dknelson jecorbett Comparing the Oxford 1949 Mercury to the Woodland Scenics 1949 Mercury, it is clear one of them is not to scale. The Oxford model looks like it is on steroids when next to the WS model. I was under the impression that the WS vehicles are not intended to be exact models but vaguely similar "close ... but" generics so as to avoid any license fees and permissions. Dave Nelson
jecorbett Comparing the Oxford 1949 Mercury to the Woodland Scenics 1949 Mercury, it is clear one of them is not to scale. The Oxford model looks like it is on steroids when next to the WS model.
Comparing the Oxford 1949 Mercury to the Woodland Scenics 1949 Mercury, it is clear one of them is not to scale. The Oxford model looks like it is on steroids when next to the WS model.
I was under the impression that the WS vehicles are not intended to be exact models but vaguely similar "close ... but" generics so as to avoid any license fees and permissions.
Dave Nelson
The Woodland Scenics cars are pretty good replicas of real cars -- the Chev pickup, Ford convertible, Plymouth coupe. WS just doesn't bother calling them by their real names.
rdgk1se3019I know someone that has a half dozen or more of those turd`s called Edsel`s (the real one`s).........I just look at him and say ....why?
The Woodland Scenics HO Auto Scene vehicles are more generic than specific; however, to me, they are reasonably close as follows: 5521 - '55* Chevy Pick-Up Truck 5522 - '52 Chevy BelAir 2dr Hardtop 5524 - '55* Chevy Wrecker & '51 Lincoln 2dr Sedan 5525 - '55 Chevy Nomad Station Wagon 5526 - '57 Plymouth Fury 2dr Hardtop 5527 - '48 Ford Convertible 5528 - '51 Ford Sedan & '52 Chevy BelAir 2dr Hardtop 5530 - '51 Lincoln 2dr Sedan 5532 - '55 Chevy Nomad Station Wagon 5533 - '40 Ford Coupe 5535 - '48 Ford Convertible 5536 - '40 Ford Coupe & '52 Chevy BelAir 2dr Hardtop *These may be a '56 or '57, but the difference is slight.With a later cross-reference:5521 -- Hall & Duke (Late 50s Pickup w/Driver & Dog) 5522 -- Billy Brown's Coupe (50s 2-Door, Top Up w/Driver) 5523 -- Felix Fix-A-Flat (Late 50s 2-Door Hardtop, Tire Changer & Lady) 5524 -- Wayne Recker's Tow Service (Late 50s Wrecker, Auto & 2 Figures) 5525 -- Family Vacation (Mid 50s Station Wagon w/Luggage, Mom, Dad & Kids) 5526 -- Lubeners Loading (Mid 50s 2-Door w/Open Trunk, 2 Figures & Luggage) 5527 -- Roger's Rag Top (Late 40s 2-Door Coupe w/Top Down & Driver) 5528 -- Willie's Warning (Early 50s 2-Door & Late 40s Squad Car w/Officer) 5529 -- Micky's Milk Delivery (50s Delivery Van w/Milkman & Lady Customer) 5530 -- Spoonin-N-Croonin (Early 50s Coupe w/Two Teenagers) 5531 -- Rusty's Regret (Late 50s 2-Door Hardtop in Bad Shape) 5532 -- Thompson's Travelin' Trailer (Mid 50s Station Wagon w/2-Wheel Camper) 5533 -- Suds & Shine (Early 40s 2-Door Hardtop w/3 Figures) 5534 -- Pickem' Up Truck (Mid 50s 1/2-Ton Pickup w/Driver) 5535 -- Sunday Drive (Late 40s Roadster w/Top Down & Two Couples) 5536 -- Cruisin' Coupes (1 Each Early 50s w/Top Up & Early 40s Hardtop)
I just wish I could get modern cars that aren't pick-ups, luxury cars, or super cars.
My kingdom for a sixth generation Honda Accord and a ninth generation Toyota Corolla!
Perhaps it is an oportunity for some percieved forced prespectiv. Put the ones that you feel are to large and the ones that you precieve as smaller more distant from the viewrs prespective. It can be a very convincing tool to make distance seem further.
Paul
rdgk1se3019 I know someone that has a half dozen or more of those turd`s called Edsel`s (the real one`s).........I just look at him and say ....why?
I know someone that has a half dozen or more of those turd`s called Edsel`s (the real one`s).........I just look at him and say ....why?
So how many here even know what I'm talking about?
LensCapOnOne of my childhood memories is of my dad trying to scrape that Nixon sticker off the bumper of his Edsel. So how many here even know what I'm talking about?
Must have been the early Nixon election, I don't remember any Edsels on the road in 1968. Reminds of my dad pulling the "studs" out of the snow tires in about 1964, I think the year they banned them in Minnesota. We had an american motors Rambler...remember those
SLC RRMust have been the early Nixon election, I don't remember any Edsels on the road in 1968.
We had an american motors Rambler...remember those
Maybe they scaled them to OO scale? (English scale)
Don - Specializing in layout DC->DCC conversions
Modeling C&O transition era and steel industries There's Nothing Like Big Steam!
SLC RR LensCapOn One of my childhood memories is of my dad trying to scrape that Nixon sticker off the bumper of his Edsel. So how many here even know what I'm talking about? Must have been the early Nixon election, I don't remember any Edsels on the road in 1968. Reminds of my dad pulling the "studs" out of the snow tires in about 1964, I think the year they banned them in Minnesota. We had an american motors Rambler...remember those
LensCapOn One of my childhood memories is of my dad trying to scrape that Nixon sticker off the bumper of his Edsel. So how many here even know what I'm talking about?
Remember tire chains? They seemed to by standard winter equipment on the hilly, snowy streets of Omaha in the 1950s and early 1960s. My family moved to Ohio in 1966 and I never saw them again.
kansaspacific1 Prototype dimensions of a 1949 Mercury coupe are as follows: Total outside length:206.8 inches with a 118 inch wheelbase. Would be interested if someone who has bought the Oxford model would measure it with a scale ruler, as I am thinking I would like to buy one. Chuck
Prototype dimensions of a 1949 Mercury coupe are as follows: Total outside length:206.8 inches with a 118 inch wheelbase. Would be interested if someone who has bought the Oxford model would measure it with a scale ruler, as I am thinking I would like to buy one.
Chuck
I don't have a scale ruler but I did measure my Oxford Mercury and the bumper-to-bumper length was 2 3/8 inches. 2.375 x 87.1 comes out to 206.8625 so that's almost right on the money. I've never known how you measure wheel base. If it is from the front edge of the front tire to the front edge of the rear tire, it is 1 3/8 inches. If it is from the front edge of the front tire to the rear edge of the rear tire, it is 1 3/4 inches. 1.375 x 87.1 = 119.7625 so again, that is pretty darn close to what you gave.
Wheelbase is center of front axle to center of rear axle on a 2 axle vehicle, so your front edge of front tire to front edge of rear tire measurement on a HO model is good enough.
I'm not a car collector myself, but if I had one it would be an MGB convertible, like the '75 I drove for many years. As a car for my layout, though, it's a no-brainer. I've found that most visitors pick up right away on the automobiles, but few are knowledgable about the trains. Advertising signs and autos are the two things that best place the era for a model railroad. An Edsel brings back so many memories.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Just went to the Oxford web page (Oxford Model Car in Google) and noticed that all of their US prototype vehicles are 1:87 scale and their other vehicles are 1:76 (OO) or other British model railroad scales. Maybe all those WS cars ARE undersize. I've found a lot of putative HO products are actually 1:96...
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
MisterBeasley
Oxford offers MGBs but unfortunately they are 1:76. I bought a couple hoping that they wouldn't look too out of place but alas they are rather too large even for use in foreground scenes.They are also right hand drive but that is easy to correct.
By the way, I had a '68 B that I drove for more than 10 years, and then a '69 C GT. The C had almost no rust, but I foolishly let it go because I couldn't afford to restore it at the time. I regret that decision enormously, but on the other hand, if I still had it all my time and money would be spent on the car and I wouldn't be involved in model railroading.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
A lot of people would be amased at what You can do with Your time and money....if You really put Your mind-set right. Put Your duck's in a row...so to speak. Took me three yrs. to restore and re-do my 49 Ford, close to two yrs. for the 54. That included rebuilding both motors and transmission's. I was even gone a lot, owning my own trucks and working on them and with four kids to support. I did not have any more time than anyone else.
Take Care!
Frank
Nice cars Frank!
I saw what I think was a '49 Ford convertible today, apparently in great shape.
I agree that you can do what you want by controlling your money. That's if you have any money. I bought the MGC before kids and mortgages. When I sold the MGC GT we were going from pay cheque to pay cheque and I couldn't justify spending any money on a car when my wife and two kids needed both my time and money, including what I got for the MGC. This is really one of those 'what if' scenarios, but I sold it to help my young family and what's done is done. I think I made the right decision.
Sorry - again!
zstripe A lot of people would be amased at what You can do with Your time and money....if You really put Your mind-set right. Put Your duck's in a row...so to speak. Took me three yrs. to restore and re-do my 49 Ford, close to two yrs. for the 54. That included rebuilding both motors and transmission's. I was even gone a lot, owning my own trucks and working on them and with four kids to support. I did not have any more time than anyone else. Take Care! Frank
I love classic cars from that era. The 49 Ford is so iconic I wonder why CMW or some other company has not offered it as an RTR model. I remember seing it offered in kit form a long time ago. One of those in which the body was a solid clear piece and you painted everything except the windows. I'd love to have a few on my layout.
This one is oversized, particularly when compared to the Chevy in the other lane.
But, oversized or not, a 2-seat British convertible will always be a babe magnet.
I always tell people that after I die, if I'm handed the keys to that '75 MGB, I'll know I'm in Heaven and headed for the Big Roundhouse in the Sky. But if I end up with that yellow Pontiac Sunbird wagon, then it's the big hot basement for my final layout.
jecorbettI remember seing it offered in kit form a long time ago. One of those in which the body was a solid clear piece and you painted everything except the windows. I'd love to have a few on my layout.
Jecorbett,
I believe what You are referring to...are The William's Bros. kits. They sold three packs of same body in clear plastic, could not beat the price, by today's standard's, with a little paint and some time You can have a great model and they were 1/87 exactly. Still have some I have never took out of the package yet. The brother's that owned the Co. had died and the assets were bought out by a Brett Ind's. I believe they are still being made.... but singley. Check out the company profile in the link, I will provide:
http://www.williamsbrothersmodelproducts.com/cars.html
EDIT: Yes they are still being sold, by Brett Ind., Here's the link:
http://www.williamsbrothersmodelproducts.com/
jecorbett SLC RR LensCapOn One of my childhood memories is of my dad trying to scrape that Nixon sticker off the bumper of his Edsel. So how many here even know what I'm talking about? Must have been the early Nixon election, I don't remember any Edsels on the road in 1968. Reminds of my dad pulling the "studs" out of the snow tires in about 1964, I think the year they banned them in Minnesota. We had an american motors Rambler...remember those Remember tire chains? They seemed to be standard winter equipment on the hilly, snowy streets of Omaha in the 1950s and early 1960s.
Remember tire chains? They seemed to be standard winter equipment on the hilly, snowy streets of Omaha in the 1950s and early 1960s.
LensCapOn jecorbett Remember tire chains? They seemed to be standard winter equipment on the hilly, snowy streets of Omaha in the 1950s and early 1960s. No. I remember getting stuck in the snow. (pre FWD)
jecorbett Remember tire chains? They seemed to be standard winter equipment on the hilly, snowy streets of Omaha in the 1950s and early 1960s.
No. I remember getting stuck in the snow. (pre FWD)
For laughs, my dad used to walk over to California St and watch cars try to make the steep climb from 41st to 40th streets. Typically they would get about 3/4 of the way to the top before losing traction and sliding back down the hill.
jecorbettFor laughs, my dad used to walk over to California St and watch cars try to make the steep climb from 41st to 40th streets. Typically they would get about 3/4 of the way to the top before losing traction and sliding back down the hill.
What happened to the one's coming down.....
Wheel chains! Been there, done that...trucks & cars...Donner's Pass is a good one! 6% grade, up and down. When chain law is in effect...guess what? You don't go anywhere without them.
Why am I bumping this thread after 3 days of quiescence? Because yesterday evening after returning from a party around 2:00AM (well, OK, technically this morning), I found a box on my stoop containing, among other model-related item, two Oxford diecast vehicles - the 1958 Edsel Citation 2 Door Hardtop, and the 1949 Mercury Coupe.(Much later) this morning, grabbing my trusty Harbor Freight digital calipers ("Pittsburgh" brand - BTW, warning, the reviewer in that video talks like most machine shop guys I know) it was, as promised, time to expand upon the work that Mister Beasley began.First, the Mercury Coupe, Dimensions from here:Wheelbase: 1.36 in = 118.58in (HO); Prototype = 118inLength: 2.37in = 206.5in (HO); Prototype = 206.8inWidth: 0.871in = 75.78in (HO); Prototype = 76.4in (this was a little tough, some angles along the size got a measurement of 78in)Height: 0.74in = 64.38in (HO); Prototype = 64.8inI'd say, really darn close for the key measurements. As far as most diecast goes...call it really good.For the Edsel, that was more or less already done before.However, just for the heck of it, using the dimensions from the 1958 Edsel Page for the 1958 2 door hardtop Citation (first linked to me in Post 19, then by others who ignored that post in their later posts - ahem, talk about something to gripe about), I get a wheelbase of 124.48in (HO) vs 124.0in (Proto), and a width of 79.17in (HO) vs 79.8in (Proto) - I'll take it, it's dang close to scale. Length I had a bit of an issue with as the Oxford model comes with a Continental Style Spare Tire with an extended bumper deck, so after several different measurements between 216 and 222in depending on where I judged the rear bumper without the tire accessory would start, I just threw my hands up and defer to Mister Beasley.Anyway, to sum up, the dimensions of the Edsel and the Mercury seem very close to their prototypes, and are definitely in HO scale, not OO scale. I put my test figure (a Presier standing male figure who scales out at 6ft, mounted on a plastic base, use for quick "does it look right" comparison), and both passed the test. Note the Mercury is noticible taller than the Edsel, both for the models and in real life, due to 9 intervening years of "longer, lower, wider" design philosophy. My poking and proding on the models done and the issue fully settled (Oxford HO diecast are indeed HO, and bear close watching if they release new future offerings), the Edsel and the Mercury will be dispatched to the shelf of interesting items once I touch up the headlights and taillights with a coat of clear gloss - the flattish silver is not quite cutting it. And so the summary of this thread is...the thread OP jecorbett needs to immediately replace all his non-Oxford classic car models .Mr. Beasley's little visual MG vignette makes me chuckle a bit, as the female figure's hair and stance is molded in such a way that it looks like she just snapped her head around to glare at the punter in the MG, possibly in response to a "Yo, sexy Mama!" (or 1960s equivalent) comment from him - she may also be questioning the random blood splatters on the MG's dashboard...
chutton01And so the summary of this thread is...the thread OP jecorbett needs to immediately replace all his non-Oxford classic car models .
What can I say?
chutton01 And so the summary of this thread is...the thread OP jecorbett needs to immediately replace all his non-Oxford classic car models .
And so the summary of this thread is...the thread OP jecorbett needs to immediately replace all his non-Oxford classic car models .
Well this thread certainly has been an eye opener. In the OP I allowed for the possibility the Oxfords were to scale and everything else I have is too small but I didn't think that was likely. It turned out to be the case.
It sounds nice to say replace everything but the Oxfords but it's really not practical. First of all I have way too much invested in the rest of the automobiles to just chuck them. So far I am only aware of five Oxford models that are appropriate for my era. The choices are already limited enough using all the manufacturers of 1950s cars so there's no way I could go with just one. On top of everything else, all my parking lots had parking spaces geared to the smaller cars. I'd have to repaint all of them to all them to accomodate the Oxfords. Right now they are almost as wide as the spaces.
The next step is going to be the same sort of checking of the other manufacturers models against their prototype dimensions. It will be interesting to find out how much they are out of scale. I also was unaware that the WS cars are actually generic cars and not models of specific prototypes. It's easy to see that some are very close to actual prototypes in design.
As for the Oxfords. I have enough places near the front of the layout where I can place single cars where the difference in scale won't be so obvious.
jecorbett, in reality I realize that no one would immediately replace otherwise decent looking vehicles (e.g. NOT S-scalish Hot Wheels), as opposed to, say, spacing them a bit apart on the layout. Just having a bit of fun.However, I would like to see more Oxford diecast HO releases, as I am familar with their OO line (they have other scales too) from RMWeb.co.uk as well as other sources, and they are fairly well thought of. I'd like to see them get involved with more HO, and if these models sell well then they probably will, and if they don't Oxford won't bother.When beginning the exciting task of comparing models between manufacturers, perhaps start with everyone's "favorite" - the 1957 Chevy Bel Air (I can think of 3 different manufacturers - Busch, Monogram, and Malibu - were there more?).ETA: Nosing around RMWeb (cause I posted a link and all), Oxford Diecast is releasing a few more HO scale American models (probably old news, but why not mention it in this thread).The "New Tooling" ones are the 1965 Mustang Convertible (OK, I guess), the 1956 Lincoln Continental Mark II (I'm happy with my old-school Eko version), the 1961 Lincoln Continental X100 ("The newly tooled Oxford Lincoln Continental X100 is a one-off replicia of the 1961 produced vehicle in which J F Kennedy was assassinated on 22nd November 1963" - oh, man ), and the 1957 Mercury Turnpike Cruiser which kind of looks like a gaudier proto-Edsel. Kind of odd choices.
chutton01 jecorbett, in reality I realize that no one would immediately replace otherwise decent looking vehicles (e.g. NOT S-scalish Hot Wheels), as opposed to, say, spacing them a bit apart on the layout. Just having a bit of fun.However, I would like to see more Oxford diecast HO releases, as I am familar with their OO line (they have other scales too) from RMWeb.co.uk as well as other sources, and they are fairly well thought of. I'd like to see them get involved with more HO, and if these models sell well then they probably will, and if they don't Oxford won't bother.When beginning the exciting task of comparing models between manufacturers, perhaps start with everyone's "favorite" - the 1957 Chevy Bel Air (I can think of 3 different manufacturers - Busch, Monogram, and Malibu - were there more?).
jecorbett, in reality I realize that no one would immediately replace otherwise decent looking vehicles (e.g. NOT S-scalish Hot Wheels), as opposed to, say, spacing them a bit apart on the layout. Just having a bit of fun.However, I would like to see more Oxford diecast HO releases, as I am familar with their OO line (they have other scales too) from RMWeb.co.uk as well as other sources, and they are fairly well thought of. I'd like to see them get involved with more HO, and if these models sell well then they probably will, and if they don't Oxford won't bother.When beginning the exciting task of comparing models between manufacturers, perhaps start with everyone's "favorite" - the 1957 Chevy Bel Air (I can think of 3 different manufacturers - Busch, Monogram, and Malibu - were there more?).
Model Power came out with 1955 Bel Airs which are really nice looking. As with everything except the Oxfords, they seem to be proportioned with the other makes but I suspect are smaller than 1/87.1 scale. They came out in quite a few different two-tone color schemes and I got at least one of everything except the purple and white. I just don't remember purple being a popular car color until the late 1960s/early 1970s when it seemed like every Dodge Charger was either purple or orange.
ETA: Nosing around RMWeb (cause I posted a link and all), Oxford Diecast is releasing a few more HO scale American models (probably old news, but why not mention it in this thread).The "New Tooling" ones are the 1965 Mustang Convertible (OK, I guess), the 1956 Lincoln Continental Mark II (I'm happy with my old-school Eko version), the 1961 Lincoln Continental X100 ("The newly tooled Oxford Lincoln Continental X100 is a one-off replicia of the 1961 produced vehicle in which J F Kennedy was assassinated on 22nd November 1963" - oh, man ), and the 1957 Mercury Turnpike Cruiser which kind of looks like a gaudier proto-Edsel. Kind of odd choices.
As I mentioned in my original rant, it sure would be nice if all the makers of automobiles would have made them truly 1/87.1 scale. I apparently blamed the wrong company for being out of scale. It was just obvious to the naked eye the Oxfords were noticeably larger than the rest. I haven't yet compared the other makes to the prototype dimensions, but I have a hard time believing they could be made to the same scale as the Oxfords which we now know are correct.
jecorbettModel Power came out with 1955 Bel Airs which are really nice looking. As with everything except the Oxfords, they seem to be proportioned with the other makes but I suspect are smaller than 1/87.1 scale.
chutton01 jecorbett Model Power came out with 1955 Bel Airs which are really nice looking. As with everything except the Oxfords, they seem to be proportioned with the other makes but I suspect are smaller than 1/87.1 scale. I highly suspect the Malibu branded 1955 Chevy Bel Air (Yellow & White) is the same as the Model Power. Since the model is on a shellf in the hall, and my digital Calipers on the workbench behind me, I figured why not check.You're gonna like this - wheelbase is 2 inches too small, the length and width are within 1/2 inch (bigger!) than the dimensions in a site I found (same site as the one with the Edsel dimensions). I tried to be as exact as my Optivisor would allow.Then, I measured a HO Hot Wheels release (the 2005 Mustang) and a 1970 VW Karmann Ghia, both of which have been hanging around my desk waiting for me to finish a body shop scene for a module - althought the Mustang seems to dwarf the VW model, in facct it was a bit too small (about 2in) while the VW was a bit too long! At that point I acknowledge that prototype cars are not as uniform as one may think, and called it a night.Still wonder why MisterBeasley's MG model has blood splatter on the dashboard...
jecorbett Model Power came out with 1955 Bel Airs which are really nice looking. As with everything except the Oxfords, they seem to be proportioned with the other makes but I suspect are smaller than 1/87.1 scale.
I highly suspect the Malibu branded 1955 Chevy Bel Air (Yellow & White) is the same as the Model Power. Since the model is on a shellf in the hall, and my digital Calipers on the workbench behind me, I figured why not check.You're gonna like this - wheelbase is 2 inches too small, the length and width are within 1/2 inch (bigger!) than the dimensions in a site I found (same site as the one with the Edsel dimensions). I tried to be as exact as my Optivisor would allow.Then, I measured a HO Hot Wheels release (the 2005 Mustang) and a 1970 VW Karmann Ghia, both of which have been hanging around my desk waiting for me to finish a body shop scene for a module - althought the Mustang seems to dwarf the VW model, in facct it was a bit too small (about 2in) while the VW was a bit too long! At that point I acknowledge that prototype cars are not as uniform as one may think, and called it a night.Still wonder why MisterBeasley's MG model has blood splatter on the dashboard...
We finally got some good weather in Ohio which is a mixed blessing since it allows me to finally start to catch up on some much needed outdoor work as well as hit the golf course. The downside is less MR time and I haven't been in the train room or visited this forum in about a week. Of course last minute tax filing came into play as well.
Very interesting about the Bel Airs. I'm going to check a number of my vehicles against prototype dimensons and find out if my premise in the OP was completely off base. Just putting the Oxfords side by side against the other makes its hard to believe they could be the same scale but numbers don't lie and if they tell me everything is to scale I'll have to eat my words. I did put the Oxford T-Bird side by side with another make I have and the Oxford was clearly bigger. The other T-Bird is one of the Euro brands although I can't remember which one. I've found that many of those Euro made American prototype cars look way too small. Clearly if the Oxford T-Bird is to scale, the other one is not. I got a couple VW Microbuses which were really minivans ahead of their time. They look way to small although I'm going to look for the actual dimensions and find out if that is the case.