# Scales used



## Mr Ron (Sep 23, 2009)

Can anyone direct me to a site that has a percentage breakdown of the scales used with G gauge track? Scales used are 1:32, 1:29, 1:24, 1:22.5, 1:20.3.


----------



## Jack - Freshwater Models (Feb 17, 2008)

Heh Mr Ron, 

You forgot 1:13.7 and 1:12! 1:13.7 is 2' gauge on G1 track and dates back to the late 1970s. If I remember correctly 10mm scale is close to 1:30. I haven't heard of any polls that would put numbers on popularity. Maybe you could run a poll to get the percentages? 

Jack


----------



## Mik (Jan 2, 2008)

then there's 'close enuff' scale... as long as it works visually, it's good.


----------



## Jack - Freshwater Models (Feb 17, 2008)

Mik, 

Thats the 1:whatever scale! Very popular in G1!!! I try to work to a given scale for a project but there are always comprimises in scale models. The main thing is to have fun!!! 

jack


----------



## Mr Ron (Sep 23, 2009)

I'm thinking about providing detail parts and drawings for large scale, but I need to know what scale is the most popular.


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Best draw in 1:1 scale and tell people to divide the dimensions provided by their chosen scale. The problem with that is that some dimensions then become too small to have any strength, such as hinges or things that stick out and are thus easily broken. Those items/etc. then need to be set to some minimum size for durability. Other things may need to have some minimum size, or rather minimum spacing between them (such as rivets or spokes, etc.) so that the actually show up. Sometimes what is needed is only a hint that some detail exists and not an exact count or size (kind of like "impressionist painting").


----------



## Jack - Freshwater Models (Feb 17, 2008)

Ron, 

Do you do casting? 

Jack


----------



## RimfireJim (Mar 25, 2009)

Posted By Mr Ron on 03 Jun 2010 02:50 PM 
I'm thinking about providing detail parts and drawings for large scale, but I need to know what scale is the most popular.

So what you probably really want is to know which scale is the most popular among those who would actually _buy_ your detail parts and drawings, which could be a very different answer than which scale is the most in use. I'm thinking that most modelers who are interested in detail parts and drawings are going to be more particular about scale than what I perceive the majority of large scale users to be. I think the majority of users fall into the 1:whatever category, especially mixing 1:22.5 and 1:24 equipment and structures. Not that I have any data to support this, just empirical observations.

With respect to drawings, I wouldn't worry about it too much, since it is so easy to adjust the scale with modern copiers. I think most scratchbuilders are used to doing that. Just include the enlargement or reduction ratio for all the scales you can think of right on the drawing, with a "check" length that can be used to verify the adjustment was done correctly.


----------



## Mr Ron (Sep 23, 2009)

I'm at home with designing and machining. Casting is something I would get into if the demand was big enough. At any rate, it would probably be farmed out. The design comes in where I have to produce a part with very fine details that is too fragile to reproduce in scale. Due to startup costs, this is just an idea I might implement very slowly; test the water so-to-speak. My idea is not to duplicate what others have done in the past or to try to compete with companies already in the business. I wouldn't be doing this to make money; just the cost of materials and utilities. At my age, I would rather do it as a service, not as a business.


----------



## up9018 (Jan 4, 2008)

Ron: 

Do 1:20.3, please!!!! 

Chris


----------



## Steve Stockham (Jan 2, 2008)

It's relatively simple: If you are modeling middle 20th century standard gauge steam up through the diesel era then you should go 1:29 as this scale has the lion's share of the hobby! As for narrow gauge, 1:20.3 has been gaining in popularity and most new items are of this scale *BUT* (you could almost see this one coming) there is a growing contingent of large scalers that are modeling in 1:22.5 and want to stay that way! This scale has the advantage of having LGB and Bachmann utilizing this scale for decades and the large scalers that use this scale are almost vehement in their desire _not_ to go larger! I would say it's a toss up with narrow gauge!


----------



## Richard Smith (Jan 2, 2008)

My own observations: 
1:20.3 is probably the biggest scratch builder market for parts but Ozark already has a very large assortment of white metal castings in this scale as well as 7/8" scale. There are also a number of brass castings available. 

1:32 is the "most correct" scale for standard gauge but I question how many potential scratch builders there are here. MTH has a nice line of 1:32 models with a considerable following and of course there is a number of pricey but very fine brass models available. 

1:29 is the biggest market currently I think for standard gauge and will continue to be so as long as Aristo and USA Trains continue to offer lower cost models in this scale but the main impetus is still diesel era even though some steam has become available. There are some very fine scratch builders working in 1:29 but I question that there are enough to support much in the way of detail parts. Probably diesel era parts would have some market but I doubt much steam era at this time. 

1:22.5 I perceive is a large part collector and run as is with little demand for detail parts. 

1:24 which is my favorite scale (in fantasy only) is pretty much dead unless you could find enough market in the 42" gauge countries. 

What "G" gauge really needs is smaller standard gauge branchline type steam locomotives in the relatively low price range. Locomotives such as ten-wheelers, consolidations and moguls made of plastic and/or diecast. The problem would be which scale? 1:32 would be the correct scale of course and my personal preference but there is probably an equal potential in 1:29 at the present time. You'd have to conduct your own survey here as I don't have a clue which would be the best course investment wise. Of course there would possibly be a ready market from those already in 1:32 steam era with the ultra expensive brass rosters if the products were of sufficient quality and detail. 

There are a number of prototypes that I think would be popular in standard gauge small steam. The Ma & Pa in the east and Sierra Ry and V&T in the west come to mind. There are many other favorites that others might mention but these have wide appeal in large parts of the country. 

Another neglected potential is for freight cars of the 30's and 40's such as outside braced and wood sheathed boxcars, tank cars of the era, twin hopper cars both peaked end and straight end as well as outside braced, wood stock cars, mill gondolas and bottom dump gons such as used on the SP. Covered cement hoppers and wood sided cabooses to match the engines produced. 

Probably much more ambitious than you have in mind though. It'd be rather hard to make a minimal test the waters investment unless you wanted to do the work for your own railroad as well. One possibility would be to approach Barry's Big Trains to colaborate. With him doing mechanisms and you doing superstructure and details you could have a first rate product right out of the gate.

Anyway that's my take on it. Admittedly my own prejudiced view that I'm sure others will argue with but as objective as I can make it. 

Best wishes on your endeavor.


----------



## Mr Ron (Sep 23, 2009)

Thank you all for your input. My personal feelings about this leads me to think that a new scale is needed. I feel 1:22.5 scale is a good scale to work in, but a new track gauge of 2.5" would represent standard gauge in that scale. I believe 2.5" gauge track was used in the past and may have gone under the name of No. 2 or 3 gauge. That I'm not sure about. Other possibilities are the scales used by Aristo or USA. All in all, I think standard gauge will be the gauge of choice and narrow gauge should adopt their own gauge. It just doesn't make much sense to be using a European metre gauge for American trains. 1:20.3 scale is pretty close to G gauge track, so I would reserve that scale for American 36" narrow gauge. My feelings are: 1:32 is too small for garden railways and 1:22.5 is a good size.


----------



## xo18thfa (Jan 2, 2008)

Scale??? Geeee whizzz What is an ich??













1:20.3 on Gauge 1 track is very widely common for narrow gauge. Lots of commercailly made products available as well as scratchbuilding supplies. 1:22.5 is niche. It is a European standard started by a company that, unfortunaletly, is out of business.


----------



## Mik (Jan 2, 2008)

Trying to decide whether I'm a collector/run as is, or simply dead - based on a previous post. Thanks!

I build a lot of stuff, and buy a lot of 'jewelry' to put on it... and most of my little mangles are in the 1:24-1:22 scale range. The sad reality is that large scale is pretty fractured. All those competing scales.... and not enough market to support much of anything. Do I wish for more, and more affordable stuff that I can use? Sure. $7 for an injector ($14/pr plus shipping) is hard for somebody on disability to justify, It's a very nice injector, brass and investment cast, but the CFO says 'we'll see'....So I usually just build my own from wire and tube. with snaps for valve handles


If it was my nickel, I'd take a hard look at what is already available, and in what scales, vs what models people seem to be buying AND modifying before jumping in. Plus, if you're making parts because you enjoy it, or as a small sideline to another business, great. If you actually expect to make enough $$ to live on, well......


----------



## Fritz (Jan 11, 2008)

there is a growing contingent of large scalers that are modeling in 1:22.5 and want to stay that way! This scale has the advantage of having LGB and Bachmann utilizing this scale for decades 

I don´t know, if Bachmann ever mentioned a scale for their pre 20,3 scale productions. Most of their Wild West stuff seems to be closer to 1 : 24/25. 
LGB claimed that they are making models in 1 : 22,5, but you´ll not find too many, which actually are in that scale. Their Stainzes, Meyers or U-Class, HF 130, HF 110 etc are more or less in 1 18/19, which comes close to Brit. 16mm scale. Most of their US Modes are 1 : 24 or smaller. 

There seems to be huge amount of detail parts on the international market already. Over here (Germany) some folks have special parts made via Rapid Prototyping and somebody will make them in brass, whitemetall or resin. 

Have Fun 

Juergen / Fritz


----------



## Jack - Freshwater Models (Feb 17, 2008)

1:22.5 VS 1:22.3 ?????? 

In the case of a 96inch (8') widget the difference amounts to .039" or about 1mm. Most detail parts are less than 3'. I guess you have to get out the digital calipers to check for correctness. IMHO the two are virtually the same scale when it comes to small parts. The difference becomes appearant in the larger parts like car sides. 

I make model parts using fabricated/machined or 3D printed patterns to make molds for spincasting. 

Jack


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Steve Stockham on 03 Jun 2010 05:23 PM 
there is a growing contingent of large scalers that are modeling in 1:22.5 and want to stay that way! This scale has the advantage of having LGB and Bachmann utilizing this scale for decades and the large scalers that use this scale are almost vehement in their desire _not_ to go larger! I would say it's a toss up with narrow gauge!




*growing* contingent??
thats debatable..
IMO, it seems 1/22.5 is gradually fading away..less and less people using it all the time.
Bachmann really only had the Big Hauler in that scale..all other Bachmann locos have been 1/20.3.
and LGB's troubles of late have put a dent in LGB sales..

and..people who like the size of the Big Hauler dont really use a lot of LGB with it..
most LGB isnt terribly compatable with the Big Hauler..

I have never seen any definitive proof either way..but based on everything I have seen and read over the last 8 years in this hobby,
I would say 1/22.5 is either "holding" or declining..I certaintly wouldnt say its growing..

1/20.3 is definately growing! that seems clear..

(just for the record, I dont model in, or particularly care about, either scale! 
so I think im fairly objective!)

Scot


----------



## Fritz (Jan 11, 2008)

Bachmann really only had the Big Hauler in that scale..all other Bachmann locos have been 1/20.3. 
and LGB's troubles of late have put a dent in LGB sales.. 

I still own a couple of Bachmann Sidetank Porters, a Baldwyn LYN for the Brit market and a Baldwin 2-4-2 Logging Baldwin. All of those are not in 1/20,3, but smaller. They had a few small plantation locos as well, which were approx 1: 22,5. . 

I do model in 1 : 22,5. So I can use veryy liittle LGB material. But I am looking forward to see some Freshwater Parts. http://freshwatermodels.net/index.htm They look like very good quality. 

Have Fun 

Juergen / Fritz


----------



## Steve Stockham (Jan 2, 2008)

"Debatable"..... yes, I suppose so! What I was referring to are the large scale enthusiasts that, for one reason or another, are not going to change to 1:20.3! (Fn3) has been growing for almost two decades now but really saw a jump when Bachmann came out with their Shay! I'm not going to get into the scale war controversy as to what each manufacturer produced other than to say that Bachmann's (and LGB's) J&S passenger cars, when compared side by side with Delton/Aristocraft (scaled 1:24), are demonstrably larger! Back to my first point, I do feel that there are a growing number of large scale enthusiasts that have decided that they do not want to model in Fn3 (1:20.3) and want to stay with G scale (1:22.5) with truck mounted couplers and R1 curves! Growing or stagnant, it's really no big deal which but I don't think it's shrinking. Part of the reason is economic; cars and engines that cost 1/2 to 1/8 as much as comparable Fn3 scaled items is a powerful incentive! Add to that the fact that these smaller scaled trains traverse curves with ridiculously small radii and that they will stay on the rails even over bad trackwork and it's hard not to see their appeal! Personally, I prefer Fn3 but I also run G on my inside loop due to the tighter curves which my Fn3 trains don't much care for.


----------



## Mr Ron (Sep 23, 2009)

It appears there are really only two choices when working with G gauge track. For standard gauge, you have to go with 1:32 scale and if you are into narrow gauge, then 1:20.3 is the scale of choice. I know that those with extensive layouts now are reluctant to scrap their present stock to keep within track scale. It's too bad we embrased LGB G gauge . It was never right for the U.S. I think the correct long term solution is to establish a standard track gauge and develop a scale as we go. They have standardized in the small gauges, but we don't have a standard for garden railways.


----------



## Fritz (Jan 11, 2008)

It's too bad we embrased LGB G gauge . It was never right for the U.S. 

Well, more than 40 years ago there was nothing else around. 45mm is perfect for European meter gauge in 1 : 22,5. 
A very intelligent move was to introduce 1 / 20,3 to represent 3 feet prototype on 45mm rail. That isolated LGB from the US market. 

1/ 29th on 45mm rail for standard gauge prototypes is a bit odd but seems to be successful. The funny thing is, most of the various model scales run on overseized rail, modelled after a vintage Swiss metre gauge prototype. 

Have Fun 

Fritz / Juergen


----------



## Jerry Barnes (Jan 2, 2008)

Hardly any detail parts are made for 1/29 or 1/32nd. I'd think a part for one of those would be fine on the other, since they are fairly close, unless you compare whole cars/locos to one another. So many parts are made for 1/20 already I'm not sure a new company could make much headway. Maybe one reason not many scratch builders work in 1/29 or 1/32 is because of the lack of parts.


----------



## Ray Dunakin (Jan 6, 2008)

I like 1/24th scale and enjoy scratch-building or kitbashing everything. I don't particularly care for 1:20.3 -- it's so big that building everything to that scale would take up more space than I have; and when kitbashing, it's usually easier to go up from a smaller scale, than to go down from a larger scale. But if that's what I have, then I just find a way to make it work. 

So... whatever everyone else does, doesn't concern me too much.


----------



## Jack - Freshwater Models (Feb 17, 2008)

Posted By Jerry Barnes on 04 Jun 2010 07:25 PM 
Hardly any detail parts are made for 1/29 or 1/32nd. I'd think a part for one of those would be fine on the other, since they are fairly close, unless you compare whole cars/locos to one another. So many parts are made for 1/20 already I'm not sure a new company could make much headway. Maybe one reason not many scratch builders work in 1/29 or 1/32 is because of the lack of parts. 

Jerry,

For detail parts there isn't much different in 1:29 and 1:32. I'm not much of a 1:29 scale fan but whatever floats ones boat. I prefer 1:32 since it is correct for the gauge and in our antiquated imperial measurement system it is easy to work with.

Making detail parts for 1:32???? I'm not sure there would be much of a market. I have looked at the possibility over and over but just don't see the demand. Most in 1:32 seem to be interested in RTR 

Probably the best way to go in a 1:32 scale product would be to make RTR and base the prototype on something that would go with a current Aster product. A difficult and risky adventure!

I still have a mold for some of the old time box car kit details if you are interested in any of them.

Regards,

Jack


----------



## Mr Ron (Sep 23, 2009)

This whole thing about scale has gotten out of hand. With the introduction of G scale (gauge), we have been working backwards. We are trying to fit a scale to suit a track gauge when it should be the opposite. We should be chosing the scale and determining the track gauge. The whole thing is made more complicated by trying to fit a scale to suit a metre gauge not used in this country. Based on this, I feel the right way is to establish a track gauge that suits our scale; either standard or narrow gauge. Think about it this way: Detroit builds cars to suit a certain width road. If the road gets wider, will they build a wider car to suit the road.Doesn't make much sense does it?


----------



## Jack - Freshwater Models (Feb 17, 2008)

Ron, 

Now why would you want to do something that makes sense??? 

Gauge 1 (3/8 or 10mm =1') the first gauge, has existed for a long time, mostly in the UK and europe. It nearly died in the 1940s 50s. 

The G1 resurgance started in the late 1970s. Since the track was there, people wanting to model narrow gauge prototypes in larger scale based their scale on the track. I think LGBs 1:22.5 and Fn3s 1:20.3 are here to stay and are now standards. 7/8 or 1:13.7 has been around longer and will most likely be around for a long time. I'm not sure what will happen with the other scales but they may eventually fade away. 

Though our gauges and scales don't seem to make sense thats the way it is. I personally wish modelers would standardize on 1:32(1:30 for British), 1:20.3, and 1:13.7 but that isn't likely. 

Just model in the scale you like! Make something real nice and reasonably priced and someone might buy it! 

Jack


----------



## Mr Ron (Sep 23, 2009)

Sigh! Standarization is a problem not easy to agree upon. I know many would like to stick to a standard, but what to do with the hundreds and thousands of dollars already spent on metre gauge. It will probably take time before it happens as it has in the smaller gauges. N, HO, S and O gauge is pretty much set in stone and that has caused the hobby to grow. Unless the garden railroaders set a standard, it is doomed for failure. My original post was to find out what were the most popular scales used, but the results are based on arbritrary scales foreign to our shores. The NMRA has established 1:32 as no.1 gauge, but a lot of people don't want the NMRA dictating what scales to use. Be that as it may, I think we need to standardize once and for all before the hobby grows too big and too fragmented. In the smaller scales, they designate a different track gauge for narrow gauge in HO. They don't scale up to fit HO track and call it narrow gauge. That's what we do with G gauge track.


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Mr Ron on 06 Jun 2010 05:21 PM 
This whole thing about scale has gotten out of hand. With the introduction of G scale (gauge), we have been working backwards. We are trying to fit a scale to suit a track gauge when it should be the opposite. We should be chosing the scale and determining the track gauge. The whole thing is made more complicated by trying to fit a scale to suit a metre gauge not used in this country. Based on this, I feel the right way is to establish a track gauge that suits our scale; either standard or narrow gauge. Think about it this way: Detroit builds cars to suit a certain width road. If the road gets wider, will they build a wider car to suit the road.Doesn't make much sense does it?


Actually, that is precisely what was done!

Those that picked a scale of 1:22 were modeling meter gauge track and so needed 45-mm gauge track. Those that picked 1:20.3 were modeling 3-ft narrow-gauge and so needed 45-mm gauge track. Those that picked 1:32 scale were modeling Standard Gauge (4' 8.5") and thus needed 45-mm track to run on.

The problems were born when people wanted to buy an item intended for one scale for use in some other scale because what they wanted was not being manufactured in their chosen scale. Namely, they bought 1:20.3 scale items to be used as Standard Gauge, but it ended up being bigger than the correct 1:32 scale. Unfortunately, a manufacturer decided to make "Standard Gauge" items at a compromise scale (1:29) so products in the two scales would look more similar in physical size and thus be able to sell 1:20.3 items to the "Standard Gauge" buyer. Doubly unfortunately, other manufacturers saw the market for doing this compromise and so jumped on the bandwagon to manufacture similar items and 1:29 scale became a big market. Some very nice product is manufactured in 1:29 and it looks very nice but it is larger than it would be if it were the correct scale of 1:32.

All the various scales are small markets. If "we" had picked some scale and decided to vary the gauge of the track to fit the gauge we were modeling then there would be all sort of track for sale and a very small market for each of them. If we had picked 1:24 scale then 3-ft narrow gauge would be 38-mm track, Meter gauge would be 41.66-mm track, Standard Gauge (4' 8.5") would be 59.8-mm track. Now throw in the folk modeling 2-ft narrow gauge, 42-inch "Cape Gauge", 5-ft Broad gauge, etc. and you see the need for more variety of track gauges in the garden.

Would that have been better? Dunno for sure, but one problem is that fewer people could go to someone else's garden RR and run trains... i.e.: the "Narrow Gauge" modeler could not run trains on the "Standard Gauge" modeler's pike.


----------



## Mr Ron (Sep 23, 2009)

As I recall, the HO gauger's made the track gauge fit the scale they were working in. They used N, TT and even Z gauge track for narrow gauge modeling. They even created their own track gauge if that was what it took to be within scale. HO gaugers tend to be sticklers for scale. Garden railway people are more down to earth and are more interested in running trains than getting their knickers in a bunch over scale. Personally, I work in 1-1/2" to the foot scale (1:8). The track gauge is either 7-1/4" or 7-1/2", but standard gauge at my scale is 7-1/16" so that's what I use. I have worked in scales from N, HO, O, #1 and G, but currently work in1:8 scale. Parts are larger to work with my failing eyesight.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

I have been in the "G" hobby for over 30 years. Over the years I have acquired 1:22.5, 1:24, 1:29, and 1:20.3. I have one layout in my backyard and depending on my mood I can run any train I want from true narrow gauge, pseudo narrow gauge to pseudo standard gauge. Some of my collection includes European narrow gauge (LGB), which is correct for 45mm gauge track (most of the time). I can run all of this on one layout. 

I like trains and will buy engines and cars that I like that will run on my layout, regardless of scale. Unfortunately, the new Accucraft Allegheny requires 10' radius and mine are 5', so I won't be getting that. If it would run on my layout it would be my first venture into 1:32.


Even in the European narrow gauge LGB made some 750 mm gauge models that run on 1000 mm scale track. 


People like to blame LGB for the scale problems. My thought is that if it weren't for LGB, there wouldn't be the participation that we have in this hobby. I seriously doubt that Charlie or Lewis would have started manufacturing trains for 45 mm track if the LGB products hadn't been successful. 


Chuck


----------



## Tom Bowdler (Jan 3, 2008)

If I build a 1 1/2" scale loco here in New York to run on the prevalent 7 1/4" gauge track and decide to truck my loco south or west to visit other tracks I'm out of luck since they use 7 1/2" gauge. With garden railroading I would have a greater chance when traveling of finding a railway laid to 45mm gauge, the standard in the garden. It is more properly called Gauge 1 which I understand was invented early in the last century. Until LGB popularized 1:22 scale gauge 1 was used to represent standard gauge and promoted by G1MRA. 
As the owner of a portable track we set up to run live steam at various venues I am asked this question all the time and have to explain that in large scale we vary the size of the trains to suit the track vs the smaller scales laying track to match their trains. Is that correct? No it isn't but that's how it is. I personally concentrate on 1:20 scale so 45mm = 3' narrow gauge but I have dabbled in 7/8 scale making my track 2' gauge. To further confuse things, one of the loops on my portable has dual 32mm and 45mm track. Imagine the confusion to the general public when I have to explain 16mm scale as used in England and by some of my Canadian friends. 
You originally asked what scales were most common with the intent of making detail parts. People responded trying to help and you tell them why they are wrong. If "garden railway people are more down to earth and are more interested in running trains than getting their knickers in a bunch over scale" then I think you've answered your own question. Certainly the market is open for enterprising individuals who produce products to help us with our modeling and there are a number of suppliers who do just that and they are appreciated. 
Best of luck to you, 
Tom


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

we have been working backwards. We are trying to fit a scale to suit a track gauge when it should be the opposite. 
There is no "should be." It is what it is. How we got here is immaterial. You've just got to shift your paradigm. I just spent two years working with the NMRA on wheel and track standards. It took a while for them to shift their perspective, but once they were able to, everything fell neatly into place. It's not "backwards" or anything like that. It's simply a different way of approaching the puzzle. 

Think of it in terms of a train passing the station. Which object is in motion; the train or the station? The answer depends on where you're sitting. If you're on the bench watching the train pass, the train is moving. If you're on the train looking out the window, the station's moving. You can either have the scale being the paramount consideration (the small scale model), or the track gauge being the paramount consideration (large scale.) Either is an equally valid way of approaching the scale/gauge issue. 

I think we need to standardize once and for all before the hobby grows too big and too fragmented. 
It's the single track gauge that unifies the hobby. Since we all run on the same track, we can all run together and share the hobby. I can bring my 1:20 trains over to the local club's garden railroad and run alongside other members' 1:32, 1:29, 1:whatever, so long as the wheels are gauged appropriately. I do so fairly regularly, and I enjoy their models as I do my own. No need for different gauges, just honest fun running trains in the garden. There are standards. The NMRA just adopted wheel and track standards that largely parallel G1MRA's long-established standards. It's a universal standard that covers all the common scales. As I mentioned, it wasn't easy getting the NMRA to understand that paradigm, but ultimately they did, and I think the hobby will benefit in the long run.

Yes, as you say, garden railroaders tend to be far less prone to care about scale, but that's only half true. Many garden railroaders are as obsessive about scale as their small-scale brethren. We just all use the same track.

Later, 

K


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By Richard Smith on 03 Jun 2010 05:50 PM 

What "G" gauge really needs is smaller standard gauge branchline type steam locomotives in the relatively low price range. Locomotives such as ten-wheelers, consolidations and moguls made of plastic and/or diecast. The problem would be which scale? 1:32 would be the correct scale of course and my personal preference but there is probably an equal potential in 1:29 at the present time. 

Another neglected potential is for freight cars of the 30's and 40's such as outside braced and wood sheathed boxcars, tank cars of the era, twin hopper cars both peaked end and straight end as well as outside braced, wood stock cars, mill gondolas and bottom dump gons such as used on the SP. Covered cement hoppers and wood sided cabooses to match the engines produced. 

I agree entirely with Richard here. From my casual observation, it seems like most scratchbuilders work in 1:20. 1:32/1:29 seems to have fewer scratchbuilders/kitbashers in it. It's just a casual observation though, and it might be wrong. The tendency in 1:29, among the manufacturers, has been to go to larger locos, and I've been trying to do as Richard notes--downsizing Pacifics and Mikados into Atlantics and consols. Detail parts in 1:32/1:29 are very scarce. There are a lot of people people operating in that scale though


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Mr Ron on 03 Jun 2010 06:45 PM 
Thank you all for your input. My personal feelings about this leads me to think that a new scale is needed. I feel 1:22.5 scale is a good scale to work in, but a new track gauge of 2.5" would represent standard gauge in that scale. I believe 2.5" gauge track was used in the past and may have gone under the name of No. 2 or 3 gauge. That I'm not sure about. Other possibilities are the scales used by Aristo or USA. All in all, I think standard gauge will be the gauge of choice and narrow gauge should adopt their own gauge. It just doesn't make much sense to be using a European metre gauge for American trains. 1:20.3 scale is pretty close to G gauge track, so I would reserve that scale for American 36" narrow gauge. My feelings are: 1:32 is too small for garden railways and 1:22.5 is a good size. 

It is a very brave man who contemplates the introduction of another gauge track for Large Scale. The actual gauge was adopted in the infancy of Garden RR'ing when LGB was the only game in town.
Garden RR enthusiasts come from all walks of life but the real growth after 1968 was driven by the Toy Train market. All the major producer/marketers in the USA come from that background. With the exception of MTH, the philosophy of near enough is good enough with respect to scale - gauge is entrenched.

Whether it should or not, Gauge # 1 - 45 mm, rules.
No one, let me stress that, [/b]NO ONE[/b] would be prepared to change what they already had.

32 mm is used in 16 mm scale to represent 2' gauge prototype. It is also pretty close to 3' gauge in 1:29 scale.

If it was me I would be going after the kit basher/scratch builder market which is somewhat limited to 1:20.3 scale, 7/8" scale, 1:24 scale and 1:32 scale. Roughly in that order. There is very little interest in such pastimes in other scales, which is why there is such a dearth of parts for them.


----------



## tacfoley (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By Mr Ron on 03 Jun 2010 06:45 PM 
Thank you all for your input. My personal feelings about this leads me to think that a new scale is needed. I feel 1:22.5 scale is a good scale to work in, but a new track gauge of 2.5" would represent standard gauge in that scale. I believe 2.5" gauge track was used in the past and may have gone under the name of No. 2 or 3 gauge. That I'm not sure about. Other possibilities are the scales used by Aristo or USA. All in all, I think standard gauge will be the gauge of choice and narrow gauge should adopt their own gauge. It just doesn't make much sense to be using a European metre gauge for American trains. 1:20.3 scale is pretty close to G gauge track, so I would reserve that scale for American 36" narrow gauge. My feelings are: 1:32 is too small for garden railways and 1:22.5 is a good size. Mr Ron - although I'm not into Gauge 3, I DO know a man who most certainly is - the former secretary of the UK Gauge 3 Society, main131. His recent post, showing British outline live-steam Gauge 3 models on his dual gauge track should demonstrate to you that though it is a small following that we are talking about, it is nevertheless re-growing in interest, with the GRS company making a whole range of electric and steam driven locos and literally hundreds of different cars to haul behind them.

Gauge 3, running on 64mm track, is very much alive and kicking here in UK, and over in Germany there are at least two serious manufacturers of locomotives and cars to run in this large scale.

tac
www.ovgrs.org
Supporter of The Cape Meares Lighthouse Restoration Fund


----------



## pdk (Jan 2, 2008)

I agree with Tony. 

Also, one BIG reason 45mm track may have become so popular is that it's just plain right for railroading outdoors. Not too big, not too small.


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

I had read on the Chaski Machinists board several years ago that the story was someone on the west coast wrote to someone on the east coast what the gauge was and the response was supposed to 7.25, but person that typed the letter left out the 2 and that resulted in the person on the west coast building to 7.5... and when the discrepancy was discovered it was too late to modify the engine he was building and they figured they were so far apart they'd never, ever share track or cars. Had no idea that somewhere in the middle between them people would be building to one or the other gauges and might actually get to share trackage/cars/engines.


----------

