# G scale denotation?



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Why is MLS defining the hobby and this forum as "G scale?" I would think it more appropriate as Large Scale as per the website name. Given the original usage by LGB most associated the "G" scale as 1:22.5 G scale does not denote "F" scale, etc.. Just curious to the subtitle change.


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

When I saw this topic I thought it said "detonation" and someone was blowing up a layout.

I have to admit it'd be fun to do a little Gomez Adams style bridge demolition. Kids would love it.


----------



## Ironton (Jan 2, 2008)

Well my F scale (1:20.3) live steamers are referred to as: small scale live steam. I do not think we should refer to ourselves as large scale when the ride on toys are a larger scale than ours.

Yes, I have seen live steam in HO scale. I have not seem smaller, but do not doubt that somebody will try (or has tried) to do a smaller scale.

Any suggestions for a generic name for out conglomeration of scales?


----------



## Larry Green (Jan 2, 2008)

I try to always use the term "G1" when referring to what we do. The emphasis is on the track gauge--45mm gauge 1--not on the scale of the models that run on the track. 
Just my way of dealing with it. I realize that exceptions abound. For example, has Dwight moved on to "Broad Gauge" ???? 

Larry


----------



## coyote97 (Apr 5, 2009)

Hi Guys,


i think we shall take a look at the "normal use" of scale notes.
G-Scale seems to be the 1:22,5 thing, perhaps the only and right one.
But G-Scale is used all over the World to figure out that we are talking about a Garden-usable modelrailroad that moves in a variety of some scales from 1: 32 till 1:20,3.


So i think its no fault to name a 45mm gauge "G-Scale". And like this its used.


Looking in the modellers history, we find the first models in some kind of "1" -scale. Later the models got smaller and were named (logicaly) "0"-scale. "H0" stands for the next "halvation" of the scale. 
With the 45mm-narrow-gauge-scale LGB created the mass-production of Gardentrains. "G"-Scale.


But a lot of more scales uses the 45mm now....G-scale.


Here in Germany, we say "G", and anyone nearly knows whats meant. To go into further detail, there is scale 1 (1:32), "US-Standard-Gauge" (1:29), scale 2 (1:22,5...what found some standard-gauge-modellers, too), or now the "F"-scale for 1:20,3.


There are some new 1:27-models, whoever had the idea to create a new scale inside the "G"-scalers.


Perhaps it would match better to say "G"-gauge. That would fit!






Frank


----------



## tacfoley (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By coyote97 on 05/02/2009 9:33 AM
Hi Guys,


i think we shall take a look at the "normal use" of scale notes.
G-Scale seems to be the 1:22,5 thing, perhaps the only and right one.
But G-Scale is used all over the World to figure out that we are talking about a Garden-usable modelrailroad that moves in a variety of some scales from 1: 32 till 1:20,3.


So i think its no fault to name a 45mm gauge "G-Scale". And like this its used.


Looking in the modellers history, we find the first models in some kind of "1" -scale. Later the models got smaller and were named (logicaly) "0"-scale. "H0" stands for the next "halvation" of the scale. 
With the 45mm-narrow-gauge-scale LGB created the mass-production of Gardentrains. "G"-Scale.


But a lot of more scales uses the 45mm now....G-scale.


Here in Germany, we say "G", and anyone nearly knows whats meant. To go into further detail, there is scale 1 (1:32), "US-Standard-Gauge" (1:29), scale 2 (1:22,5...what found some standard-gauge-modellers, too), or now the "F"-scale for 1:20,3.


There are some new 1:27-models, whoever had the idea to create a new scale inside the "G"-scalers.


Perhaps it would match better to say "G"-gauge. That would fit!






Frank 



Dear Mr Frank - just to let you know that from over here in UK - where we actually invented large-scale live-steam in the garden railways in the late 19th century, and then invented 1/19th scale - more usually called 16mm - live steam in the garden railways in the late 1960's - you seem to have overlooked this scale. 

What is probably the largest live steam model locomotive manufacturing company in the world and I'm excluding Aster here as much of what they produce is not actually made by them, is Roundhouse Engineering of Doncaster - again ALL to the scale of 16mm to the foot, 1/19th. We even have an association with around 3000 members... 

Also please note that Gauge 2 is about as dead as it is possible to imagine, but *Gauge 3* is alive and getting bigger by the month. Here in UK we have GRS to thank for the ever-increasing range of locomotives and rolling stock running on this 64mm track. By comparison, the so-called standard gauge that matches Fn3/1:20.3 is almost unknown over here in the home of garden railways. Perhaps you mean IIm - the German designation for the scale of 1/22.5 running stock on 45mm track to simulate meter gauge.

Also please note that it was a GERMAN manufacturer, LGB, who 'invented' 1/27th scale, with their US-outline F7 and steam mikados. This trend has been assiduously followed up by PIKO.

tac
http://www.ovgrs.org/


----------



## ralphbrades (Jan 3, 2008)

I have "more than a few" pieces of SM32 track which is 32mm gauge I am (oh so slowly) amassing pieces of Gauge 3 track. I simply lump "G" as meaning "Garden". Hence "Garden Scales". So if someone wants to call my 16mm scale Price 16 Wheeler or my 13.5mm scale NER EE-1 "G" scale then I don't mind at all... But is someone wants to call my track work "G" Gauge -then I do mind!!! 

regards 

ralph


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Personally, I do not like applying a letter to describe either the "Scale" or the "Gauge"! 

"G" doesn't tell me a thing.

I run 1:32 scale on 45-mm gauge track.

Saying "G" is as meaningful an answer to "What is your Scale?", or "What is your Gauge?" 

as it is to "What color is it?", or "What's for dinner?" or "What are you drinking?"


Answering "Number 1" to that last question could be misinterpreted and leave one not wanting to participate in quenching their thirst with you.


----------



## Bucksco (Jan 4, 2008)

"G" doesn't really denote "scale". It's more of a generic way of saying "outdoor" or "Garden" trains.


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

Tac,

Where you write, "Also please note that Gauge 2 is about as dead as it is possible to imagine,..." would you care to speculate on which is more dead (deader?), Ga. 2 or TT ga.? (I suppose in absolute terms, I should write "TT scale" but I'm more interested in knowing your opinion of the relative deadness of the two gauges.) Also, what is the gauge of 'Gauge 2'?

For my part, they can call this board anything they wish, in my mind 'G Gauge' represents a range of scales commonly found on 45mm gauge track. OTOH, calling something 'G scale' is meaningless to me. It was (laboriously) explained to me that my chosen scale,1:20.3, running on 45mm gauge track, was more correctly called 'Fn3'. I was delighted to find that a stab in the dark on my part had such excellent results, because I've always wanted 'narrow gauge'.

I think that in general correspondence, "G scale or gauge" generally refers to outdoor RRs run on 45mm track, here in the US, as I've found that I have to specify that I'm building an indoor layout.

Les


----------



## thekollector (Jan 2, 2008)

Spurweiten, Maßstab und Module 
Unsere Gemeinschaft stützt sich auf vier Themenkreise im Maßstab 1:22,5: (scale 1:22.5) 

II - Regelspur 1435 mm - 64 mm Spurweite 
IIm - Schmalspur 1000 mm - 45 mm Spurweite 
IIe - Schmalspur 650-850 mm - 32 mm Spurweite 
IIf - Feld- und Industriebahn kleiner als 650 mm - 26,7 und 30 mm Spurweite 

English: 
II - Standard gauge 1435 mm - 64 mm gauge 
IIm - Narrow gauge 1000 mm - 45 mm gauge 
IIe - Narrow gauge 760-750 mm - 32 mm gauge 
IIf - Slim and Industrial gauge less then 750 mm - 30/26,7 mm gauge 

Oh Yeah, TT is dead. Only three million plus hits for "TT Spur" on Yahoo.de. 

"1 - 10 von 3.270.000 für TT spur" 

Jack


----------



## tacfoley (Jan 3, 2008)

Dear Mr Les - here in UK at least Gauge 2, or Number 2 Gauge, has only one follower, whose name escapes me right now. He does, however, exhibit a small layout of his models.

Number 2 Gauge runs on 2" gauge track and is about 1/28th scale. I have never heard of it anywhere else except here in UK. 

As for TT gauge/scale - it has an enormous following, especially in Germany, as a look at the internet would show you. The range and quality of the new models from the NSM this year would astound you. Sadly, it seems to have died here in UK with the rise of n.

tac
www.ovgrs.org


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

Jack 'n Tac:

Thank you both for the info. Last I heard, TT was dead in the US a long time ago, but surviving in Checkoslovakia. I'm wholly immersed in Fn3, and never thought of Googline for TT. That was my bust.

Les


----------



## thekollector (Jan 2, 2008)

Les, 

No big deal! Model railroading is such a wide field that standing in any one location will blind one to the diversity worldwide. It is absolutely amazing. 

Jack


----------



## Guest (May 2, 2009)

Any suggestions for a generic name for out conglomeration of scales?

well, if we have to cease "large-scale" to the elefant-scaled things out there, for me there is just one name left. 
and that would not be Gauge 1 scale. (because gauge 1 means 1:32 on 45mm tracks) 
*i would advocate 45-scale or 45mm-scale.* 
the 45mm tracks is, what we all got in common. (we all? - no, but most of us) 

korm


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

TT was a biggie in the Eastern Block. Not dead, but a regional thing, much like S, not much S modelling outside of the US. 

The other users of TT track (12mm gauge) are OOn3 (Irish and Manx modelling) and HOm (Swiss and German). 

http://www.chestermodelrailwayclub.com/stock.htm 

http://www.bemo-modellbahn.de/ 

The Bemo stuff is first class.


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

Korm,

Y'know, that suggestion has real merit.

Les


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Somewhere on a European forum I found the answwer:

"G, wir sind Gummi"


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

Jack, Tac & Garrett:

This hobby is remarkable, in my mind at least. (Many things are, but that's off the subject.) Where else do we see modellers of all walks of life, all over the world (so far as I know--not sure of Asia) pursuing the re-creation of a particular form of transportation, once thought to be obsolete? Not only the general form (rail roads) but specialization in certain eras, and of course in certain countries and areas within those countries.

The hobby as a whole (rail roading) subdivides down practically to a single individual--wait, the Ga 2 guy in England. It subdivides along gauge lines, narrow gauge, etc. Between steam, diesel, and steam/diesel as major categories.

There are other hobbies with larger followings, but when you factor in the scratchbuilders, the demanding (and ready to pay) RTR folk, the researchers, the experimenters and the just plain let's-have-a-good-time folks, is there a more diverse hobby with such a large following? I don't know. I've led a sheltered life. But it's curious when one thinks about it.

Oh, about my interest in TT: I was in late grade school when I first saw a TT layout. I had a Lionel 027--a pretty nice one--but that thing fascinated me. I had _no _idea that could be done. I still remember it.

Les


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

Garrett,

I'm ever so glad you shared that. What's it mean?









Les


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By kormsen on 05/02/2009 5:59 PM
Any suggestions for a generic name for out conglomeration of scales?

well, if we have to cease "large-scale" to the elefant-scaled things out there, for me there is just one name left. 
and that would not be Gauge 1 scale. (because gauge 1 means 1:32 on 45mm tracks) 
*i would advocate 45-scale or 45mm-scale.* 
the 45mm tracks is, what we all got in common. (we all? - no, but most of us) 

korm


"SCALE" is "scale" and "GAUGE" is "gauge" and we should just keep it that way.

"45mm-scale" sounds too much like it means 45mm = 1 foot scale... similar to "1.5 inch scale" (1.5-inches = 1 foot) and "1-inch scale" (1-inch = 1 foot).

If we would drop this assigning an arbitrary letter to the scale OR gauge, which is often claimed to be useful as a "short hand" of referring to it (supposedly so it doesn't take so much time or room to specify it) then we would not have this continuous discussion of what "G" means... 

We'll NEVER get everybody "on-board" to understand it for two reasons... 

1) it has too many definitions, and we cannot get agreement as to what it means in the first place...

and

2) there are always going to be new people that need it explained to them... over and over again.


Please, just specify the scale as a ratio of modeled dimension (inches, feet, meters, furlongs, etc.) per real world dimensions, such as "1:32" or "1:29", "1:22.5", etc. and specify the gauge in real world dimensions, "45-mm gauge", "32-mm gauge", etc. and everybody can immediately be "on-board" about what you mean.


----------



## Guest (May 2, 2009)

Les, 
Gummi is german for gum or rubber. 
he refers to some types in a german forum, who decided, that "G-scale" means "Rubber-scale". 

edit:
semper,
as this thread evolved about how to denominate ths forum, then, following your point of view, we might call it "multi-scale" forum...


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

Posted By Semper Vaporo on 05/02/2009 6:48 PM
Posted By kormsen on 05/02/2009 5:59 PM
Any suggestions for a generic name for out conglomeration of scales?

well, if we have to cease "large-scale" to the elefant-scaled things out there, for me there is just one name left. 
and that would not be Gauge 1 scale. (because gauge 1 means 1:32 on 45mm tracks) 
*i would advocate 45-scale or 45mm-scale.* 
the 45mm tracks is, what we all got in common. (we all? - no, but most of us) 

korm


"SCALE" is "scale" and "GAUGE" is "gauge" and we should just keep it that way.

"45mm-scale" sounds too much like it means 45mm = 1 foot scale... similar to "1.5 inch scale" (1.5-inches = 1 foot) and "1-inch scale" (1-inch = 1 foot).

If we would drop this assigning an arbitrary letter to the scale OR gauge, which is often claimed to be useful as a "short hand" of referring to it (supposedly so it doesn't take so much time or room to specify it) then we would not have this continuous discussion of what "G" means... 

We'll NEVER get everybody "on-board" to understand it for two reasons... 

1) it has too many definitions, and we cannot get agreement as to what it means in the first place...

and

2) there are always going to be new people that need it explained to them... over and over again.


Please, just specify the scale as a ratio of modeled dimension (inches, feet, meters, furlongs, etc.) per real world dimensions, such as "1:32" or "1:29", "1:22.5", etc. and specify the gauge in real world dimensions, "45-mm gauge", "32-mm gauge", etc. and everybody can immediately be "on-board" about what you mean.











Um, the way it is, I can specify Fn3. A few folks will know right off what I'm referring to. Even myself if I stop to think.

By your system, I would have to write 45mm/1:20.3. Or, 1:[email protected]

The biggest problem with your system is in its irreducible clarity.

Do we really want that?


----------



## Guest (May 2, 2009)

The biggest problem with your system is in its irreducible clarity. Do we really want that?

no, Les, "you" don't want that. (by "you" meanig the the north americans) 
you like measures like: "1.5 inch scale" (1.5-inches = 1 foot) and "1-inch scale" (1-inch = 1 foot). 
and you seem to dislike everything, that could be divided by ten. 
but for persons, who did not learn your measurments by heart, they are a real horror.


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By kormsen on 05/02/2009 7:11 PM
The biggest problem with your system is in its irreducible clarity. Do we really want that?

no, Les, "you" don't want that. (by "you" meanig the the north americans) 
you like measures like: "1.5 inch scale" (1.5-inches = 1 foot) and "1-inch scale" (1-inch = 1 foot). 
and you seem to dislike everything, that could be divided by ten. 
but for persons, who did not learn your measurments by heart, they are a real horror.


It is really easy, I just remember my rails are 0.008947745 rods apart.

I see no reason to convert it to chains myself.


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By kormsen on 05/02/2009 7:11 PM
The biggest problem with your system is in its irreducible clarity. Do we really want that?

no, Les, "you" don't want that. (by "you" meanig the the north americans) 
you like measures like: "1.5 inch scale" (1.5-inches = 1 foot) and "1-inch scale" (1-inch = 1 foot). 
and you seem to dislike everything, that could be divided by ten. 
but for persons, who did not learn your measurments by heart, they are a real horror.


I don't know which came first (chicken or egg syndrome) but back in the days of the mechanical draftsman he had a triangular stick ruler that had six "scales" on it. (I still have one on my drafting board (someplace!). To convert from 1:1 scale, you used one of the "sides"/"scales" on this ruler. One edge had marks every one and a half inches" another was marked at 1/2-in intervals, another at 3/16-inch intervals, etc. So if you were drawing in "1.5-inch scale" you just read the real size of an object (from some list) and drew the "scaled" object by using the 1.5-inch marked edge of the ruler. That is why many of the old hands still speak of their models in the incremental markings of this ruler. 

But, I don't know if the ruler was designed after someone decided to draw in those scales or if those named scales came into being because that ruler had those markings.

1:8 is the ratio for "1.5-inch scale", 1:12 is the ratio for "1-inch scale", 1:24 is he ratio for "1/2-inch scale" , 1:32 is the ratio for "3/16-inch scale", etc.

Personally, I like the ratio specification because those numbers do not specify the measurement size. 1:32 is 1-inch to 32-inches or 1-mm to 32-mm or 1-furlong to 32-furlongs... doesn't matter what the increment is, it is always the same ratio.


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Oh and by the way... 

"G" stands for "GOOFY".


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

Posted By kormsen on 05/02/2009 7:11 PM
The biggest problem with your system is in its irreducible clarity. Do we really want that?

no, Les, "you" don't want that. (by "you" meanig the the north americans) 
you like measures like: "1.5 inch scale" (1.5-inches = 1 foot) and "1-inch scale" (1-inch = 1 foot). 
and you seem to dislike everything, that could be divided by ten. 
but for persons, who did not learn your measurments by heart, they are a real horror.


I am _not _a North American. I am an Ozark hillbilly, a member of a small remnant of a once great nation.

I submit that 1.5 divided by 10 = .150. (Machinists always add the extraneous zero.) This is clear to me. That it relates to nothing in common drill bit sizes is irrelevant to the task at hand, which is to convince you that there is logic in the fact that 1 inch x12 = 1 foot, and 1 foot x 3 = 1 yard. 2000 yards are considered to = 1 nautical mile. Don't you at once grasp the connection between 12, 3, and 2,000?

Anyway, you ought to blame Garrett and the rest of the Englishmen. Who invented the train? Englishmen. What was the gauge they picked? 4' 8-1/4". Why the quarter inch? Look at the first thing they did: they invented narrow gauge for their collieries. (Coal mines, however ya spell it.)

And the French aren't blameless either: what gauge did they pick, after stealing the locomotive idea from the English: meter gauge. And what is a meter? An arbitrary length set by a bunch of leftist radicals based on their inaccurate measurement of the latitude of Paris and the assumption that the Earth is spherical. (It is flattened at the poles.) 1m =10dm =100cm =1,000mm. But there's another fatal flaw at the heart of the metric system: that meter is specified to be a 'meter length' only at a certain temperature! So, what if it gets hot? A bigger meter. What if it gets cold? A smaller meter. In our system an inch is an inch in ****, or on the darkside of Pluto. 1 inch always = 1 inch. The STP is never defined, because our math (which btw, _is _ base 10) the units are always the same length.

To persons who did not learn metric as children find it distractingly other-worldly.

And last, did I not agree, in a post up-string, that your suggestion has great merit? I think 45 scale is catchy, like Colt 45. Which is really 0.490" cal, if you mike a bullet. 

Les

(Humor, in case it doesn't come across)


----------



## thekollector (Jan 2, 2008)

"To persons who did not learn metric as children find it distractingly other-worldly." 

Probably because it's so simple ;-) 

Jack


----------



## Mik (Jan 2, 2008)

Back to the OQ, how about just calling it " *G*enerally overpriced shtuff that's big enough to SEE, but still small enough to carry"?


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By thekollector on 05/02/2009 8:32 PM
"To persons who did not learn metric as children find it distractingly other-worldly." 

Probably because it's so simple ;-) 

Jack


I have been told many times that it is so simple that any simple-minded person can understand it...

and if I try really hard I might be able to also!


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By thekollector on 05/02/2009 8:32 PM
"To persons who did not learn metric as children find it distractingly other-worldly." 

Probably because it's so simple ;-) 

Jack


Jack, I was of the generation of kids that got both in elementary school due to the switch coming. Never happened. 

So here in the SE, unless you are in Oak Ridge and parts of Alabama, you will not see a KPH sign (I think the Oak Ridge ones are gone now) due to the Auslander populations in both areas.

But thanks to us landing VW-AG, the Tennessee Legislature just added German to Japanese, Spanish and English for the driver's license test, so who knows what may happen. 

A whole slew of folks in Chattanooga may soon learn KPH and realize an Ausfarht is not something that occurs after eating cabbage soup with a tall glass of egg-nog.


----------



## vsmith (Jan 2, 2008)

G, wir sind Gummi = G is Gummi 

Namely that its like the taffy candy thats pulled mashed and warped to fit the need. 

My personal education over the last years is that G "scale" is specific, 1/22.5, any other scale is just that, another scale, and should be designated as such, like F: 1/20.3, A: 1/29 or H: 1/24 scales. Guage 1 is also specific, 1/32 scale. Its actually pretty easy to remember all the different scales that all share the same 45mm guage track, if you put your mind to it.


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By vsmith on 05/02/2009 11:12 PM
G, wir sind Gummi = G is Gummi 

Namely that its like the taffy candy thats pulled mashed and warped to fit the need. 

My personal education over the last years is that G "scale" is specific, 1/22.5, any other scale is just that, another scale, and should be designated as such, like F: 1/20.3, A: 1/29 or H: 1/24 scales. Guage 1 is also specific, 1/32 scale. Its actually pretty easy to remember all the different scales that all share the same 45mm guage track, if you put your mind to it. 



True, G was 1:22.5, but then a lot of other scales were lumped into it by the general public and non 1:22.5 mfgrs. It is the 'non large scalers' that have the biggest problems with this as vic points out, the rest of us know where we are.


----------



## John J (Dec 29, 2007)

When I started I was told it was G gauge. But to me Gauge has to do with the track. So when People asked me about my trains I said it was G scale. Then I found MLS. I then realized that G scale was a better name

I always thought G scale meant anything that ran in the garden. The actual size had to do with the manufacture. So anything that ran out doors was G scale. I didn't not know that only one brand was G scale.


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By kormsen  on 05/02/2009 5:59 PM
Any suggestions for a generic name for out conglomeration of scales?

well, if we have to cease "large-scale" to the elefant-scaled things out there, for me there is just one name left. 
and that would not be Gauge 1 scale. (because gauge 1 means 1:32 on 45mm tracks) 
*i would advocate 45-scale or 45mm-scale.* 
the 45mm tracks is, what we all got in common. (we all? - no, but most of us) 

korm

Korm
I would refer you to a long standing forum/organization (Gauge One 1947) that would dispute your denotation of gauge 1 means 1:32 on 45 mm:

As with many modelling sizes, Gauge One has variants to help those who like to model certain locomotives or different countries’ practice. 45mm gauge is also very appropriate for the modelling of narrow gauge prototypes of 3’ 6” or metre gauge (1:24 & 1:22.5 full size respectively) and the use of 1:20.3 scale is very popular in the USA for models of their 3’ gauge systems.

here is the website reference:

http://www.gaugeone.org/History & Facts.htm


----------



## Dwight Ennis (Jan 2, 2008)

and you seem to dislike everything, that could be divided by ten.

H0 scale trains first appeared in the United Kingdom in the 1930s, originally as an alternative to 00 gauge. 
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HO_scale
Note that HO = 3.5mm = 1'-0", that it was developed in Great Britain, not here, and that 3.5mm isn't divisible by 10 either.


----------



## thekollector (Jan 2, 2008)

3.5mm divided by 10 = .35mm. 

I won't comment on scale designations that mix measuring systems. 

Jack


----------



## thekollector (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By thekollector on 05/03/2009 8:11 AM
3.5mm divided by 10 = .35mm. It's the magic of the moving decimal.

I won't comment on scale designations that mix measuring systems. 

Jack


----------



## thekollector (Jan 2, 2008)

Well! The edit button can produce interesting results.


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By thekollector on 05/03/2009 8:15 AM
Well! The edit button can produce interesting results.
Jack

While you may believe that you clicked the "_Edit_" link, I believe it more likely that you in fact clicked the "_Quote_" link instead, thus the quote box. That is, unless of course you also manually typed in the requisite tags to create the quote, prior to submitting the edit for posting.


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Dwight Ennis on 05/03/2009 7:28 AM
and you seem to dislike everything, that could be divided by ten.

H0 scale trains first appeared in the United Kingdom in the 1930s, originally as an alternative to 00 gauge. 
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HO_scale
Note that HO = 3.5mm = 1'-0", that it was developed in Great Britain, not here, and that 3.5mm isn't divisible by 10 either. " src="http://www.mylargescale.com/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/wink.gif" align="absMiddle" border="0" />


Ah, but at H0's inception, wasn't the UK still using the standard (imperial?) system?

Anyone else remember 1/8" scale models being sold as HO? My father talks about this frequently from "back in the day".


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

You folk need to look in a dictionary for the definition of the word "Scale"... no where in any of my several dictionaries do any of them list anything about the distance between the rails. So "G-Scale" is NOT a definition of 45-mm between the rails. "SCALE" means the size relation ship between two objects of similar form... i.e.: real train in relation to a toy/model train. 

45-mm track CAN be a SCALE representation of an HO track... it is just an enlarged scale instead of a miniaturization. 

Our vocabulary is in such a decline that I think we must fight to keep word definitions or we will lose the ability to learn.... e.g.: due to people usurping the definition of "Gay" there is a big difference between the "Gay '90's" of the 1800's, vs the "Gay '90's" of the 1900's. Kids today think that the term "Gay '90's" refers to something entirely different than what society actually was like in the late 1800's!!! 

"Scale" means size relationship 

"Gauge" means the distance between two points. 

They are NOT interchangeable terms. 

The track in most of our gardens is 45-mm between the inside edges of the rails; that is the Gauge. 

The Scale of our trains varies from huge (such as, "1:13.5" or more) to tiny (such as, "1:32" or less). 

But they all fit on the same gauge track, even if they may look silly if the different scales are juxtaposed next to each other.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Well as I told my brother-in-law as he was letting the 4 grand kids try to derail my trains; "This is a rich man's hobby and a sacrifice for the rest of us!" 

I have trouble believing the claim that the resulting hodge-podge of scales is because track is so expensive to make? Really? Tie molds must be very simple pop out types, the Aristo profile shows this, so the expense is the rail and that could easily be affixed to any guage... 


Back to the topic; My nomination; G $cale 

John


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

First, some history...

In the earliest and chaotic days of model railways, many scales and gauges were tried. However, some order was established in the first decade of the last century when Gauges 1, 2, 3 & 4 were agreed upon. Gauge One was the smallest gauge commonly available and featured a track gauge (the distance between the inside surfaces of the running rails) of 1¾ inches.

Neither G gauge or G scale is recognized by organizations that have established hobby standards So, if we cannot agree to a standard language to our hobby then it will never to clear to those interested other than the term of "G". People like tradition and history therefore with that aspect along with standards put forth this "large scale" portion of the RR model hobby, we would get more respect with proper terminology. 


With the denotation used on our forums is 
http://www.nmra.org/standards/sandrp/S-1_2StandardScale.html 


F 15 mm .591"
(15.00 mm) 1:20.32 2.781"
(70.62 mm) (See Note 1) Fn3 15 mm .591"
(15.00 mm) 1:20.32 - (See Note 2) # I 3/8" .375"
(9.52 mm) 1:32 1.766"
(44.85 mm) #1n3 3/8" .375"
(9.52 mm) 1:32 1.125"
(28.6 mm)


----------



## KYYADA (Mar 24, 2008)

Maybe John J hit the answer as he said that is what they called it when he got started, the same for me as well. So just maybe he changed the name not to shoehorn the hobby but to get more hits on search engines. If you Google ( g + scale + online ) guess who is near the top of the list? So if he gets more hits and more people join the forum then they will have a good place to eventually know the difference. 

Johnny


----------



## ThinkerT (Jan 2, 2008)

I would note that while the locomotives and rolling stock maybe 1/20 or 1/22 or 1/29 or 1/32, most of the commercially available buildings (and figures) are actually 1/24. Only rarely do I see a building specifically listed as something other than 1/24...though there is a wider variation in the sizes of the figures.


----------



## Guest (May 4, 2009)

well, it seems that we got a little definition problem at hand. 
going back to the original theme of the thread: 
since we agree, that there is more than one scale, possibly it might be better to use G-scales and My Large Scales ?


----------



## Mik (Jan 2, 2008)

Ain't nuthin wrong wid *G*eneric scale. To me it's sort of like any photocopy is a xerox, a colored wax stick wrapped in paper is a crayon, and whatever soft paper thingy that you blow your snozz on is a kleenex. Oh, sure, the word (or scale) police will continue to have a snit. -- As will the trademark lawyers.... but people, all those great unwashed masses of us, will know what ya mean.


----------



## stevedenver (Jan 6, 2008)

while like all things-things change-large scale isnt the same as when introduced to the masses in 1967.... 

this issue/topic reminds me of the use by so many of kleenex to describe any facial tissue 
or coke to describe any cola 

i think since LGB started the mass market acceptance and familiarity with large scale-which they deemed as G scale-garten or garden or gross, or whatever...... it is used in common parlance-to convey BIG TRAINS THAT RAN ON 45 mm track 

now things have changed a bit and there are many more makers 

to those with more sophisticated understanding of the hobby-g scale may not be precise enough 

somehow -having done this large scale hobby since 1986-when i hear 'g scale' - i kinda know what someones taking about-even if its 1:20, 1:29. 1:22.5, 1:16 etc ad nauseum- 

so how accurate do we need to be in general discussions-or is it important to have more precise jargon that only large scale guys feel comfortable with?? 

or is this about establishing f scale (or whatever) or dis-establishing the LGB designation ? is there some other agenda ? 


BUT it did not escape me, as it appears to have did large scale marketing types, that the red 45mm in a circle began to be used to denote-at least-the track width-in order to minimize the focus on descrepanices of scale-or to more simply to identify simply, to a wide consumer market-that if you see the 45mm logo-all these trains will run on a single size of track


----------



## coyote97 (Apr 5, 2009)

Hi Les,


 
Gummi means rubber. Perhaps its meant to say that G-scale is a wide notion.


And thats what i wanted to say. And what i am convinced of. 
And it seems that u think the same.




Dear Tac, 


im sorry that i have forgotten the uk-gauge. perhaps it happened because that 16mm gauge for outdoor-use is in middle europe as well known as gauge 2 is in the uk.
All i wanted to say is that G-scale names a lot of gauges and scales in qolloquial language.


I do not know what brings me your angre, and i promise to have a better research the next time. I dont want to run another time in an open knife, just because i didnt know that britains invented the modelrailroad just before the real ones.


I also excuse for knot beeing able to find the right words as well as others, because untill now, not the whole world speaks english perfectly.


The only thing that i can take out positively is to see, that even those who think to know everything may fail at the collective wisdom of a whole forum.


:-D


regards


"Mr." Frank 


P.S.:
one thing i forgot:
dont ever forget to see that our hobby shall bring fun. we should better be polite and take a smile than breaking sticks over others.


----------



## Torby (Jan 2, 2008)

A guy from NMRA approached me at the Botanic last summer. "Why don't you Garden railroaders used the suggested notation?" 

For want of a better idea, I shrugged and said, "Hard headed, I guess."


----------



## Allan W. Miller (Jan 2, 2008)

As has been pointed out numerous times: 

GAUGE, as applied in railroading and model railroading, refers ONLY to the distance as measured between the top inside edges of the railheads. That's it! 

SCALE refers to the proportional relationship of a model--any model--to its "real world" prototype. It has nothing to do with the measured distance between the rails. 

"Large Scale" is a nice nad entirely appropriate umbrella description for describing trains of any scale that operate on 45mm track. I like it a whole lot better than "G", "F", or the various other incarnations that have been created over the years.


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

Posted By coyote97 on 05/04/2009 11:03 AM
Hi Les,



Gummi means rubber. Perhaps its meant to say that G-scale is a wide notion.


///Thank you, Coyote. I'm an old guy, so I elected to quote as opposed to 'reply', which means you can keep your comments in view while I add mine. Which are denoted by /// marks. 'Slashes', I call them. A convientway to break into a thought or paragraph.


And thats what i wanted to say. And what i am convinced of. 
And it seems that u think the same.

/// Yes, I do. You should understand that I am old. When I was learning to talk, WWII was in full swing. My grandmother was German. She was a nice, lovely old lady who was a true Grandma (Grandmother--I don't know how familiar you are with English) to me. She was also listed as an Enemy Alien, under the laws, then. This is funny to me because all she ever cared about was 'kids, home, church'. I think I remember, "Kinder, Hausen, "Kirken". So, when I began to speak, guess what, it was German. Oh, my! My mother had to quit work and stay home to teach me to speak English.

My grandmother (grossenmutter?) came to the US in 1904. I hear German spoken as one who has hearing problems: I _almost _understand. But yet, not.

I have tried, on the Web, several times to find a German who can speak Low German. We are not 'high class' folk, which might not interpret well, because in America (of old, not now) all it mattered was, "Can you do the job?" Yes, there were segregations, because people do that, until the segregated ones prove themselves worthy. The Germans had no problem doing this. I am half German. The other half goes all the way back to when New York was called New Amsterdam. (ca 1550).

Enough history. I want to calm you towards Tac's comments, because I fear you are being offended when no offense was meant.




Dear Tac, 


im sorry that i have forgotten the uk-gauge. perhaps it happened because that 16mm gauge for outdoor-use is in middle europe as well known as gauge 2 is in the uk.
All i wanted to say is that G-scale names a lot of gauges and scales in qolloquial language.


I do not know what brings me your angre, and i promise to have a better research the next time. I dont want to run another time in an open knife, just because i didnt know that britains invented the modelrailroad just before the real ones.

/// Coyote: I do not think Tac meant to upbraid. I think he meant to inform, which helped me, anyway.


I also excuse for knot beeing able to find the right words as well as others, because untill now, not the whole world speaks english perfectly.

/// I hope I never see the day when a non-English speaker has to apologize for his syntax or lack of grasp of the vernacular. I want this to be a friendly, open board where anyone may ask any question. I ask very stupid ones, sometimes.


The only thing that i can take out positively is to see, that even those who think to know everything may fail at the collective wisdom of a whole forum.

/// This last makes me think you are young. I am not. Therefore, I am not easily offended. Please be patient with those who seem to disagree. I happened to find his input informative. 


:-D


regards


"Mr." Frank 


P.S.:
one thing i forgot:
dont ever forget to see that our hobby shall bring fun. we should better be polite and take a smile than breaking sticks over others. 

/// This sentiment is ever so true, and I hope you will relax and enjoy our board.

Les


----------



## blackburn49 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Allan W. Miller on 05/04/2009 2:09 PM
As has been pointed out numerous times: 

GAUGE, as applied in railroading and model railroading, refers ONLY to the distance as measured between the top inside edges of the railheads. That's it! 

SCALE refers to the proportional relationship of a model--any model--to its "real world" prototype. It has nothing to do with the measured distance between the rails. 

"Large Scale" is a nice nad entirely appropriate umbrella description for describing trains of any scale that operate on 45mm track. I like it a whole lot better than "G", "F", or the various other incarnations that have been created over the years.

I like to use the term "Large Scale," too. Unfortunately, that does not work with people unfamiliar with our hobby. My visitors (mostly tourists) here at the Copper Rail Depot often ask "what scale OR what gauge is that train?" Either way the only answer that seems to satisfy is my use of the "G" designation. Anything else is simply too confusing. So I tell them to think of garden-scale or "G"-scale. That answer is the one that satisfies them--every time. Anything else is simply too confusing. WE in the hobby understand the fine distinctions and can discuss them all day long. THEY outside of it do not and would have no interest in any of that.


----------



## coyote97 (Apr 5, 2009)

This is off-topic, but "in-thread".


Hi Les,


 
thank you for your words. And if i got Tacs comments wrong, i will excuse for my comments.  
Forums are sometimes a bit of a problem for me.
Even though im working hard to keep my ego calm, there is a kind of style in written language that hits me.
And whenever this style mirrors a kind of wiseacre, im getting aggressive, posting poissonous comments in forums.
Its a button that -i think- nearly everyone has.


So, this forum is not the first one i find me upset just after a few weeks.


I know that clearly spoken im not able to take part in forum.  


Though i have no problems to take part in a critical or discordant discussion. But i learned that there are terms which can be easily misunderstood. And www-forums are predestinated plattforms for terms to be misunderstood!


So i must confess that i really have a problem with articles that involve "you have totally overseen that...." or "you are completely wrong about...". 
Why?--we may imply that the writers really know what they are talking about. But my experience from forums is, that in most cases the people using this axiomatic terms have either no clue or they need to act like the queen bee.


So i have to split my reactions in forums in two parts: the facts written in articles and the "stomach-feeling" i have while reading them.
And even seeing the fact that i might be a bit sensible about that, i more and more learn not only to hear the "facts" voice. In most cases offending articles and terms are meant like that.


That are my feelings about..i cannot deny! And maybe theres the language-problem, too, but beginning an article-reply with "dear Mr. Frank" is offending. I do not know about using the forename with "Mr." in the english language, and here in Germany its a very offensive term, meaning clearly that the other one looks at you as a "clever-dick".


So see---that is my forums problem!


And sadly this is no question of age, its a question of wisdom. So....i have half a year to become wise, because  people say that swabians do so at the age of 40. So that is relatively old and relatively young. Too old not to see how stupid i can be and too young to change something out of that.


Maybe this article makes a smile on many faces, either approvingly or compassionate. Other faces will be angry about it.
But i hope  to find some acceptance and maybe the one or other guy finds himself in my words --as a victim or committer. 
And perhaps we will be able to change our habits reflecting about those things:


The ones not to take every single word  as aggressive,
the others to think about a less aggressive language.




So, Tac,


i´d really like to offer a handshake for i myself now offended you. My knowledge about model-history is not world-spanning, and i didnt meant it to be taken as. And i really didnt know that 16mm gauge is meant to be a g-scale issue.
But theres no use going into detail, so i just want to say that i hope for your reply was not meant as poissonous as my re-reply was.
And i apologize for. So lets hold peace.


One really important thing im able to take out of this case: i should stay quiet when there is not really a "hardware" thing to talk about. Philosophics, meanings and personal views are no area for me to move in. 




Regards


Frank


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Frank
Please do continue in the discussion...having a "worldly" point of view is important to MLS.

Another "fact" in this hobby language development was the effort of the manufacturers to establish a baseline of common ground: World's Greatest Hobby PR campaign.
In that campaign the term "large scale" is used. An interesting mistake in the general overview in which this "knowledgeable" group of hobby powers made a mistake indicating that large scale basically started in 1970 (relating it to LGB and G). Large scale start long before 1970.


----------



## Torby (Jan 2, 2008)

I answer "G gauge, 1:29."


----------



## tacfoley (Jan 3, 2008)

Frank - no offence was taken, and certainly none was intended, I assure you with all my heart. I lived almost eight years in Germany, our children were born there, and one of them is buried there, too, so I'm well-accustomed to the alleged cultural nuances that are said to make Swabians slow to learn! 

My two God-sons have recently retired from the Luftwaffe, and now that I have more time to see them, I'll be pursuading THEM to get into large-scale trains, since both have suitable families Their father, my life-long buddy Horst, is a full-time target shooter, and like many Citizens of Berlin, lives in a small apartment, so n scale would be HIDS preferred scale.

But the one thing that joins us all up together is trains - big or small, electric or steam, or even, as with my grand-daughter, pushalong.

...and as for 16mm and 'G Scale', well we all just call it 16mm..............

Best wishes

tac
www.ovgrs.org


----------



## tacfoley (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By Charles on 05/05/2009 5:34 AM
Frank
Please do continue in the discussion...having a "worldly" point of view is important to MLS.

Another "fact" in this hobby language development was the effort of the manufacturers to establish a baseline of common ground: World's Greatest Hobby PR campaign.
In that campaign the term "large scale" is used. An interesting mistake in the general overview in which this "knowledgeable" group of hobby powers made a mistake indicating that large scale basically started in 1970 (relating it to LGB and G). Large scale start long before 1970.



Charles, in fact, what we now call 'large-scale' began when the British and the German toy manufacturers, headed up by Henry Greenley from England and Gebrueder Maerklin and fellow-companies Bing and Carette of Nuremburg agreeing to the 'number/scale' nomenclature/dimensions in 1898. 

Sadly, like the so-called 'World Series', the well-intentioned 'World's Greatest Hobby' campaign never left the borders of the US of A.....so we poor Europeans carried on in our ignorance - never knowing that we had been ignored in your version of modle railroad history. [sigh emoticon]

Best

tac
www.ovgrs.org


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Tac
Here lies the problem "worldwide web" of which MLS has many from outside the borders of the USA as members. Thus the reference points of history, Gauge One, Large scale, etc. Yet the plot thickness when one looks at the Roundhouse site (UK for those unfamiliar) with frequent utilization of the "G" word in their information versus Aster (Japan) with 1:32 (gauge one), or Accucraft (China/US) with Fn3, Gauge 1 and 1:29 along with the majority of electric USA G scale 1:29, Aristocraft 1:29/G45mm then the minority 1:32 MTH(Gauge one)- please no offense to any manufacturer I did not recall, add if you wish.

Therefore, I posed this discussion point given the world wide appeal and membership of MLS to examine the "G scale" label as one that is a correct term for the purpose and represents the global community of hobby.

General members of MLS-
Seems as if the best most of the others who enjoy MLS and large scale model trains have as an explanation would be "G" scale (LGB's 1:22 usage). even the G Scale UK explains it in a limited fashion:









Started by the German firm of Lehmann in the 1960s, with a trade name of LGB (which translated means Lehmann Big Railway), G scale is essentially the modelling of narrow gauge railway on track 45mm wide (the same as gauge 1, but to a heavier profile). 
Then there is:
*G*-Scale[/b] at the National Toy Train Museum- 
The Museum has one of the finest collections of toy trains on display along with operating layouts in Standard, “O", "G", "S" and HO gauge



Just curious what does one say when asked to explain "G scale?" (garden, giant, general...1:29, 1:24, 1:20, 1:22, it cannot be 45 mm which is gauge). 


I am going back to my Gauge One (1:32) equipment that is the correct scale for standard gauge and enjoy running trains. Gauge one (45mm) recognizes the correct application of other large scales on the rails .


----------



## coyote97 (Apr 5, 2009)

.....perhaps "G" stands for "Gauge".
So G-scale is every scale undergoing a wide-formed discussion about what gauge it is...or what scale the Gauge has ..mean..one gauge has...the one which scale is for gauges that are nearly the same scale..but also the same gauge. Or for Gauges that are nearly the same but having the same scale..or some other, different scale.


I think, thats it!
Copy and paste it to wikipedia as "the only clear description about Largescale"




Dear Tac,


thank you for your forbearing words. We all know about the difficulties in communication on the www missing the face  and the tone of the spokesman. But typing and sending is fast, so this sort of communication can be very imprudent.
So got mine, i fear, and in those cases its good not to have a "hot head" on each side of the line.


....*grin...and we are NOT slow in learning.....


only a bit....well-considered.
Even though not all cases of consideration are leading to fine effects....mhmm.




So thank u oncemore for your words, leaving behind a very eased mind for avoiding a useless and dump web-war.
And i want to say one more time  "excuse me" for nearly initialized it.




regards


Frank


----------



## Bucksco (Jan 4, 2008)

I don't think the arguement over - What scale is "G" - will ever go away on forums such as this one. The letter "G" is used by manufacturers to aid retailers in showing people what trains will run on 45mm track. It is far too complicated for a retailer to explain the many different "scales" that exist in Large scale model railroading without discouraging a potential large scale model railroader from getting involved. The reason so many different scales exist is because most large scale manufacturers have made their models to run on what was the most available commercial track system- LGB. 

The scale purists out there will argue that everything should be made to one particular "scale". That's fine but you will need to have multiple track systems to accomodate narrow gauge, standard gauge, etc....
As long as there is only one track "gauge'" you will always end up with different "scale" trains. 

Believe it or not there was a reason that LGB selectively compressed and expanded dimensions on thier trains. It was so you could combine different types of narrow gauge and standard gauge trains and have them all look good running together. They weren't really concerned with combining LGB with other manufacturers products.


----------



## blackburn49 (Jan 2, 2008)

Besides, calling the various trains used in large-scale "G-scale" is so much easier to explain to people who otherwise have nothing to do with this scale in particular or model trains in general. It is so much easier to say "G-scale: THINK 'garden railroad.' "


----------



## coyote97 (Apr 5, 2009)

So....what is Large-Scale?
Its big enough to be used in the garden
tough enough to stand dirt, rain and childrens hands
hot enough to be used in heavy snow
cool enough to be run in the desert sun.


It attracts people from youngest children to oldest men to be played with, and even the grandmas are standing amazed.


Large..for that reason seems to be everything that is large enough to be noticed running trough the grass. 
Regarding the upper meanings, it should perhaps be regardless, if we are talking about G, F, n, m, 1,2,...whatever.


So let me submit this proposal:


Largescale is all from slightly bigger than H0 till you can sit on it. (gnagna...i KNOW you can sit on a z-scale train, too......)


G-Scale is therein a common term of telling about a common gauge: 45 mm. That is -perhaps- not correct in detail, but a term to be understood by nearly everyone who has a clue about gardentrains.




regards


Frank


----------



## thekollector (Jan 2, 2008)

Just a small note. It is "gauge one" when spoken in English. The written notation is with a Roman numeral "Gauge I". 

In German it is written "Spur I" and spoken as "Spur Ein" 

Jack


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

To further the discussion as it seems to be developing towards a particular section of our hobby: garden railways. " I referenced a well known publication, Garden Railways, with a very knowledgeable editor. In Garden Railways advertisement for products items are indicated as *"large scale*. The Garden Railways Magazine has a section for the beginner about the basics of the hobby and the history. Here is the description which is relevant to this post:
"There are many, many possibilities. LGB is 1:22.5 scale -- also called G scale -- and it runs on No 1 gauge track (45mm between the rails). This gauge is sometimes called "G gauge," but this is a misnomer that adds to the confusion. *No 1 gauge* goes back to the late 1880s, and there is no reason to rename it today."

Then to further educate the beginner is offered a chart of scale and gauge:
http://www.trains.com/grw/objects/pdf/scale.pdf 

Based on the common knowledge and facts about the hobby, MLS wishes to make it known that all its sections are G scale relative to 1:22.5? (great promotion for LGB...maybe a come back)


----------



## spodwo (Jan 2, 2008)

I always refer to it as LargeScale or LS for short. If you look for some consistency in the world - then you could take a clue from the 2nd most popular train size in the US - O GAUGE....so I would contend that G Gauge would be more appropriate if using the whole "G" thing. 

But even O [oh] Gauge is a misnomer...technically - it should be 0 Gauge [Zero/Zed] Gauge.

Can't win for losing...

This discussion is like an old friend. It has been awhile since this has come up. Ah - the good ole days...


----------



## Guest (May 6, 2009)

one problem about G-scale is the language barrier. 
there was (in germany at least) the known denomination of the gauges. 
bigger than O there was for nearly a century the "Spur eins"/Spur I and Spur II (zwei/two). the former at 1:32 scale, the latter at 1:22.5 
the "spur" denominations are exact. they name the gauge of a standard track in any given scale. no room for doubts. 
but both scales/gauges were used by few modellers. when Lehmann brought out their new toys, they wanted them big, but not too big. the new trains were meant to fit in small apartments and in (generally not very large) gardens. 
their new trains were in gauge 2m - following the german(?) naming - gauge two-m = Spur IIm (like there is H0m and others) 
apart from their logo (LGB) they stressed the now infamous "G". 
i remember well the advertising for LGB in the late sixties/early seventies. 
it evolved around two words starting with "G". 
one was Garten - garden. 
the other was "gross" or "groß"(using the german sharp "s") gross could be translated as big or large. 

"*G* steht fuer gross!" - (G stands for big!) - was one of their slogans. 
"Gartenbahn" (gardentrain) was another of the stressed words. 

the other (smaller) producers stayed with "Spur IIm" and with the "G" for advertising. 

so far everything went well. 

the problems arose, when producers like Bachmann wanted to "jump the train". 
they used the "G", but they toyed around with scales. 
(i got a Bachmann starterpack with a 4-6-0, that is nearer 1:20 than 1:22.5, a caboose of about 1:24 and a boxcar, that is near to 1:29) 
but all those firms, who changed the "scale" did not change gauge. 

so we are stuck not with "large scale". but with *"large scales" * 
or with the well known expression "G-scale". 

and, at rereading my post, i think, that we all got some loose screws, that we are all nuts. 
here we debate earnestly some minor detail about playing with toy trains, instead of having fun by running them - regardless of name. 

korm


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Korm
Well, said....thanks for the reality check
"and, at rereading my post, i think, that we all got some loose screws, that we are all nuts. 
here we debate earnestly some minor detail about playing with toy trains, instead of having fun by running them - regardless of name."


----------



## coyote97 (Apr 5, 2009)

LOL!!


now doubt!--you must have some loose screws to spend thousands of dollars or euros for a toytrain in the garden.
So im with you: we MUST have some loose screws.




LOL




But discussions like this are not only for "nothing"....the exchange of opinions often leads to something i call "the golden midway"
They might lead to a changed awareness both for the people near the middle way as for those on the extreme borders. And even for the ones already in the midddle.


When the ones who think: "never mind!" may take it a bit more serious, and the others who see the world exploding because the number of pins on a tender is wrong may learn to take it less serious, i think its a chance to get more average quality in our hobby.  


G-scaling has a lot to do with visions and how a thing looks and how it comes out to the beholder.
So ..."Wild creatures" as LCEs should be allowed to push a bit in the toytrain-sections, while fine worked out layouts or models should be looked at as more valuable model works.
But such as the "toytrainer" should be amazed about the craftmanship of a "modeller" , the modeller should always be able to take a smile when a LCE or an Eggliner runs its rounds.


Such is the scale-gauge-discussion.


lets take out the information that for detail, we should clearly talk about  measurement scales, while a gauge is a dimension.


And for some models, there is a notation in which a letter and/or number gives both  scale and gauge.


So i have no problem to  say "i have a g-scale train", and giving more information when the listener wants to have more. THEN i can tell that its Fxyz2m or whatever.


Discussions like this MIGHT lead to the ones not to say: "Scale?--what scale---no clue--something big...." and the others not to be sure that theres a difference between 1:20,3 and 1:20,32.


That i mean might bring up more quality.  




regards


Frank


----------



## Paradise (Jan 9, 2008)

All this time I thought 'G' stood for Goofy. 

Ah hugh ! 

Andrew


----------



## Fritz (Jan 11, 2008)

Here in Germany, we say "G", and anyone nearly knows whats meant 


I live and work in Germany. If somebody comes up to me and says "G" , I definitely do not kinow what he or she is talking about. 
At least in my surrounding, people playing with trains quote a scale, sometimes, if they don´t mean standard gauge, a combination of scale and gauge. 
Even expressions like IIm, 16mm-Scale, Gn15 , F-Scale, 0e, HOm or 0n30 are understood by many people in this country. 

"G " ? - Must be some outlandish rubbish. What is it supposed to be? 

Have Fun 

Fritz / Juergen


----------



## Bucksco (Jan 4, 2008)

Here's what I see happening- 
Joe Average goes into the train store and asks the guy behind the counter to show him some Large Scale trains. 
Guy behind the counter asks him what scale do you want to see- IIm, 16mm-Scale, Gn15 , F-Scale, 0e, HOm or 0n30 ? 
Joe Average leaves (totally confused) without buying anything and probably decides to take up a different hobby.


----------



## coyote97 (Apr 5, 2009)

is it possible that fritz-jürgens position is a bit provocant...


...and a bit "narrow-gauged"?




"outlandish rubbish"----what shall i say about? that LGB in one way failed because its inlandish rubbish?
Oh man, just can get a red face and be ashamed of beeing a fellow countryman......**blush


regards


Frank


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

If Joe Average can navigate the N, HO, S, and O waters without difficulty, then he should be able to navigate the 1:32, 1:29, etc. waters with equal aplomb. The myriad scales under the "large scale" umbrella are no different than the myriad scales under the "small scales" umbrella. 

An example: There's this scale called "Q-scale". The track is all the same gauge. Some trains are 1:87, some 1:64, some 1:48. They're all interspersed on the same aisle with little indication as to what scale each product might actually be. All the steam locos are grouped together, all the cabooses, etc., and so forth. They all run on the same track, so clearly they all must be interchangeable, right? Sounds familiar. The problem is, if we walked into a hobby shop and saw HO, Sn42, and On30 trains all being sold as completely interchangeable, we'd laugh hysterically and wonder if the clerk had an ounce of brains in his head. 

Why does there exist in large/G scale this inane insistence that everything be sold to the public as being completely compatible? Yes, it is the premise by which the seed took root, but that tiny seed has now grown into quite the mature tree, with lots of branches. Let's not be afraid to clearly identify each scale under the "large scale" umbrella in the same way that the small scales do. Doing so will in no way hinder those who want to run whatever they'd like (as many do now), but it would make it infinitely easier for Joe Average to walk into the store and leave with his new streamline passenger set, secure in the knowledge that his observation car isn't going to dwarf the diner. 

Later, 

K


----------



## coyote97 (Apr 5, 2009)

Hi ETB,


the comment about the "G-Scale-compatibilism" is a really serious one! 
Its something that grew also into the e-bay-auctions, that the most cheap dickie-rubbish is sold as "rare high-performance"-model!


My mind is splitted between the wish of an exact denotation and the knowledge about people cannot work with that all! 
most people wanting to buy a garden railroad do know NOTHING. And because of this, they often bought the LGB--stuff.
Why?
because its common G-scale. "What scale?" "never mind - as long as it runs arround"


I think we  have to divide the chossen language in two or more parts of using it depending on what people we are talking to.


I often experienced that "not-insiders-but-interested" have NO clue about when i tell that i once had a z-scale layout:
"what?"  
"Z"
"whats that?"
"Scale 1:220"
"and whats that?"
"very small"
"ah! ok!"


So please explain one who does not know about "Z" what "Zm" will be!


Like this everyone can understand when i say *"Gartenbahn---Gardenrailway, a big modelrailway for outdoor use"*


We really have to adjust our technical language to the level the listener can understand. And therfore its a really big difference to talk to speciallists or to just very amazed and interested people.


AND: most visitors on my gardenrail are not insiders. Or for more: i didnt had a real insider as vistitor at all.
Children standing aside and looking did -at NO time- say: "oh, THAT car has a wrong scale!!!"
They are not able to see the difference between a playmobile car and a high-perfomance AMS-coach. 
WHAT they see is like: "in this loco there is no human at all?!?!"


So it oncemore becomes a question of awareness:
what is more failure in modeling: using a 1: 22,5 car on a 1:20,3 RR or driving a loco without engineer?


The question we are talking about is  NOT to be answered.




We have to accept thats its a issue of the KNOWING ones to adjust to the level of the LESSKNOWING ones.


I am always grateful when i got understnadable answers in things i dont know.




So IIe, H0m, S, F....this are all things MORE for the speciallist.
And for them (for US), i think there should be an exact system, used on *every* car or loco that is sold.


But i find nothing wrong to use a term like "G-scale" for other customers, meaning nearly all things that can get to run on a 45mm-rail.




regards


Frank


----------



## Fritz (Jan 11, 2008)

Hi, 

In Germany Joe Average in most cases will have to travel many miles, to find a train store. Even if the servant in the shop will understand what the customer wants, he will not be able to serve him most of the time. 

I have never seen a 16mm scale model in a German shop. OK, a lot of the LGB stuff was in 1 : 19, which is close. Even something in 1 : 22,5 on 45mm rail is rare. LGB made some models in this scale / gauge combination. , but most of their products had at least 5 different scales combined in a single model. I yet have to find a shop which carries Gn15 or 7/ 8th models. 0e or 0-16,5 will be dificult to find not to mention 00 or 009. 

So the next shop will be as far away as my keybord or my telephone. There are actuallly mailorder firms which offer G-Scale trains. Even G-Scale cables and G-Scale decoders or G-Scale transformers. Even G-Gauge figures (?) They probably think, their customers are a bunch of complete idiots. Hope they accept my G-scale money. 

So I have to go back in my sandbox and play with some of my larger trains: 










No G-Scale, but all more or less in 1 : 22,5. The one on the left runs on 32mm track, the one in the background on 45m and the unpainted one on 16,5 mm rails. 

Have Fun 

Fritz / Juergen


----------



## vsmith (Jan 2, 2008)

"the comment about the "G-Scale-compatibilism" is a really serious one!"


Reading thru all this maybe the topic should be "G-scale COMBAT-iblism"








But Kevin is essentially right, it has more to due with self-education and knowing what you like and what to model and who makes it, and as such is no different than in any of the smaller scales. Coming from HOn30, or HO scale on Nscale track (but also called HOe), the transition to large scale confusication was easier for me, Its not rocket science to figure out the scale/gauge issues.
I think alot of the problem is that the average consumer just doesnt want to be bothered with the self-education necessary to navigate thru the various different scales avalaible as to who makes what, and the manufacturers know this so they just stooped to the bottom most common denominator label "G scale".


----------



## Fritz (Jan 11, 2008)

Hi, 

The average consumer, willing to spend some hundred or thousands of Dollars / Euro does not want to get fooled or ripped off. 
Some companies tried and failed in the long run. Qualiity and honest advertising will survive. The "G-Scale-frauds" will not. 

Have Fun 

Fritz / Juergen


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

Posted By kormsen on 05/06/2009 4:47 AM
one problem about G-scale is the language barrier. 


and, at rereading my post, i think, that we all got some loose screws, that we are all nuts. 
here we debate earnestly some minor detail about playing with toy trains, instead of having fun by running them - regardless of name. 

korm








Korm,

I'd put a kinder emphasis on your thought and say that, "Yes, I do think these discussion have value, but it's not exactly obvious: A lot of technical terms are exchanged. Some few get accepted, others don't and still others sort of 'morph' into a far more widely-recognized term. And histories are repeated or expounded for the first time, perhaps.

I don't 'have a dog in this race' because I don't care what finally settles out, so long as it's understood by most concerned. I find that in public, I hold my hands about a foot apart (.3m) and say, "I model the big garden trains, like about this big...." and most who know anything about model RRing say, "Oh, okay." Scale never rears its ugly head. The ones who don't just give me blank looks.

Les


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

Fritz,

In reference to the three 'more or less' 1:22 scale' engines you've shown:

You are saying that the figure would work equally well in _any_ of the locos? And still be reasonably correct?

You have confused me. I still don't have a very solid grasp on this scale/gauge ratios thing.

Les


----------



## Fritz (Jan 11, 2008)

Hi,

Of course, a figure in a given scale suits every model in the same scale. Locos or wagons on 15 inch rail can´t be too large. They say, 3 - 4 times the witdth of the track gauge. Have a look here: http://www.perrygrove.co.uk/heywood-collection.html

Or on the other hand, try to squeeze a 1 : 20,3 scale figure (F-Scale) into the cab of a 1 : 29 loco. It will not fit. No matter on which track it runs. 

Have Fun

Fritz / Juergen


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

Fritz,

Thank you. This stuff sort of gets confusing sometimes. And the link you sent, that is one of the sites I keep in my file to reference to when I begin to build. My layout will have, in addition to 45mm an 0 ga. (32mm?) an tramway of S ga (0.808"). All in F scale.

Thanks for the kind reply and link.

Les


----------



## work4fil (Jan 4, 2008)

I too fell for the "G Scale Dentonation." Then as I read the thread, I relived my dilemma. My first impression of "G Scale" was it was all the same. I panicked when I bought my Connie because the ad said narrow guage. I did not know what I was getting into (nor do I do now, but my wife says that is expected of me). I tend to stay down around the low end of "G Scale" in the low 20's, but the 29-32 end does attract me. All I have to do is watch some video from Raymond's site, or read some of the posts and I am green with envy. 

The more time I spend here, the more comfortable I am with feeling an attraction all the way through G Scale. You can have it all if it makes you happy. If you want to stick in the high end, more power to you. My probelm is I like trains. I always have and always will, so I will spend myself into insolvency accruing equipment in all the large ratios. I will try not to run all of them together at the same time, but I won't make any promises. I just need to have my decoder ring handy to translate a lot of what is said here. 

Now where were we on discussing scale weight?


----------



## coyote97 (Apr 5, 2009)

Yeah!
Scale weight!


Perhaps an issue for a separate thread, but one to get very interesting.
For some weeks, long time ago, i helped out in a shop mounting decoders to HO-locos.


One day a customer came in and told me that he found out about the bad tractive effort of his märklin-diesel-loco.


i wondered, because the loco was an old-style, full-metal-modell (V200) that was never known to have a bad performance.


"it is too light-weighted", he said. "with about 80 tons in real the model in 1: 87 should weigh "a bit more" than 900kg"


***sigh***




regards


Frank


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Weight is volumetric. Take a 5 pound sack of sugar. If you were to have a sack of sugar 5 times larger than that, it'd be 5 times taller, wider, and thicker, so 5 x 5 x 5, which gives you a 125 pound sack of sugar. An HO scale model of an 80-ton locomotive would not weigh 1/87th of that weight, but 1/658,000 of that weight. (87 cubed), or about 4 ounces. 

Later, 

K


----------

