Sweet looking locomotives.
Too bad they had to be gutted to work properly!
I got my 4 X 4 Dodge Pick-em-up stuck in the drive way today. It took an hour and a half just to dig out.
jb, bring some chains when you come up here.
Steve Featherkile said:
Sweet looking locomotives.Too bad they had to be gutted to work properly!
I got my 4 X 4 Dodge Pick-em-up stuck in the drive way today. It took an hour and a half just to dig out.
jb, bring some chains when you come up here.
Damn! the weather gods got the message screwed up, the snow dance was for our parts! GRRRRRRRRR
HJ,
Want me to send you some? I’ve got lots!
Curmee, nice photos, thanks! I assume the correctly sized one is your Magnus K? Best wishes, Zubi
Actually, the Magnus sufers from the same “fat-boilered-syndrome” of virtually all K’s commercially built since 1973, that were based on the erroneous MR drawings.
The Magnus (second loco) is 1:22.5, the Bach is 1:20.
The Magnus has been accepted for service on the CCRy, and has the oxide roof, oil bunker, and several other features used on the CCRy.
Zbigniew Struzik said:Zubi, good one! :lol: :lol: And this after we waited so long to get properly scaled "stuff" to run on 45mm track. :/
Curmee, nice photos, thanks! I assume the correctly sized one is your Magnus K? Best wishes, Zubi
You know all that 1:20.3 Colorado equipment at a reasonable price could tempt a “dyed in the wool” RhB fan like me. OTOH once I made up my mind, no swerving from the straight and narrow. 
PS I read that Regner is planning a RhB G 3/4 Live Steamer, now that will be enough temptation for the rest of my life.
Is the Bachmann K the same, too fat?
Yes, I could see it as far as from Tokyo, that the boiler on the Magnus is as fat as on the Bachmann… It seems they got the proportions right on the Bachmann, pity about the wrong size… - scale, I mean. Well perhaps Mr Kiss will make one in 1:22.5, one day, although I would not hold my breath. Best, Zubi
Hans-Joerg Mueller said:Hans-Joerg, HUH??? What I am waiting for is some more properly scaled 3'--3'6" stuff for 1:22.5 Not too much though, since I hardly have space and money for much more... Still, I am sure there are some nice surprises waiting out there.
Zubi, good one! :lol: :lol: And this after we waited so long to get properly scaled "stuff" to run on 45mm track. :/
Hans-Joerg Mueller said:Don't even think about it. Write to Kiss Brawa or Maerllin if you wish that they make some properly scaled Colorado or other 3ft to run with our 1:22.5 stuff. Barry Bogs has them ready to serve as patterns.
You know all that 1:20.3 Colorado equipment at a reasonable price could tempt a "dyed in the wool" RhB fan like me. OTOH once I made up my mind, no swerving from the straight and narrow. ;)
Hans-Joerg Mueller said:Well, unless you are an expert in live steam I would not waste time and money on it. Look for the G3/4 by KISS, there are a few around that have not been burned. Hard to find but supposedly excellent value. Alternatively, write to Mr Kiss to re-release (unlikely I must say) Best wishes, Zubi
PS I read that Regner is planning a RhB G 3/4 Live Steamer, now that will be enough temptation for the rest of my life.
No, the Bachmann dimensions are correct.
Since 1973, they have been wrong, but the Blackstone H0n3, and now the Bachmann unit are correct dimensions.
Steve Featherkile said:
Sweet looking locomotives.I got my 4 X 4 Dodge Pick-em-up stuck in the drive way today. It took an hour and a half just to dig out.
jb, bring some chains when you come up here.
Wolf,
I ain’t comin up there until this summer!
You can bring the freakin modules down yerself to the college.
jb
Curmudgeon said:Kermy, 17" on the ground right now. I've sno-blown the driveway twice today!
I see he got his millimeters and inches crossed up again.
TOG
This part of town it’s still snowing at 7:45pm. The weatherman says we got 8-11 inches. He must use the LGB ruler in reverse. It’s up to my knee caps in my back yard…and I think we got the least snow of anyone around. The worst part is that this is an extremely heavy, wet snow. I’ve got 2" of water under the snow.
Zubi.
Are you trying to say the 1:20.3 scale is wrong when used to represent 3’ gauge on 45mm gauge track?
Nice pics, and a great looking layout!
TonyWalsham said:
Zubi.Are you trying to say the 1:20.3 scale is wrong when used to represent 3’ gauge on 45mm gauge track?
Tony, I am not only trying but I have also been saying this for the past dozen years or so. Of course it is a wrong choice. 1:22.5 is a good choice for gauges from 36’ to 42’. 1:20 is much better suited for 30inch prototypes and thereabout, but even 30inch/750-760mm is often done in 1:22.5 for the sake of scale compatibility. Best wishes from Tokyo, Zubi
Ummmm…Zubi…if you calculate 1.777" (45mm) to 36", what scale do you get to do so?
There is but one, and it ain’t 22.5.
It’s 20.258.
Zbigniew Struzik said:TonyWalsham said:
Zubi.Are you trying to say the 1:20.3 scale is wrong when used to represent 3’ gauge on 45mm gauge track?
Tony, I am not only trying but I have also been saying this for the past dozen years or so. Of course it is a wrong choice. 1:22.5 is a good choice for gauges from 36’ to 42’. 1:20 is much better suited for 30inch prototypes and thereabout, but even 30inch/750-760mm is often done in 1:22.5 for the sake of scale compatibility. Best wishes from Tokyo, Zubi
Zubi,
From what I gathered during my short time in the LS fraternity there are at least two kinds of persuasion when it comes to scale:
-
Those who remember how the formula to establish the scale to track gauge ratio works.
-
All the rest who need slight “adjustments” to make things more pleasing, better looking, more impressive, more compatible etc. etc. etc.
If legend is to be believed, the “LS in the Garden based on plastic” model trend went askew with the very first “model” known as “Stainz” and it has been “interesting times” ever since.
Curmudgeon said:Gosh, Curmee... Adequate scale choice is much more than just picking one odd numerical ratio. Please do not be misled by a marginal "proto" philosophy. Correct scale choice is usually defined as a solution to an optimisation problem which guarantees smallest error between standard model gauges and closest, scaled prototype gauges, resulting from applying a constant scale ratio to a number of prototype gauges. 1:22.5 produces such an optimum starting from standard gauge on gauge 3, through meter and 3ft gauges on 45mm, down to 2feet-30inch fitting on 32mm, standard 0 gauge... Best wishes from Tokyo, Zubi PS Of course, the optimisation problem devised to define an appropriate scale may involve other cost functional than gauge error. For example G-scale appears to be defined by constant maximum size - as a result G-scale is a function (of gauge), not a constant ratio.
Ummmm..........Zubi......if you calculate 1.777" (45mm) to 36", what scale do you get to do so? There is but one, and it ain't 22.5. It's 20.258.
Zbigniew Struzik said:Zubi.Curmudgeon said:Gosh, Curmee... Adequate scale choice is much more than just picking one odd numerical ratio. Please do not be misled by a marginal "proto" philosophy. Correct scale choice is usually defined as a solution to an optimisation problem which guarantees smallest error between standard model gauges and closest, scaled prototype gauges, resulting from applying a constant scale ratio to a number of prototype gauges. 1:22.5 produces such an optimum starting from standard gauge on gauge 3, through meter and 3ft gauges on 45mm, down to 2feet-30inch fitting on 32mm, standard 0 gauge... Best wishes from Tokyo, Zubi PS Of course, the optimisation problem devised to define an appropriate scale may involve other cost functional than gauge error. For example G-scale appears to be defined by constant maximum size - as a result G-scale is a function (of gauge), not a constant ratio.
Ummmm..........Zubi......if you calculate 1.777" (45mm) to 36", what scale do you get to do so? There is but one, and it ain't 22.5. It's 20.258.
Sorry. Nice try. But no cupie doll.
With the greatest respect, a model is either made to the correct scale proportions, or it is not.
The correct scale proportions for representing a 3’ gauge prototype on 45 mm gauge track is 1:20.3.
Period.
Now, I am not denying it may look pretty good to an untrained eye having a certain homogenity to proportions, but that does not mean we should accept such an incongruity as being accurately scaled.
Even though it would fit nicely in with other incorrectly scaled models.
Until I see evidence to the contrary I must believe the Bachmann K-27 is an accurately proportioned model for use on 45 mm gauge track.
The Magnus is not.
BTW. Neither would 1:20 or 1:22.5 be accurate for representing 24" or 30" gauge on 45mm gauge track.
Also BTW.
“G” is definitely not a function of gauge.
Even though some manufacturers would like such a bending of reality to become a fact and have one letter, “G”, to define both scale and gauge for all Large Scale models.
45 mm gauge is, and has been known as being so for over 100 years, #1 gauge.
“G” is a scale. A ratio of 1:22.5. Just ask the NMRA.