# Rolling stock width/height



## Brandon (Jul 6, 2011)

For specifically 1:29 scale locomotives and rolling stock, what are the tallest, widest, and longest cars that are in production or have been in production in about the last 10 years? I know there has been a fair bit of talk about accounting for the largest items that may run on a layout but those have always included 1:24 and other larger scale items (k-27's for instance that are 6.5" wide and 9" tall) but for those of us limited to tighter (8'-10' radius) should actually be considering for dimensions for over/under, parallel tracks straight and parallel curved tracks.


PS. I believe the tallest are the USA double stacks at 9.25" but how about besides that, is there anything else that's over 6"-7"?


----------



## bnsfconductor (Jan 3, 2008)

The new USA autoracks might be slightly taller and wider then the double stacks. I do not own either so I can not give you a real measurement. Double stacks and autoracks are generally plate H which means that they are wider, and taller then plate C which is the 'standard' boxcar size. 
Here's a PDF with the AAR plate codes, and the actual measurements. The image is kind of small, you have to zoom in quite a bit to read it. http://www.emdx.org/rail/Gabarit/ComparaisonGabaritsEuropenEtAAR.pdf 
Or this http://www.trainweb.org/utahrails/drgw/plate.html 
Again these aren't model measurements, but actual prototype. So if you want to plan for the future you can convert from scale feet to actual inches. It's almost guaranteed that if you plan for something that has already been built, some time in the future they will produce something taller and wider. That's why I would use the plate H measurements. 
Something even better 









Craig


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

We have alot of visiting trains, so 9" wide min by 10.5 off rail tall min 
can't think of to many problems.


----------



## Brandon (Jul 6, 2011)

Do manufacturers really stay close enough to prototypical that you can rely on those specs? I'd think that if they went non-prototypical they'd go smaller but I have no idea.


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Brandon on 06 Mar 2012 11:31 AM 
Do manufacturers really stay close enough to prototypical that you can rely on those specs? I'd think that if they went non-prototypical they'd go smaller but I have no idea. 
They actually went larger....
Piko with their standard gauge equipment is roughly 1:27 scale if you measure the model and compare it to the prototype, they don't actually specify a scale; LGB with their standard gauge equipment is closer to 1:26 scale.

If one expects friends to bring equipment to run on the layout, I would try to meet the clearances of the LGB clearance gauge:

http://www.gbdb.info/details.php?image_id=2770

In any case, if there is some new equipment that has never run on a particular layout, try a very slow test run to check if there are any problems.
I have had issues with locos not clearing switch lanterns or other structures close to the track; some equipment really takes a lot of room when entering a curve.

Knut


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

LGB, and apparently Piko are "gummy scale"... 

Aristo, USAT, and AML seem to scale out very well, although often the locos are bit too high or low. 

Greg


----------

