Picture showing all sizes of O scale trains?

Here's a picture from this thread:
https://ogrforum.com/topic/mth-boxcar-sizes

@Zeke posted:

MTH Premier on the left, Railking in the middle, and Lionel 6464 on the right. Mark is correct that the 6464s are pretty equal to Rugged Rails. Hope that helps.

Here's another good thread on the subject with some pictures of different "O" boxcars.

https://ogrforum.com/...0#152477234578367300

It is all in the terminology.  I don't believe that most prewar trains would really be classified as "scale" trains, but rather O "gauge" trains, which denote the track width and is in no way related to "scale". 

American Flyer produced all sizes of O "gauge" trains with cars ranging in length from c. 4 inches to 12 inches, with the heights and widths of the cars varying significantly over the years.

This is actually a more challenging question than how it might appear on the surface.  A 1:48 scale boxcar can vary in size widely based on the period when it was built.  Take for example the standard 40' boxcar.  Prior to WWII many steel boxcars were closer in height to a Lionel 6464 boxcar.  With the introduction of the Pullman Standard PS-1 boxcar in 1947 boxcars tended to be taller.

While some rules of thumb are always helpful, I always encourage everyone to research your prototype if you are interested in prototype modeling.

@GG1 4877 posted:

A 1:48 scale boxcar can vary in size widely based on the period when it was built.

Not only when but what it was built of if you are including wood cars...

While some rules of thumb are always helpful, I always encourage everyone to research your prototype if you are interested in prototype modeling.

Yes!  If you are going to pursue real scale modeling, accuracy to scale is directly from the prototype, not from the label on the box.

You asked and i definitely would say this is the wrong place for this. You will do better on the 3 rail scale forum. This forum is for people who don't really care about fidelity to scale. And you might change the title to :  " Pictures showing.... O gauge....?" O scale trains are by definition all in scale.

You can eliminate all prewar ( with a handful of exceptions like the Hudson) all post war, all O27, all Fundimensions, everything before some time in the 1990s. You should know the prototype sizes and carry a small tape measure. After a while, you will know what a scale boxcar looks like. For those of us who grew up with Postwar 6464 boxcars, scale boxcars look enormous.

None of this will help your wife much, nor will a photo, since she won't know what car in the photo to compare with the one she is looking at.  More helpful would be to give her a scale car to carry around or maybe a piece of paper with a boxcar printed on it in scale. She could hold the possible purchase against it.

Or just give her links to purchase on line.

Thank you. Some of the linked pictures were exactly what I was looking for. Much appreciated!

@Will posted:

You can eliminate all . . .  Fundimensions, everything before some time in the 1990s.

Not quite true.  The Standard O line is scale in dimensions.

@palallin posted:

Not quite true.  The Standard O line is scale in dimensions.

I don't think I know what the standard O line is?

As mentioned above the word, "Scale" has a definition and implies a prototype.    Gauge refers to the track width when talking trains.     So to show different sizes, you would have to compare models of the same prototype.    Otherwise as Jonathon says, different prototypes were all sorts of different dimensions.

Now one thing that might help is that most if not all prototypes for standard gauge are the same width at least for most of the 20th century and up to now.    Most all RR equipment is about 10 feet wide.   I am not sure if it 10 or 10 1/2,      The real RRs maintained this because that is the max their clearances would allow and they can't change tunnels, bridges, signal locations etc. easily.    And they don't want to go narrower because they want as much capacity as possible.

So looking at stuff end on is a good guide to whether it is scale or not.    Compare a scale car to a Lionel 6464 or just about any PW lionel car and you will see the obvious difference. 

An interesting factoid is that the Lionel PW N5C porthole caboose body matches the height and length quite well for a scale car.    However is about 5/16 too narrow.    This is really obvious if  you put one on a track with a string of scale cabooses.    I have cut a shell from one of these in half down the middle lengthwise and widened it to scale width. 

@Will posted:

I don't think I know what the standard O line is?

Here is a picture of the early ones ADCX Rob shows above:

@GG1 4877 posted:

This is actually a more challenging question than how it might appear on the surface.  A 1:48 scale boxcar can vary in size widely based on the period when it was built.  Take for example the standard 40' boxcar.  Prior to WWII many steel boxcars were closer in height to a Lionel 6464 boxcar.  With the introduction of the Pullman Standard PS-1 boxcar in 1947 boxcars tended to be taller.

While some rules of thumb are always helpful, I always encourage everyone to research your prototype if you are interested in prototype modeling.

Here are photos of scale Weaver and Atlas cars.  All these cars were around in the 40s and later.

B&O M-26, MILW XM, and PRR X-29

PRR X-29 and PRR X-26 Rebuilt.

UP BX-50-25.  I wish I had a photo of this car next to another one to show how low it is.  It is 50' long, but only about the same height as an X-29.  Looks strange in a consist.

It is not a boxcar, but here is a scale dimensioned Lionel Standard O reefer next to an X-29. 

You forgot 17/64 scale, which is the proper scale for O Gauge track.  Being true to scale is sort of foreign when discussing tinplate toy trains, since they were all designed to be caricatures, not scale models.  The recent move to 3-rail scale is quite a different matter, but if you truly want scale models, the only current alternatives in this general area are Proto-48 and 17/64, neither of which has an even moderate following - they are pretty much a scratch builder's hobby.

But sure - if you want "presents" to fit in with your model railroad scheme, the only two ways to assure you get things that "fit" are to provide part numbers (and sources) or hand your proposed donor an example.

FYI the Mke ribbed box cars are taller than most of the time  period . they were home built in the Mke shops

Really just having some fun this afternoon.  Excuse the poor photo quality.  It was a brisk 55 degrees outside today in sunny Arizona!

These are both O scale boxcars.

@bob2 posted:

You forgot 17/64 scale, which is the proper scale for O Gauge track.  Being true to scale is sort of foreign when discussing tinplate toy trains, since they were all designed to be caricatures, not scale models.  The recent move to 3-rail scale is quite a different matter, but if you truly want scale models, the only current alternatives in this general area are Proto-48 and 17/64, neither of which has an even moderate following - they are pretty much a scratch builder's hobby.

17/64” is really darn close to European O scale.  If you stick with those you’ll get pretty accurate models on O-gauge track.

@GG1 4877 posted:

Really just having some fun this afternoon.  Excuse the poor photo quality.  It was a brisk 55 degrees outside today in sunny Arizona!

These are both O scale boxcars.

This speaks volumes!  Love it.  Like you always say it’s best to go to the prototype.

This brings up another interesting point, and that is picking an era if you really want something to look accurate and “scale”.  The NMRA has some nice guides that speak to clearances and track spacing for modeling different eras.  A modern tunnel portal built for two-wide double stacks would look odd with wooden 36’ reefers and tank-on-flat cars going in and out.