Lazarus]

I would say 7, I have done some locos in 8 and 6 all custom and I think 7 is the sweet spot. 8 wide the models look good but the track is two narrow so the wheels look like they are not wide enought. 6 wide harder to put detail into them due to limated space and sometimes they look to high from front view.

7 is my sweet spot I say, I will be going though all my loco designs over the next few weeks and converting them all 6 and 8 wide locos to 7 wide so all my locos are the same.

Edited February 4, 2014 by Lazarus

[garethjellis]

I just started to design the British Rail fleet from the 80's period, and wanted to start on a good width. I agree with you the 6 stud looks too skinny and tall

[legoman666]

I've done 7 & 8, prefer 7. 8 makes everything else look too small.

[Bluredblue]

Might be a silly question, but what do you look at to determine the stud width? If I look at the Emerald Night, for example, it appears to be a 7 wide based on the maximum width of the body, but the driving rods push it to an extra stud on each side, making it in effect 9 studs wide.

[Lazarus]

Most of my Moc locos are 80s BR diesels. I have a 37,47,20 all 6 wide what i need to make 7 and a 33 in 7 wide and A4 pacific in 7 and A3 pacific in 8 wide.

I decided this when I was looking at the 33 and thinking it does look better in 7 than 6. the 37,47 and 20 all look good from the side but always looked to tall from the front.

I think he is talking about base width. some bits will stick out an extra stud but its the base size well i think we are talking about here.

Edited February 4, 2014 by Lazarus

[SavaTheAggie]

At least when it comes to American trains. At the same scale, British trains would be 7-wide (I've looked into building a British train or two), as might European trains (never looked to know for sure).

--Tony

Edited February 4, 2014 by SavaTheAggie

[JopieK]

I prefer a 6 wide base with up to 8 studs maximum overhang. @Tony, that looks very reasonable indeed, although I also like the 4 wide trucks of the eighties very much.

[ronenson]

I like 6 wide, mostly for consistency with the original sets. I also like the challenge to be creative within the 6 wide limits.

[Barduck]

8 wide for loco's (my Red Devil being the exception at 7 wide). For rolling stock, I've looked at 8 wide but I feel 7 wide looks better, less bulky

[Commander Wolf]

I go by a scale, about 77mm per LU, and try to build to that scale. Some things are thus 8-wide and some 7, though oftentimes there's sparse to no data on the widths of various locomotives.

[Andy Glascott]

Almost all of my stuff is 6 wide, largely because most of my track is from the 12v era when points meant that two tracks ran side by side and 6 (or 7) wide trains can pass easily. I also have and run a 7740 and 7745 as well as a 9v Metroliner so 6 wide is in keeping with those. My large steam loco (based on the Princess Coronation Class in the UK) is 8 wide at the cylinders and 7 at the cab - I'm trying to find a way of narrowing the cylinders a stud so it can pass everything else....

At least when it comes to American trains. At the same scale, British trains would be 7-wide (I've looked into building a British train or two), as might European trains (never looked to know for sure).

--Tony

Tony, on the basis that Eurostar trains run in the UK and Europe I'd guess at scaling British and European trains the same, certainly the track gauge is the same here and on (most of) the continent.

[Nagyzee]

Tony, on the basis that Eurostar trains run in the UK and Europe I'd guess at scaling British and European trains the same, certainly the track gauge is the same here and on (most of) the continent.

Track gauge is the same, structure gauge not necessarily. UK locomotives are usually noticeably less tall for example than continental ones. Here's a picture depicting a Hungarian diesel shunter together with an Enligh mainline electric loco:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=302296&nseq=27

[jrathfon]

I just started MOCing, but I like to be true to scale like Sava. If you go by rail gauge and scale proportionately, you'd expect a diesel to be an 8-wide. I still think the Emerald Night looks good against this scale, maybe not completely accurate. But this is just my experience with my E7's I am building and my 6-wide ten-wheeler narrow gauge "Tweetsie" loco, built for IJ track.

[greenmtvince]

I build to 8 studs is roughly 10 feet. Thus most North American equipment is 8 studs wide and my British Railways Class 08 at 8'6" is 7 wide.

I owe my paradigm shift largely to Tony's Unifying Theory of LEGO. Everything just becomes perfectly proportioned when you do it that way.

[garethjellis]

Would this be a good guide to use then? (adjusted Tony's Theory)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/116392714@N02/12307933053/

Edited February 4, 2014 by garethjellis

[Paperballpark]

Europe and the UK use the same track gauge, but the structure gauge is higher in Europe and on High Speed lines in the UK. This is why there are double-decker coaches on European railways but not on UK railways.

To answer the question, I've tried to keep to 6-wide, but it's starting to become too restrictive in regards to detail. Looking at this thread I'll probably look to do most of my future trains in 7-wide.

Edited February 4, 2014 by Paperballpark

[LEGO Train 12 Volts]

I think that 7 studs is the perfect size, however building a locomotive 7 studs wide is an hard task (sometimes an impossible task!) so you have to chose a more easy 8 studs path for models.

On the contrary make a perfect train 6 studs large is rare because you lose lot of details

Conclusion:

6 too simple

7 perfect but really hard

8 may be a little bit large but sometime is the only possible way

[Aaron]

All of my trains are built to scale, so that one stud equals one foot. At this scale, LEGO track is scaled almost perfectly to standard gauge track, and the wheel diameter of basic LEGO train wheels at 3 studs works great for 3 foot diameter wheels. I am currently constructing several Budd stainless steel passenger cars, as well as an EMD E2 diesel locomotive for my 10-wide Super Chief. I am still awaiting Kadee O scale couplers, several BrickLink orders, and custom decals in order to complete them, but in the meantime I will give a preview of what one of them looks like.

Here is the Acoma lounge car, which has the most progress so far. It still needs more underbody detail and Kadee couplers to replace my crude Technic couplers.

The dimensions are consistent with the real thing.

My version of the Acoma lounge car measures 10 studs wide, 80 studs long, and just under 14 studs total height, with 55 studs between the centers of each truck. Each truck has a 9 stud wheelbase, and can move freely, with a 360 degree rotation, so that the car can handle sharp curves. The base of the train car is built using 13 6 x 10 plates, with the trucks attached by turntables. These techniques allow for more constructive freedom compared to using typical train plates and bogies, and allow for the construction of larger and more accurate train cars. Thanks to its width, the doors (although I'd love to use smaller ones to move the bathroom window over by a stud) are also able to open inward, as they do on the real trains. Once you go 10-wide, you never go back.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Aaron

[zephyr1934]

I personally prefer 6 wide for most of my rolling stock and 8 wide for steam locomotives. The tight radius of the lego curves means you will likely have to foreshorten most cars no matter what width. When I built my superliners I took 6 wide and scaled everything else as close as possible to that same scale, yielding 52 stud long cars. At this scale the windows should be about one brick tall (I cheated and made them 4 plates tall), so they are probably closer to the microfig scale (hum... maybe I should get a bunch of microfigs...). The length and weight of these cars makes it a tricky train to get moving (though I am still working on a few solutions) and it looks horrible in standard curves (but beautiful in wider radius curves).

Even at 8 wide the trains are a much smaller scale than minifig (e.g., most real passenger trains seat 4 across plus an isle, a few pack in 5 across). Still 8 wide is so much better if you want to build detailed interiors. Eight wide equipment is also much heavier. If you want to have much of a train and still be pure lego, XL motors are likely the easiest solution.

All of my trains are built to scale, so that one stud equals one foot. At this scale, LEGO track is scaled almost perfectly to standard gauge track, and the wheel diameter of basic LEGO train wheels at 3 studs works great for 3 foot diameter wheels. I am currently constructing several Budd stainless steel passenger cars, as well as an EMD E2 diesel locomotive for my 10-wide Super Chief. I am still awaiting Kadee O scale couplers, several BrickLink orders, and custom decals in order to complete them, but in the meantime I will give a preview of what one of them looks like.

WOW!!! Wow wow wow! That is an incredible passenger car. Please post more in a separate thread. I assume you will be powering it with something other than lego motors??? Meanwhile, with this size, you could build dutch doors that open in rather than the lego train door (though I also like the homage to lego trains that you make with this door).

[dr_spock]

I prefer 6 wide in keeping with LEGO sets but I also have done 1, 2, 4, 8.

Binary Pattern? by dr_spock_888, on Flickr

[Aaron]

WOW!!! Wow wow wow! That is an incredible passenger car. Please post more in a separate thread. I assume you will be powering it with something other than lego motors??? Meanwhile, with this size, you could build dutch doors that open in rather than the lego train door (though I also like the homage to lego trains that you make with this door).

I was thinking about waiting until I finish a sleeping car, baggage car, and engine before I post a thread, but I suppose I could do one just for the lounge car in the meantime. Just give it about a week for the rest of its parts to arrive. The new couplers will make a huge difference. ;)

As far as the door goes, I originally tried a 3-wide brick-built door, but it was too flimsy and eventually couldn't be attached properly when I made some changes to that section. The LEGO train door is literally the only thing I can think of that works in this situation. I had all five of the original Santa Fe passenger car sets, so I salvaged the doors from them. Inside, it uses white doors in dark bluish gray 1 x 4 x 6 frames. I wish they made train doors in this fashion, but sadly they do not.

[Lazarus]

That coach is crazy big, and looks really good, but you would need nice long sweeping bends.

I dont have the space for this, i cant even setup my 6m by x 2m set in my house.

[Aaron]

That coach is crazy big, and looks really good, but you would need nice long sweeping bends.

I dont have the space for this, i cant even setup my 6m by x 2m set in my house.

With body-mounted couplers, it requires spacing between each curved rail. However, if the situation calls for tight 90 degree turns consisting of only curved rails, my bogies have attachment points for androgynous technic couplers. This allows even an 80 stud long passenger car such as mine to be used on any layout.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Aaron

[Spitfire2865]

Those coaches are amazing, although I much prefer heavyweights. The length is perfect, and I agree, 1stud per foot is what I follow. I do like your technic couplings. Magnets would never hold a few of those.