ONLINE
STORE
"ASK THE BACH MAN"
FORUM
PARTS, SERVICE,
& INFORMATION
CATALOGS AND
BROCHURES

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 22, 2017, 01:26:49 AM
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Please read the Forum Code of Conduct   >>Click Here <<
+  Bachmann Message Board
|-+  Discussion Boards
| |-+  General Discussion
| | |-+  Scale 55 - Modeling 3 foot narrow gauge on HO track
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] Print
Author Topic: Scale 55 - Modeling 3 foot narrow gauge on HO track  (Read 6693 times)
Ken

View Profile
« Reply #30 on: November 07, 2009, 10:41:17 AM »


  NarrowMinded

     Re Columbian Rlys, majority were either 3FT or 1 Meter.(3ft 3&3/8in)

   Two books covering Columbian Railways from my library

    For a general overview

    Narrow Gauge in Columbia
     Christopher Walker
     Trackside Pub
      ISBN 1.900095.24.6

    Locomotive Coverage  (400+ steam, 150+ Diesel)

    La Segunda Mula  de Hierro  (The Second Iron Mule)
    Gustavo Arias de Greiff
    Pen Clips Publicidad & Diseno Ltda.  (www.penclips.net)


    Ken Clark
      GWN


     
Logged
hminky
Guest
« Reply #31 on: November 07, 2009, 10:43:51 AM »

Dear All,

I'm gonna hijack this thread back to topic.  Sorry. 

I have thought of a name for this scale.  Since it is 1:55 or 5.5 mm/ft, how about FF, or Dublef, e.g. FFn3

Kind of a cross between Dublo (OO) and F = Fifteen mm/foot.

It would be interesting to compare the (various HO gauge) rail codes (heights) to prototypical 3 foot gauge rail heights. 

Is there a rail weight (lb/yard) to height conversion formula or table to reference?

Peeking over the edge of the Abyss....with a mirror on the end of a 10 foot long pole..

Joe Satnik

Read my signature :

"We DON'T need NO stinkin' LETTER"

I don't even want to go to that letter designation crap. That idea was a total waste and gives no indication of the size. My Scale 55 comes from the approximate 1/55. Wouldn't it be easier with "Scale48" or just "48 scale" instead of the jumble of incoherent letters that indicate nothing.

The .083 is about 60 lbs in Scale 55.

Rail sizes the best is:

http://www.s-scale.org.uk/rails.htm

Harold

PS: the proto boys have already gone there : P:87. P:48. etc
« Last Edit: November 07, 2009, 11:40:24 AM by hminky » Logged
hminky
Guest
« Reply #32 on: November 07, 2009, 10:47:23 AM »


  NarrowMinded

     Re Columbian Rlys, majority were either 3FT or 1 Meter.(3ft 3&3/8in)

   Two books covering Columbian Railways from my library

    For a general overview

    Narrow Gauge in Columbia
     Christopher Walker
     Trackside Pub
      ISBN 1.900095.24.6

    Locomotive Coverage  (400+ steam, 150+ Diesel)

    La Segunda Mula  de Hierro  (The Second Iron Mule)
    Gustavo Arias de Greiff
    Pen Clips Publicidad & Diseno Ltda.  (www.penclips.net)


    Ken Clark
      GWN


     

What does that have to do with this thread?
Harold
Logged
Ken

View Profile
« Reply #33 on: November 07, 2009, 12:21:20 PM »



 Harold

    "NarrowMinded" asked a question on this thread, I just provided an answer.
 

    Ken Clark
     GWN
Logged
mf5117

View Profile
« Reply #34 on: November 07, 2009, 01:05:08 PM »

Did you know ...... Gauge is the distance between the two rails on a railway. In Britain the standard is 4ft 8 1/2 inch because when wagon railways were pulled the gauge had to be the right width for a horse to walk between the rails that the wagon was on .

For the U.S. , it was not until the mid 1880's that a standard gauge of 4ft 8 1/2 inch was adopted .This width was used because of federal orders .
Logged
hminky
Guest
« Reply #35 on: November 07, 2009, 01:13:26 PM »

I have counted to ten a lot.

If you notice someone has posted to your thread and find it is complete bullc*ap, it gets old.

Harold
Logged
scottychaos


View Profile WWW
« Reply #36 on: November 07, 2009, 09:52:01 PM »

Harold,
I like your idea!  Grin
nice way to make correct 3-foot gauge!
well done..

I also invented a new scale..a few years ago..
so far it hasnt caught on! and im still the only one modeling in the scale..
but thats fine!  Wink
because im happy with it..

I also debated on names for the scale..I settled on 29n2, because the scale is 1/29 scale, and its narrow gauge, and its 2 foot gauge..

just going with historic precedent, If I were you, I probably would have gone with 55n3 for the name..because the "n" is always used for narrow gauge, and the 3 is for 3-foot..technically just "Scale 55" would suggest standard gauge in 1/55 scale..but its your scale, you dont have to agree! Wink

here is all my musing and building in 29n2 scale:

http://gold.mylargescale.com/scottychaos/29n2/

Next spring im going to finally begin my outdoor garden railroad, and im planning to lay down some 29n2 scale 2-foot gauge track alongside the standard gauge track..


Scot
« Last Edit: November 07, 2009, 09:55:30 PM by scottychaos » Logged

glennk28

View Profile
« Reply #37 on: November 07, 2009, 09:56:13 PM »

My "Why" refers to having to basically re-invent the wheel.  You will be having to scratch build almost everything.  There is enough difference in size that very few parts from any other scale can be adapted and look right. 

One reason for the One0 push was to model common 1:48  equipment on commercially available track.  There has become a line of a few On30 track components, however we are finally seeing some usable and well-proportioned track components properly done for On3. 

Even though I am "gainfully unemployed" (retired ) I still have other things that need doing--that encroach on my available time.  I therefore prefer to spend my RR time building what I can't get, rather than re-build the basics. 

I have seen a few  "free-scale" layouts--and the modeling was interesting--but I'd rather spend my time supplementing the available equipment.

My 3 cents' worth.

gj
Logged
hminky
Guest
« Reply #38 on: November 07, 2009, 10:45:50 PM »


technically just "Scale 55" would suggest standard gauge in 1/55 scale..but its your scale, you dont have to agree! Wink

Scot

That's right it is Scale55 or 55 Scale, like P:87, P:48 designate a numerical size using prototype standards. 55n3 is a subset and if you used proto standards it would be P:55.

And it isn't my scale I am just felt it needed a name. The have used this size in England since 1963.

Harold

PS: The large Bachmann On30 locos could be converted to Scale55 standard gauge with new running gear at 1.015 gauge. On3 equipment is the right size for rolling stock.

The Bachmann On30 box car closely matches the Jersey Central boxcar in the 1879 Car Builder's dictionary.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2009, 10:57:20 PM by hminky » Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!