# Large scale and the NmRA



## Dunbar (May 5, 2016)

I would like to know the back story of the friction between Large scale and the nmra. From what I can conclude, seems like nmra does not like to acknowledge large scale much.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I believe it is a don't care, most of the hobby is HO, and I believe most of the NMRA "officers" and "big shots" are HO. I'm in Z scale also, and we suffer the same "persona non grata" situation there.

Greg


----------



## rdamurphy (Jan 3, 2008)

Definitely seems HO and N get all of the attention, but then again, that's where the market is. O tinplate is Lionel, S is American Flyer, also tinplate, S scale is nearly non-existent, Z is only a couple of manufacturers, and LS went off the deep end in the first place with 1/29th scale thing...

BTW, 1:22.5 LGB was originally known as K scale.

F scale is non-existent, as is #2 scale. #1 scale is MTH and Accucraft, Fn3 is Bachmann and Accucraft/AMS and a few folks working out of their garages, but most of them are gone. I'm starting to doubt if Bachmann will ever do another 1:20.3 locomotive, although the Blackstone K28 has me hopeful... 

No need to mention TT or OO, both European.

O scale went the same route with the off-scale thing, And, well, ON30... 

Then there's the On3, Sn3, and HOn3 stuff, mostly brass or craftsmen kits.

Proto87 looked promising for a while, and well, no need to mention Nn3, stick a fork in it...

So... HO or N. 95% of the market?

Robert


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Actually Z scale is HOT, there are lots of manufacturers and new stuff coming out all the time. They do short runs, and they are always sold out.

Greg


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

I don't know that I'd classify it as "friction." I think it's more along the lines of apathy. The bulk of the membership in the NMRA is into HO and N so they're not thinking about large scale, and large scalers aren't thinking about the NMRA because they're not into HO or N. 

I worked closely with the NMRA a few years back on wheel and track standards for large scale. They were very open to increasing the exposure of large scale within the ranks, but the upshot of the discussion was that it takes large scalers to generate the exposure for the membership. The articles don't magically appear for the magazine; the railroads don't open themselves up for tours during regional meets. It takes modelers to do that. It ends up being a downward spiral; large scalers are needed within the ranks to generate exposure, but they won't join because there's currently very little large scale within the group to encourage them to join. 

If there's "friction," I think it's more based on individuals, not a wholesale feeling between groups. When I was doing the standards, there was a loud, vocal minority of large scale folks chanting "NMRA Go Away!" the entire time. They did a good job of letting their own personal feelings be known (some to the point of calling me a "traitor" for daring to working with them), but I never got the sense they were anything more than a handful of folks who just didn't like the NMRA for whatever reason. By the same token, I've encountered individuals who are NMRA members who look at garden railroads as though they are the second black plague. Here again, these views are nothing more than the opinions of individuals who are woefully under-informed about large scale. 

At the end of the day, I think it's just a matter of where the interests are. The NMRA appeals to the scale modeler; primarily those in the smaller scales. I never got a sense from working with them that there was any animosity at all in play. The folks I was working with on the committee were mostly large scalers themselves. Most of the large scalers I talked to were simply apathetic or didn't even know about the NMRA to begin with. 

I think where we see stronger large scale representation within the NMRA are in places where the local or regional divisions have strong, active groups. If people are meeting, going to each others' houses for railroad tours, etc., then there's exposure, there's interest, and there's education going both ways. Where there's not that level of activity, there's no education, so perceptions are formed based on the vocal minorities we hear. 

Later,

K


----------



## rdamurphy (Jan 3, 2008)

Kevin, have you ever noticed that loud vocal minorities always seem to get their way?


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Funny comment, this thread is about minorities NOT getting their way.

The only other minorities were people complaining that Kevin should not work with the NMRA, but that fell on it's face and Kevin completed his effort on the standards committee.

Greg


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Some, er ... credit goes to the manufacturer's, I don't think any of them wanted those constraints as they fudged to be compatible with LGB. Cloning LGB led to success where adhering to standards could change the Chinese Toy Train concept and probably raise the cost.
John


----------



## Dave Meashey (Jan 2, 2008)

For those of you who remember TOC (The Old Curmudgeon), he definitely did not care for the NMRA. His term for them was "enema Ray!" But then he also called a rectifier a "rectum fryer."

Actually, I miss him. He had a way of stirring things up that made one stop and think about what he was trying to communicate.

Cheers, 
David Meashey


----------



## rdamurphy (Jan 3, 2008)

Pardon my ignorance, but what happened to TOC?

Robert


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

He's alive and kicking, a friend of mine just ran on his RR last week. 
John


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

John

Did he have trucks on the soles of his shoes, or did he just run on the layout? 

Chuck


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

'Bout the same way you did when you ran on mine! 
Are we having fun yet?
OK he ran a train on Dave's layout, sheeesh ...

I've got a nice short version of the Cieniga Narrows emerging on the new incarnation. Where the track runs from Vail down to Marsh Station. The older line used a wash.... not sure Miss Mally will clear! But the bus will feel at home.

yer pal,
John


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Thanks.

No worry about Ms Mally, but the bus will travel.

Chuck 

There is a lot in the English language that leads to multiple interpretations. I've heard that there is an entire profession that specializes in it, can't remember the name.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

chuck n said:


> Thanks.
> 
> No worry about Ms Mally, but the bus will travel.
> 
> ...




Seems my friends are the quickest!


I've cleaned up this end...
See more than talk.
John


----------



## Dunbar (May 5, 2016)

Seems pretty sad that neither Large scale nor NMRA dont care. NMRA should support ALL model railroading and vice versa. The scales should support NMRA and try to submit articles to be published if anyone wants to see change. As far as the scales that rdamurphy was discussing, I have seen those numbers abused and misused (Ive seen 1:29 called #1,#2,S scale,etc). . Cant tell you how frustrating it was trying to learn all that. Should be simplified somehow also. Saw a post from somebody somewhere that simplified and improved on those scales(#1, #2, etc.). Thats where it would be nice for nmra to say "ok, this is the scaling" and then enforce it along with the manufacturers adopting a/the better system. 
As EBT stated, the nmra was open about getting large scale some exposure. Large scale can use it as its numbers are dwindling which is apparent from shows cancelling, shows opening to other scales, manufacturers going out of business, etc. I think its up to us to get some publicity and advertizing generated, and then have the makers and org's join in to promote this hobby. 
With regards to the small handful of "haters" ; well we just need to exterminate them in house. Everyone of us has their own design and way of running our empires, but to have a few ruin a relationship for all, thats not right. If you have some concerns or ideas, voice them properly; dont bitch and scream and act like a petulant child. We should really try to help, nurture and grow this hobby .
I know some of you will read this and disagree. Thats fine. Like I said, we are all running our empires in our own way. Feel free to post your feedback. As for the others, whats your thoughts.


----------



## riderdan (Jan 2, 2014)

This is just my opinion, but part of the problem seems to be that there are a lot of areas that don't overlap between LS and smaller scales. The issues encountered outdoors in large scale aren't relevant (mostly) to indoor modelers... They don't have to re-ballast after the rain, or clear leaves in the fall. And I can't build mountains out of plaster and gauze or make trees from wire and lichen. My layout lighting in G is the sun, and a nighttime scene happens only when the sun is down. Large scale is so large that there's no possible way to model an entire city, like some of the Z and N scale guys do. Heck, my "town" is 9 structures and it feels crowded. 

I love Z scale (and G, obviously) but what I model and how I do it in those scales is completely different from each other in a way Z and N and HO aren't. On my Z layout, I have a 1:220 scale castle that would be about 20' long, 8' wide, and 6' tall in 1:22.5. My Z track needs cleaning periodically, but I never have to retighten rail clamps and once the track is down it never goes out of level due to frost heaves, expansion, etc. In some ways, the smaller scales seem more like modeling--with G you have to keep it up like a real railroad  That's especially true when you throw in live steam.

I think it's understandable that NMRA, whose membership is mostly HO and N scale folks, isn't always relevant to us in Large Scale. That doesn't mean any kind of emnity on my part, it's mostly indifference. Though I do occasionally subscribe to other RR publications just to enjoy the ideas--even if they aren't particularly useful outdoors.


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

The last time I recall NMRA reaching out to us was on couplers. The protagonist had USA and Aristo cars and they wouldn't couple up. Perfect thing for a standard, right? 

Unfortunately he missed that there are Fn3 and g-1 factions who don't like or want 1/29 couplers. It took a while to explain to him that he was going to have to trim his sails and settled for a less comprehensive standard.


----------



## Ted Yarbrough (Jan 2, 2008)

Friends,
I agree with reply #5 above, posted by K. The Georgia Garden Railroad Society and the Piedmont Division of the NMRA have a good relationship. Both groups have members that have joined the other group. G-scale layouts are always on the NMRA fall tour. When the national NMRA convention was in Atlanta a few years back, G-scale layouts were on the tours. Members of the Georgia Garden Railway Society helped out with the convention. When the 2018 national garden railroad convention comes to Atlanta, there will be NMRA members helping with it. The Georgia Garden Railroad Society has a link on their homepage to the Piedmont Division of the NMRA. At our local train shows, N-scale, HO, Lionel, and G-scale layouts are operating right alongside each other for the public's enjoyment. I feel it is kind of like still fighting the Civil War, as if there was any riff, it was a long time ago, and it is time to move on. Both groups can support the model railroad industry and help promote model trains to the public and thus gather a few new hobbyist into the fold!


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Pete Thornton said:


> The last time I recall NMRA reaching out to us was on couplers. The protagonist had USA and Aristo cars and they wouldn't couple up. Perfect thing for a standard, right?
> 
> Unfortunately he missed that there are Fn3 and g-1 factions who don't like or want 1/29 couplers. It took a while to explain to him that he was going to have to trim his sails and settled for a less comprehensive standard.




But a big 'ol X2F horn hook would be just the ticket! 

The Chinese wanted to make Toys, They resisted making parts and one exec was quoted as saying; "Break it? Buy a new one." 
Do you really think they wanted to be bothered with Standards?
John


----------



## rdamurphy (Jan 3, 2008)

I've always found the coupler thing secretly funny... After all, the prototypes solved it in the 19th Century...

Robert


----------



## Dave Meashey (Jan 2, 2008)

John;

One thing about an X2F coupler in large scale is that they could have been uncoupled easily with a common flat blade screwdriver.

The flat blade screwdriver is my uncoupler of choice for Kadees.

On the real railroad, radio communications require brevity, so cars are "cut" and "tied." The lever for uncoupling is called a "cut lever."

Have fun,
David Meashey


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

After we got done with wheel and track standards, there was a push to look at couplers and see if it was even possible to come up with a "standard" there. The NMRA already had standards for coupler heights, which were pretty much drawn straight from what the manufacturers were already doing. (3/4" for hook-and-loop or truck-mounted couplers; 1 1/8" or 1 1/16" for body mounted couplers depending on the scale of the model.) The question we grappled with was whether there was a way to "define" a specific coupler for large scale. The result was a survey of the proportions and geometries of the various couplers available in large scale, with a summary of what those sizes were.

We didn't go any further than that. I don't recall the specifics of the discussion, but the general feeling was that in large scale, we have prototypically-functioning scale couplers in both 1:32 and 1:20.3 made by Accucraft. What was the point in "designing" a coupler when the prototypical coupler is already available and proven reliable? Those couplers are compatible with Kadee couplers (the market leader in aftermarket couplers). We also considered the trend for manufacturers to use more-or-less universal draft gear for their couplers, or at least allow for easy installation of market dominant draft gear. We figured the market was taking care of things just as well without official "standards" to help them along. 

I don't know if there have been further developments along similar lines since then or not. 

(Now, if Accucraft would kindly re-run the 1:32 couplers again. I've run out! Oh, and a pilot-mounted version of the same would likewise be greatly appreciated!)

Later,

K


----------



## Dunbar (May 5, 2016)

I would be happy if they renamed the different scales that are within "G" scale.


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

They tried. T for 1/13.7, F for 1/20.3 A for 1/29 and 1 for 1/32. The F caught on, so Fn3 is commonly used. The 1/32 guys talk about gauge-1, not scale-1. And A was prompted by the Aristo LS stuff- note the LS29 on the boxes.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

I'm happy with the numerical designations for scales that run on "G" track. Keep it simple.

And as an aside. I'm happy with the non decision on couplers. The only coupler that doesn't play well with my other couplers is Aristo. They are easily replaced.

Chuck


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

That's one thing we wanted specifically to get away from, actually, at least in terms of standards. In fact, that was part of the proposal which ultimately got me involved with the process, because one proposal being put forth included a set of unique standards for _each _of the scales which encompass large scale, including "standard gauge" and "narrow gauge - 'n3'" standards for each. 

Large scale is unique in that all the scales run on the same track. Unique standards for each scale, even though the track was the same gauge, didn't make a whole lot of sense from a compatibility standpoint, nor did going through the motions to write standards for modeling pursuits which don't exist (1:29 narrow gauge, 1:24 standard gauge, etc.) We decided the best way forward was to focus almost entirely on where the wheel meets the rail, since that was the common denominator to all scales we run in large scale. 

Now, so far as clearly identifying the scales of the models within the context of their packaging and marketing, that's a different ball of wax. Some manufacturers do a better job than others (and some are intentionally vague), but that's not something we felt any NMRA standards would change anyway. 

Later,

K


----------



## Garratt (Sep 15, 2012)

Yeah Pete that half works. Hardly anyone seems to use A for 1:29 or T for 1:13.7 is just outside the box. 
SE is often used for Seven Eights (1:13.7). 
H scale is at times used for Half inch scale or 1:24. 
There is also 1:19 or 16mm to the foot scale which has been referred to as SM with a 32 or 45 post-fixed for gauge but not necessarily common and more of a UK thing.

The names for scales are one thing but as far as standards go I can see Kevin's point of not trying to define a different set of standards for each. People do mix and match some differing scales and ideally they need to work together.

Andrew


----------



## Dunbar (May 5, 2016)

Sorry , but I have to disagree with everything encompassing G scale. Yes, they all run on the same track, but when your buying something from ebay, or as stated above from a manufacturer thats vague; and it all says g scale and your in 1:29 and that box comes and its 1:24 or 1:32; it gets pretty **** frustrating. Its the equivalent of say ordering a part for a ford explorer and your sent the same item but for a ford escape. Doesnt fit.. And the logic of " well its a ford product and they both drive on the road" is just dumbshit. Clearly identify the thing.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

If you are thinking about buying used "eBay", you are fighting 35 years of un-labeled boxes. The first manufacturer to put scale on the box was Delton and they are one of the few.

You need to know your scale and the manufacturers products to get what you want. It is confusing for the beginner.

I'll mention scales and manufacturers, the manufacturers list wiill be far from totally inclusive.

If you like North American 3' narrow gauge 1:20.3 is the correct scale: Accucraft, Bachmann Spectrum.

European meter gauge is 1:22.5: LGB, Kiss

A lot of North American Narrow gauge came out at 1:24: LGB, Delton, HLW, USAT, Bachmann Big Hauler, AristoCraft. They look nice, but are not correct scale for 3' gauge on "G" gauge track.

Standard gauge, incorrect scale, 1:29: LGB, AristoCraft, USATrains.

Standard gauge, correct scale, 1:32: I'm not into this scale, so I won't mention any manufacturers.

I collect/run 1:20.3, 1:22.5/24, and 1:29. 

If you are buying something, you need the Manufacturers stock number. If you don't know the scale ask us and we can probably help. 
Chuck


----------



## Garratt (Sep 15, 2012)

The term 'G scale' is a misnomer unless specifying 1:22.5. 'Large Scale' is a better catch all phrase. The general public need to be educated on this. For instance, there is a category on eBay called 'G scale' which encompasses everything that runs on 45mm gauge.

You do need to know the products to know what scale you are getting then it can still be a bit vague, depending on interpretation of the model. They aren't all modeled from the real thing. Some can work for several scales.

Andrew


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Dunbar said:


> Sorry , but I have to disagree with everything encompassing G scale. ...


Dunbar, I don't disagree with you one bit with respect to labeling the scales on the boxes. That's a mess. Always has been, likewise always will be. Part of the reason is that certain manufacturers play very fast and loose with the scale ruler when it comes to their models. I call it the "carry-on luggage" syndrome. They've got a specific overall size for their models. It doesn't matter how big the prototype may be, the model will be proportioned to fit that overall size. LGB is probably the most prolific with this. Standard gauge, narrow gauge, really tiny narrow gauge, it doesn't matter. It will all be right around 4" wide and 6" tall. When you compare their models to the prototypes, their scales range anywhere from 1:19 to 1:29. Yet the entire product line is identified as "1:22.5." Piko comes in a close second, with scales ranging from 1:22.5 to 1:32. 

Some manufacturers have gotten better about putting a scale on their packaging, but others simply do not. There's a big part of me that thinks the manufacturers purposefully omit that information on the premise that if people don't see any kind of scale label, they'll figure everything's the same scale and buy more. The flip side, of course, is that there are people who don't buy the products because they don't know what scale they are. What I can't answer is who there are more of.

I don't know what the answer there is. There have been a handful of proposed labeling schemes promoted over the years. Not a one of them has come close to taking hold. Manufacturers don't seem to care. Hobby shops put everything large scale in the "G scale" aisle. The NMRA has singled out "F" scale as 1:20.3. Even that hasn't caught on with the manufacturers, retailers, or even the publications. Both _Garden Railways_ and the _Narrow Gauge & Shortline Gazette_ will overwhelmingly refer to that scale by its numeric value. Bachmann and Accucraft (the largest producers of 1:20.3 equipment) use the numeric value. 

Unfortunately, no "standards" by any organization are going to change manufacturer behavior with regard to their own marketing. 

Later,

K


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Until all large scale manufacturers are concerned with scale fidelity, they will promote it as "G" so as to get the widest possible market, that's been clear for years.

And to a certain degree it makes sense for the hobby, where it has fostered mixing scales where it would be taboo in HO for example.

It's all about the $$.

Greg


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

Dunbar said:


> Sorry , but I have to disagree with everything encompassing G scale. Yes, they all run on the same track, but when your buying something from ebay, or as stated above from a manufacturer thats vague; and it all says g scale and your in 1:29 and that box comes and its 1:24 or 1:32; it gets pretty **** frustrating. Its the equivalent of say ordering a part for a ford explorer and your sent the same item but for a ford escape. Doesnt fit.. And the logic of " well its a ford product and they both drive on the road" is just dumbshit. Clearly identify the thing.


We feel your pain. If you were around a few years ago when the debate was over labeling boxes, and the "LS29" was adopted by Aristocraft, we thought we were making progress. However, very few vendors followed suit - to this day USA Trains still does not put the scale on their boxes. Bachmann made an attempt - the Spectrum range has the scale usually on the label. (I think.)

Many sellers on eBay haven't a clue what scale their item might be. LGB is vague - many standard gauge models are actually 1/26th scale. Try asking what scale the Bachmann "Thomas" range is? Ans: "Thomas scale".


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

> There is also 1:19 or 16mm to the foot scale which has been referred to as SM with a 32 or 45 post-fixed for gauge but not necessarily common and more of a UK thing.


The SM refers to the "Sixteen Millimeter" :ft scale. Similarly, the "T" is "Thirteen" and the "F' in F scale is for "Fifteen millimeter:ft".
Of course, all this ignores the complications, pointed out elsewhere. The UK also uses 10mm:ft for std gauge on gauge-1 track (~1/30th). 1/24th was popular, once.


----------



## Garratt (Sep 15, 2012)

Pete, Thomas' stuff is 1:22.5 scale or thereabouts! Even though he is modeled on a standard gauge railway. I guess you can do as you wish on Sodor Island. 
One of the dealers in England used to pull the 7 plank truck tops off because they were sought after for 2.5" gauge (G64) enthusiasts. I purchased a box of the left over chassis bottoms so I can make some vans in case Bachmann never get around to it.  

Andrew


----------



## Garratt (Sep 15, 2012)

Yeah Pete, I figured the T was for thirteen. never seen anyone use it though. The SM term can get you into arguments too with some of it's users. The term SM45 is used by Peco on it's track products.

Andrew


----------

