Being that it is no secret that I am a HUGE "SCALE" proponent, this may sound a
bit unlike me...
But if one wants to get TECHNICAL about this topic, then the only TRUE method
of determining what is scale and what isn't scale is (1) the railroad that is
being modeled and (2) the size of the actual (1:1) rail that is being used (if
modeling what is presently there) or the size of the rail that WAS there (if
modeling a past date) on the particular line (or division) that is being
modeled. Considering the common practice (that most, if not all railroads
followed) of using different sizes of rail in dofferent locations and
conditions, this leaves the modeler a TON of research work to do to "get it
right"... or leaves him (or her?) the freedom of freelancing the line to have
whetever he (or she) prefers.
Now... with that said... since (according to the SHS site) the PRR commonly
used 155# rail that is the equivalent of code 131 model rail, then I feel it
would be safe to determine that just about anything up to that size could,
TECHNICALLY, be consideres SCALE. If any other railroads used larger rail than
that, I can't even begin to guess (nor do I really care)... but my main point
is that those of us who seek to model a particular, real railroad/railway need
to let REALITY of what WAS or IS determine what is SCALE for our layouts...
unless, of course, your entire layout is based on a fictitious and/or freelance
railroad.
Got that? Anyone?
John Degnan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: Edward Loizeaux
To: 'David Engle'
Cc: List, S scale
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 3:55 PM
Subject: {S-Scale List} RE: Separating the sheep from the goats
-----Original Message-----
From: David Engle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just curious. If you drew a line between the small rail, for scale
modeling, and larger rail, for the hi-rail guys, etc., where would you
make the difference?
Would code 125 be the largest "scale" size, and everything above that be
"hi-rail", or would you break between code 125 and code 100?
DJE
Dave....
I have had some thoughts on this particular topic. And I am probably in
the minority. But, since you asked........ In my view, code 125 rail
is too large for a "true scale" layout. End of opinion.
But there are others who continually proclaim that the PRR used a very
heavy rail and that code 125 is the closest size to that rail. For a
while, I accepted that argument without question. In one recent
discussion, an SPF (name withheld to protect the guilty) informed me
that the PRR's heavy/large rail was only used East of Harrisburg (or was
it West?) and only after a particular date (which I have forgotten) and
not for sidings and/or yards. So......unless you are modeling the PRR
east (or west?) of Harrisburg after the forgotten date and have no
sidings or yards, code 125 is too large. Pure and simple. In spite of
all the protestations to the contrary.
Perhaps some cooperative SPF on this List can fill in the missing
details such as East vs. West, dates, rail size/weight, etc. Being a
NYC type of guy, I tend to forget things pertaining to the lesser roads.
:>)
Now having said all that, let me also say that using code 125 rail makes
for a very nice appearance on an otherwise "true scale" layout. Ask me
how I know! My first layout (now demolished) used code 125 rail in
Miller tie strip. It looked fine to my semi-trained eyeballs. When
ballasted/painted/weathered, it looks just fine. After all, we are
talking about twenty five thousandths of an inch here between the two
sizes. And it is typically viewed from a distance of two to three feet
without wearing an Optivisor. So my personal loose modeling standards
would find that code 125 is not a major problem at all. On the other
hand, code 125 is one-fourth larger than code 100 and it is noticeable
if you are specifically looking for that kind of difference.
Starting a new "true scale" layout, I would choose code 100 because it
does look better to my now-more-trained eyeballs. On my present layout,
I am using code 100 in the yards and on the sidings and all over the
place. The true perfectionist would quickly point out that this is
incorrect since yards and sidings typically had lighter weight rails.
The rivet counter guy would be correct. But I am not going to tear
things out and replace them for that reason. Just isn't worth it -- at
least to me. I gotta get this thing finished before Scotty beams me up
to the great roundhouse in the sky, y'know. At age 65, I have only 20
more years to enjoy this hobby.
Some of the above is opinion. Some is fact. Much of the code 125 hype
comes from folks who make or sell code 125 products and so there a small
possibility of subliminal bias. As with most things, use what you like
and don't sweat what other folks say. It will ruin your day and spoil
the enjoyment. Do not, under any circumstances, become a slave to the
Authenticity God. What a pain that is.......
Cheers.....Ed L.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
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:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[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/
