*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 01:33:50 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Donate

We Appreciate Your Support

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 1686604
  • Total Topics: 118111
  • Online Today: 626
  • Online Ever: 2235
  • (October 29, 2023, 12:32:45 AM)
Users Online

Recent

Author Topic: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56  (Read 16915 times)

Offline Poliorketes

  • King of the Congo
  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 2031
  • Never look back
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #15 on: July 16, 2009, 07:51:20 PM »
I own both the Matchbox Rolls Royce AC and a Rolls Royce Silver Ghost. The AC is definitely 1/48, while the other is 1/56 or 1/60
If you come for the king, you better not miss (Omar)

Offline traveller

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 3743
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #16 on: July 18, 2009, 08:27:39 PM »
I share your scale agony. I am also full invested with loads of 1/48 Matchbox, Solido and plastic kits. I also have Corgi 1/50 vehicles that cause no problems when compared to 1/48. I have also been drooling over all the 1/56 stuff but resisted so far. I look forward hear more about your findings. Last week I tried to defend my 1/48 faith by visiting an armour museum, photographing my 172 cm tall son by the WW2 tanks to hopefully find some relief. I was actually amazed of how big the Sherman tanks looked. I hope to make a separate post of this later on.

Offline CompanyB

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1065
    • http://www.companyb.biz
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #17 on: July 21, 2009, 06:36:57 PM »
Cripes, so much controversy over models...

1/48 will work in a pinch for just about anything, especially if you already have a good number of models you've invested in.

Or you can do like me, and stick all your 1.48 models in a display case, and make 1/56 ones!

1/56 scale is pretty close to the correct scale for 28mm figures...and since the same sculptor that does a lot of our 28mm figures, sculpted the rolls royces, I think I can trust him.  There are always going to be edge cases where the scale is fudged a bit, because the scale does not look right.  This pretty much has to do with perception.  Since if you actually stand next to a real car, you'll see that 1/64 matchbox cars are pretty close to correct for true some scale 28mm figs, but they just don't look right (and 1/50 or 1/43 feels much better).  1/48 is way too big for smaller sized 28mm figs, and you if had any true 1/48 figs you could see that.  But..bigger models always will look a bit more comfortable and feel right...since that is what folks are use too. Also, the more bulky 28mm figs look fine in either scale model on a table.  It's only if you work with the actual vehicle in question, and sculpt both crew and vehicle that you start to see the differences between the scales.  I've mastered models in both scales..it's only a slight 10% difference.

As for the trains, they are a wargame compatible scale, and not really a "scale" model.  They are made to create the general look of the model to provide a good game experience, and be compatible with most of the models we sell (as well as Brigade Games)  If we made a true scale 1/56 train, no one could afford it, and the engine alone would have too many parts to classify it as a wargame model. So the model is a compromise of cost, size and feasibility.  Which must be working since I can't keep either set in stock for longer than 24 hours. For those who are really finicky about true scale trains with rolling stock...your in luck, because we have a line of exact 1/56 armored WW2 trains casting now with more masters in progress.  And they are true beasts of resin and metal.


We are not sure anyone will buy them, but they are coming soon, barreling down a track near you....

former user

  • Guest
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #18 on: July 22, 2009, 05:00:14 PM »
wow

Your soviet train looks really amazing, congratulations

not that I wouldn't like the RCW armoured train
and of course I understand a wargame model has to be affordable
not to speak of not taking too much space on gaming table
to these issues Your models do respond very well

but not to others unfortunately
regarding how detailed and authentic even some toy railway models look, it is hardly understandable how models made of resin and metal, THE material to perform outstandingly in the detail and realism division, can make such a poor impression
when it comes to fully armoured components, of course not much detail is needed, but as soon as one looks at the more civilian versions....
the axle distance e.g.
or the fact that the wheels.....
and the steam engine....
all in all, only an impression of railway models, and a poor one

but never mind, if it sells, that is the best argument...

Offline Golgotha

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 2176
    • BMC Miniatures - All things wargame related.
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #19 on: September 04, 2011, 07:40:14 PM »

Offline Willypold

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 386
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #20 on: September 04, 2011, 08:32:39 PM »
I may have missed any mention of this little item in the discussion about O scale, but just to confuse you even more... As someone said, the British versions of various scales are due to the smaller size of the real locomotives and they all bought the good quality German motors for their models. Now O scale is not only 1:43 or 1:48, it is actually 1:43 (mainly UK), 1:45 (most of Continental Europe) and 1:48 (mainly the US)! :-)

Offline Galland

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 2024
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #21 on: September 12, 2011, 10:14:48 AM »
I always find the scale arguement amusing... we happily fudge groundscales and weapon ranges, but beware the gamer that mixes his vehicle scales.  :D

Haha, so true... ^^ this :D
Tintin - Pulp Adventures in a orderly fashion
Gallows Falls - Western Village
Eisende - Mordheim costal village WIP
Rome - SPQR & Hail Caesar

Offline BAMeyer

  • Assistant
  • Posts: 49
    • Company B
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #22 on: September 13, 2011, 06:38:35 PM »
In the interest of full disclosure I am the partner at Company B that pushed for producing the armored train.  Further I admit that I was motivated purely by the desire to have one for my own gaming table. 

Initial research concluded that the trains purpose built in the latter part of the interwar period where simply too large for gaming.  It was the length of the individual cars that was the factor.  However, trains built in the early and mid period were crafted in various railway yards and used existing carriages and materials on hand. These would be suitable.

We chose to replicate a sample of early armored train cars and scaled them be compatable in size to our 1/56 vehicles.  The armored engine was a duplicate of an engine displayed in a Russian museum.  The overiding factor on size was that hey look right with our vehicles and 25-28mm figures.

The next decision was what to do about track.  We went looking for a commerical model railway product.  The reason was simple, we could cast and sell track for the train at $6-$9 a foot or buy it from a model railway supplier at half that or less. HO gauge was just to narrow, O gauge was much too wide, but S gauge looked just right.

So for the record, the Company B armored train is advertised as 1/56 scale because it's sized to work with 1/56 vehicles and 25-28mm figures.  The track it runs on is S gauge because it looks right.  Hopefully that clears up any problems about scale and gauge.

We are very precise in keeping our veicles to scale but in the case of the armored train it was necesssary to take the license that we as gamers take with terrain and buildings.




 


     

Offline Willypold

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 386
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #23 on: September 13, 2011, 08:22:25 PM »
We are very precise in keeping our veicles to scale but in the case of the armored train it was necesssary to take the license that we as gamers take with terrain and buildings.

Sounds like a very sensible approach!

For my own part I will probably try to get an armored train or two later on - maybe not primarily as a gaming piece, but because I'm just enamored (enarmored?) by trains!

Offline Galland

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 2024
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #24 on: September 15, 2011, 10:13:40 PM »
The overiding factor on size was that hey look right with our vehicles and 25-28mm figures.

but S gauge looked just right.

So for the record, the Company B armored train is advertised as 1/56 scale because it's sized to work with 1/56 vehicles and 25-28mm figures.  The track it runs on is S gauge because it looks right. 

We are very precise in keeping our veicles to scale but in the case of the armored train it was necesssary to take the license that we as gamers take with terrain and buildings.

All very good points, and what I like to hear and see! :)

Offline Burgundavia

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 705
    • Coreyburger.ca
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #25 on: November 18, 2011, 07:41:29 PM »
My vehicle collection is an odd mixture of Lledo and Matchbox, with a few randoms thrown in for good measure. My brother (Wirelizard) has some Models of Yesteryear, but we found them too big compared to the figures.

Also, an extra inch may not look like much (ask any guy), but on a smaller gaming table like we use for .45A, that extra space starts mattering a great deal.

Offline BAMeyer

  • Assistant
  • Posts: 49
    • Company B
Re: sCALE, 1:48 VS 1:56
« Reply #26 on: December 11, 2011, 06:03:47 PM »
Sorry for the confusion.  The Company B train runs on S Gauge track, it is not S Scale.  It is a nominal 1/56 scale.

Bruce
Company B 

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
2049 Views
Last post February 09, 2009, 11:34:45 PM
by Bako
6 Replies
3506 Views
Last post December 25, 2009, 11:11:31 AM
by former user
7 Replies
2702 Views
Last post January 13, 2010, 01:09:15 PM
by Smokeyrone
14 Replies
4046 Views
Last post April 05, 2010, 12:00:59 AM
by P_Clapham
3 Replies
2834 Views
Last post December 12, 2011, 09:02:07 PM
by Mason