Hi all,
Remember the “interesting discussions” about the scale/gauge question???
I’ve been looking for a page where it would relate if not all, then at least most of the nonsense!
And I have found it!
Tabelle der Modellbahn-Maßstäbe und -Spurweiten
Yes, it is in German but the tables contain few different terms that are easy to look up. Someone did a lot of work!
Thanks HJ!
That table answers some of my questions, such as “EM” in Great Britain, but when I look through English model magazines they always refer to 4mm scale and 7mm scale, where do they fit in that table?
Paul
Hi Paul
4mm/ft is 1:76.2 scale
7mm/ft is 1:43.5
All those mm/ft are easy, just take 304.8 (1ft) and divide by whatever i.e. 304.8:3.5= 87.1 (H0)
Paul Stanton said:
Thanks HJ! That table answers some of my questions, such as "EM" in Great Britain, but when I look through English model magazines they always refer to 4mm scale and 7mm scale, where do they fit in that table?Paul
Anyway, the term “4mm scale” usefully covers everything except track and wheels in those three gauge groups.
As for 7mm, it is British 0 scale (1:43.5), and the “7mm” term avoids confusion with those treacherous Continentals (1:45) and seditious Americans (1:48, usually). 0 gauge, of course, is another kettle of fish, there being at least two variants (Americans trying for a more accurate scale/gauge relationship).
Having lived with the British mishmash, I still wonder how Americans who (justifiably) found it laughable can happily live with 1:29 instead of the proper 1:32 (established by Maerklin in the dawn of model railroad history) for large-scale standard gauge models.
WOW factor, SHMOW factor.
I shall now return to my cave and grumble to the bats.
One look at that chart and I think I’ll go play with my FnTrains!
I was right! 1/29 is listed NMRA as “A” Scale and 1/24 has an “H” scale.
Thats a very useful site! Wish it was in english but I was able to figure most of it out.
But nobody in Large Scale has accepted those scale designations…manufacturers included…so they are not worth the paper they are printed on. I know the NMRA thinks they are god, but most large scalers could care less about what they think.
The thing is, the NMRA COULD get buy-in from the LS community if they’d 1) listen to them, and 2) get some noted LSers on the NMRA board. But, its a chicken-and-egg thing. They have to make do with who they have as members, and, it seems, the LSers in the NMRA have their own ideas.
Im thinking that the NMRA needs to say to the LS community as a whole “Sorry we were jerks, how about us all sitting down and hammering this out?”, but that’ll never happen. The biggest issue is that we, as LSers, look at our 45mm track, then decide we want to run NG/SG/2foot trains on it, then say “Oh, so thats 1:20.3”, or whatever…the rest of the scales say “I like O scale, but I want to model narrow gauge, so thats On30, on HO track”…we sort of have an oblong view of it.
But what a diversity we have…! 
Bob McCown said:
The thing is, the NMRA *COULD* get buy-in from the LS community if they'd 1) listen to them, and 2) get some noted LSers on the NMRA board. But, its a chicken-and-egg thing. They have to make do with who they have as members, and, it seems, the LSers in the NMRA have their own ideas.I’m thinking that the NMRA needs to say to the LS community as a whole “Sorry we were jerks, how about us all sitting down and hammering this out?”, but that’ll never happen. The biggest issue is that we, as LSers, look at our 45mm track, then decide we want to run NG/SG/2foot trains on it, then say “Oh, so thats 1:20.3”, or whatever…the rest of the scales say “I like O scale, but I want to model narrow gauge, so thats On30, on HO track”…we sort of have an oblong view of it.
Bob the trouble with this is that the NMRA thinks that WE are the jerks for not cowtowing to them a few years ago when they tried to unilaterally impose scale designations and standards without any real consultation or co-ordination within the large scale community and got a collective “yeah, right” responce from the large scale community.
If they had the forsight (which they never have had) to see where the large scale market was going back in the early nineties, and approached the companies to propose working with them to set standards that each could live with (this is PRECISLY what they did in HO and N years and years ago) and coax the manufacturers towards a more universal set of standards, we might be living in a very different large scale universe.
The biggest problem that the NMRA has had in the last 20 years is that they are SO focused on HO and N that they ended up being very dismissive of almost every other scale. They were dismissive of large scale from the very beginning, Early stuff’s toylike appearence didnt help with the dismissive attitude, but in general the attitude from the core members has been best described as sneering derision. There are fans in the org but they are a minority.
So now here we are, 2007, with at least 7 active scales using 45mm track, we generally set our own standards when we build, and just live with what standards we get from the manufacturers. Not the best of worlds I agree, but the NMRA has lost its chance to have an impact in LS and unless there is a quantum shift at their HQs, the NMRA is going to have to wait for the core HO-centric members to either die off or age to the point where they shift to LS, and maybe then we’ll get a better relationship with them.
Personally I doubt it, they are having enough trouble keeping up ranks as it is. New members end up leaving disenchanted with the “old boy” administration of the org. Newbies feel like they are just “cash resources” and feel ignored by the head honchos.
I read this all the time on HO forums whenever the subject comes up.
When’s the last time you saw an NMRA advertisement in Garden Railways? That speaks volumes as to their concern for large scale. Any wonder why the LS community pretty much thumbs its collective nose at the organization? You gotta support the hobby if you want support from it.
I’ve nothing against the NMRA, personally. Growing up, dad and I were always invited to display at their regional meets (we were not members), and–for the most part–were very well received, especially when we’d do prototypical switching layouts. We hosted the regional group at our railroad annually, which delighted pretty much everyone who came over. But behind the compliments was the sense that we were the exception to the rule–that while we were doing “NMRAesque” stuff with large scale, the hobby in general was nothing more than a mere curiosity.
That hasn’t changed in 20+ years, but neither has the reason for giving that perception. Yes, there are far more “scale” models being produced, and more people who know what a scale rule is, and how to apply it. But when you look at public displays–particularly those at train shows (GATS, etc.) many large scale railroads are done by rolling out green indoor/outdoor carpet on the ground and setting up as many tracks as humanly possible. It does nothing to showcase the trains as scale models, nor showcase them running through realistic garden scenery. The general public doesn’t care and/or notice, but the HO and N scale modular groups do. They’re the NMRA members, and their view of large scale comes from seeing these displays. So long as that’s the public face of garden railroading, ain’t nuttin’ ever gonna change.
I’m not worried about that, mind you. We’ve managed quite well without the NMRA, and even if they were miraculously able to come to terms on something that resembles standards, there’s still the matter of convincing the manufacturers to get on board. That’s something else that ain’t never gonna happen. They’ve had every opportunity over the history of this hobby to get together and establish at least rudimentary standards, to no avail. Each–frustratingly–wants to do its own thing. We muddle, manage, and buy third-party couplers and wheelsets. The result is a strong sense of independence that gives us reason to thumb our noses at them. So while we can say that the NMRA still doesn’t support large scale after all these years, we also have to acknowledge that we give them no reason to do so. I don’t see the hobby suffering as a result.
Later,
K
Yes Kevin, I agree with what you’ve said.
It seams to me that the future will be most interesting when these HO NMRA scale freak wankers get older, cant handle the small trains anymore and decide to give LS a whirl. This describes a good chunk of newbies in the LS hobby and how will they react to the Wide World Of Sports we call LS will be very interesting to see.
I’ve already seen posts questioning why there are no kits like in HO (there are, ya just have to look), no standard couplers (we do, hook-n-loops!), no standard track code (we do, 332 for better or worse) I’m tempted to point out that even in HO track code size avalable is all over the place, kits are very much hit or miss qualitywise, and couplers have at least 3 choices as well.
Bob McCown said:Bingo!
The biggest issue is that we, as LSers, look at our 45mm track, then decide we want to run NG/SG/2foot trains on it, then say "Oh, so thats 1:20.3", or whatever...the rest of the scales say "I like O scale, but I want to model narrow gauge, so thats On30, on HO track"...we sort of have an oblong view of it.
Or one could approach it like NEM-MOROP does, same gauge is used for several different scales. The following table with its nice graphic order is only available in German, so I took the liberty and substituted the English terms
Admittedly they run a bit roughshod over the gauges that are near and dear to the Super-Proto crowd i.e. 1250 - 1700mm includes Standard as well as Broad gauge. OTOH if one considers that NMRA runs 1:48 SG on 32mm track … hmmmm. It isn’t “Super Korrekt” but it sure is a more logical line-up. Read the columns from the bottom up for any of the gauges and you see at a glance what that gauge is used for i.e. 45mm = Vi (Industrial NG at 1:11); IIIe (FRR at 1:16); IIm (Meter gauge at 1:22.5); I (SG at 1:32). As far as the NMRA goes I haven’t been a member for years, unless one is a member there’s no input regarding the “Standards”. Which in my case means I use those NMRA Standards (and variants thereof) which are of use to me i.e. the DCC stuff. For LS Standards I look to NEM-MOROP; I don’t like wearing a dumb hairshirt! 
Here’s the page translated with Google:
Roy
Roy Mickle said:
Here's the page translated with Google:Roy
Google translations are always entertaining.
The British 0 scale of 1/43 is the reason why the international scale for model die-cast cars is also 1/43.
The original toy cars to go with 0 gauge trains were made by Hornby in the 1920’s and were called ‘Dinky Toys’…ever since then, this scale has been used by manufacturers of scale models motor vehicles.
Not many folks know that…
tac