Scale vs Semi Scale size differences

A lot of semi-scale diesels are close to 1:48 scale in size, just lacking in details of the true scale engines. The Alco FAs were compressed more and would look odd but, other than those, I think you'll be OK switching to Legacy without having to jettison your Lionchiefs.

You have to have specific examples as we kinda' know what "scale" is if we're talking about 1:48 proportions.  OTOH, there are ranges of "semi-scale", you can have really small stuff like the Lionel Baby Berkshires at around 18 inches long, locomotive and tender.  Then you might see the MTH RailKing Berkshire that is 22 inches long, quite a big larger.  The scale Berkshire is 26 inches long.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

You have to have specific examples as we kinda' know what "scale" is if we're talking about 1:48 proportions.  OTOH, there are ranges of "semi-scale", you can have really small stuff like the Lionel Baby Berkshires at around 18 inches long, locomotive and tender.  Then you might see the MTH RailKing Berkshire that is 22 inches long, quite a big larger.  The scale Berkshire is 26 inches long.

Thank you John.
For now, I’m looking at a modern era diesel like my LC ET44C4, photo below. There are some nice Legacy diesels like this that I’m looking at.

Pretty sure you'll find the Legacy models a few inches longer.  However, that's not to say that the LC model won't look good on the layout.   Not all my stuff is scale, and I don't anguish over the semi-scale stuff much.

“Semi-Scale.”

I’ve never liked that term. It’s like being “semi pregnant.” Makes no sense.  

I didn't coin the term Rich, but I know what you mean.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Pretty sure you'll find the Legacy models a few inches longer.  However, that's not to say that the LC model won't look good on the layout.   Not all my stuff is scale, and I don't anguish over the semi-scale stuff much.

Thanks!

Semi-scale started, I think, in 1938, when Lionel brought out the famous 700-series of models.  They were full scale, with sprung trucks and scale size couplers, and the only real flaw was they were not insulated for 2-rail operation.  In my opinion they are still right at the top of true O Scale products.

Then they put giant couplers and big flanges on them and called the result "semi-scale."  The idea that "semi-scale" meant smaller was in the future.  I am with Rich - call it undersize.  Skip all the obscure nomenclature.

I view the term "semi-scale" as "non-scale". It's either scale sized or it isn't (putting aside the truck configuration for a minute). MTH turned that on its ear with some Rail King offerings being scale sized models of smaller prototypes. There have been several articles over the years about converting these to 2-rail models. The other side of the coin was offering the high-end passenger cars and auto carriers in shortened lengths.

Actually MTH downgraded some of the original Premier to "Railking Scale" when they came out with more detailed models.    My example are the Baldwin AS616 and EMD GP30.     Mine were both premier when I bought them.   Later in the catalogue they were listed as Railking scale.

Another odd example is the Williams mikado from the early 90s.   It is nice loco, but the motor was too big to fit in the fire box, and I guess they didn't want to extend into  the cab.   So they added about 1/2 to firebox and made the whole loco longer.    So that one is actually bigger than a scale model should be.

Semi-scale is a bad term because the non-scale items vary all over the map.    There is not one size on all non-scale items.    If there were, they would be a different scale, running on O gauge track.

I believe the terms are Scale vs. Selectively Compressed.  They all share an O Gauge... but that’s about it.

Jon

"NO" scale (Not scale) or better yet "KO" scale (Knot scale)... this may provide some comfort and relief to afflicted modelers.

When I was building my roster, I got almost all Railking (similar to LC+2.0 as far as sizing).  Now that I have too many locos, I get almost all Premier (scale).  I’ve found that I rarely run the undersize locos these days especially if I have the same item in Premier that is true scale.  The Alco PA1 and GG1 are good examples where the Railking version is noticeably smaller than scale.  But there are some cases (RS3, GP9) where Railking locos are scale so they get plenty of run time.

If you are considering LC+2.0 locos, I would check the dimensions to see how close it is to scale.  Otherwise, it may become a shelf dweller as your roster grows.

As for rolling stock, some scale and non-scale items will live together happily and some won’t.  Box cars came in many sizes so large and small ones look OK together.  Scale and non-scale TOFCs might look funny together with trailers of different sizes.

the problem we have is that all the non-scale stuff is not the same offset or compression.     If they were they would do well together.    But if you look at pictures of real trains or go and watch them, and then you see the non-scale stuff together, you see things that don't look right.    They are out of proportion to each other.

Here's 2 photos of a Williams E7 and a 3rd Rail E7.

Williams E7:

3rd Rail E7:

Really not a lot of difference, even though they are of different phases, but can you spot the big one???

The Williams unit is "semi-scale", the 3rd Rail unit is scale.  I think the Williams unit is approx 1/2" shorter...that's the clue for the answer of my question.

I was quite bewildered by this, when I first encountered it. It isn’t really a British thing. Hornby and the other 3-rail O Gauge lines were either generic, or outright toys.

That isn’t to say that OO, the dominant U.K. scale by a long chalk, didn’t employ “selective compression”; it did, but the resulting coaches (in particular, because bogie goods stock was largely unknown in U.K.) were simply referred to as “9 inch Tri-Ang” or something similar.

Hornby have a range called “Railroad” which denotes lesser levels of detail, items moulded on rather than applied, that sort of thing.

Great information by everyone - thanks! So I’m really leaning towards the Legacy line for my first upgraded locomotive because I really like the realism, extra features, and apparent power advantage with the upgraded motors.

One feature I know I like on the legacy is the Momentum and the ability to realistically depict the slow start/stop ‘creeper’ speeds. Do any of the LC+2’s have similar features and if so, how well do you like it?

It almost seems like the major difference between the two lines is that the LC+2’s are heavy on Legacy features but not true scale? Would that be a correct assessment?

I really do appreciate all replies!

Steve

Raven87

Maybe more important than scale vs semi scale may be what the radius your curves are.

The scale locos will look more out of proportion on 027 or 031 curves and have more " hang over" on smaller curves.  The bigger locos, scale or semi scale will look more  in proportion on 042 or larger curves.

Charlie

@Raven87 posted:

Great information by everyone - thanks! So I’m really leaning towards the Legacy line for my first upgraded locomotive because I really like the realism, extra features, and apparent power advantage with the upgraded motors.

One feature I know I like on the legacy is the Momentum and the ability to realistically depict the slow start/stop ‘creeper’ speeds. Do any of the LC+2’s have similar features and if so, how well do you like it?

It almost seems like the major difference between the two lines is that the LC+2’s are heavy on Legacy features but not true scale? Would that be a correct assessment?

I really do appreciate all replies!

Steve

Steve.

     A club member brought in a Lion Master SD70Ace, it had LC+ 2.0 and when running it using a Cab2 it had almost all Legacy functions including momentum settings. Momentum is not available using LC appt.

     The problem with semi scale is sooner or latter someone will put a scale engine next to it and you will say to yourself .....why did I wast my money on semi scale where is the rest of my engine.

     If you have small curves stick to small steam (nothing larger than a Pacific) and two axle diesels (GP, F Units etc) but always go scale. In the long run you save money.

JohnB

If mth’s future was certain I would probably go imperial six axle diesel. I’ve seen them in person and they look awesome.

@Choo Choo Charlie posted:

Raven87

Maybe more important than scale vs semi scale may be what the radius your curves are.

The scale locos will look more out of proportion on 027 or 031 curves and have more " hang over" on smaller curves.  The bigger locos, scale or semi scale will more in proportion on 042 or larger curves.

Charlie

Great point Charlie. On my mail line and its loops everything is 048. On my switch connections and into the yard area I have 036’s. Nothing will be smaller than that and I may even change out the 036’s switches for 048’s eventually.

@JohnB posted:

Steve.

     A club member brought in a Lion Master SD70Ace, it had LC+ 2.0 and when running it using a Cab2 it had almost all Legacy functions including momentum settings. Momentum is not available using LC appt.

     The problem with semi scale is sooner or latter someone will put a scale engine next to it and you will say to yourself .....why did I wast my money on semi scale where is the rest of my engine.

     If you have small curves stick to small steam (nothing larger than a Pacific) and two axle diesels (GP, F Units etc) but always go scale. In the long run you save money.

JohnB

Excellent advice John. As I noted in another reply my main curves are all 048.
Much appreciated!

And, I do really like the six axle diesels!

Steve

@Raven87 posted:

And, I do really like the six axle diesels!

Steve

Don’t we all!!!!

OK, so the answer to my quiz is...Look at the side windows on each cab, the Williams unit doesn't have the small side window/wind deflector that the 3rd Rail unit has, which I believe is where the 1/2" length discrepancy is located.

My point is, it's things like this (leaving off detail) that would place a model in the semi-scale category.

My biggest thing is window location on passenger cars, why eliminate windows when all that's needed is to shrink the overall car by whatever percentage is needed and keep the appearance intact.

@JohnB posted:

Steve.

     A club member brought in a Lion Master SD70Ace, it had LC+ 2.0 and when running it using a Cab2 it had almost all Legacy functions including momentum settings. Momentum is not available using LC appt.

     The problem with semi scale is sooner or latter someone will put a scale engine next to it and you will say to yourself .....why did I wast my money on semi scale where is the rest of my engine.

     If you have small curves stick to small steam (nothing larger than a Pacific) and two axle diesels (GP, F Units etc) but always go scale. In the long run you save money.

JohnB

I’ve never seen a basement big enough to make scale engines or rolling stock not look silly.  I’ll stick with “traditionally” sized trains.  And so far, nobody has broken into my house to sneak a scale piece in when I wasn’t looking.

Jon

@KOOLjock1 posted:

I’ve never seen a basement big enough to make scale engines or rolling stock not look silly.  I’ll stick with “traditionally” sized trains.  And so far, nobody has broken into my house to sneak a scale piece in when I wasn’t looking.

Jon

You need to see Ed Rappe's basement layout!!!

@Raven87 posted:

It almost seems like the major difference between the two lines is that the LC+2’s are heavy on Legacy features but not true scale? Would that be a correct assessment?

Steve

There is at least one LC+ loco (the camelback 10 wheeler) that is true scale.  There may be other LC+, LC+2.0 that are scale, but I don’t know enough about the line.  If you are thinking about an LC+2.0, but you are concerned about scale, I would look up the dimensions and compare the actual size to a scale model of the same loco or calculate from a real loco what the scale dimensions should be.

Here are a couple of pictures from my layout that illustrate some of the frustrating aspects of this question. The subject is simple... truck trailers and shipping containers.

When I first received my Maine 3 Railers MTH trailers on flat cars, including the Wyman's trailer shown, I thought that these trailers look too big. The Wymans measures 10 inches, perfect for a 40 foot trailer at 1/48. The Lionel Southern Pacific trailer is typical of what I'm accustomed to seeing - it measures 8 1/4 inches, which scales out to 33 feet... conceivable but probably an example of compression.

The second photo is one of my Atlas stack cars, which I've always thought of as scale. The upper container is marked 48; it measures 11 1/2 inches, which scales out at 46 feet. The lower container sits between markers on the rail car indicating it is 46 feet long. It measures 10 inches, or 40 feet.

Go Figure...

Jan

I use a pair of scale diesels with Legacy to pull a nine car train made up of mostly semi-scale freight cars, though I do have one scale car and three more on the way.

@HiramO posted:

Here are a couple of pictures from my layout that illustrate some of the frustrating aspects of this question. The subject is simple... truck trailers and shipping containers..........*truncated*

The second photo is one of my Atlas stack cars, which I've always thought of as scale. The upper container is marked 48; it measures 11 1/2 inches, which scales out at 46 feet. The lower container sits between markers on the rail car indicating it is 46 feet long. It measures 10 inches, or 40 feet.

Go Figure...

Jan

"That's What I'm Talking BOUT." <GRU> That's just wrong, I don't care who you are....

@Dylan the Train Man posted:

I use a pair of scale diesels with Legacy to pull a nine car train made up of mostly semi-scale freight cars, though I do have one scale car and three more on the way.

Any pics of the train?

Great examples of things that look off, Hiram and Miggy. The pic of the boxcar in a gondola is definitely glaring.

Thanks.