Why "scale" can be such a difficult concept...

[kstrong]

All three locomotives are the same scale (1:20.3).

Track 1 - Accucraft K-37
Track 2 - Bachmann 2-8-0
Track 3 - Accucraft "Ruby" 0-4-0 (kitbashed)

Accucraft sent me the K-37 for review, which will be published in an upcoming GR. When I opened the box, my jaw dropped. (Fortunately, the locomotive didn't.) Having thought my B'mann 2-8-0 was big, this put everything in perspective. I won't steal my own thunder, but it's a very impressive loco.

More comparison photos can be found here.

Later,

K

[Rastun]

That's a great comparison Kevin.

 

Thanks for posting it. 

[FJ and G]

nice! I'm assuming track 3 is the track to the right, as I'm not familiar with 3' gauge locomotives and the Ruby was really bashed to where it's unrecognizeable.

 

I'm running 7/8n2 and 7/8n18 both 1:13.7 scale. You should see a the comparisons of those; sorry, no side by side photos yet but have some big Maine stuff and little UK stuff 

[GearDrivenSteam]

...and that's just in the ONE scale. When you include all the other scales associated with G scale, it's no wonder there's so much confusion.

[FJ and G]

• Robert, that's why have to laugh when I see an ad in GRR for something "G scale". I'm clueless as to what they mean by G scale.
  

[altterrain]

That's a great shot, Kevin. More folks should get out to railroad museums to compare the real things. A comparison of minvan sized 4-4-0 to a warehouse sized 2-6-6-6 Allegheny, like they have up at the B&O museum in Baltimore, would certainly be an eye opener (they have a nice garden  railway too).The K-37 is a beauty. So, how long does one get to keep a locomotive for "review"?

 -Brian 

[MTCarpenter]

Wow.  That's cool.

[gtrainman1]

Nice photo.

It looks like comparing something like G, O, and S. together but on the same track.

[RR Redneck]

That's a great comparison Kevin.

 

Thanks for posting it. 

Short, sweet, to the point. I CONCUR.

[Anonymous]

Tis normal with companies not wanting to change dies, but you can stick with one comany you like the best.

[bman36]

Hi Kevin,

     WOW...that thing is huge. Reminds of when I opened the box for my Bachmann 45 tonner. BIG and very YELLOW! Scale? I give up. Later eh...Brian.

 

[GearDrivenSteam]

• Robert, that's why have to laugh when I see an ad in GRR for something "G scale". I'm clueless as to what they mean by G scale.
  

You got it. when I first started examining large scale, I really had to pay attention. It's tough if you're not careful. Hell, it's tough if you ARE careful.  

 

[Anonymous]

Oh and yes we must remember the little people on our railways......why can I not fit him into the cab of the engine? He is way to BIG....so which little people do I buy? "G" scale?!

I have seen some very talented {sp} men out there do wounders with I think it was eith wax or clay with heat unit...can not remember who?

[tomikawaTT]

That's a great shot, Kevin. More folks should get out to railroad museums to compare the real things. A comparison of minvan sized 4-4-0 to a warehouse sized 2-6-6-6 Allegheny, like they have up at the B&O museum in Baltimore, would certainly be an eye opener (they have a nice garden  railway too).The K-37 is a beauty. So, how long does one get to keep a locomotive for "review"?

 -Brian 

If you want to see a REAL contrast in size...

When I visited Steamtown in Scranton, PA, a few years ago, one of their display locos was the Dayton Typewriter Company's miniature Porter 0-4-0t, reputed to be the smallest standard gauge loco built in the United States.

Immediately behind it was a Big Boy.

Model or prototype, there are small, medium-size and 'pushing the loading gauge' locos.  Going purely by photos, the first N&W 2-8-8-2's were scrawny beasts indeed when compared to the Y-6.  And then there's the Kiso Forest Railway 0-4-2T (now at the California Railroad Museum) which has an industrial cyclone stack bigger around than its boiler!

Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - one scale, three track gauges)

[Marty Cozad]

Kevins a pretty smart guy....

I'm not. 

Back when I got into the  G hobby I seen some of the scale info but, it was simple for me, I like this engine and it looks good with these cars , thus I'm going to buy them.  As time and age goes on I have learned alot about scale / gauge and understand it,,,but the principle still applies.

This looks good with this and I like that!!!!heheheheheeh 

 

[DMUinCT]

I've posted this before. What scale are the cars?

[dwbeckett]

I've posted this before. What scale are the cars?

The scale of the cars in the photo are 1:1, on standard gauge track.

So the question I Have is why do we referr to Large Scale trains as G scale when they are not? Scale implys model size compaired to actual size. Gage is the space between the rails. That is why we have so many scales running on G Gage track.

K good photos, if you want to confuse most of us place the same figure in front of each engin.

[hoofe116]

Darn you, Kevin! Just when I thought I had it figured out! Seriously, thanks for taking the time to post; certainly one picture is worth a thousand words.

 Les W

[kstrong]

...So the question I Have is why do we referr to Large Scale trains as G scale when they are not?

The short answer is that "G scale" has simply become a generic term for the large scale hobby, the same way "Kleenex" is now a generic term for any kind of facial tissue. It was the first letter "assigned" to this size of models, so it stuck, and everything else evolved from being "compatible with" G-scale.

The problem is that there's no viable alternative for naming. The term "F scale" has only received limited support from the manufacturers doing 1:20.3. The NMRA's one-time proposed "A scale" for 1:29 never gained any kind of traction whatsoever. But even if these conventions did gain momentum, they'd still fall under the same "large scale/g-scale" umbrella on the hobby shop shelves. It's all "garden railroading," so it'll all be in the same aisle anyway, regardless of scale. Credit some manufacturers for at least clearly stating (and adhering to) a specific numeric scale. I think that's about as close as we're going to get to any kind of clarification.

...if you want to confuse most of us place the same figure in front of each engin.

If you follow the link in the original post, there's a side view with a fireman standing in the cab of the small and medium locos. The Accucraft loco didn't come with a figure, and I didn't think to place an extra one in the cab.

Later,

K

[Anonymous]

............................... 

Credit some manufacturers for at least clearly stating (and adhering to) a specific numeric scale. I think that's about as close as we're going to get to any kind of clarification.

........................................................

Later,

K

 

Kevin,

 

When it comes to scale, that is all that is needed: a clearly stated and adhered to numerical ratio.

That allows those who care about scale to choose the right product for the scale they model. Those who don't care will most likely not notice anyway.

 

Best regards

ER 

 

PS publications like GR, and others in the Large Scale field, are doing everyone a service by stating what the scale is, both in the new product section and in reviews. If there is no numerical scale ratio mentioned  by the manufacturer, that is also worth mentioning. An informed consumer is a wiser consumer!

[Marty Cozad]

Thats why we need to call it G gauge.....then ask what scale are you interested in.

[Anonymous]

Thats why we need to call it G gauge.....then ask what scale are you interested in.

 

Hello Marty

 

And the answer will be: "G scale!"

 

Regards

 

ER 

[GearDrivenSteam]

I found this. See if it helps.

Bachmann Big Haulers and some rolling stock 1:22.5

Spectrum series and some of the other rolling stock 1:20.3

LGB 1:22.5

Some of the newer modern LGB equipment is coming in close to 1:29

Aristocraft Modern equipment 1:29

Aristocraft Classic series 1:24

USA Trains 1:29

MTH 1:32

Marklin 1:32

Hartland Locomotive Works 1:24

Accucraft Depending on the line either 1:20.3, 1:24, 1:29, 1:32

[Santa Fe Kent]

So if the gauge is all the same, but the scale varies....

How about keeping the G that everybody knows, and appending the G for scale purposes:

G20, G29, G32, etc.

I guess that could be confused with Gn3 or similar, but if the "n" is left out, and everybody knows what it is for..... It shouldn't be a problem.

[GearDrivenSteam]

They kinda do that, in a way. There's G, Gn9, GN15, Gn18, Gn2, Gn30, and Gn3. What I have chosen to do is run 1:20.3, which is Fn3. I'm also probably going to run some 1/29 Aristo-Craft stuff mixed in as well.....yeah I know. Surprisingly though, my Aristo-Craft Lil Critter doesn't look so out of place next to my Bachmann 1:20.3 45 tonner. I was surprised....and pleasantly so. I don't understand all of the different scales in large scale. I just settled on one or two that I think will run together and move forward.

[kstrong]

So if the gauge is all the same, but the scale varies....

How about keeping the G that everybody knows, and appending the G for scale purposes:

G20, G29, G32, etc.

I guess that could be confused with Gn3 or similar, but if the "n" is left out, and everybody knows what it is for..... It shouldn't be a problem.

Something very similar to that was proposed maybe 8 or 9 years ago. (LS20, LS22, etc.) I thought it made perfect sense--clear, concise, and easy to understand. It met with little support, and faded quickly from the landscape. Aristo-Craft, Hartland, and a few others jumped on board and ran with it for a while, but ultimately dropped it. Why they did, you'd have to ask them, but the small accessory manufacturers never jumped on board with it--most likely because they were reluctant to pigeon-hole their products to one specific scale.

I have little faith that we'll ever see a clear-cut defining of the scales in large scale. History has certainly indicated a strong reluctance, and I don't think the attitudes have changed.

Later,

K

[Santa Fe Kent]

That leads me to my next idea; how about if we forget about scale!

 O guage has done this for nearly a century without any problems!

[Anonymous]

That leads me to my next idea; how about if we forget about scale!

 O guage has done this for nearly a century without any problems!

 

Hello Kent,

 

You're not far off the mark, "O" is an excellent example of having things go sideways.

NMRA "O" scale = 1:48  Naturally on 32mm track which is interesting since 1435mm (4ft 8.5") devided by 48 results in 29,9mm for the track gauge.

 

NEM-MOROP "O" scale = 1:45 on 32mm track. 1435:45=31.9mm not "spot on" but tolerable. 

 

To sum it up, yes "LS" probably took after "O". Lots of funny math! Back in the "dark ages" we used to do calculations with a sliderule. That was a lot closer than some of the stuff that was calculated after the invention of the electronic calculator.

 

Best regards

 

ER 

[vsmith]

Forget the manufacturers coming to any agreement about scale, gauge, or consistent standards for the time being...

Best suggestion is that it still remains the MODELERS responsibility, if they deterimine that if they want to work in a consistent "scale" or "theme", it will be up to them to educate themselves as to what is on the market, what 'scale' it is, and whether it will be appropriate for the "theme" of their roster.

Yeah I know, its a pain but theres sooooooooooooooo much stuff out there that runs the gambit from 1/19 to 1/32 that all runs on 45mm track and could concievably end up coupled together, that its going to be up to the modeler to figure out what will work best for them.

Heres the short list of things I consider:

Scale: 1/22.5 is what I aim for, but I have some stuff thats 1/24 but my LGB Porters are more like 1/18 scale.

Theme: 1930 thru to about 1950, steam and motor units, mostly wooden cars. Western desert narrow gauge mining tramway, but I am also heavily influenced by logging lines.

I have to sift thru the market and decide whats right for me.

So no Geeps pulling mining ore carts on my layout

[Marty Cozad]

G is not a scale.