I always assumed the 45 in Slope 45 means 45 degrees, and in Slope 33 it means
33 degrees, however if you calculate the exact degrees based on brick measures
it is not.
A standard 1 x 1 brick measures 7.9375 mm x 9.5250 mm (length/width x height
without the stud).
Building with Slope 45 bricks results in a slope of 50 degrees, not 45.
Building with Slope 33 bricks results in a slope of 31 degrees, not 33.
As is well know, assumptions are the mother of all f*ups, so I most likely assumed
wrong
Therefore... just curious, where do the 45 and 33 come from?
I always assumed the 45 in Slope 45 means 45 degrees, and in Slope 33 it means
33 degrees, however if you calculate the exact degrees based on brick measures
it is not.
A standard 1 x 1 brick measures 7.9375 mm x 9.5250 mm (length/width x height
without the stud).
Building with Slope 45 bricks results in a slope of 50 degrees, not 45.
Building with Slope 33 bricks results in a slope of 31 degrees, not 33.
As is well know, assumptions are the mother of all f*ups, so I most likely assumed
wrong
Therefore... just curious, where do the 45 and 33 come from?
I always assumed the 45 in Slope 45 means 45 degrees, and in Slope 33 it means
33 degrees, however if you calculate the exact degrees based on brick measures
it is not.
A standard 1 x 1 brick measures 7.9375 mm x 9.5250 mm (length/width x height
without the stud).
Building with Slope 45 bricks results in a slope of 50 degrees, not 45.
Building with Slope 33 bricks results in a slope of 31 degrees, not 33.
As is well know, assumptions are the mother of all f*ups, so I most likely assumed
wrong
Therefore... just curious, where do the 45 and 33 come from?
I'm going with it's close enough to determine the difference in the slopes,
no need to be that accurate.
That seems rather likely. It also does not say 45º just 45. Then it is more like
a name/type to distinghuish then a number indicating something like degrees.
I presumed it was for 1 brick up for 1 stud along and then 1 brick up for 3 studs
length.
For a Slope 45 2 x 1 that would result in 1 up 1 along = 45 degrees
For a Slope 33 3 x 1 that would result in 1 up 2 along = 27 degrees, not 33
Or
1 up 3 along = 18 degrees
I always assumed the 45 in Slope 45 means 45 degrees, and in Slope 33 it means
33 degrees, however if you calculate the exact degrees based on brick measures
it is not.
A standard 1 x 1 brick measures 7.9375 mm x 9.5250 mm (length/width x height
without the stud).
You forgot about the lip (around 1.6mm), so the slope is ~8mm long and ~8mm high,
which makes it ~45°.
(Skedadling before you think about apply the same reasoning to the 33 slope….)
Building with Slope 45 bricks results in a slope of 50 degrees, not 45.
Building with Slope 33 bricks results in a slope of 31 degrees, not 33.
As is well know, assumptions are the mother of all f*ups, so I most likely assumed
wrong
Therefore... just curious, where do the 45 and 33 come from?
I always assumed the 45 in Slope 45 means 45 degrees, and in Slope 33 it means
33 degrees, however if you calculate the exact degrees based on brick measures
it is not.
A standard 1 x 1 brick measures 7.9375 mm x 9.5250 mm (length/width x height
without the stud).
You forgot about the lip (around 1.6mm), so the slope is ~8mm long and ~8mm high,
which makes it ~45°.
(Skedadling before you think about apply the same reasoning to the 33 slope….)
I always assumed the 45 in Slope 45 means 45 degrees, and in Slope 33 it means
33 degrees, however if you calculate the exact degrees based on brick measures
it is not.
A standard 1 x 1 brick measures 7.9375 mm x 9.5250 mm (length/width x height
without the stud).
You forgot about the lip (around 1.6mm), so the slope is ~8mm long and ~8mm high,
which makes it ~45°.
For just one slope it is ~45° but building a roof won't result in a roof
of ~45° due to the lip it will turn out to be 50°
(Skedadling before you think about apply the same reasoning to the 33 slope….)
Doesn't work for 33
Building with Slope 45 bricks results in a slope of 50 degrees, not 45.
Building with Slope 33 bricks results in a slope of 31 degrees, not 33.
As is well know, assumptions are the mother of all f*ups, so I most likely assumed
wrong
Therefore... just curious, where do the 45 and 33 come from?
I always assumed the 45 in Slope 45 means 45 degrees, and in Slope 33 it means
33 degrees, however if you calculate the exact degrees based on brick measures
it is not.
A standard 1 x 1 brick measures 7.9375 mm x 9.5250 mm (length/width x height
without the stud).
Building with Slope 45 bricks results in a slope of 50 degrees, not 45.
Building with Slope 33 bricks results in a slope of 31 degrees, not 33.
As is well know, assumptions are the mother of all f*ups, so I most likely assumed
wrong
Therefore... just curious, where do the 45 and 33 come from?
Most are rounded results of arctan (height/width) in BL units (where even though
1 height is different to 1 wide in actual mm dimensions, they are the same 1
unit).
The odd one is 33, but that helps to differentiate it from the different family
of 30 'cheese' slopes.
I always assumed the 45 in Slope 45 means 45 degrees, and in Slope 33 it means
33 degrees, however if you calculate the exact degrees based on brick measures
it is not.
A standard 1 x 1 brick measures 7.9375 mm x 9.5250 mm (length/width x height
without the stud).
Building with Slope 45 bricks results in a slope of 50 degrees, not 45.
Building with Slope 33 bricks results in a slope of 31 degrees, not 33.
As is well know, assumptions are the mother of all f*ups, so I most likely assumed
wrong
Therefore... just curious, where do the 45 and 33 come from?
Most are rounded results of arctan (height/width) in BL units (where even though
1 height is different to 1 wide in actual mm dimensions, they are the same 1
unit).
The odd one is 33, but that helps to differentiate it from the different family
of 30 'cheese' slopes.
Also lego call the 33 system 25°, but the 45 system 45°.
LEGO made the first Slope brick (known als Slope 45) where the slope itself is
as high as it is wide both 7.9375 mm resulting in 45° angle and a lip of 1.5870
mm and when building a roof resulting in 50° angle.
Then the next Slope brick (known as Slope 33) was created with the same lip height.
Somehow this got called 33 on BrickLink, but it's not 33° but 31° close enough.
LEGO got stuck with the lip height of 1.5870 which does not match e.g. a Plate,
just because they wanted a 45° angle at the start.
I was looking at Cobi parts, they made a different choice. They set the lip height
to Plate height, thus 3.1750 mm. Resulting in smoother models to be built with
these parts if put along side. This is how I got to my question.
In Catalog, patpendlego writes:
I always assumed the 45 in Slope 45 means 45 degrees, and in Slope 33 it means
33 degrees, however if you calculate the exact degrees based on brick measures
it is not.
A standard 1 x 1 brick measures 7.9375 mm x 9.5250 mm (length/width x height
without the stud).
Building with Slope 45 bricks results in a slope of 50 degrees, not 45.
Building with Slope 33 bricks results in a slope of 31 degrees, not 33.
As is well know, assumptions are the mother of all f*ups, so I most likely assumed
wrong
Therefore... just curious, where do the 45 and 33 come from?
LEGO got stuck with the lip height of 1.5870 which does not match e.g. a Plate,
just because they wanted a 45° angle at the start.
No, they didn't want that from the start, it's a logical result. That
lip is simply a panel width. Brick width + panel width = brick height. Removing
one panel width from the bottom of the brick and you're left with a perfect
cube. Then you cut the cube diagonally (=45 degrees) to get the slope.
Then the next Slope brick (known as Slope 33) was created with the same lip height.
Somehow this got called 33 on BrickLink, but it's not 33° but 31° close enough.
Hmm, I think it's like 26.57 degrees? 2 steps wide and 1 step high, that
gives a tangent of 0.5... calculator says that's 26.57 degrees...
LEGO got stuck with the lip height of 1.5870 which does not match e.g. a Plate,
just because they wanted a 45° angle at the start.
No, they didn't want that from the start, it's a logical result. That
lip is simply a panel width. Brick width + panel width = brick height. Removing
one panel width from the bottom of the brick and you're left with a perfect
cube. Then you cut the cube diagonally (=45 degrees) to get the slope.
Then the next Slope brick (known as Slope 33) was created with the same lip height.
Somehow this got called 33 on BrickLink, but it's not 33° but 31° close enough.
Hmm, I think it's like 26.57 degrees? 2 steps wide and 1 step high, that
gives a tangent of 0.5... calculator says that's 26.57 degrees...
Yes, but patpendlego calculates the slope of a stack of slopes, like he said
the 45° were actually 50°, and tan⁻¹(9.6/(2x8)) = 31°.
LEGO says 25° in the names, which is wrong too… but closer to 26.57° than 33°
LEGO got stuck with the lip height of 1.5870 which does not match e.g. a Plate,
just because they wanted a 45° angle at the start.
No, they didn't want that from the start, it's a logical result. That
lip is simply a panel width. Brick width + panel width = brick height. Removing
one panel width from the bottom of the brick and you're left with a perfect
cube. Then you cut the cube diagonally (=45 degrees) to get the slope.
A panel? Back in the old days when the Slope 45 was created there were no panels.
So, I don't think that was considered at all.
Then the next Slope brick (known as Slope 33) was created with the same lip height.
Somehow this got called 33 on BrickLink, but it's not 33° but 31° close enough.
Hmm, I think it's like 26.57 degrees? 2 steps wide and 1 step high, that
gives a tangent of 0.5... calculator says that's 26.57 degrees...
I always assumed the 45 in Slope 45 means 45 degrees, and in Slope 33 it means
33 degrees, however if you calculate the exact degrees based on brick measures
it is not.
A standard 1 x 1 brick measures 7.9375 mm x 9.5250 mm (length/width x height
without the stud).
Building with Slope 45 bricks results in a slope of 50 degrees, not 45.
Building with Slope 33 bricks results in a slope of 31 degrees, not 33.
As is well know, assumptions are the mother of all f*ups, so I most likely assumed
wrong
Therefore... just curious, where do the 45 and 33 come from?
It has to be less than 45, not more than 45 because when I put two together (slope
to slope) I get an angle very slightly less than 90 degrees. This was the easiest
test for me to do. The measurement of the actual slope can not include the full
length and height, just the length and height of the part containing the actual
slope.
You are correct. With my digital angle tool for wood trim, it appears to be
between 43 and 43.3 degrees.
The 33 1x3 is about 25.5 degrees.
It has to be less than 45, not more than 45 because when I put two together (slope
to slope) I get an angle very slightly less than 90 degrees. This was the easiest
test for me to do. The measurement of the actual slope can not include the full
length and height, just the length and height of the part containing the actual
slope.
You couldn't be more wrong
Remeasure and recalculate.
In Catalog, tEoS writes:
You are correct. With my digital angle tool for wood trim, it appears to be
between 43 and 43.3 degrees.
The 33 1x3 is about 25.5 degrees.
It has to be less than 45, not more than 45 because when I put two together (slope
to slope) I get an angle very slightly less than 90 degrees. This was the easiest
test for me to do. The measurement of the actual slope can not include the full
length and height, just the length and height of the part containing the actual
slope.
You couldn't be more wrong
Remeasure and recalculate.
In Catalog, tEoS writes:
You are correct. With my digital angle tool for wood trim, it appears to be
between 43 and 43.3 degrees.
The 33 1x3 is about 25.5 degrees.
It has to be less than 45, not more than 45 because when I put two together (slope
to slope) I get an angle very slightly less than 90 degrees. This was the easiest
test for me to do. The measurement of the actual slope can not include the full
length and height, just the length and height of the part containing the actual
slope.
Are you saying my logic is wrong, or that the digital tool is wrong?
I am only trying to show that the angle is less than 45 degrees.
Can you explain why this test is not accurate for determining if the angle is
less than 45 degrees?
The bottom of the piece runs parallel to the adjacent side of the triangle
The back of the piece runs parallel to the opposite side of the triangle
Therefore, if the angle is greater than 45 degrees, shouldn't the angle of
the combined pieces, as shown in the below image, form an angle of more than
90 degrees, not less than 90 degrees?
You couldn't be more wrong
Remeasure and recalculate.
In Catalog, tEoS writes:
You are correct. With my digital angle tool for wood trim, it appears to be
between 43 and 43.3 degrees.
The 33 1x3 is about 25.5 degrees.
It has to be less than 45, not more than 45 because when I put two together (slope
to slope) I get an angle very slightly less than 90 degrees. This was the easiest
test for me to do. The measurement of the actual slope can not include the full
length and height, just the length and height of the part containing the actual
slope.
Are you saying my logic is wrong, or that the digital tool is wrong?
I am only trying to show that the angle is less than 45 degrees.
Can you explain why this test is not accurate for determining if the angle is
less than 45 degrees?
The bottom of the piece runs parallel to the adjacent side of the triangle
The back of the piece runs parallel to the opposite side of the triangle
Therefore, if the angle is greater than 45 degrees, shouldn't the angle of
the combined pieces, as shown in the below image, form an angle of more than
90 degrees, not less than 90 degrees?
You are right. It is including the height of the step that is the issue.
The angle of the slope depends on whether you measure the slope of a single part
or the overall slope of multiple stacked parts.
You couldn't be more wrong
Remeasure and recalculate.
In Catalog, tEoS writes:
You are correct. With my digital angle tool for wood trim, it appears to be
between 43 and 43.3 degrees.
The 33 1x3 is about 25.5 degrees.
It has to be less than 45, not more than 45 because when I put two together (slope
to slope) I get an angle very slightly less than 90 degrees. This was the easiest
test for me to do. The measurement of the actual slope can not include the full
length and height, just the length and height of the part containing the actual
slope.
Are you saying my logic is wrong, or that the digital tool is wrong?
I am only trying to show that the angle is less than 45 degrees.
Can you explain why this test is not accurate for determining if the angle is
less than 45 degrees?
The bottom of the piece runs parallel to the adjacent side of the triangle
The back of the piece runs parallel to the opposite side of the triangle
Therefore, if the angle is greater than 45 degrees, shouldn't the angle of
the combined pieces, as shown in the below image, form an angle of more than
90 degrees, not less than 90 degrees?
You are right. It is including the height of the step that is the issue.
The angle of the slope depends on whether you measure the slope of a single part
or the overall slope of multiple stacked parts.
So folks are measuring different things, explaining the different results. That
makes complete sense.
[…]
So folks are measuring different things, explaining the different results. That
makes complete sense.
Yes… well… except for “33”: the only way I can find to get to that number is
to say “the brick is 3 units long and 1 unit high which makes it a 33% slope”
(%, not °, not a typo), except that the vertical unit is not the same as the
horizontal one and it counts the stud.
That or discaculia or dislexia (changing 31° into 33)…
… and a mighty bunch of people just repeating without understanding and/or correcting.
Just enough mystery for the words “Templars” or “aliens” to come to mind
Also makes me think of this joke:
A foreign lord is visiting a monastery, and the abbot explains how the monks
work at copying manuscripts. And the lord asks:
“So, the monks copy the original books?”
“Oh, no! Those are too precious and fragile, they are copying the last copy.”
“But what happens if someone makes an error in copying? Then the error will
be copied again and other errors will be added?”
At these words, a monk working next to them jumps from his seat and rushes out.
Everyone is astounded for a minute and then they hear wails and cries and go
check what it’s about.
They quickly find the monk in the archives, were the oldest books are kept.
He’s holding an old parchment and crying.
“What’s he holding?” asks the lord.
“Oh, it looks like the original of our order’s rules” answers the abbot.
“And why is he crying?”
And the crying monk says “It’s celebrate! Not celibate!”
[…]
So folks are measuring different things, explaining the different results. That
makes complete sense.
Yes… well… except for “33”: the only way I can find to get to that number is
to say “the brick is 3 units long and 1 unit high which makes it a 33% slope”
(%, not °, not a typo), except that the vertical unit is not the same as the
horizontal one and it counts the stud.
That or discaculia or dislexia (changing 31° into 33)…
… and a mighty bunch of people just repeating without understanding and/or correcting.
Just enough mystery for the words “Templars” or “aliens” to come to mind
Also makes me think of this joke:
A foreign lord is visiting a monastery, and the abbot explains how the monks
work at copying manuscripts. And the lord asks:
“So, the monks copy the original books?”
“Oh, no! Those are too precious and fragile, they are copying the last copy.”
“But what happens if someone makes an error in copying? Then the error will
be copied again and other errors will be added?”
At these words, a monk working next to them jumps from his seat and rushes out.
Everyone is astounded for a minute and then they hear wails and cries and go
check what it’s about.
They quickly find the monk in the archives, were the oldest books are kept.
He’s holding an old parchment and crying.
“What’s he holding?” asks the lord.
“Oh, it looks like the original of our order’s rules” answers the abbot.
“And why is he crying?”
And the crying monk says “It’s celebrate! Not celibate!”
I really don’t see any need for the 45 or 33, even if they were accurate. No
one is using Lego to help with their math homework or to do technical drawings.
The footprint dimensions and the picture together ought to tell anyone what they
need to know.
In Catalog, patpendlego writes:
I always assumed the 45 in Slope 45 means 45 degrees, and in Slope 33 it means
33 degrees, however if you calculate the exact degrees based on brick measures
it is not.
A standard 1 x 1 brick measures 7.9375 mm x 9.5250 mm (length/width x height
without the stud).
Building with Slope 45 bricks results in a slope of 50 degrees, not 45.
Building with Slope 33 bricks results in a slope of 31 degrees, not 33.
As is well know, assumptions are the mother of all f*ups, so I most likely assumed
wrong
Therefore... just curious, where do the 45 and 33 come from?
As I understand it, the only reason to add angle to the dimensions, is to allow
for differentiating between the angles. Ironically, the other dimensions illustrate
the difference well enough vis-à-vis slope. The added number only serves to convolute
the dimensions and their usefulness. It’s superfluous, imho.
-popsicle
In Catalog, axaday writes:
I really don’t see any need for the 45 or 33, even if they were accurate. No
one is using Lego to help with their math homework or to do technical drawings.
The footprint dimensions and the picture together ought to tell anyone what they
need to know.
In Catalog, patpendlego writes:
I always assumed the 45 in Slope 45 means 45 degrees, and in Slope 33 it means
33 degrees, however if you calculate the exact degrees based on brick measures
it is not.
A standard 1 x 1 brick measures 7.9375 mm x 9.5250 mm (length/width x height
without the stud).
Building with Slope 45 bricks results in a slope of 50 degrees, not 45.
Building with Slope 33 bricks results in a slope of 31 degrees, not 33.
As is well know, assumptions are the mother of all f*ups, so I most likely assumed
wrong
Therefore... just curious, where do the 45 and 33 come from?
I really don’t see any need for the 45 or 33, even if they were accurate. No
one is using Lego to help with their math homework or to do technical drawings.
The footprint dimensions and the picture together ought to tell anyone what they
need to know.
There needs to be an indicator of the piece "slope" degree, even if not accurate,
but it serves to know which ones share the same angle.
In Catalog, patpendlego writes:
I always assumed the 45 in Slope 45 means 45 degrees, and in Slope 33 it means
33 degrees, however if you calculate the exact degrees based on brick measures
it is not.
A standard 1 x 1 brick measures 7.9375 mm x 9.5250 mm (length/width x height
without the stud).
Building with Slope 45 bricks results in a slope of 50 degrees, not 45.
Building with Slope 33 bricks results in a slope of 31 degrees, not 33.
As is well know, assumptions are the mother of all f*ups, so I most likely assumed
wrong
Therefore... just curious, where do the 45 and 33 come from?
I really don’t see any need for the 45 or 33, even if they were accurate. No
one is using Lego to help with their math homework or to do technical drawings.
The footprint dimensions and the picture together ought to tell anyone what they
need to know.
There needs to be an indicator of the piece "slope" degree, even if not accurate,
but it serves to know which ones share the same angle.
IMO there does not... Slope 2 x 1 or Slope 3 x 1 says it all. No confusion about
the 45 or 33 (which is incorrect anyway).
In Catalog, patpendlego writes:
I always assumed the 45 in Slope 45 means 45 degrees, and in Slope 33 it means
33 degrees, however if you calculate the exact degrees based on brick measures
it is not.
A standard 1 x 1 brick measures 7.9375 mm x 9.5250 mm (length/width x height
without the stud).
Building with Slope 45 bricks results in a slope of 50 degrees, not 45.
Building with Slope 33 bricks results in a slope of 31 degrees, not 33.
As is well know, assumptions are the mother of all f*ups, so I most likely assumed
wrong
Therefore... just curious, where do the 45 and 33 come from?
I really don’t see any need for the 45 or 33, even if they were accurate. No
one is using Lego to help with their math homework or to do technical drawings.
The footprint dimensions and the picture together ought to tell anyone what they
need to know.
There needs to be an indicator of the piece "slope" degree, even if not accurate,
but it serves to know which ones share the same angle.
IMO there does not... Slope 2 x 1 or Slope 3 x 1 says it all. No confusion about
the 45 or 33 (which is incorrect anyway).
The degree in the name gives them A NAME -- something to call them by.
I have been playing with LEGO for over 40 years and have always used the degree
of 45 or 33 to indicate what piece I am talking about (with other people).
The degree of slope is how many people label storage containers, too, such as
a label that reads 33 Degree Slopes, etc.
I have a Lego friend who is even older than me (he is now 64 years old) and has
been playing with Lego his entire life. He actually NEVER calls them Slope --
his word is BEVEL BRICKS -- but he says 45 degree Bevel Brick or 33 degree
Bevel Brick and I know EXACTLY which pieces he is talking about.
And your example doesn't work with these pieces:
Slope 2 x 3 versus Slope 3 x 2. They are NOT the same as one is 33 and the
other is 45.
In fact, more than one seller on BL has shipped me the WRONG piece when I have
ordered Slope 2 x 3 and they sent me Slope 2 x 3.
We definitely need to keep the degree in the names, even if it is not exactly
correct mathematically.
I really don’t see any need for the 45 or 33, even if they were accurate. No
one is using Lego to help with their math homework or to do technical drawings.
The footprint dimensions and the picture together ought to tell anyone what they
need to know.
There needs to be an indicator of the piece "slope" degree, even if not accurate,
but it serves to know which ones share the same angle.
IMO there does not... Slope 2 x 1 or Slope 3 x 1 says it all. No confusion about
the 45 or 33 (which is incorrect anyway).
The degree in the name gives them A NAME -- something to call them by.
I have been playing with LEGO for over 40 years and have always used the degree
of 45 or 33 to indicate what piece I am talking about (with other people).
The degree of slope is how many people label storage containers, too, such as
a label that reads 33 Degree Slopes, etc.
I have a Lego friend who is even older than me (he is now 64 years old) and has
been playing with Lego his entire life. He actually NEVER calls them Slope --
his word is BEVEL BRICKS -- but he says 45 degree Bevel Brick or 33 degree
Bevel Brick and I know EXACTLY which pieces he is talking about.
And your example doesn't work with these pieces:
Slope 2 x 3 versus Slope 3 x 2. They are NOT the same as one is 33 and the
other is 45.
In fact, more than one seller on BL has shipped me the WRONG piece when I have
ordered Slope 2 x 3 and they sent me Slope 2 x 3.
We definitely need to keep the degree in the names, even if it is not exactly
correct mathematically.
____
And Here is the origin of the name Bevelled Brick:
There needs to be an indicator of the piece "slope" degree, even if not accurate,
but it serves to know which ones share the same angle.
IMO there does not... Slope 2 x 1 or Slope 3 x 1 says it all. No confusion about
the 45 or 33 (which is incorrect anyway).
So how about you ignore them, and other people that want to use them to identify
parts that naturally fit together can use them. I find there are many keywords
added to descriptions that I never use and are therefore superfluous (at least
to my way of searching).
There needs to be an indicator of the piece "slope" degree, even if not accurate,
but it serves to know which ones share the same angle.
IMO there does not... Slope 2 x 1 or Slope 3 x 1 says it all. No confusion about
the 45 or 33 (which is incorrect anyway).
So how about you ignore them, and other people that want to use them to identify
parts that naturally fit together can use them. I find there are many keywords
added to descriptions that I never use and are therefore superfluous (at least
to my way of searching).
In all my 50 years of playing, collecting, buying, selling and talking about
lego slopes I never ever had the need of something like a 45 degree roof or 33
degree rampage I just wanted to built a good looking roof .
So I never gave it any thought or attention, indeed just ignoring it most
of the time. The one time it is practical is when sorting the slopes online to
find all the ones alike.
There needs to be an indicator of the piece "slope" degree, even if not accurate,
but it serves to know which ones share the same angle.
IMO there does not... Slope 2 x 1 or Slope 3 x 1 says it all. No confusion about
the 45 or 33 (which is incorrect anyway).
So how about you ignore them, and other people that want to use them to identify
parts that naturally fit together can use them. I find there are many keywords
added to descriptions that I never use and are therefore superfluous (at least
to my way of searching).
In all my 50 years of playing, collecting, buying, selling and talking about
lego slopes I never ever had the need of something like a 45 degree roof or 33
degree rampage I just wanted to built a good looking roof .
So I never gave it any thought or attention, indeed just ignoring it most
of the time. The one time it is practical is when sorting the slopes online to
find all the ones alike.
And that is the point of the label, knowing which ones work together.
For example, [p=3046a]
No doubt you can come up with dimensions to code up the system that will be the
same as regular slopes, but the two character "45" (3 if you include a space)
is much more efficient. It doesn't matter what the exact angle is, just like
it doesn't matter if all the torsos with "ascot" have true ascot ties, or
neckerchiefs, or cravats, or whatever someone wants to call them. Learning it
is called an ascot here finds them all, so long as the term is used consistently.
I really don’t see any need for the 45 or 33, even if they were accurate. No
one is using Lego to help with their math homework or to do technical drawings.
The footprint dimensions and the picture together ought to tell anyone what they
need to know.
I agree to a certain point but if we would get rid of the angles, then we would
need the height for some slopes. Not sure what would be best though.
I really don’t see any need for the 45 or 33, even if they were accurate. No
one is using Lego to help with their math homework or to do technical drawings.
The footprint dimensions and the picture together ought to tell anyone what they
need to know.
I agree to a certain point but if we would get rid of the angles, then we would
need the height for some slopes. Not sure what would be best though.
I really don’t see any need for the 45 or 33, even if they were accurate. No
one is using Lego to help with their math homework or to do technical drawings.
The footprint dimensions and the picture together ought to tell anyone what they
need to know.
I agree to a certain point but if we would get rid of the angles, then we would
need the height for some slopes. Not sure what would be best though.
I really don’t see any need for the 45 or 33, even if they were accurate. No
one is using Lego to help with their math homework or to do technical drawings.
The footprint dimensions and the picture together ought to tell anyone what they
need to know.
I agree to a certain point but if we would get rid of the angles, then we would
need the height for some slopes. Not sure what would be best though.
I really don’t see any need for the 45 or 33, even if they were accurate. No
one is using Lego to help with their math homework or to do technical drawings.
The footprint dimensions and the picture together ought to tell anyone what they
need to know.
I agree to a certain point but if we would get rid of the angles, then we would
need the height for some slopes. Not sure what would be best though.
I really don’t see any need for the 45 or 33, even if they were accurate. No
one is using Lego to help with their math homework or to do technical drawings.
The footprint dimensions and the picture together ought to tell anyone what they
need to know.
I agree to a certain point but if we would get rid of the angles, then we would
need the height for some slopes. Not sure what would be best though.
Netherlands, Overijssel
United Kingdom, England
USA, New Jersey
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Italy, Marche
Spain, Comunidad Valenciana
Portugal
Sweden, Södermanland