*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 22, 2018, 07:48:41 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Recent

Poll

What would be your preferred track width for 28mm gaming

O gauge - 32mm
11 (29.7%)
S gauge - 22.5mm
17 (45.9%)
OO gauge - 19mm
3 (8.1%)
HO gauge - 16.5mm
1 (2.7%)
Other measurement (please state)
5 (13.5%)

Total Members Voted: 37

Author Topic: A question of gauge  (Read 8306 times)

Online OSHIROmodels

  • Moderator
  • elder god
  • *
  • Posts: 18087
  • Custom terrain a speciality.
    • Oshiro modelterrain
A question of gauge
« on: January 29, 2015, 09:08:45 AM »
Ladies and gents, as the question asks, what would be your preferred gauge (distance between the rails) for 28mm gaming?

I've listed the main scales that are close to 28mm and an option for something else.

Please let's not have this as a scale/gauge debate as there are already a few of these on the board, I just want to gauge (pun intended  :D ) people's preference for gaming railways  :)

cheers

James

Offline FramFramson

  • galactic brain
  • Posts: 8686
  • Emoticon Knight-Errant and Baron of Bad Posting
Re: A question of gauge
« Reply #1 on: January 29, 2015, 10:01:21 AM »
Just to clarify, is this "ideal" or "for practical purposes"?

See, there's something of a general preference for S/On30/Poundland trains all of which are on or about the right size. S is arguably the best fit, but is virtually unavailable. On30 is almost the same size as S only running on HO track. Because On30 is fairly easy to obtain, in practice a lot of people who might otherwise choose S opt instead for On30 (On30 may also be strictly superior in certain cases, such as for narrow-gauge colonial railways). Then there's the cost-conscious folks who are happy with Poundland-type trains because both S and On30 would be too expensive for them.

I literally just placed an order for $85 of S-scale track yesterday, so I know where I'm bound.  lol ::)
« Last Edit: January 29, 2015, 10:04:19 AM by FramFramson »

Offline Cubs

  • scatterbrained genius
  • Posts: 2834
  • "I simply cannot survive without beauty ..."
Re: A question of gauge
« Reply #2 on: January 29, 2015, 10:16:02 AM »
Depends on the railways gauge you want to depict, because they varied a lot. If it was me, I'd stick as close as I could to the historically accurate comparative size as I could, within reason and depending on budget and availability.
'Sir John ejaculated explosively, sitting up in his chair.' ... 'The Black Gang'.

Paul Cubbin Miniature Painter

Offline pocoloco

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • scatterbrained genius
  • *
  • Posts: 3869
Re: A question of gauge
« Reply #3 on: January 29, 2015, 10:35:56 AM »
Yes,

more historically accurate, the better.

You could thus offer three gauges, one based on the broad gauge of 1520/1524mm gauge, the second for the standard gauge of 1435,1mm and the third for the narrow gauge of ~1067mm.

That would enable to make systems such as pictured in the link below, combining both broad and standard gauges:

http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raideleveys#mediaviewer/File:Haparanda-Tornio_rail_bridge_Sep2008.jpg

So I rest my case, make three gauges :)

Offline FramFramson

  • galactic brain
  • Posts: 8686
  • Emoticon Knight-Errant and Baron of Bad Posting
Re: A question of gauge
« Reply #4 on: January 29, 2015, 05:40:32 PM »
For whatever it's worth, existing commercial hobby gauges of track are cheap and being able to match S, or HO (for On30), or other existing track sizes will make it easy for people to buy off-the-shelf track without getting fiddly.

Offline Cory

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • mad scientist
  • *
  • Posts: 968
Re: A question of gauge
« Reply #5 on: January 29, 2015, 05:51:23 PM »
My preference is in part determined by the ground scale - for RCW for example with a focus on units I go with HO track so that the rail line doesn't excessively dominate the board.

For more skirmish games with a ground scale closer to the figure scale I use track that I reset the rails for at 1/56.
.

Offline TimK

  • assistant
  • Posts: 30
  • Occasional modeller
Re: A question of gauge
« Reply #6 on: January 29, 2015, 06:03:08 PM »
If you are asking for the purpose of making rolling stock, the answer is simple, make the wheels an interference fit on the (separate) axles so that the user can then gauge them to their preferred track. This technique is often used by the hardline railway modellers who see OO as too inaccurate and regauge to EM (18.83mm @ 1/76), a quick spin through the railway modelling press should throw up some examples.

As for Pocoloco's suggestion that broad gauge is 1520mm, I refer him to Mr Brunel's broad gauge Great Western Railway at 7' (2133.6mm)   ;)

Tim

Offline pocoloco

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • scatterbrained genius
  • *
  • Posts: 3869
Re: A question of gauge
« Reply #7 on: January 29, 2015, 07:56:04 PM »
Haha, well that surely is/was one of the broadest gauges :) I tried to convey just some sort of general current consensus  o_o

Online OSHIROmodels

  • Moderator
  • elder god
  • *
  • Posts: 18087
  • Custom terrain a speciality.
    • Oshiro modelterrain
Re: A question of gauge
« Reply #8 on: January 29, 2015, 08:11:55 PM »
Many thanks for the replies gents  :)

After looking around a fair bit at lunch time over various fora I think it will probably be a case of varying wheel positions rather than stock rails as suggested above...

Watch this space...

cheers

James

Offline Heisler

  • scientist
  • Posts: 483
Re: A question of gauge
« Reply #9 on: January 30, 2015, 04:52:28 PM »
Varying the width of the trucks on rolling stock is probably not much of an issue. Trying to adjust the width of the trucks on a locomotive is a whole different proposition, especially for steam locomotives. If you try to adjust the driving wheels on a steam locomotive you will have to figure out how to adjust the side rods and the valve gear so they don't bind.

And from the perspective of the rolling stock it would be much easier to swap out the trucks completely than to go through and adjust all the wheels.

Quite frankly you are better off picking one available gauge of track whether that is HO/On30, S, Sn3 or O.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 04:54:11 PM by Heisler »
It's NOT denial. I'm just very selective about the reality I accept. -- Calvin (Calvin and Hobbes)
<img src="https://i.imgur.com/jGGuwIV.jpg" title="source: imgur.com" />

Offline Michi

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • scatterbrained genius
  • *
  • Posts: 3230
  • Hoist the colours!
    • Tableterror
Re: A question of gauge
« Reply #10 on: February 02, 2015, 05:08:19 PM »
Just to clarify, is this "ideal" or "for practical purposes"?

S is arguably the best fit, but is virtually unavailable. On30 is almost the same size as S only running on HO track. Because On30 is fairly easy to obtain, in practice a lot of people who might otherwise choose S opt instead for On30 (On30 may also be strictly superior in certain cases, such as for narrow-gauge colonial railways).

I know where I'm bound.  lol ::)

100% !

Offline Michi

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • scatterbrained genius
  • *
  • Posts: 3230
  • Hoist the colours!
    • Tableterror
Re: A question of gauge
« Reply #11 on: February 02, 2015, 05:14:28 PM »
I think it will probably be a case of varying wheel positions rather than stock rails as suggested above...

James this is actually what the prototypical railways did actually: pressing the wheels on the axles to allow matching different gauges. There was continental rolling stock where this was regularly done when it passed the frontier to and from Russia for example (1435mm to 1524mm and back) and the narrow gauge military field railway steam and diesel engines of the Heeresfeldbahn had outer frames which allowed pressing the wheels to either 600 or 750mm gauge.

Offline eilif

  • mastermind
  • Posts: 1904
    • Chicago Skirmish Wargames
Re: A question of gauge
« Reply #12 on: February 02, 2015, 08:39:52 PM »
Completely depends on your priorities.
If it's for realism. I'd go with S.  
If it's for ease of acquisition, price and doing less modification, I'd choose O.

So unless someone else is paying, I'd probably go O scale.

It's a bit of an outlier, but I'm doing a sci-fi elevated train for my layout. It's all on Lionel style O-27 tri-rails.  With no sleeper, metal connections and 3 rails, it looks nice and spacey.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2015, 10:55:05 PM by eilif »
Chicago Skirmish Wargames:
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/chicagoskirmish/
Chicago Skirmish Wargmes, Club Blog:
http://chicagoskirmish.blogspot.com/

Offline FramFramson

  • galactic brain
  • Posts: 8686
  • Emoticon Knight-Errant and Baron of Bad Posting
Re: A question of gauge
« Reply #13 on: February 02, 2015, 08:57:21 PM »
Two of the things I like most about S track are that a figure on a smaller base (22mm or smaller) can be stood cleanly between the rails and that the ties are sized much more realistically against figures.

... which reminds me that American Models still hasn't confirmed my track order. Better get to seeing what's up.  :?

Offline Constable Bertrand

  • scatterbrained genius
  • Posts: 3315
    • Make and Paint Blog
Re: A question of gauge
« Reply #14 on: March 09, 2015, 09:50:47 PM »
James, perhaps if you want to do rails do a two part kit.

1)Sleepers and rail/ties
2)second rail.*

*if that's a little flimsy perhaps do tri tail. Lock in the middle rail and leave the outer one floating. You wouldn't be able to do curves though!  o_o

I just measured my toy train from K-Mart. I assumed it was running HO, lucky me in on 00 at 19mm lol lol.

Cheers
Matt.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
9 Replies
4027 Views
Last post November 06, 2010, 04:31:29 PM
by Bungle
15 Replies
8809 Views
Last post July 17, 2010, 02:11:19 PM
by Bungle
15 Replies
5817 Views
Last post October 31, 2011, 10:35:38 PM
by Scout_II
7 Replies
10290 Views
Last post February 08, 2015, 11:42:49 AM
by roadskare63
11 Replies
6394 Views
Last post February 12, 2017, 10:38:57 AM
by Ultravanillasmurf