Re: new[TANKS]

[Thomas Lum <tlum-at-mac.com>]

I'm building an Abrams now and struggled with the proper scale in which to build.  I 
also arrived at 1/7th as a happy comprimise with logic versus enthusiasm.  (but not 
before building all three chassis sizes and looking at them)  At 1/6 scale, the tank 
w/o cannon was 52 inches long and 15.5 inches tall, a virtual billboard for 
paintball shooting. Also, I'm partial to roller chain for tread and the length was 
almost 100 inches, which is a huge amount of mass to get rolling.  I also wanted a 
decent amount of power and speed to work with and it was just going to be too 
cumbersome, especially if woods orclose quarters were a battlefield.  At 1/8 scale 
the hull came in at just over 3 foot long but the width was too narrow in the hull 
and I was afraid of not fitting the motors, transmission and suspension in a box 
only  10.4 inches wide.  So 1/7 seems good. 16 inches less track length, almost 12 
inches in hull width and a good comprimise between soze and agility.  I'll let you 
know, and I can always buy more roller chain!
Tom


On Wednesday, November 08, 2006, at 05:31PM, "Derek Engelhaupt" 
<tankme-at-gmail.com> wrote:
>If I ever get around to building an Abrams, it will be 1/6 also for the very
>same reason.  ;)
>
>Derek
>
>
>On 11/8/06, Aahz. <ErickKilmer-at-comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> Polanik wrote:
>> > I didn't go 1/6 th becouse it would have been huge.
>> >
>>
>>    heh, I went with the full 1/6th *because* it would be huge :)
>>
>> Aahz.
>>
>