Correct scale for N gauge

Hi,
Following on from my post regarding the MKI coaches, what is the correct scale for N gauge 1:148 or 1:160 ???
Cheers
Malcolm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think 1:148 is 2 mm scale N being 2 and a 1/16 or something is any thing fro 150 to 160
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Opps British outline is 148 continental is 160 and 2mm is 152
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Thanks,
I was looking at a Dapol loco and it had 1:148 scale on the box... just wanted to be sure before I parted with my cash :-)
Malcolm
Trev wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Malcolm" wrote

I'd also want to see it work before parting with *my* cash, there have been some very indifferent reports about their stuff.
John.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Please John, can you provide more info.
I thought that Dapol were the "Rolls Royce" in terms of reliability and quality... The model I was looking at was a Dapol 14xx 0-4-2T.. but also like the look of their 45xx 2-6-2T but the review in the 4/05 issue of the N-Gauge journal did comment on quality and running issues ?
Regards
Malcolm
John Turner wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Malcolm" wrote

I know about six people who have bought Dapol locos and all have said they will not buy more due to indifferent running qualities. Whether this is representative or not I cannot say, but as a result of those comments I would just ensure that I saw a loco run before buying.
John.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Malcolm wrote:

I wouldn't describe any current British RTR N steam locos as "Rolls Royce". If making car comparisons, the current two main makers are nearer to Kia and Proton (I did think Trabant and Yugo, but both those car makers have ceased production !).
I wait to see if Peco's re-entry into the market pushes the standard up to what it should be.
The Dapol 14xx' I've seen run fairly fast and vary in their smoothness. Not seen one which runs well at low speed. (Except the one a friend rebuilt to 2mm standards, but that has a new chassis, 45:1 gearbox, coreless motor, new wheels, new boiler.... All done by someone who started model making a year ago, so beginners can do it, but it does take some dedication.).
If just after visual upgrade, its possible to remove the boiler skirt and drill a hole in the chassis block to allow the daylight back underneath.
- Nigel
--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Would the fact that you are in the 2mm Society colour your judgement somewhat as to the quality of commercial N Gauge items.
They are not expected to be to "Finescale" standards.
As for the number of manufacturers it depends on whether you model UK or Other outlines.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Brian Seamens" wrote

I didn't comment in my earlier postings about the quality of the body mouldings, just that I'm told they don't run particularly smoothly. Now *that* really colours *my* judgement, and effectively means that I wouldn't touch them with a barge pole.
The main criteria I have about any model loco in any scale is that it works well. In N-gauge that becomes even more of an issue.
John.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Wasn't getting at you John.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Brian Seamens" wrote

< vbg > That makes a change! ;-)
Sorry, I wasn't inferring that you were, but maybe I should have edited my posting better to show that.
I was, however, trying to say (maybe badly) whether the body of a loco is of superb quality or otherwise, is pretty much irrelevant in my book if the thing doesn't work smoothly at all speeds. In 2005 there is little justification for turning out any model in any scale that doesn't meet that simple criteria.
OK, those of us with the necessary time and skill can I suppose go to the trouble of building a new mechanism under a decent quality proprietary body, but that surely defeats the whole concept of ready-to-run models.
John.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No problem mate, often get caught out myself. It is easy to get too brief when posting electronically and put over a wrong impression. Do it all the time myself.
I agree it is best to have good running and good body.
It is the drive mechanism that is the major cost so it should be good quality otherwise we would all only buy bodyshells I guess and put our own (Kato etc) motors into them.
The guy from the 2mm org was basically saying that all UK RTR steam loco stock was crap.
Not an entirely fair point.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Brian Seamens" wrote

I didn't read Nigel's point quite that way. I think he was suggesting that we have a lack of 'Rolls Royce' products in the UK model railway N-gauge market, and in many respects I agree with him.
Certainly we've nothing on a par with the best available from Japan (Kato) or the best on sale in the USA, but things are moving forwards thanks to some workmanlike improvements from the Farish stable since Bachmann took over.
I'm not sure, however, that Dapol's current production is adding anything other than quantity to the UK N-gauge market.
John.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Brian Seamens wrote:

I use the signature so people know what I do. This seems entirely proper.
What standard of running do you regard as acceptable ?
I am quite happy to recommend people towards decent N items. Kato for example. But unfortunately they are US or Japanese prototypes which limits their interest to many UK modellers. Or alternatively, some European models (European N models vary considerably in running properties). I have a Kato 2-4-0 tank loco in Japanese N which runs rather well straight from the box. Its smaller than most UK prototypes. It cost around 40 in the UK, considerably less if bought in Japan. That shows what can be done commercially at a sensible price. OK, with a smaller UK market the price might double, but is that unaffordable for decent running ?
The major problem with British N is the acceptance of sub-standard models. OO used to have the same problem, but has started to change over recent years. Many current new OO models are very good, and the need to build stuff yourself to achieve decent running and decent appearance has gone away.
Unfortunately British N steam models haven't really moved forwards much for decades. The best steam loco remains the Peco Jubilee of 30-odd years ago. I wish it were otherwise. The diesels are getting better, but I said steam in the original posting.

What standards would you like them to be ? I'd not be as critical if they ran smoothly at sensible speeds. In 4mm scale, the only difference between OO and EM/Scalefour for some locos are the replacement wheels underneath. N could be the same, its a shame it is not.

I think I said that.
- Nigel
--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Having been the originator of this thread I would like to thank everyone that has contributed. Its made interesting reading, and for once remained on topic ;-)
I would echo John's comments. I think that in this day and age, given all the technical achievements, manufactures should be able to produce reliable smooth running N gauge steam outline loco's.
I like a fair amount of detail, but would prefer a smooth starting, slow running engine, especially in the 0-6-0 config, over the fact that the loco has a copper chimney "just like the full size one".
I remember as a child (7 or 8 years old) having a Hornby Jinty (we simply referred to it as puffing billy !) and this would crawl round an oval of track fed from a very old and basic rheostat controller. That was 30+ years ago, and haven't seen a modern loco do the same thing, even with modern electronic controllers.
I too prefer Peco wagons, mainly as I feel that the metal wheels on Farish stuff looks "toyish", where as the black plastic wheels on Peco look right. Its just a shame that Peco have not gone on to produce a decent range of coaches and continue their success with the additional steam outline engines.
Malcolm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Malcolm wrote:

Correct scale: 1:160 (used by everybody except Brits and Japanese) UK (2mm scale): 1:152 (in which 9mm represents 4'6" gauge). UK (bastard comnmercial scale: 1:148 (who's guilty of this mess????) Japan: can't remember, I think it's 1:120 (which would be 9mm representing 3'6" gauge, the most common gauge in Japan IIRC).
Footnote: In the 50s and 60s, some Japanese brass HO gauge models were imported into Canada and the USA scaled at 1:64, or S Scale. These were 3'6" narrow gauge locos, as 16.5mm gauge is very close to 3'6" in 1:64 scale. I have one of these lokies, a 2-8-0, much modified (I sprung axles 1, 3 and 4, which almost doubled its tractive effort.) It looks OK with HO scale rolling stock so long as you don't put it next to HO scale locos - the cab is too large. It's the first loco I ever bought with my own hard-earned money. It cost me 10 hours pay.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Now I'm really confused ?
>Previously "Nigel Cliffe" wrote > The real nasty ones were the Lima Mk1's, which if anything, were 1:160 >in some directions
So Lima were producing to the correct scale, but everyone has commented that it never looked right. Farrish and Dapol build to 1:148 which is incorrect (even in the gauge) according to Wolf's information below ???
I suppose at the end of the day, given the mess that N gauge is in, that Kim's point of "Isn't it what you like that matters? Not what someone else likes" is all that matters.
Cheers
Malcolm
Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Malcolm wrote:

I said "in some directions". Yes, Lima were probably trying to get the coaches to 1:160, but by then the 1:148 scale had a fair bit of support from the other producers of "British N", including excellent models like the Jubilee from Peco (still nobody has done a better RTR steam loco for British N, and the thing was designed well over 30 years ago, and been out of production for ages).

All British RTR scales suffer this mess: OO with its 4ft3 track gauge (whereas Continental HO is correct on the same track), which necessitates the finescale community using 18.2/18.83mm (as your choice).
- Nigel
--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Nigel Cliffe" wrote

Sorry to be pedantic, but 16.5mm (OO-gauge) equates to a scale track gauge of 4'1" and not 4'3". :-)
John.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.