Hello All,
I believe some Lima offerings in O gauge use differing scales, such as the coaches being 1/48 whilst locos are 1/43.
At shows, certain Lima outline offerings turn up, such as a French diesel I saw at Telford.
Does anyone know what scale was used for these models?
Also, does anyone know what is the linear scale used for the Bachman On30 narrow gauge model line?
Thanks in advance for any help
Pete.
"Peter Principle" wrote
I think it's all to one scale (1:48), but some UK liveried items are actually continental prototypes and may appear to be overscale compared with the coaches.
John.
=>Also, does anyone know what is the linear scale used =>for the Bachman On30 narrow gauge model line?
1:48Runs on 16.5mm track. Use Peco's On30 track if you want correct tie size and spacing. Or fudge it with standard gauge OO/HO track.
I think the Lima were a hybrid scale, something like 1:45.
Those are 1/48, being intended for the US market.
It's a bit of a mix and match though, because the prototype was
3' gauge instead of 2'6". Although the little Porter was available for a variety of inductrial gauges including 2'6". But eg the the Colorado stuff was 3'.
There are a number of different European "0" scales; 1:43.5, 1:45 and
23mm/metre - for obvious reasons they don't use 7mm/foot."Gregory Procter" wrote
Strange then that they use 3.5mm : 1 foot for HO scale.
John.
No they don't - HO scale in Europe is 1:87 ratio. 3.5mm:1 foot is not
1:87. (nor is it 1:87.1 as used in the USa)Regards, Greg.P.
In message , Gregory Procter writes
You're right. It's 1:87.08571429, which to 1 decimal place is 1:87.1
That's dependent on what degree of compromise you're prepared to accept in scaling your models. I don't see any point in converting a metric prototype dimension to an Imperial measurement and then dividing by an Imperial:Metric ratio to get a metric model dimension which fractionally doesn't match the accepted and official metric scale. Once I know the scale dimensions I wish to model, I make the adjustments to suit the materials and tools available and to suit my modelling skills. I certainly wouldn't use the US rounded scaling factor, because that introduces an error before I make my own modelling compromises.
Regards, Greg.P.
Oh yes - it is very close to 1:87. Try it on your Calculator!
304.8/3.5 = 87.085714David.
1:76.2 is "very close" to 1:87 depending on your perspective - why use other than the exact scale conversion.
So your models of 1m diameter wheels will measure 11.4942528736--- mm or do you use something other than exact scale? Perhaps an 11.5mm wheel, ie scale of 1:86.96, or even an 11mm wheel, a scale of 1:90.96 (and I know they might be worn wheels, that's not the point)
The difference between 1:87 and 1:87.1 is not significant in modelling, even P87 track and wheels are compatible whichever scale you use. An 80ft car is 0.28mm different in length, can you model well enough to tell? Keith
Make friends in the hobby. Visit Garratt photos for the big steam lovers.
Hmmm, my wheels measure 11.5mm, 11.08mm and 10.5mm depending on the situation.
Yes there is a significant difference: - I start with a prototypical dimension - I apply my scale factor - I _then_ adjust to suit any factors I decide are appropriate.
You say the ".1" is not significant. That immediately brings forth two questions:
- why include it?
- when does a figure become significant?
-1:76(.2)?
-HO by MOROP standards is 1:87 with 1:80 as an alternative. I'm informed by some modellers that the difference isn't significant! That extra figure can affect rounding of a converted dimension when one works to the nearest 0.5mm. When I fit my wheels to, for example, a Roco wagon I have to take into account that Roco have already fudged the design to suit 11mm wheels, Märklin to suit
10.5mm wheels. Correct diameter 11.5mm wheels won't fit without fudging other dimensions.
A length over buffer beam and a length over buffers rounding can make a difference that is visible in a model.
Regards, Greg.P.
In message , Gregory Procter writes
Thank goodness I model in OO. I don't have any of these problems.
Sure, the rails are on the correct side of each other and the gauge variation isn't significant ;-)
Some of us are obsessed with building everything to the finest detail, some of use want to buy and run rtr trains. Nothing wrong with either.
Some of us wander around in the middle ground. I buy rtr trains and I build the models I do build to the best of my ability.
We sure do. rtr locos with a few details added, throw in a little kitbashing of buildings, rolling stock and locos and that suits many of us to a tee.
-- Cheers Roger T.
So where do they get 1:43.5 and 23mm/m from then? Both of those are
7mm/ft rounded off as you so like to do but indistinguishable in practice except to those who can see the effect of 0.28mm in a 280mm long coach. 1:45 is the 'corrected' scale to correctly fit 32mm gauge. So, IMHO, there are two european 'O' scales and several ways of expressing them. KeithMake friends in the hobby. Visit Garratt photos for the big steam lovers.
They come from dividing the prototype gauge by the model gauge - why would Europeans use English feet when converting a prototype metric measurement to a model metric measurement? I fell foul of this situation years ago in converting Württemberg prototype drawings in "fuss" (feet) to scale size using 3.5mm as the conversion factor. They are a quite different measurement!
Yes, there are at least two European continent 'O' scales and considerable arguement as to which is "correct".
Regards, Greg.P.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required