Would you support a movement in G Scale to standardize?

[Anonymous]

Capt Bob, Of course not I think it's for boosting profit[:(] Unless they are trying to get back the Bachman market[?]

I myself would prefer they would just mark what scale it is they are selling and require all distributers to do the same and get rid of the "Gray Area" all together!

[Anonymous]

The universal hook (coupler) is along time in coming!!!

[Capt Bob Johnson]

Also as a new development, since they are all gravitating to having thier product made in the same factory in China; wouldn't standardization lower production costs as the factory would not have to do as much retooling in changing from making one manufacturer's product to the next? Split the difference, 1/3 the saving to the factory, 1/3 to the manufacturer, and 1/3 to the buyer?

[Capt Bob Johnson]

Well, I threw some $$$ at NMRA for a couple of years in support of standardization, and saw more rivet counting than standardization! I'd like to see couplers that mate without having to go to an outside coupler manufacturer! They didn't seem to be working on coupler height, location,type or anything along those lines; only track guage.

we need standards. Any manufacturer of 1/22 should have 1/22 standards. likewise for each of the other scales in large scale. That at least would be seen as progress.

[Anonymous]

I am against all movement to do anything they are all just abunch of radicals.

I am particularly against the greens; after they wrote on my beautiful opera house they are just a bunch of vandals.

The wrote a word on the beautiful Sydney Opera house on Bennelong Point in Sydney Harbour and i will not support that sort of thing at all.

Aussie Ian

[emipapa]

vsmith
As the OLD saying goes, it would be a DULL WORLD if everything was alike or the SAME!

[vsmith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by emipapa

vsmith
Thank you for your reply to my post in this forum.
At this time I must point out to you that I DID NOT STATE that LGB invented the 45 MM gauge rail. I only stated that they supplied it with their product. I have seen the information that you suggested I look at, in fact I have been to your informations host hobby shop,THE HOBBY BARN a number of times and have spoken with the proprietor at lenght regarding GAUGE and SCALE.
Again I say Thanks for the information and your posting of the link so that the many forum members can also view it as I have again.
Happy Railroading
Ron

Ron
If I misread your initial post, sorry.

The whole gauge issue especially going back to tinpate era makes for interesting if confusing reading. I have met many people who did indeed think LGB invented gauge 1. While they did develop the 2 rail brass and UV plastic tie track we know today, the gauge itself is far older. i just wanted to FYI other readers who might not have known about that facet of history. Its amazing just how many different scale there are out there.
Vic[:D]

[emipapa]

vsmith
Thank you for your reply to my post in this forum.
At this time I must point out to you that I DID NOT STATE that LGB invented the 45 MM gauge rail. I only stated that they supplied it with their product. I have seen the information that you suggested I look at, in fact I have been to your informations host hobby shop,THE HOBBY BARN a number of times and have spoken with the proprietor at lenght regarding GAUGE and SCALE.
Again I say Thanks for the information and your posting of the link so that the many forum members can also view it as I have again.
Happy Railroading
Ron

[grandpopswalt]

Gentlemen,

I think petitioning the major manufacturers is a great idea. I'm in favor of forming an ad hoc committee and asking someone who is very knowledgable, say, Kevin Strong or Marc Horovitz, to chair it. If we can't agree to set standards of scale, we can, as Kevin correctly points out, at least try to have some compatibility in track, wheel and coupler dimensions.

I worked in the industrial automation business for many years. When the PLC (computer) was first introduced there was absolute chaos. Every manufacturer produced a proprietery product that absolutely would not work with any other product, it was a mess. In my opinion if that "tower of babble" approach had been sorted out at the very beginning, the industry would have flourished 15 years sooner. Today, there are universal connectivity standards and everybody's product can work smoothly with everyone elses. Point is, now that it all works together, everyone is selling a lot more product because the market has greatly expanded. Instead of being hurt by standardization most manufacturers profited from it .

Walt

[vsmith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bman36

Kevin,
Interesting point. Brings me to another point. Since the majority run outdoors why on earth are PLASTIC wheels still used on some equipment. As you just said...don't give me the cost issue. Bachmann uses metal and their stuff is still cheap. Besides anyone who is seriously into the hobby in any scale usually convert all their equipment to metal wheels for obvious reasons. A standard metal wheel profile is an excellent start. Then as I see it we could attack the derailing issues and start fine tuning. BUT this would mean that the manufacturers would have to agree on something TOGETHER. Not impossible...but hmmmm...PRIDE gets in the way of such things. So now I am interested at looking at this further...how can we as a group approach them on this issue? Will they even listen? Later eh...Brian.

Brain,

I think the reason they still use plastic wheels is simply because they can...and they asume that anyone who will replace them will do so with the same brand replacement wheels that they often sell seperatly, like Bachmann LGB and USA do. To me this is a faulty logic as there are quite a few other options for replacement and you can cross replace. I have replaced all the plastic wheels on my LGB cars with Bachmann. They are far less expensive and install easily. I'm sure the LGB Cult members would shudder at the idea of replacing the stock wheels with anything but LGB metal wheels, and I'm also sure the manufacturers are thinking the same thing, but to me I'll use whatever works best for cheapest price. B'mann wheels are my "standard". [8D]

[Anonymous]

Brian,
Like your thinking on this. Would they listen, probably not, but the main point we have going as a group is that we are from the far corners of the planet, not a little group in one country. Can't really say we represent the planet but for representations from 'G' RR's we aint a bad cross section. I certainly support approaching manufacturers via letter through the mag. Back to that 'would this make a good editorial' thing again.
Cheers,
Kim
[tup]

[bman36]

Kevin,
Interesting point. Brings me to another point. Since the majority run outdoors why on earth are PLASTIC wheels still used on some equipment. As you just said...don't give me the cost issue. Bachmann uses metal and their stuff is still cheap. Besides anyone who is seriously into the hobby in any scale usually convert all their equipment to metal wheels for obvious reasons. A standard metal wheel profile is an excellent start. Then as I see it we could attack the derailing issues and start fine tuning. BUT this would mean that the manufacturers would have to agree on something TOGETHER. Not impossible...but hmmmm...PRIDE gets in the way of such things. So now I am interested at looking at this further...how can we as a group approach them on this issue? Will they even listen? Later eh...Brian.

[kstrong]

I asked on the Bachmann board, and their On30 stuff uses HO wheel profiles and gauge standards--which makes infinite sense since the stuff is designed to run on standard HO track.

So, this absolutely begs the question--why can't the manufacturers at least all get on board with consistant wheel standards? The various boards are chock full of complaints about wheels from "X" manufacturer jumping when going through switches built by "Y" manufactuer, but rolling fine through switches made by "Z." And it seems that each manufacturer has been quite reluctant to "standardize" anything, stating that they have their own engineering reasons for making the wheels the way they do. It's really nothing more than good old fashioned stubbornness, in my opinion. Nothing more than each thinking "their" way is best, and not wanting to compromise on anything, or claiming that the tooling would be cost prohibitive. Each of these reasons is completely meritless. If the big four sat down together one day and said, "here's a wheel profile, let's all build to that," then every other mfr. would quickly follow suit. Yes, there still will always be room for those who want their absolute scale wheels, but for the purposes of track standards and things like that, one set standard would make life oh, so much easier.

I don't think I'm going ot hold my breath waiting for it to happen, though.

Later,

K

[Anonymous]

[bman36]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Capt Carrales

QUOTE: Originally posted by emipapa

I am also NEW to Garden Railroading.
If you do the research you will find that all of the G SCALE RAIL is 45 MM gauge. You will also discover that L.G.B. provided the first 45 MM gauge rail to the modeler in the begining with their rolling stock. After that had happened then all of the other manufactures jumped on the band wagon and started to produce ALL of their rolling stock, no matter what scale they produced, to ride on the 45MM gauge rail, They then expanded their product lines to provide rail of the SAME 45 MM gauge. I do think FREE ENTERPRISE is GOOD for the HOBBY and the ECONOMY. One other note I must add is that I feel that we have SUFFICIENT people in Government, weather it be City/Town, County/State or Federal making more then enough RULES, REGULATIONS and LAWS for us folk who would have to pay the bill for the change or standardization that you speak about..
I say Don't TRY to FIX whats NOT BROKE!
Just my 2 cents,
Ron

I think Capitalism is actually working against us in this instance. Case-in-point, with so many standards and scales, no one scale can be provided with ample materials and factory parts are too different. I began with 1:20.3, and I cannot model to my best level because I have to scratchbuild everything, of which time is a constraint.

Diversity is not possible with no standard, the industry is restrained since no manufacture can afford to provide a variety of parts.

...and the beat goes on. Or as Billy Joel once said "We did'nt start the fire..." [:0] Sure makes for a great discussion though. Makes me wonder about my Vanilla Coke beside me here. Why on earth 591ml??? Oooops... sorry..RR forum. Later eh...Brian. [:D]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by emipapa

I am also NEW to Garden Railroading.
If you do the research you will find that all of the G SCALE RAIL is 45 MM gauge. You will also discover that L.G.B. provided the first 45 MM gauge rail to the modeler in the begining with their rolling stock. After that had happened then all of the other manufactures jumped on the band wagon and started to produce ALL of their rolling stock, no matter what scale they produced, to ride on the 45MM gauge rail, They then expanded their product lines to provide rail of the SAME 45 MM gauge. I do think FREE ENTERPRISE is GOOD for the HOBBY and the ECONOMY. One other note I must add is that I feel that we have SUFFICIENT people in Government, weather it be City/Town, County/State or Federal making more then enough RULES, REGULATIONS and LAWS for us folk who would have to pay the bill for the change or standardization that you speak about..
I say Don't TRY to FIX whats NOT BROKE!
Just my 2 cents,
Ron

I think Capitalism is actually working against us in this instance. Case-in-point, with so many standards and scales, no one scale can be provided with ample materials and factory parts are too different. I began with 1:20.3, and I cannot model to my best level because I have to scratchbuild everything, of which time is a constraint.

Diversity is not possible with no standard, the industry is restrained since no manufacture can afford to provide a variety of parts.

[vsmith]

Emipapa

Actually LGB revived a gauge that has been around since the turn of the Century. 45mm is really called Gauge 1. Most toy trains in the early 20the cent. operated on either gauge 1 track, there were two other common gauges, gauge 2 and gauge 3. Guage 1 started as 1 7/8" gauge. Gauge 2 was 2 1/8" and Gauge 3 was 2 5/8". Guage 4, at 3" , is still around in some live steam circles. as is Gauge 5 at 4 5/8". Guage 1 later became standardized at 45mm.

O at 1 3/8" was developed as motors became smaller and actually stands for Guage "Zero" .

HO was also developed as motors became smaller and more efficient, HO literally means Half -O and scaled at just that, O later designeted as 32mm, HO being 1/2 that: 16mm.

N is 1/2 HO or 9MM and maybe should have been called HHO or HOH (half HO or HO half)

Interesting how some of the gauges follow a logical process of reduction.

Check out this link for a breif history of gauges, its interesting:
http://www.thehobbybarn.com/resources/measure/trains.htm

[emipapa]

I am also NEW to Garden Railroading.
If you do the research you will find that all of the G SCALE RAIL is 45 MM gauge. You will also discover that L.G.B. provided the first 45 MM gauge rail to the modeler in the begining with their rolling stock. After that had happened then all of the other manufactures jumped on the band wagon and started to produce ALL of their rolling stock, no matter what scale they produced, to ride on the 45MM gauge rail, They then expanded their product lines to provide rail of the SAME 45 MM gauge. I do think FREE ENTERPRISE is GOOD for the HOBBY and the ECONOMY. One other note I must add is that I feel that we have SUFFICIENT people in Government, weather it be City/Town, County/State or Federal making more then enough RULES, REGULATIONS and LAWS for us folk who would have to pay the bill for the change or standardization that you speak about..
I say Don't TRY to FIX whats NOT BROKE!
Just my 2 cents,
Ron

[Anonymous]

This is a tricky one really between the purists and the people that just want to run trains.A bit like OO and HO smaller scales.My locos are LGB but I have on loan at the moment an Aristocraft Doodlebug.If you stick them side by side the difference is fairly obvious but when they are running it looks ok.It is a case of personal choice.Are you making your railway for your own pleasure of running trains,or are you worried about someone elses opinion.If you model to a certain scale then you stick to it.If someone does'nt make the model you want in that scale,then you don't get it.
My opinion is that,If it looks ok from about 10 feet away,then it works.If it looks wrong to your own eye,then no amount of haggling in your own mind it going to make it better.
Troy

[vsmith]

As I said in a previous post on this subject, this should have been started 20 years ago when garden railroading and large scale in general were becoming popular. Instead the manufacturers have had far too long to develop there own "standards" .

[bman36]

Hey Guys,
I personally don't see any change in the near future. I'm with Walt in that I work at trying to make everything look at least close. Yeah it's frustrating at times but it's all we can do right now. Personally I feel manufacturers are happy to keep their own loyal following. A change now would mean retro work on all the existing equipment out there. I don't feel they really care about us who mix-n-match. The attitude is just stick with our line of products and you will be happy. Sad but I think we are too late. And that is my two bits. Later eh...Brian.

[Anonymous]

Hi guys,
I like it the way it is, model what you want, it's all the same track and for me it's a train going around the garden. I would like the manufacturers to agree on ONE STANDARD knuckle coupler though. A compromise size midway between the scales would be good, I can then buy Aristo/USA/Bachmann/LGB and get on with enjoying my trains.
Cheers,
Kim
[tup]

[kstrong]

At this stage in the game, I think we can all but give up on a "standard" scale relative to the 45mm track gauge. Too many camels now have their noses under the tent. Proper labeling, I think, should be paramount, but then manufacturers run the "risk" of segmenting their market. If they label it generically, the people in this hobby who don't give a fig about scale will happily buy it.

Couplers are another area where I doubt we'll see any standardization, at least to any one particular standard. I'd like to see a 1:29/1:32 standard and a separate 1:24/1:22.5/1:20.3 standard developed, but I think we may get world peace first.

The one area where we can and should have standards is the wheels. Flange depth, contour, and back to back spacing needs to be 100% identical across the board, so that we can ensure that our trains--regardless of scale or couplers--will run on any railroad to which we may choose to run them. With flanges as typically "overscale" as we have in this hobby, we can get away with having a single standard regardless of scale. The flanges will be "slightly" large in the narrow gauge scales, and "large" in the standard gauge scales. G1MRA has had wheel standards for a bazillion years, and it now seems that the NMRA is leaning towards adopting similar, if not identical standards.

Related question that perhaps is better asked on the Bachmann board...

The wheel profiles for Bachmann's On30 stuff--is that the same as HO wheel standards, or are they using O standards, and just narrowing the gauge?

Later,

K

[Anonymous]

Bravo, everyone...Bravo! I really wish "G" as a true scale. It would save me much grief.

[Anonymous]

I was re-reading all the post and it occurred to me that if 1:20 was chosen to be Scale, It would take my 4 kids, wife,and I to carry a Big Boy out to the layout[:D]
As I said early on it would be nice to see Narrow and standard gauge in the same scale side by side.[sigh]

[Anonymous]

Hello, Walt! It would be great if one or two of the manufactureing companies, ie the Train manufacturers would "sponser" the making of vehicles, buildings and ect. in the (3?) major scales: 1/24 1/32 and 1.20.3 . As it is I'm running 1:20.3 and have ordered a 1/29 engine to boot. I run live steam out side, I have a certain advantage provided by distance and viewing angles, my wife reminds me that my better viewing angles are at a distance....... BTW, just before I had finished my initial reply, my electricity went out, I'm surprised that E-mail was sent, sorry it seemed so curt.......

[grandpopswalt]

Slick,

The point is not to revisit the "Standardization" issue but to remind folks that you do have an option available to you if you want trains that are properly proportioned to the thousands of available 1:24 scale cars and trucks in both plastic and diecast.

Walt

[Anonymous]

Seems that horse is out of the barn..........long ago.

[grandpopswalt]

Gentlemen,

Remember this old thread? I'm bringing it back to make a point. I model in 1:24 scale, late depression era (1939) , backwoodsey shortline, etc,etc. I've finished bashing the B'mann Industrial Mogul per the recent GR article and it looks great! I've now put the B'mann "small steel wheels" under a few B'mann cars and they look great behind the Mogul. Further, I've purchased some Sunset Valley RR code 250 Narrow Gauge track to put under the train and IT looks great. And lastly, I put a number of 1:24 and 1:25 scale cars and trucks next to the train and THEY look great.

I've found Nirvana, I'm in 1:24 scale heaven at last!

Walt