There seems to be an interesting discussion about fidelity to scale, with to be
honest more heat than light and entrenched positions.
Being an S scale modeller in the UK, some of the comments strike me as being
the opposite of experience here!
>but simply to have them see me as someone who models in a different but
>equally respectable scale, not in "S - that toy train gauge."
In the UK, S scale is just about the very last scale which would be viewed as a
"toy train gauge" - even Scale7 modellers, every bit as pernickety as Proto48
in the US, tend to respond to S scale in a slightly reverent manner, for a real
falling out, you need to see some of the forums devoted to 00 gauge - 4mm scale
on H0 track - EM gauge (4mm scale on 18.2mm gauge track) and P4 (4mm scale on
18.83mm gauge track), where "we have more fun than you" debates have been known
to rage to no one's ultimate benefit. (And to be perfectly honest, most of this
went on a few years back.)
No, in the UK S scale - first developed in 1896! - as always been the preserve
of the dedicated do it yourself merchant, with very little support outside of
that provided by the UK base S Scale Model Railway Society. Which isn't to say
that we don't refer to the hobby as "toy trains".
Over here, S scale has one set of standards (the real thing scaled down, with a
slight adjustment to gauge - .0012" over gauge - to allow for engineering
tolerances. We don't have these debates!
> Thanks for helping me out. Only 3 on this list seem to want Lionel to do more
> for "Scale" products.
Without wishing to in-flame anyone at all, and certainly not the poster of this
remark, I would say that is a fair comment, but:
1) How many "scale" modellers are on the list?
2) How many S scale modellers are on the list?
3) Given the somewhat robust responses to some points made on this list, is
anyone surprised that few of those interested in "scale" products have
responded?
Here is my own experience, as a teenager (too) many years ago, with RTR 00
gauge items, being worked up to be more scale with better wheels of the correct
diameter, etc.
I spent some time upgrading a set of very nice RTR 4-wheel freight cars, which
had been (no unreasonably) designed to cope with train set curves. As the cars
were long wheelbase, the axles were designed to pivot in a sub-frame which also
pivoted the couplers in well-established Talgo style. This also applied to a
small Bo-Bo I was detailing. Part of the detailing process was to replace the
couplers with scale hooks and links.
Because European railways do not yet routinely use "knuckle" centre-buffing
couplers, the body was raised by 1mm to accommodate coupler movement (tension
locks) under the buffers on radius 1 curves. Unfortunately - and I did not know
this at the time - the manufacturer did not leave things there, but in a desire
to get a "correct" scale height, reduced the height of the open (=gondola), van
(=boxcar) and loco (=loco :) ) by 1mm, thus subtly altering the proportions of
the vehicles. On the van, this was not too noticeable, but the open (gon)
looked awful.
I became aware of this later, when a reviewer showing how to update the models
in a similar manner commented on this silly decision: it made no difference to
the "train set" end of the market whether the overall body height was correct
or not, but to the scale end of the market, it was important, and as they would
be correcting the reasons for having the body mounted too high, then the
manufacturer was effectively ruling themselves out of a part of the market - it
may not have been a big part of the market, but why make a compromise which
reduces sales?
So, I would say to all, by all means enjoy your trains/railroads in whatever
manner you wish.
But to manufacturers I would add, if you get the basics right - such as body
proportions - if you can make compromises necessary for one end of the market
(e.g. just raise the body, or fit Talgo-type coupler mounts to trucks to
accommodate curves) such that the other, smaller, scale end can modify to suit
without carving things off, then you will maximise sales.
Personally, I think taking a loco (for example) designed for the hi-rail
market, and remounting pilots and couplers on the body, refining, replacing and
upgrading the details falls into "modelling" and personalises the model.
And one last point: I can't get to see the prototype, so I rely on
manufacturers to get things basically right - failing that, it is really useful
to know what is wrong, and how to fix it. I take such remarks positively, as
they enable me to make models which are more to scale, but I am also perfectly
happy that this is not everyone's cup of tea. (Earl Grey, please, with a slice
of lemo.)
Regards all, and best wishes for Christmas and the New Year!
Simon
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
