Large Scale Central

ON30 SCALE? 1:48?

Other Scales O / On30
#21

Pete Thornton said:

Are you sure the Lionel stuff you are looking at isn’t “Standard Gauge” ? Lionel tinplate buildings were all sorts of sizes/scales, as they were made to suit the big Standard Gauge railroad equipment and then repurposed to O gauge…

I happened to be looking at some other old scanned photos and found the attached. All pre-war Lionel (from a neighbor’s collection that I helped sell.) The ‘Hells Gate’ bridge and the electrical towers were quite valuable. There is a ‘power statin’ and a small bridge, plus the station. But you can tell they are huge.

That’s what I am referring to. But not just older stuff either. I have some buildings that are newer plastic ones and they are just as huge. But then others fit. I measured a Bachmann On30 coach. It scales out pretty well to 1:48. Coach is 39’ long, 8 feet wide, and the door is 6’ tall. So I can totally buy that it is 1:48. I also understand that in real world terms old narrow gauge equipment was small. But when i compare it to the doors on some of these buildings those doors are damn near 10’ tall.

#22

Prototypically speaking, it was not uncommon for turn of the century buildings to have larger than today’s standards for door and windows. I grew up in a house built in the early '20s that had 10 foot ceilings and the exterior doors were 96 inches high. Do some historical searches, you might discover that they are not that far out of proportion.

#23

Bruce Chandler said:

Korm Kormsen said:
…

http://kormsen.info/scales/bilder/korms-scale-table.GIF

Isn’t there On3 as well? For 3 foot narrow gauge (US). It’s consistent with On2.5, but not On30…I guess to be consistent with that, it would have to be On36, which I have never seen.

that is very probable. that would measure out to a gauge of about 22mm.

for my post above i used the chart, i made some time ago.

when i made that chart, i would have included that gauge, if i would have had seen it somewhere.

maybe i didn’t read about it, because i used mainly european and british sources.

(the only size, i knowingly left out, were the Faller/Eco/Hit trains. they are about 1:24ish on 32mm (O-gauge) for figures similar to playmobil.)

but i’m sure, that there must be dozens more, that i never heard or read about.

#24

Well I am glad I asked this question because it has reaffirmed that I don’t care. If it looks right it works if it looks wrong it does. I’ll leave my rivet counting to 1:20.3.

#25

Someone in one of the clubs I belong to ran some On30 equipment, and insisted that “its the same as HO.” After trying in vain to explain that it is not the same, I gave up.

From the Bachmann website;

On30, sometimes also named On2½, is a narrow gauge railway for O-Scale.
The Scale is 1/48 (1/4’’ to 1’).
The On30 gauge is .649’’ (16,5 mm), same as HO. Also the couplers and the coupler high are the same as HO…

For On30 you can use all O-Scale accessories, figures, buildings and vehicles.
(Not the O gauge locos, rolling stock and tracks, they have a larger track gauge)…you can use HO tracks with the same gauge, but for correct On30-Scale the size of ties and the spaces between the ties are too small.

#26

David Maynard said:

Someone in one of the clubs I belong to ran some On30 equipment, and insisted that “its the same as HO.” After trying in vain to explain that it is not the same, I gave up.

From the Bachmann website;

On30, sometimes also named On2½, is a narrow gauge railway for O-Scale.
The Scale is 1/48 (1/4’’ to 1’).
The On30 gauge is .649’’ (16,5 mm), same as HO. Also the couplers and the coupler high are the same as HO…

For On30 you can use all O-Scale accessories, figures, buildings and vehicles.
(Not the O gauge locos, rolling stock and tracks, they have a larger track gauge)…you can use HO tracks with the same gauge, but for correct On30-Scale the size of ties and the spaces between the ties are too small.

I have learned over the years that trying to explain gauges to some model railroaders is a waste of my time and theirs.

trainman

#27

John Lenheiser said:

I have learned over the years that trying to explain gauges to some model railroaders is a waste of my time and theirs.

trainman

And I am not really sure why that is. They are only loosely related ideas. In modeling gauge is really not at all important. Scale is what we do. We make “scale” models of the real thing. We don’t make “gauge” models of the real thing. Now some purists might insist that the gauge of their model is correct for its scale such as On3 guys who want a true 3’ gauge track in 1:48th scale, same applies to 1:20.3. In one case such as On3 they made the gauge fit the scale and in the other they made the scale fit the gauge. But 99% of model railroad folks accept a gauge and model to a scale.

#28

John Lenheiser said:

David Maynard said:

Someone in one of the clubs I belong to ran some On30 equipment, and insisted that “its the same as HO.” After trying in vain to explain that it is not the same, I gave up.

From the Bachmann website;

On30, sometimes also named On2½, is a narrow gauge railway for O-Scale.
The Scale is 1/48 (1/4’’ to 1’).
The On30 gauge is .649’’ (16,5 mm), same as HO. Also the couplers and the coupler high are the same as HO…

For On30 you can use all O-Scale accessories, figures, buildings and vehicles.
(Not the O gauge locos, rolling stock and tracks, they have a larger track gauge)…you can use HO tracks with the same gauge, but for correct On30-Scale the size of ties and the spaces between the ties are too small.

I have learned over the years that trying to explain gauges to some model railroaders is a waste of my time and theirs.

trainman

Well, it IS confusing because we put SCALE and GAUGE together…not sure why, although IF you do understand it, it does make some sort of sense, I guess… I suspect that even before the “fad” of modeling narrow gauge railroads there was still confusion about scale…

#29

I sometimes have to chuckle at some live steam and (whisper it) battery powered 16 mm scale NG purists who insist that the only correct gauge for use in that branch of the hobby is 32 mm. These people as well as running some prototypical models also run locos that are pure “freelance” fancy so no actual prototype exists and as a result an actual true scale or track gauge cannot be applied to the model. Might be why the suppliers and most of the hobby now accept either 32 mm or 45 mm gauge operation of their products, either freelance or finescale representations. But they are still all marketed as 16 mm scale.

I feel here on a mainly US oriented forum I am free to utter what some might think as heresy. So don’t any of you rat me out to the orthodoxy residing the other side of the pond. I would never be able to show my face at the annual 16 mm NGM show ever again (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-laughing.gif)Max

#30

Well, folks who didn’t know the difference in the terms, or didn’t care, used them interchangeably. Over time that helped cause the confusion. So when I started in the hobby, I didn’t know that the terms actually meant different things, and I used them interchangeably. Many other folks new to the hobby make the same mistake, because they are following the lead of people they see as more knowledgeable in the hobby. Once I discovered narrow gauge, then it dawned on me that gauge and scale are in fact different things. But I still find people that have been in the hobby for decades, who use the terms interchangeably, and either do not know they mean different things, or only vaguely know that they could mean different things.

I agree. Certain topics are not worth trying to explain to certain people. But I confess that I did smile when that “same as HO” On30 locomotive, crashed into the highway overpass on the far corner of the layout. I really had to fight the urge to say “I told you so.”

#31

David; many times in the past, I have tried to present corrections to the statements from the supposed “Experts”, only to be shot down by their loyal, but misinformed following. So…I usually just sit back and watch. Of course, being as human, and as prone to mistakes, as everyone; I have made many mistakes myself…!!!

Fred Mills

#32

Fred Mills. said:

David; many times in the past, I have tried to present corrections to the statements from the supposed “Experts”, only to be shot down by their loyal, but misinformed following. So…I usually just sit back and watch. Of course, being as human, and as prone to mistakes, as everyone; I have made many mistakes myself…!!!

Fred Mills

People do NOT like being corrected for any reason - but ESPECIALLY when they are wrong.

#33

strange…

the person, i would think, who has to say the most about “O” and “On30” on this forum is missing. Tom Grabenstein.

Devon, somebody mentioned, that “O” is cheaper, than the bigger scales.

but not the figures. i looked up O-scale figures.

found only Preiser (1:45) and they are at about US$ 10.- per piece.

#34

Korm, I am on the old Yahoo Tweetsie forum/list and get emails from Ton’s postings on the list quite frequently. I am of the opinion he has abandoned us for more like minded folks. He is making nice progress on his On30 railroad with the same enthusiasm and attention to detail he did with LS.

#35

Bob Cope said:

… I am of the opinion he has abandoned us for more like minded folks. He is making nice progress on his On30 railroad with the same enthusiasm and attention to detail he did with LS.

understandable. - but a loss for us.

#36

Bruce Chandler said:

Fred Mills. said:

David; many times in the past, I have tried to present corrections to the statements from the supposed “Experts”, only to be shot down by their loyal, but misinformed following. So…I usually just sit back and watch. Of course, being as human, and as prone to mistakes, as everyone; I have made many mistakes myself…!!!

Fred Mills

People do NOT like being corrected for any reason - but ESPECIALLY when they are wrong.

Uh huh. And that there is why I usually first say something along the lines of “I understand where you are coming from, or I understand how you feel”, that way the person in question feels like I am agreeing with them. Then I explain, as gently as I can, the reasoning why their viewpoint is not correct. But even that approach doesn’t work on some people. The Washington County District Attorney still disagreed with me, and yelled at me to get out of his office and that he had “better not see me ever again.”

#37

The problem with anything around O scale…

  • British O scale is 1/45
  • Most consider US O to be at 1:48
  • But 1/43 is very popular for all kinds of things

I like using 1/43 vehicle and figures when I can, especially for stuff close to the edge of the fascia.

I have some 1/50 scale WW2 vehicles hidden in the treeline for forced perspective, but nobody’s noticed them yet…

#38

The thing about model railway scales and gauges is that they are at the same time interdependent and independent.

Strictly speaking, gauge is the dimension between the the track’s railheads and that’s it, nothing more and nothing less, & scale is the proportional size of the model compared to the real deal.

However …

At some point in model railway history, I think during the tinplate years, that changed from being measured from center of railhead to being measured from inside edges of railhead.
So even that hasn’t remained set in stone during model railway history.

Anyway …

Track gauges can be created to fit existing modeling scales and modeling scales can be developed to fit existing track gauges.

A lot of the ‘fun’ comes because …

  1. since most railway modelers model standard gauge trains a shorthand way of speaking developed where instead of saying “1/87 scale standard gauge trains on HO gauge track” people just said “HO gauge” and the fully defined meaning was understand in the context.
  2. real railway track exists in multiple gauges.

And …
3. Modelers decided to save time, and hopefully money, by adapting existing model track gauges for modeling narrow gauge trains in a larger scale than what models of standard gauge trains would be for that track gauge.

And …
4. over many decades of time there has been movement toward finer scale models, wheels, and track construction standards.

Sometimes compromises have been made by choice because of engineering realities.

For instance …
The story is that the UK’s OO scale came about since that in being the first to have steam railways the UK had smaller, tighter, loading gauge clearances than most of the rest of the world & 1940s and 50s electric motors would almost but not quite fit inside the boiler dimensions of HO scale UK steam engines.
So …
Keep the HO track gauge of 16.5mm where a 1/87.1 scale model represents a standard gauge train on that gauge of model track but tweak the model scale to 1/76.
(the purist could refer to them as 3.5mm/foot scale and 4mm/foot scale)
(and then that raises the difference between the purist, the degrees of purist, and the casual and the typical railway modeler)

Eventually …
Some modelers wanted to build finescale track truly proportioned for those 1/76 scale models and 18.83mm gauge track came in to use.
Also …
Over time good electric motors became smaller and one truly could fit a motor inside a UK HO scale steam loco boiler.
While …
Along with that, tender drive was developed and thereby mooted the boiler dimension issue.

Yet …
Both development trees have continued.

Yes, model railway scale and gauge history is overflowing with quirks and idiosyncrasies.

So,
accept that the scale/gauge matter is an untidy, documentably imperfect, thing with several loose ends, and a few loose cannons, therefore do what works for your way of doing model railways.

#39

“Some modelers wanted to build finescale track truly proportioned for those 1/76 scale models and 18.83mm gauge track came in to use.”

Forrest;

Here is a funny “fun fact” concerning the OO (or Protofour) 18.83mm gauge. Some years ago there was a humorous email circulating concerning why the “standard” railroad gauge was such an odd dimension of 4 feet 8 1/2 inches. The conclusion was that the gauge was an adaptation of the width between the wheels of a Roman war chariot. Wait a minute! The ancient Egyptians had the Romans beat when it came to exporting war chariots. (Solomon bought Egyptian chariots [as mentioned in I Kings at the end of Chapter 10]) Egyptians measured in cubits, so just for fun I divided 56.5 inches by three. (Probably should mention here that I guessed the standard gauge would be about three cubits - a cubit has been defined as the distance on a human forearm from the elbow to the longest finger. To standardize, the reigning Pharaoh’s forearm was measured, but most carpenters just used their own forearms.) By stopping at the second position to the right of the decimal point (the 3s actually run to infinity), the “cubit” works out to 18.83 inches! That’s my story, and I am sticking to it - because 18.83 inches is not an outlandish length for a cubit.

Best, David Meashey

Edited to mention my hunch and define a cubit.

#40

Scale, gauge. Whatever. Keep in mind ONE thing:

It’s hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it’s damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person.