Large Scale Central

Scale Dilemma

General Discussion
#1

It seems that if not specifically stated, then any project posted is assumed to be 1/20.3 scale or standard gauge, if obvious. The defacto 1:22.5/1:24 scale seems to be left a relic of the past and rarely spoken of. I have absolutely no intention of switching to 1:20.3 scale and find that this site is heading definately in that direction. For the newcomer, or someone not heavily involved in 1:22.5 scale, then this is not a problem. I am not particularly fond of the direction we are headed, as a large portion of the hobby are disenfranchised and lose a site to post their thoughts.

Fifteen years ago, 1:20.3 scale was a modellers’ scale with little to none ready to run stock available. Today, the scale is heavily supported with most anything one would need (almost like Athearn in ‘h.o.’ scale), so there is little the hobbyist need do. Basically, select his personal choice of wheels and couplers and his locomotives and rolling stock are 'out of the box, ready to run. Is this a good direction? What of those left in the lurch who follow other scales? Will this become a dedicated 1:20.3 scale site?

#2

Dont worry Tim, theres still a couple of us 1/22.5 Luddites around here to keep things interesting :slight_smile:

#3

Just for the record:

The scales are derived from the width of the track. We are all running on 45 mm track.

If you see the track as meter gauge width, then you will want to model in 22.5 to 1 scale.

If you see the track as 42 inch width then you will want to model in 1/24th scale.

If you see the track as 3 ft width then you will choose to model in 20.3 scale.

If you see the same 45 mm track as two foot width then you will model 13.71 to 1 scale.

And sure enough some one may come along and give us even more options. But American narrow gauge is 3 foot and converts to 20.3 to 1 scale. To support this we have advocates modeling in 20.3 standard gauge with a new track gauge of 45mm plus .99 inches, big stuff.

Barry - BBT

#4

I wish there was a lot more in the 1:24 scale. this would suit me greatly in modelling 3’6", however when I began I was befuddled by the scale/gauge thing and except for a smattering of 1:22.5 began collecting the 1:20. equipment. It seems to me the main modellers, of which there are lots in the US (also the largest market) of narrow gauge want to model the 3’ lines.
In a perfect world all the manufacturers would model their equipment in 1:24 as there is so much around to complement this,(doll houses and furniture, cars etc), then all we would need is different tie sets for the diffent gauges I think that would be great as you could model all the gauges without any scale compromises. it would certainly fix the scale/gauge conundrums we all suffer from.
just my 2c
Dave

#5

Tim, I hope not many feel the way you do as we would lose a number of regular posters. I rarely post my scale and when I build I try to give all measurements in 1:1 feet and inches, so all can model to their scale. I run Aristo Craft trains normally, but my first set is a Bachmann big hauler and since I love my circus train yep it gets ran and worked on too.
Shawn uses HLW stuff as I do, Ralph runs a lot of bachmann not many examples but still posters who don’t do 1:20.3.

#6

Tim,

maybe we have all been hiding our light. The 1:22.5 Bachmann Big Hauler range was my first purchases. Cheap and cheerful, even by UK price standards, plus I have no qualms for re-painting or making slight modifications; i’m not up to your modeling skills Tim.

I then discovered 1:29 Aristo-Craft. I have a mix of both and usually run one or the other. However, I find that the B/H tank cars and coal hoppers (EBT which I have re-badged for my railroad name) do sit quite happily with 1:29 - to my eyes anyhow -lol - .

As I have more than enough stock for my small back yard set up 1:20.3 is not on my wish list.

#7

Model what you like and write about it.
What’s the point of crying about what others are doing?
If you have a dilemma, I don’t share it.
Ralph

#8

well, i started out with “G-scale”. - in German.

“G” stands (in german) for Gross and for Gummi - meanign big and rubber.
i firmly stand by that scale, no matter, what others say.

:wink:

#9

Truthfully when I look at everyones projects and pictures I dont think about the scale. If it looks good with the landscape and everything looks good together then why should scale matter. Narrow guage rolling stock was never all the same size. I mainly model 1:22 - 1:24 Scale. Why? For one it is a lot cheaper when compared to 1:20 scale stuff. I also love the HLW stuff. They are affordable, strong and easily can be kitbashed. Im learning all I need is a HLW flat car and I can turn that into almost anything. I dont need a large selection that way. For my RR I dont need a large selection, a few log cars, flats, box cars, ore cars and a passenger car or 2. Since I repaint everything and use my own decalse . I dont need a selection of colors and road names. HLW does not have the selections like Bachmann but they have what I need.

#10

I have been modeling in ‘rubber’ Gummi scale, 1:24 buildings, 1:22 figures and cars, 1:20 motive power (narrow “F” gauge I label standard gauge). Only if one of you guys stop in to view my RR will anyone know the difference.

How many rivets are there on each brace on a Lehigh Valley Covered Hopper car? :wink:

#11

Tim,
I feel your pain. I have promoted my 1:21.4 scale for many years and as of yet have found few converts amongst the modelers and none amongst the manufacturers. Therfore, I must settle for 1:22.5 and 1:20.3 equipment hoping some is over siize and some is slightly undersized. It seems that life is full of compromises and certainly isn’t fair. Try, if you can, to have a great day, anyway. It is totally up to you. I had a bad day in the Fall of 1969. I’ve decided, I don’t have them anymore.

#12

Yea, but, see, as far as I know, nobody here on LSC cares what scale you model in, or what you choose to do, as long as 1) it involves trains, and 2) you’re having fun. Want to model propeller driven flatcars in 1:25.7678 scale? Go ahead!

I model in 1:20 because of the availability of the Shay (initially, oh these many years ago) and the K. The rest of my rolling stock is about 95% scratchbuilt, because thats what I enjoy. Are my models 100% accurate? No. We call it “operations quality”. It works, and looks like a boxcar, but wouldn’t even place in a modeling contest.

Ric, what scale are you modeling in?

Edit: Whoops, Ric posted while I was writing mine

#13

Is this site leaning toward more and better modelers, rather than the RTR crowd? Yes, I think so.

Do we have anything against RTR ? No. Not at all. I personally have bunches of it and buy more than I build.

True. some of the more prolific posters here are modeling in 1:20.4, but there are many examples of fine work being done in 1:29, 1:24 and 1:22.5 including your recent posts Tim.

My first purchases were 1:29. I followed that almost immediately with lots of 1:24 and a few 1:22.5 locos. I did, and still do, run all of that together. Recently I decided to try 1:20.3 because my 1:24 stuff looked narrow gauge in style, but the rails looked to far apart. That and I really like BIG stuff.

I’m with Ric on the scale ratio. I wonder what I would get if I did a weighted average of what I own.

Keep building in whatever scale you like and post it here. Ideas and technique don’t have scale boundaries.

Jon

#14

Cracks me up when guys get all wrapped up about scale. I just run what I like and build what I like and have fun, isn’t that the whole idea of a hobby? Some get so wound up about this issue and others I don’t see why they are in the hobby, don’t seem to be enjoying it. To each his own, why put anyone down over something you disagree with?

#15

I model 1:22.5, 1:24, 1:20.3, 1:32, 1:18, and 1:29
depending on then mood I’m in.

My scratch-built stuff is “more or less” a model of a prototype.

#16
Tim Brien said:
It seems that if not specifically stated, then any project posted is assumed to be 1/20.3 scale or standard gauge, if obvious. The defacto 1:22.5/1:24 scale seems to be left a relic of the past and rarely spoken of. I have absolutely no intention of switching to 1:20.3 scale and find that this site is heading definately in that direction. For the newcomer, or someone not heavily involved in 1:22.5 scale, then this is not a problem. I am not particularly fond of the direction we are headed, as a large portion of the hobby are disenfranchised and lose a site to post their thoughts.

Fifteen years ago, 1:20.3 scale was a modellers’ scale with little to none ready to run stock available. Today, the scale is heavily supported with most anything one would need (almost like Athearn in ‘h.o.’ scale), so there is little the hobbyist need do. Basically, select his personal choice of wheels and couplers and his locomotives and rolling stock are 'out of the box, ready to run. Is this a good direction? What of those left in the lurch who follow other scales? Will this become a dedicated 1:20.3 scale site?


Tim,

What does it matter? A good model - doesn’t matter which scale - is a good model. Usually that means the modelbuilder knows how to convert prototype dimensions to model dimensions. Which scale it happens to be doesn’t bother me.

Personally I find the 1:20.3 trend very good, it means proper gauge to scale ratio for the 3ft crowd. That is a very big improvement over the “Gummi” syndrome that seems to afflict too much of the Large Scale hobby. So more power to those who know what gauge/scale are about, whichever scale it may end up to be! AND … they still need to build all the rest of the goodies in their chosen scale; there’s a lot more to building a layout than just the rolling stock.

Oh, let me remind the “Audience”, the scale on our layout is 1:22.5, the prototype is the Swiss “Rhaetian Railway (RhB)”. I also get to build most of the structures since there are few mfgs who know what 1:22.5 structures look like and fewer yet who know what selective compression could mean whem properly applied.

Count your blessings! At least here in NA those kind of themes are regularly mentioned in the hobby press - warts and all - that is if you check out more than just Garden Railways.

Oh BTW since I coined the “G - wie Gummi” moniker many years ago - even prior to my feuilleton in the GARTENBAHNprofi, which stirred the pot with a larger audience - things have improved in some quarters. Of course there will be more “Gummibahner” than modelers, doesn’t really matter, most of the “Gummibahners” haven’t the slightest clue what happens on the prototype - be it in regards to track, rolling stock, operations or any of the other myriad topics of the “Real Thing” - they are quite content to run in circles, small ones in Z to large ones in “G”.

I had one of the breed ask me why I would be wasting gas video filming the real trains. Right! I could be sitting at home working on cheap basket cases picked up by the bushelful at the last “modelers meet”. GRRRRRRRRRRR

#17

“Oh BTW since I coined the “G - wie Gummi” moniker many years ago - even prior to my feuilleton in the GARTENBAHNprofi, which stirred the pot with a larger audience - things have improved in some quarters.”

HJ, sure you did and algore invented the internet. I believe you. Really.

#18

Ric Golding said:
“Oh BTW since I coined the “G - wie Gummi” moniker many years ago - even prior to my feuilleton in the GARTENBAHNprofi, which stirred the pot with a larger audience - things have improved in some quarters.” HJ, sure you did and algore invented the internet. I believe you. Really.

Welllllll Ric, Unlike Al Gore I have the proof :stuck_out_tongue: :smiley: … …

(http:///F-PIX/GwieGummi_s.jpg)

… … How did that Feuilleton come about? Friedhelm Weidelich had read my scale dig often enough on the Internet and figured it would be “just right”. :lol: :lol: The rest is history!

#19

I conceed. I would never have thought “Gummi” would have been part of your vocabulary. Like I can read that article. :wink: Of course, that is already more data than many of our elected/selected officials have submitted as proof of what they claim. All algore has ever done is get mad and swet on everything when he was/is challenged.

#20

Tim
Sorry you feel this way. Funny how things work out. I run what ever I like. I have 1:20.3 to 1:29.0 stuff. I have Steam and Deisel running at the same time. The only rolling stock I built was 1:24.0. easy to do the math on that scale. My buildings I got from Colorado are 1:24 because that is a nice middle of the road for those of use with out skill. 99.9% of my stuff is RTR and I love it all. I also love this site because it was the first site to make me feel welcome and is still the only one that realy makes me feel welcome. Even thoe most everyone here also hangs at other sites the over all feeling here is more like “we don’t care how or why just so long as your having fun.”

My thought on this is most no one post scale because over time you learn who is doing what scale so there is no need to ask or its just not that important to the builder.

hope you have a nice day and screw the scale just have fun.