It wasn’t '93/'94 but maybe '01 or ‘02 when the NMRA tried again. The resounding cry on the forums was "Standards? We don’t need (or want) no stinkin’ standards". For the life of me I can’t figure out that mindset. Unless you operate in a vacuum, you need some measure of standards for interoperability. Whenever we get together at shows or meets, the lack of standards always rears it’s ugly head, especially with couplers. Thank goodness for rubber bands and paperclips )
Jon, we managed to at least get wheel and track standards in 2010, though I’ve still got the scars from the pitchforks poked at me for daring to suggest we needed them. An attempt at coupler standards (not a standard coupler, but just a basic consensus on sizes and heights) fizzled out shortly thereafter.
Stan, that may have been the proposal which sparked the NMRA wanting to define -n3, -n30, and -n2 standards for each of those individual scales. (The proposal I saw had “A” scale for 1:29 instead of “X.”) Personally, I’m glad that one died on the vine. What they were looking to do based on that proposal was the textbook definition of “utter chaos.” And it took some convincing to get them to agree we didn’t need individual track standards for each of the individual scales since the premise of large scale was that all the scales run interchangeably on the same track.
HJ, interesting question. In my case, I’m pretty OC about accurate scale for my own stuff, but also model in 1:24 for my dad’s railroad. And my kids are decidedly in the “don’t give a fig” camp.
Later,
K
Kevin
Indeed the need to define all the different scales was killed many times but kept comming up again. F and II are about the only letters that makes sence since both standard and multiple narrow gauges are modeled in them. Some still use F while others you the 1.20.3 nomenclature.
Many more of the scales are modeled than commonly reconginized. for example around here it is common to model the Maine 2 foot stuff. Some model in 1/20.3 and changes the track gauge while other keeps the 45mm track and changes the scale.
In the end it is interchange and interchange normally is only key when you have more then one manufacturer producing product commercially.
Stan
PS many of the gauges other then 45mm also play around with multiple scales sharing the same guage. In each case it is the track and wheel specifications that are the most important aspects to agree upon.
Personally I think the free market has done a great job for compatibility. I run or have run Accucraft, AMS, Aristo, Bachmann, Delton, HLW, LGB, Lionel, Marklin, MDC, USA, and even a tiny amount of MTH. Mixed different brands in one consist too. I do this on track from AML, Aristo, and LBG. I’ve used wheels from all of them and many more from Gary Raymond and San-Val. I’ve used couplers from Kadee and mixed couplers from one brand with rolling stock of another. I run LGB deep-flanged wheels on code 250 track and Raymond fine-scale wheels on LGB code 332. I’ve never used a coupler height, wheel, or track gauge. I cannot ever recall having a derailment that was related to a “compatibility issue” except running on too tight a curve. I have had to swap couplers to make “transition cars” and while this is a minor irritation I do not expect Ford parts to fit my Dodge either.
I think formal “standards” are a solution looking for a problem. If you want 'em, go ahead and work on it. I am not against them, but at the end of the day I will still be running my trains and likely not notice a bit of difference.
Hans-Joerg Mueller said:Steve Featherkile said:I tried to keep it to even numbers, it apparently is less confusing that way. Especially since most NA modelers are convinced the 0 (O) = 1:48 aka "quarter inch to the foot". Which is another scale to gauge mismatch.
............ Not to put too fine a point on it, HJ, but it is 1:43.5. That is how they got Half Zero (Zed) at 1:87. Attention to detail, indeed. :DBTW when it comes to road vehicles the mfgs refer to them as 1:43
That is because the overwhelming majority of early pre-WW2 die-cast autos and trucks were made by a British company - Dinky toys - to go with the British Hornby 0 scale models, and British 0 scale is 7mm to the foot, or 1/43rd scale. As They were all part of the same company - Hornby of Binns Road, Liverpool. - the proprietary interest was there, maintained right up to the very last glimmers of the original parent company.
tac
Now, see what a mess you’ve made, Ollie?
Ollie who?
I’m gonna jump back in here, covered in coal dust and glowing with youthful excitement having chased the NKP 765 on monday.
I admit, my numbers were probably off in my description, but the numbers themselves were irrelevant. The key to remember with my scheme is that the LETTER denotes the actual physical gauge measurement. In large scale, I suggest “G” simply because SO MANY newcomers to the hobby lumps aristo, USA, LGB, MTH, Bachmann, Hartland, etc all together as “G Scale”. Yes, I understand that this is incorrect, however, my opinion is why not make a gauge/scale standard which conforms to what most people use anyways? Is that not how Kevin and his associates pushed through track standards? (if not, then my apologies to their hard work, no offense or downplay is intended.)
MTH’s large scale equipment runs on #1 gauge, using a stated scale ratio of 1/32. Aristo uses teh same gauge, but builds their equipment to the 1/29th scale ratio. Lets envision a new company, Broad Top Models, which produces 1/29th scale ratio models of the East Broad Top equipment. Lets also assume, for the moment, that they decide to make their equipment run on standard Lionel O gauge track. This then sets the stage for how easy it is to decrypt my scheme:
I run 1/29th scale equipment to model modern American standard gauge. I already run Aristo and USA equipment so I know that their units are (semi) compatible. I walk into the hobby shop to buy a new freight car with my birthday money. Walking down the isle, I see MTH’s new 1/32 ore jenny. On their box, in big bold letters is G-32. The boxes at home I already have are similarly labeled as G-29. Looking at that G-32, I know that the jenny will run on my track that I already have, because the letter tells me that the car is designed to operate on “G” gauge track, which conforms to the LS standards which Kevin and his crew worked so hard to get for us.
However, while I’m getting my new jenny… in fact they are on sale, so I have enough money for two of them, I decide to wander down the isle and see what else is available. On an end cap, a large flashing sign announces the arrival of the brand new EBT 2-8-2 mikado #18, made by Broad Top Models. Their box has a big bold O-29 on the side. Instantly, I know that the engine will NOT work on my track… but look how beautifully rendered those brass boiler bands are!
Hmmm. now lets see here. The East Broad Top is a narrow gauge railroad, running on 36inch gauge track. If I was to model the Mount Union interchange, using my existing Aristo and USA Norfolk Southern DASH9’s and SD70MACs, I’d need EBT models that run on a smaller gauge track, if I want to model the EBT next to my existing equipment. But, can this be? Yes, it is! O-29 and G-29, while track gauge INCOMPATIBLE, are in fact SCALE COMPATIBLE.
Hey, I could use that O-29 #18 on the same layout as my G-29 DASH-9… just gonna need to buy 20 or so feet of O gauge track.
Now, having babbled on so childishly, I point out that this arrangement works for ANY gauge, and ANY scale. Just because there are three scales in use on O track, doesn’t make a difference. They become O-43, O-45, and O-48. All run on “O” gauge track, but are built to different scales.
This scheme gives all the info one needs to make an informed decision on what to buy: For those who are scale purists, the scale ratio is clearly identified. For those who just want something to run on their existing railroad, the track gauge, via the letter, is clearly identified. And for those who aren’t paying attention, there is no real excuse for getting home and finding out their HO87 purchase doesn’t work on their O48 layout.
As for the use of letters rather that the actual gauge, thats simple marketing. Newcomers already identify the trains by the letter… yes, anything bigger that O scale is “G Gauge”! But also Kids could easily identify what they need. Mommy mommy mommy, that has a G on it! it works on my train! Anniversary: honey, all you have to do is look for a circle that says G-20.3 on it to know that it will work for our garden railway of the East Broad Top. Christmas: Little tommy has “HO” trains… anything with “HO” will run on his tracks.
Thoughts?
Mark V said:
I think what is clear is that model train scale/gauge nomenclature is clear, concise, and easy to follow. And any other system developed would be equally clear, concise, and easy to follow.
From the Hitchhikers Guide:
There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
I think this theory also applies to LS when it comes to scale and gauge questions…
While we are all futzing around, let’s not forget the habit we all have of mixing standards - fer’instance
0 scale in UK [~1:43-ish] is also referred to as 7mm to the foot scale.
00 scale is a also referred to as 4mm scale as well as 1:76.
and all the little scales…like 016.5 - British narrow gauge 0 scale running on H0 [16.5mm] track.
009 - narrow gauge 00 scale running on 9mm [n scale] track.
But not forgetting the daddy of ALL the popular garden railroad scales and gauges here in UK - 16mm [to the foot], but rarely referred to as 1:19th scale, but that is what it is. And it runs on?
Why, 0 gauge track of 32mm of course. 
There are also the Continental scales like the beautiful Bemo stuff for H0m [12mm] and H0e [9mm, where the ‘e’ stands for ‘eng’, narrow in German]…
Ahh, 'tis the stuff of many a train discussion…all, I might add, most equable and friendish.
Let’s take care to keep it like that, eh? 
tac
If it was easy, it would be HO, which is really H0, or Half Zero (Zed for those of you north of 45) or 1:87 which is half of 1:43.5, but nobody models that…
Oh, never mind.
tac & steve,
why mess around?
if its numbers, leave it to the germans!
It’s a sea of madness…
And somebody wants to straighten this mess out with Standards?
Ha!
And another thing! We forgot about Proto 48 while discussing 0 Scale. 1:48 model trains running on 1:48 handlaid scale track. It takes a special kind of Geek to do that.
My granddad was doing that in the 30s. Outside 3rd rail stuff. I’ve still got two of his locomotives. Of course, back then there was very little mass-produced, ready-to-run stuff, so handlaying the track and customizing the models was largely SOP anyway. Not that big of a stretch to do things to the correct gauge. Curious that it never became more mainstream, but it’s always been a niche…
Later,
K
Me, I’ve got TWO gauges of track.
45mm and 16.5mm
If it don’t fall off either of 'em, I’ll run it.
tac, ig, ken the GFT & The Sawtry Sunshine Quartet Boys
Steve Featherkile said:
And somebody wants to straighten this mess out with Standards?
Ha!
And another thing! We forgot about Proto 48 while discussing 0 Scale. 1:48 model trains running on 1:48 handlaid scale track. It takes a special kind of Geek to do that.
Steve, thats where my suggestion works: O48… “O(h)” gauge, 1/48 scale
Jon Radder said:
Whenever we get together at shows or meets, the lack of standards always rears it’s ugly head, especially with couplers. Thank goodness for rubber bands and paperclips )
You forgot bread/sandwich bag ties. Every large scaler’s toolbox should contain about a dozen…
As for the whole scale thingy… Lehmann wasn’t the only folks with a rubber ruler or a penchant for (not so) selective compression.
Mik just Mik said:
… Lehmann wasn’t the only folks with a rubber ruler or a penchant for (not so) selective compression.
Looking back now, I have to say that was pretty brave of them, for they took those steps at a time when serious model railroaders were obsessive about accuracy.
But LGB wasn’t marketing to the rivet counters, were they?
The rubber scaling got permission from LGB’s initiative. To some of us it may be an annoyance because we want everything to scale; to others it has freed us from old obsessive ways.
Both types are on this forum.
I think most observers woild place me in the second camp. I own trains in all the common scales that run on 45mm track. I usually don’t mind running them together, especially if we’re just running stuff as a garden ornament.
But when our operators’ group gets together we are more consistent; my trackside structures are 1:24, and my gear for operations matches pretty closely, at 1:22 and 1:24 scale, with select 1:29 gear, half a dozen Aristo ballast hoppers, which “look ok” to me, thrown in.