Pet O Scale Annoyance

@Micro posted:

Wait, so English O and American O are not the same size?    Are these both "scale"? Please explain because I am very confused.  Apologies.

English (UK) O is 1/43.5 (close to 17/64" = 1')

US O is 1/48 (¼" = 1')

English O is larger but their loading gauge is smaller so the models somewhat match ours in physical size. The same holds true with their OO on HO track, an example of one of my Bachmann Branchline OO Freightliner class 66s on a friend's Chessie based HO layout:

@CAPPilot posted:

So Ow5 refers to 2-rail scale track that is 1.24" gauge, while P48's 2-rail scale track gauge is 1.177".  This is 2-rail stuff and has nothing to do with 3-rail, so I think maybe us 3-railers should stay out of the Ow5 discussion (I see at least one reply has been deleted).

Back to the OP's comment, I do agree with the replies that if you want 1:48 scale dimensioned products you need to do your homework prior to buying any item.  Don't depend on the seller's description.  If you are not sure, don't buy it.  As I transition some of my trains to 3RS this has become a requirement (actually, just adding Kadees).

Hello Ron,

Not busting your chops here, but O Scale is 1.25 as in 1 1/4 inches. For the simple reason that way back when, it was a lot easier to measure 1.25 as opposed to 1.177. So for the want of .008, we have O scalers and P48ers.

One of the early proponents of P48 was the late Bill Clouser. He was primarily a traction modeler, and produced the Clouser coupler.

ECI

@EastCoastIron posted:

Hello Ron,

Not busting your chops here, but O Scale is 1.25 as in 1 1/4 inches. For the simple reason that way back when, it was a lot easier to measure 1.25 as opposed to 1.177. So for the want of .008, we have O scalers and P48ers.

One of the early proponents of P48 was the late Bill Clouser. He was primarily a traction modeler, and produced the Clouser coupler.

ECI

I don’t disagree with you.  I said the Ow5 discussion is a 2-rail discussion.  I think Ow5 means nothing to the average 3-railer, nor should it.  And that 1.24 was a typo; need to do better at proofreading.

@Mark V. Spadaro posted:

I thought this thread was gonna be about cats jumping up on the train table🤦🏼‍♂️

👍🤣☝️

Well, this is on-going confusion about O-scale and O-gauge.  "O-scale" is 1/4" to-the foot scale (1:48), and is not directly related to the distance between the rails, which can be 1.25 inches for "O gauge," (or "Ow5," meaning 5 feet in 1:48 scale), or the correct 1:48 scale width of 1.177 (proto-48).

O-gauge is an old toy-train standard (more than a century old now) which was adopted years ago by "O-scale" modelers because the track and trucks were readily available, and they simply went on using those components in conjunction with accurately-scaled 1:48 models of rolling stock and locos. Most of us O-scale modelers have just gone along with that compromise, running beautifully detailed 1:48 models (O-scale) on 1.25"-gauge track (O-gauge).

A different approach, in the 1940's mostly, was to build models to 17/64" to the foot scale, in which case the conventional 1.25" track gauge  (O-gauge) would be very close to 4 ft-8 1/2" at that scale. But this was a minority effort that never hit the big time.

Then, of course, along came Proto-48 in which the rails are spaced at the correct distance (1.177") for "O-scale." Of course, that requires the use different trucks for rolling stock and either newly designed or heavily modified "O-gauge" locomotives.

Continuing the "gauge" vs. "scale" confusion, I noticed a Lionel model on e-Bay in an original Lionel box that said "O and O27 gauge trains" -- now that reflects a situation of total confusion at Lionel headquarters.

O scale ...if you look in the NMRA standards O gauge  listed as ...1/4" OR 17/64" ......when this was deemed the gospel..1936.....outside 3rd rail was the standard practice .......2 rail would be 3 years in the future for O scale ...

Don't get hurt falling off of one's high horse

Any one who has a ruler knows 1/4" is not correct for O gauge track .

In the words of that great scholar Rodney King " can't we all just get along?"

Cheers Carey

Hi ECI, there's a smart *** joke in there about are you into 00?  Anyway, the difference Ow5 vs. P48 is approx .08 inches not .008 and it is visible.  Luckily, being in England, 2-rail O track gauge is near enough the same ... 32mm vs, 1.25" ... OK, near enough.  Means I can run 1:48 scale stock thru' 1:43.5 scenery built to the smaller British loading gauge without destroying bridges and shaving station platform edges - usually.

So, Nth American O track is about 5% too wide for 1:48 scale and British track is about 5% too narrow for 1:43.5, all because the P48 and ScaleSeven communities couldn't be bothered too invent the calculator before WW2.  Before you all doze off, why on earth didn't Lionel seize the opportunity for 2-ra...OK, OK, I'm English, modelling the D&H, love pancakes and maple syrple, sorry to criticise Lionel.  Yeah, yeah, criticize

I'll do a separate post with my actionable Pet O Scale Annoyance!
Jason

Depending on prototype, MTH diesel handrail stanchions can be the incorrect profile.  Instead of the correct squared-up U channel like all the appropriate Atlas and Lionel models I've seen, the MTH version is similar to the cross-section of a priest's hat:

Trouble is, they're on stampings which are wrapped all around, I wonder why they got this wrong?

Jason

Yeah, different definitions of scale can be confusing, but everyone is aware of it.  If a particular aspect of scale fidelity is important to you, then verify it carefully before buying.  No serious hobbyist expects a 6464 boxcar to adhere to scale dimensions and details.  I can't tell the difference between a 1/43 and 1/48 vehicle unless they're side by side - if they make a nice scene, it's all good. 

Among my many train interests, I subscribe to Railway Modeller.  I'm amused that some OO modelers (or are they modellers? ) are so bothered by common track being about 8 scale inches too narrow that they will regauge all of their locos and cars to EM - so much work!  On top of that, an article in a recent issue of RM pointed out that EM track is only 4'6" gauge - 2-1/2 scale inches too narrow!  Oh the humanity!

It's a hobby - we do it for relaxation and enjoyment.

Mine is also the lament related in some of the previous posts that newly manufactured locomotives listed as scale 2-rail often suffer from inaccurate truck bolster or frame height, overly wide truck width, and compromised end pilots due to the manufacturer wanting to offer three rail versions too.

Per a recent thread here; the MTH AS-616 for example though Atlas and Sunset 3rd rail often have this issue as well. It's a shame because the carbody shells are often surprisingly good. On a similiar vein the standardizing of the hand rail stampings for hood units across multiple builder's as in EMD's vs Alco's vs GE's.

I realize for many of us the trade-off for fixing these issues is affordability so I guess I understand why we're stuck with this, but inversely fine scale brass versions of the same models are not always a suitable alternative either, despite (usually) having more prototype fidelity, many are really too fragile for the kind of layouts, environments and operations I'm involved in, where-as mechanically the Asian manufactured models often are, especially after re-wiring to series.  Just my .02    

Every time I pass over a 1:1 grade crossing I’m struck by how narrow the track spacing appears, and of course the lack of a third rail running down the middle!  That our “o-scale” trains run on track that is not o scale is very apparent to me.  No complaining, I like the toy train nostalgia of our track system despite operating otherwise o scale equipment

Prototype RRs use much more narrow spacing between tracks than modelers do.    I think I read numbers in the range of 13-14 feet.    Most modelers  use much more - I use 4 inches or the equivalent of 16 feet.   That way I can get my fingers between strings of cars if they derail on parallel tracks.

This thread has wandered off the original direction which was misleading or misuse of the words scale and gauge.    I think sellers should use the terms properly.    Scale means it is proportional to prototype.   In O scale, this means the model is 1:48 or 1/4 per prototype foot.  

Gauge refers to the distance between the rails - and I know we started off down the wrong direction 100  years ago and 1 1/4 inch for O scale which is 4 1/5 scale inches too wide.    But "gauge" does not refer to the size of the model and what it represents in the prototype.     It is the track width.    Some people have built models of Large scale narrow gauge prototype equipment that runs on 1 1/4 gauge track.    Is it O gauge - YES - is it O scale NO.

Calling some O Scale when it is not is like advertising to sell a milk cow, and when the buyer shows up, leading out a goat!  

@Carey Williams posted:

In the words of that great scholar Rodney King " can't we all just get along?"

Carey,

Not going to happen.

When this thread first started it appeared to me that it might focus on outsiders' perceptions or lack of knowledge of the details and oddities of O Scale vs. O gauge.  At least that's where it seemed to begin.

Now it's clear that it's actually more about insiders' perceptions, and naturally these are at times taken to the extreme.  We seem to have gravitated to the point where there are annoyances associated with every little detail, and also with the folks who plant stakes in the ground around these details.

Given the long history of the OGR Forum, and the longer history of the hobby, I believe that this is to be expected.

Yet, I've asked the question "Are we more alike; or more different?" a number of times.  The answer always seems to come back that we're all genuinely more different, and that we actually enjoy sparring about the differences.

In light of this it appears that we only really come together on one thing:  Within our hobby, and extending to out its extremes, the OGR Forum is the very place best for the kind of sparring we like to do.

No, we can't just get along.

Mike

@prrjim posted:

..the stuff called G Gauge.    Various manufacturers have made products ranging from 1:20 to 1:32 scale to run on this gauge track.     If  you are looking  for a new passenger car for narrow gauge 1:22 scale trains and see one listed as a G Scale coach  - what is it?    Is 1:32 and way too large to fit with  your layout, or is 1:22 and a perfect fit, or 1:20 ...

G is the scale(1:24) not the gauge.  These all run on Gauge 1 track(45mm).