Large Scale Central

Is Bachmann REALLY 1:20.3? Why don't the figures fit?

Modeling Figures
#1

Hi Folks;

Well, tonight it was too overcast for taking photos, and it kept threatening to rain. I put a folding table on the carport and installed an engineer in the cab of the Bachmann Davenport instead. This is my pet peeve with Bachmann. They claim that all their Spectrum stuff is 1:20.3 scale, but sometimes it’s even hard to get a 1:22.5 figure into their cabs.

I had the same trouble with the Heisler. It was supposed to be 1:20.3 scale, but the giants Bachmann supplied for the crew would not fit into the cab. I had to use a Lionel LS crew instead. Those guys were probably 1:24 scale.

Anyway, the figure I wanted to use for the engineer was one of the Train-Li 1:22.5 seated figures I had bought at the ECLSTS show. When I test-fitted this fellow over the seat in the Davenport’s cab, his butt was 1/8 inch above the seat! Either LGB are not the only people who use a rubber ruler, or Bachmann only chooses to model locomotives that were run by midgets or hobbits. I made a seat cushion from the foam material that Bachmann had placed around the coupler shanks to protect the couplers during shipping. Now the guy’s feet are slightly off the floor, but not enough that I can’t live with it.

The Davenport is a great little locomotive, and probably the best bang for the buck I have seen in a long time. It’s just that Bachmann seems to let things down when it comes to getting the human element into the picture.

Are others having similar problems with getting crews into Bachmann cabs? It seems to happen mainly with closed caps. The 4-6-0s, 2-6-0s, 2-8-0s, and the Ks are less likely to have the problem.

Sorry for the rant. It just seems to me that if a locomotive is supposedly 1:20.3, then a 1:20.3 engine crew should fit into the cap.

Yours,
David Meashey

#2

Dave,
The Davenports had pretty short cabs. I’m sure an engineer was probably hunched over, with his knees at his elbows :wink:
Most of the steam locomotives where I’ve been able to get in the cab, I can’t stand up straight. Even some of the diesels.
Ralph

#3

Ralph;

Guess I got spoiled by the two Porter saddle tank locomotives I ran at the W,K&S RR. Though small (45 tons and 65 tons), they still had fairly roomy cabs for a 5’ 7" person. Though I do remember cracking my noggin on the headlight switch on occasion. I suppose somebody needs to make some crew figures that don’t stand or sit so straight.

Guess I should get better with Sculpy. I can’t seem to sculpt a face that looks better than a badly-drawn cartoon.

Thanks,
David Meashey

#4

Thanks for this info! I had been staring at my 1:20 porter next to my 1:22 4-6-0 and wondering if I really understood scale…

#5

David:

I understand your frustration, but there are several reasons why accurately scaled figures do not fit into accurately scaled cabs.

First is the fact that most model figures are rigid, rather than being flexible like us prototype humans. Using your example of a figure not sitting down on the seat, consider that real people can draw their legs up to sit on something that is really low. A rigid plastic figure can’t do that. Add clothing that is rigid rather than flexible and the problem is worsened. Your 1/8" observed seat height difference is only ~2 ½" in 1:20 scale. Really easy for a real human to accommodate that much difference in seat height.

Next, virtually all the 1:20 scale narrow gauge rolling stock is from a time when people were somewhat smaller. Smaller locomotives and smaller people definitely were the norm, and the cabs were accordingly smaller.

Taking a figure that is a model of a 6’ tall person (slightly above the current average height for American males) and trying to fit it into the cab of a late 1800s or early 1900s cab will produce the result you are observing. American males in 1900 were closer to 5’7" or 5’8" tall. And again, the rigidity factor comes into play. When I ride in the cab of one of my favorite early day Shay locomotives, I am able to duck and bend so I can fit, and my clothing flattens to accommodate the space available.

I often visit the Yosemite Mountain Sugar Pine Railway where there are two Westside Lumber Co. Shays (#10 & #15) in operation. The YMSPRR also has a small gas mechanical locomotive (similar in size to the B’mann Davenport) that is used for MOW operations. Seeing Max Stauffer (YMSPRR’s owner) who is slightly over 6’ tall get into and operate that locomotive is amazing. He literally has to operate it in a crouched position as the cab was obviously built for a much shorter person. Again, Max is flexible enough to get into the cab. A cast resin figure of Max wouldn’t come close to fitting without major surgery.

Hope this all makes some sense!

Happy RRing,

Jerry

#6

Figures don’t bend like us regular folks do, even the articulated ones. I’ve been inside dozens of real cabs and as a 6’ + guy it is pretty cramped forehead hitting spaces especially in the small switchers and cane engines that I’ve been in. Seat sizes differ too. Even in real furniture. Chairs run between 16 to 22 inches with and without cushions.
I have a few bachmann narrow guages and their deminsions are within inches of their prototypes (at least from the erection drawings I was able to get). I noticed when reviewing images of my favorite road OR&L that many times the fireman would sit on the window sill with his but hanging out the window. I used to think that was because it was just too darn hot in there, but it was also very cramped.

#7

Sure figures don’t bend like regular folks…And true people were smaller in the “olden days”…And I’ll even buy some cabs were tiny for even the smallest engineer. But I do have a hard time with a supplier building the engine and supplying the buyer with a figure completely inappropriate for the cab. Just poor planning. If you don’t have a figure that fits then don’t put it in the box.

I’m with ya Dave.

#8

I agree Mark, I’ve always hated those little dudes bachmann puts in, but I like them because they made me start sculpting again :slight_smile:

#9

I’m glad you’re sculpting too!

By the way, am I the only one who noticed the Bachmann engineer has one arm significantly longer than the other?

#10

Another reason to buy those el-cheapo Chinese figures? At about 55c each, you don’t feel too bad cutting them up.

And Dave, the easy solution to cartoonish is to cut the heads off plastic figures and use them with your clay bodies… most of the B’mann figures have melon heads that would look better on 1:20 bodies anyway

#11

Mik;

I like your idea. Perhaps I could build a small gillotine. “Off with their heads!” But seriously, I may try that when making custom figures.

Mark V;

It’s not just Bachmann. Aristo has at least one brakeman with one arm noticably longer than the other. Perhaps it came from dangling off the sides of boxcars too many times - lengthened that arm. Maybe we will just have to subject our figures to the infamous “short-arm inspection.” :lol:

Thanks to all for the suggestions. We do tend to perceive things based on our own size. Since I am realtively short, most of the real locomotives I have been in seemed to have decently sized cabs. The main exception was the 0-4-0 camelback at the Strasburg RR.

Best,
David Meashey

#12
Jerry Bowers said:
David:

I understand your frustration, but there are several reasons why accurately scaled figures do not fit into accurately scaled cabs.

First is the fact that most model figures are rigid, rather than being flexible like us prototype humans. Using your example of a figure not sitting down on the seat, consider that real people can draw their legs up to sit on something that is really low. A rigid plastic figure can’t do that. Add clothing that is rigid rather than flexible and the problem is worsened. Your 1/8" observed seat height difference is only ~2 ½" in 1:20 scale. Really easy for a real human to accommodate that much difference in seat height.

Next, virtually all the 1:20 scale narrow gauge rolling stock is from a time when people were somewhat smaller. Smaller locomotives and smaller people definitely were the norm, and the cabs were accordingly smaller.

Taking a figure that is a model of a 6’ tall person (slightly above the current average height for American males) and trying to fit it into the cab of a late 1800s or early 1900s cab will produce the result you are observing. American males in 1900 were closer to 5’7" or 5’8" tall. And again, the rigidity factor comes into play. When I ride in the cab of one of my favorite early day Shay locomotives, I am able to duck and bend so I can fit, and my clothing flattens to accommodate the space available.

I often visit the Yosemite Mountain Sugar Pine Railway where there are two Westside Lumber Co. Shays (#10 & #15) in operation. The YMSPRR also has a small gas mechanical locomotive (similar in size to the B’mann Davenport) that is used for MOW operations. Seeing Max Stauffer (YMSPRR’s owner) who is slightly over 6’ tall get into and operate that locomotive is amazing. He literally has to operate it in a crouched position as the cab was obviously built for a much shorter person. Again, Max is flexible enough to get into the cab. A cast resin figure of Max wouldn’t come close to fitting without major surgery.

Hope this all makes some sense!

Happy RRing,

Jerry


What a great contribution to the discussion. Thanks, Jerry! :wink:

#13

I think an Alleluia may be in order. I’m just out of scale a bit! (say, 1:0.6 or so?) Seriously, it happens in 1:1 too. The Climax at Durbin WV (nee Moore Kepler) is a tight enough fit that the only way I could ever get into the cab was via the window… fortunately, someone must have thought of that, because there’s a grabiron above, and a ledge below that facilitates that. I’ve got a photo of me in the cab of one of the White Pass DL535’s and while it’s probably one of the larger NG diesels ever built, I think I wiped a bunch of the diesel grime off the side squeezing down the walkway to the cab, and had to nearly climb OVER the seat to get into the engineer’s seat for the now semi-famous picture. Now, that’s not entirely fair; a 1:20 model of me would probably seem overscale in a much larger scale (see above) but it illustrates the point quite nicely. I have a drawing of the 2-4-4T Vulcan that most know best as Edaville #3 … the door is 60" tall by 19" wide (and originally, the tender tank encroached on that!) I’d bet that’d involve some “Cab Ride Yoga” for many people on this list! Matthew (OV)

(http://freightsheds.largescalecentral.com/users/slatecreek/_forumfiles/dlMattcomp.jpg)

#14

Oh, and Dave, if you look closely at this, you can see my solution to that. Now Richard’s “Marcus Schutte” (seated) would fit nicely in there, except that you’d have to take the cab off to get him in there without scraping something up.

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_3Hdj0jDlqqs/ScAq7Jssr8I/AAAAAAAAAGg/a3EBqUS-v4M/s1600/P3170005.JPG)

#15

Last but not least …

The EBT has a centercab buried in one of the shops that has a cab that slopes DOWN from two already short hoods (say, shoulder height or so on an average sized guy?) A fifth grader sitting on the floor might be comfortable, but then he’d never be able to see out, beyond the tiny front window and the sliding side one. I’ve seen park trains with more room in the cab… I’ve been trying to find a photo of it, or one similar (seems like I saw one on Northeast.railfan.net at a steel mill, but I’ll be darned if I can find it.)

At the other end of the spectrum, my understanding from those who ran them is that a GG-1, while a behemoth on the outside, doesn’t have much room for anybody on the inside.

There’s also a photo I couldn’t find, but that was helpful when doing the inside of #2 above that showed a similar engine in Hawaii (maybe the same line as the "Sugar Cane Train on Kauai?) where it looked for all the world like the engineman was supposed to sit sideways in the cab on a … board … on the floor, work a clutch pedal that went toward the left cab wall when pressed, and levers sticking out from the back of the hood. So, the enormous metal (and unremoveable) metal hump in the Bachmann cab might not be all that far off. I cut the seat out entirely, added more controls (allowing for a clutch, gearshift, throttle, direction, and brake,) raised the control stand about 1/4-1/2 inch, so that someone sitting on the new, larger, higher seat on the back wall could reasonably operate them, and then covered some of the charging gear by installing a sand box on the left side, that would double, in a pinch, as a seat for someone with their feet out the side door.

But then, I don’t think this model was intended to be 1:20, strictly speaking; I think the last of those was the K (which is Marcus’ new assignment) and thereafter the forney, the 2-6-6-2, and this thing were marginally passable in either (very small 1:20 or large 1:22.5) although for me, making them “passable” in 1:20 involves some reasonably serious modification, which is why my 2-6-6-2 has never seen the rails, and my 2-4-4T has been cut up in a box after one test lap.

Someday…

Matthew (OV)

#16

Matthew; You solved the problem by removing the stock seat and mounting a bench seat to the rear wall. Correct? I did something similar for my Lil’ Deuce Caboose, but the conductor prefers his barrel seat on the front deck as long as the weather is nice.

(http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/davemeashey/LDeuce03.jpg)

(http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/davemeashey/LDeuce02.jpg)

I will keep your idea stashed away for future projects. On the two Porters I ran, the 0-4-0st had seats that could fold against the cab wall. The “seat” for the 0-6-0st was a 25 gal grease drum with a cushion mounted to the top. (Hey! All of us hoggers thought that cushion was pretty civilized!) Best, David Meashey P. S. You and I must have been posting at the same time. I see that your last post answered my question.

#17

You’ve got it exactly. :slight_smile:

The only real problem with this arrangement, I think, is that backing up for long periods of time, you’d have to sit on the transmission hump or something … or stick a foot out the door and sit sideways (but still use your left foot to work the clutch) … I ran the Plymouth at Doe River Gorge a couple of times, and found that backing up was a whole lot less comfortable than going forward, even with no pedals involved!

So, in warm weather, sit sideways on the seat … feet out the door except when you need to shift. Cold weather, fold the seat, shut the door, and sit on the transmission. Maybe bring a float cushion from your winterized boat?

Matthew (OV)

#18

Matthew;

I know what you mean. We had no provision for turning locomotives at the W,K&S RR. The trip to Wanamakers required running in reverse. The plus side is that it forced me to become an ambidexterous hogger. I can run as well with my right hand as with my left. I usually stood to run anyway, so #2 was no problem. #65 was another story. The coal bunker was mounted to the back of her cab. Running in reverse with a newly-filled bunker meant keeping the bandana over the mouth and nose, shoving the cap down to my eyebrows, and making sure my goggles were on snug.

Even with those discomforts, I miss running those old girls.

Yours,
David Meashey

#19

Quote:
… I noticed when reviewing images of my favorite road OR&L that many times the fireman would sit on the window sill with his but hanging out the window.

I’ve seen lots of engineers and firemen ride like that too, so naturally, I had to do that…

(http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/eastbroadtop/EBT3/EBT327.jpg)

The fireman on this loco stands about 5’ 10", and wouldn’t need too much of a boost to see up and over the top of the cab.

(http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/eastbroadtop/EBT3/EBT325.jpg)

Compare to EBT #12, which is, shall we say, just a bit bigger…

(http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/eastbroadtop/EBT12/EBT1237.jpg)

The figures are within an inch or two of the crew in #3. I put a 6’ 4" action figure inside the cab of my K-27, and someone once commented on how small he looked. Later, K

#20

(http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/davemeashey/LDeuce02.jpg)

Dang! Ah nevah saw an awthawse with winderz before!