*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 20, 2024, 01:42:45 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Donate

We Appreciate Your Support

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 1689752
  • Total Topics: 118293
  • Online Today: 786
  • Online Ever: 2235
  • (October 29, 2023, 01:32:45 AM)
Users Online

Recent

Author Topic: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56  (Read 16959 times)

Offline leadfool

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1004
sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« on: June 16, 2009, 07:51:56 AM »
Fellow LAF members, I am heavily invested in 1:48 scale vehicles for my 28mm figures.  My latest vehicle is another of the Matchbox Rolls Royce armored cars.  Matchbox has always been indeterminate about scale.  I think it is 1:48 but who knows.

 I have a number of Solido, Vereem, and Museum 1;48 scale vehicles.  Mostly WWII but many are useful for colonial/WWI.

However, I can't find a number of vehicles that I might want in 1:48.  Then I find "Company B" which seems an answer to my prayers BUT they are in 1;56 scale ie. "S" scale for model railroading.  They have a number of vehicles that look great and have that very cool armored train. 

Does anyone own both a company b rolls royce armored car and a Matchbox one, and could they take a picture of them side by side?

Does anyone have any thoughts on how the scales fit together, say could you run the S scale train but have the vehicles in 1:48?

Any thoughts would be appreciated
FOUNDER OF THE D'ISREALI ARMY
_______________________________

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for lunch.  Liberty is a well armed Lamb, contesting the vote.
B Franklin.    ----

Offline matakishi

  • The Teacher
  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 4470
  • Cousin of Hammers
    • Matakishi's Tea House
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #1 on: June 16, 2009, 08:03:37 AM »
the only real problem is if you have the same vehicle in different scale, it can look odd then. The train should work with your existing vehicles but you'll probably have problems with the armoured car. I don't own either version so I can't be more help with that though.

Offline Cory

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 991
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #2 on: June 16, 2009, 03:17:44 PM »
Warning: S scale is 1:64 not 1:56.
.

Offline leadfool

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1004
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #3 on: June 16, 2009, 04:09:50 PM »
Great now there is 1/65 1/56 and 1/48.  I have also found vehicles in 1/43.  Company B says they are 1/56 scale experts and someone else said their train is "S" scale.

I guess my two real question are;

Can I use the Company B stuff with matchbox rolls royce armored cars. 

And are Matchbox armored cars really 1:48.

But any insight into scale is appreciated.

Offline Svennn

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 5334
  • Balding bloke with a 'V'
    • Svenns Little Men
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #4 on: June 16, 2009, 04:18:19 PM »
I believe "S" scale is different depending on where you are in the world - just to be awkward I suppose.

I use Matchbox armoured cars but do not have any others to compare. I also do not have the train but think it would work admirably alongside.

Its an oft repeated subject with many differing opinions but the defining thing for me is "does it look right?" You cannot "scale" wargames figures - period. Take a head and scale it up and you will get different results to the arms, legs, height, waist, hands, weapons etc. etc.

Figures are anatomically incorrect, why?, because they look right.
"A jewelled sceptre plucked by order to serve their cause"

Offline matakishi

  • The Teacher
  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 4470
  • Cousin of Hammers
    • Matakishi's Tea House
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #5 on: June 16, 2009, 04:27:17 PM »
I always find this useful:

Bungle on train scales:

Right I had it explained to me by a bloke at work very well. British train engines are tiny compared to European and American ones.. its all due to the way the tracks were laid and tunnels dug.
So when toy trains started out if the same track was used bristish engines had to be made bigger to fit the motors in than they should have been at the right scale. Hence the muck up now.
British O gauge is 1/43... American is 1/48
00 is 1/76... 20mm
HO is 1/87
British TT is 1/100... other TT is 1/120
British N is 1/144 (?) American and European are 1/160.
S gauge is 1/64 not often used in the UK
Z is 1/220

Offline redzed

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1724
    • redzed
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #6 on: June 16, 2009, 05:09:17 PM »
Great now there is 1/65 1/56 and 1/48.  I have also found vehicles in 1/43.  Company B says they are 1/56 scale experts and someone else said their train is "S" scale.

I guess my two real question are;

Can I use the Company B stuff with matchbox rolls royce armored cars. 

And are Matchbox armored cars really 1:48.

But any insight into scale is appreciated.
Solido military range is actually 1/50. As is the Corgi WW2 range.
Matchbox '1/48' series actually scale out between 1/48 and 1/43.
I believe the Company B train is '28mm' but the track used is American S scale (1/64).
Commission Painting undertaken, PM or email me.

Offline Bungle

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 235
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #7 on: June 17, 2009, 12:49:37 AM »
My ears are burning ;)

Matchbox models of yesteryear Y-38-1
1920 ROLLS-ROYCE ARMOURED CAR
Scale 1:48

http://www.matchbox.3kom.ru/data/yy-38-1.htm?e

RedZed is right about the company B train although of course the track could be either 4'8" or 5'2" depending on German or Russian track. Neither S or O are correct for either, but its a lot easier than making up your own track to the correct scale.

So.... the Company B RR will be smaller than the Matchbox one

if you follow the link above and have a look at the other cars you can get an idea of what will fit..... 1/50 to 1/46 I suppose will go with your 1/48th stuff with little notice.

But really... if it looks right it'll do, very few of us have seen these old vehicles in real life to compare them.

(Scale nasty head on - 1/56 is the right scale though) ;) :D

Offline TMcNulty

  • Assistant
  • Posts: 38
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #8 on: June 17, 2009, 01:14:58 AM »
I had 1/48 vehicles for my 28mm, but sold them all off for 1/56. I feel 1/56 looks with 28mm figures.
I personally wouldn't mix 1/48 and 1/56 on the table.

Offline Mainly28s

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 391
  • Granddad, 28/8/1944
    • The 28mm review site
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #9 on: June 17, 2009, 06:48:02 AM »
My take on the whole scale thing:

http://mainly28s.com/how_to/measuring_scale.html
Olaf Meys
admin at Mainly28s.com
also known as le Comte du Flandre and Immelmann

http://mainly28s.com

Offline leadfool

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1004
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #10 on: June 17, 2009, 07:22:37 AM »
Thanks you , as always a wealth of info. I was always curous how (and why) 1/43 even exists. 


Offline Lowtardog

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 8262
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #11 on: June 17, 2009, 08:05:15 AM »
I had 1/48 vehicles for my 28mm, but sold them all off for 1/56. I feel 1/56 looks with 28mm figures.
I personally wouldn't mix 1/48 and 1/56 on the table.

When gaming WW2 I went the other waty when Corgi released their tanks, at the time only Westwind produced 1/56th (actually 1/60th) and had a period when their production line stopped so I figured what the heck.

Anyway then Corgi stopped-NO HANOMAG FerChrisake! and I regretted it every since then selling off all my figures in the end (not solely due to this mind you)

Offline Bungle

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 235
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #12 on: June 17, 2009, 10:04:59 AM »
Thanks you , as always a wealth of info. I was always curous how (and why) 1/43 even exists. 



1/43 is the British O gauge for model trains, so cars are done to match

former user

  • Guest
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #13 on: June 28, 2009, 03:42:58 PM »
well, here my approach

although figures might very well fit the accurate 28mm 1/56 scale, the proportions are always very different
usually the heads, hands and weapons will be overscale, since they are the main focus

so there never is a correct scaling
apart from the fact that the human size varies a lot, you will simply have to make a decision about the looks of Your figures
as to the vehicles...
here an example
I am currently working on a rather insane railway project for Wargaming and have done much research on that topic
neither S or 0 Gauge will fit, and you will never be able to provide the correct tracks for any region or time unless you make your own tracks  (tracks range from 65-200 cm! even today, spanish tracks are wider inspite any european norm)
a chap of mine once criticized the size of my tracks, stating that it would be impossible to commit suicide by lying across the tracks on 0 Gauge (32mm) for a 28 mm figure, so the scale is wrong
my answer - bad luck for spaniards then, since theit track is 1,72 m life size and the average "dego" surely lies under this height - so they would have to choose another way of suicide...

you already get the hint that I chose 0 gauge, for the following reasons:
1. the nicely sculpted company B is mounted on S gauge (22mm), but it is an elevated scale
meaning that they simply made it taller. The result is that most period artillery pieces are too wide to be loaded on a flatcar! (no discussion here, I tested it myself)  not to talk about sandbags or vehicles
Company B did not even bother to make them wider to pretend a narrow gauge, which would have been a suitable compromise.(shame on You...) And personally, i dislike the civilian range for looking even toyisher than toys...
in addition, the wheels are poorly cast, meaning you will have to overwork them a lot, and they don't even turn! So you either want to use your train in a static role or you want to drag a 5 component armored train made of resin and metal along the tracks without turning wheels...
(sorry Company B - take it for a personal review)
so with no ready made models in sight, the only alternative would have been to build it all from scratch (even I am not that insane) or compromise on the detail to make scratchbuilding reasonable
again no choice for me so -
2. Make it affordable - there is a lot of stuff available in 0 gauge (and S too, but not in Europe), and it is not that expensive if you have a sharp knife and two right hands. Besides, the width of a car is around 6 cm - ideally if You want to show a tank transport e.g. - the correct scale Sherman  through Panther tank will fit.
search ebay for 0 gauge railway models and playtrains - I recommend Faller Hittrain - resonable detailing and rather cheap. Don't try to hunt for an Atlas or Lionel engine, you don't want to spend 500€
Yes, the track is that much too wide as the S gauge track is too narrow - so use larger models for the suicide vignette!

the conclusion is: You will have to decide: if You want to stick to the Company B standard (and maybe other Manufacturers will adopt it) you will have to use smaller artillery and vehicles or convert them
or You decide for 0 gauge
« Last Edit: June 28, 2009, 03:54:16 PM by bedwyr »

Offline Arlequín

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 6218
  • Culpame de la Bossa Nova...
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #14 on: July 16, 2009, 06:16:08 PM »
I always find the scale arguement amusing... we happily fudge groundscales and weapon ranges, but beware the gamer that mixes his vehicle scales.  :D

As far as visual appeal goes I'd say you'd get away with 'Big' tanks better than you would smaller vehicles. A 1/48 Hanomag looks quite roomy against 28mm figures, whereas you look at the 1/56th version and wonder if there's room for your section to squeeze in without attempting a Guinness World Record.

As said before, providing you don't mix different scales of the same vehicle, it should (mostly) look ok. Just keep an eye out for the scale police.  ;)

Having said that, we are often our own worst critics.. I've scoured e-bay for the 'right' scale aircraft, when I could have got away with 'near enough'  ::)
« Last Edit: July 16, 2009, 09:40:58 PM by Jim Hale »

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
2072 Views
Last post February 09, 2009, 11:34:45 PM
by Bako
6 Replies
3523 Views
Last post December 25, 2009, 11:11:31 AM
by former user
7 Replies
2724 Views
Last post January 13, 2010, 01:09:15 PM
by Smokeyrone
14 Replies
4053 Views
Last post April 05, 2010, 01:00:59 AM
by P_Clapham
3 Replies
2849 Views
Last post December 12, 2011, 09:02:07 PM
by Mason