Some funny questions about scales

General Discussion General Modeling Discussion
1

Hello

Okay, please take note that this is out of sheer curiosity and my personal knowledge (and no deal breaker whether or not I will start building the Monogram B-25J bomber I have in my stash).

I have a few (funny) questions about scales.

Why 1/87 is called HO ? (I know it is a scale mostly used for railroad modeling)

Why 1/72 is called “braille scale” ? Is 1/76 considered “braille scale” too ?

Why 1/48 is “quarter scale” ?

How come you have 1/25 scale and 1/24 scale (mostly for automobile) ?

How come you have 1/32 scale and 1/35 scale (for vehicles) ?

Like I said, I’m simply curious ! [:D]

2

I can’t answer all your questions, but I can answer a few.

HO is indeed a railroad scale. I do not know how it was arrived at for 1=87 of a given unit of measurement.

1/72 is jokingly called Braille Scale because working with such tiny parts that are often in those kits will make you go blind :wink: Yes I think 1/76 can be grouped in there as well, although selection in 1/76 is not as widespread.

1/48 is called “quarter scale” due to 1/4 of an inch actual size being equal to one scale foot of actual size. Many of the old Monogram kits that started that scale line (as opposed to “box scale”) were labeled as such.

3

When it comes to 1/35 vs 1/32 in armor, and 1/24 vs 1/25 in autos, I suspect that has more to do with the country of origin of the model company in choosing those scales when they were first established, and what measuring system is in common use there- English or Metric. Obviously the way those measuring systems break down had something to do with the choice of scale. 1/24 is pretty obvious like 1/72, 1/96, 1/48- 1 inch equals x scale feet. The math is simple. Metric, breaking down into tenths, simplifies under scales that end in 5s and 0s. Now, why 1/32 was chosen rather than say 1/36- 1 inch equals scale 2 feet 8 inches vs. 3 scale feet is really beyond me. Aside from most English rulers not having 1/3 inch subdivisions.

4

Perhaps apocryphal, it’s often said that 1/35 was selected by Tamiya as the smallest scale that would comfortably accommodate a pair of batteries (and a standardised motor/gearbox pack ?).

5

I doubt that’s apocryphal. Model railroad gauges ( width between tracks) were derived by the same methods- what was the best electric motor at the time, axis parallel to the direction of travel, that a scale model could accommodate.

Model railroad scales are independent of the track gauge. Unless handlaying track, which is largely a lost, and not much missed, art; scale models are built with the wheel set distance “approximate” to the scale in order to run on available prefabricated sections of track.

O scale runs on track sized to fit Lionel Ives and earlier Marklin running gear on 30 mm gauge track, while 1/48 scale runs on that scale gauge.

HO (half O) runs on 16.5 millimeter track

Which was a manufacturing decision and backs out the weird scale of 1/87. N Scale runs on 9 mm track which backs out a scale of 1/160.

6

stikpusher, it is not english measurement but imperial measurement. american gallon is 2/3s of an imperial gallon.

7

It becomes even more confusing when kits/accessories are marketed as “HO/OO scale”, as HO is 1/87 and OO is 1/76.

Back in the day, Airfix made aircraft primarily in 1/72, but made military vehicles and figures in the mysterious “HO/OO” scale, making it difficult to make dioramas containing aircraft and vehicles/figs in a consistent scale.

8

I’m not a model railroader, but I can remember discussing this stuff I the hobby shop wher I used to work (longer ago than I like to think about). The conventional wisdom was that HO stands for “half O.” But that’s only approximately true. O scale is I/48; HO is 1/87.

Another theory is that some of the problem originated with the British. According to the theory, the British settled on a small model railroad scale of 1/76, which they call OO, and the Americans wanted to use the same track. Real European track is narrower than American track; 1/76-scale British track worked out to be 1/87-scale American track.

That scale of 1/76 got picked up by Airfix for its armor and soft plastic figure sets. (Anybody else remember those? Fifty cents for 48 figures at my local hobby shop!)

I think 1/72 scale got started by another British company, Frog. In the late thirties Frog introduced a series of 1/72 kits called “frog Penguins.” (FROG stood for “Flies Right Off the Ground - which other Frog models did, courtesy of rubber bands. Penguins don’t fly. Get it?) A few years later, the USAAF adopted 1/72 as the scale for its “recognition models.” I assume the attraction was that in 1/72 scale 1”=1’, so a human figure would be an inch tall. I hadn’t heard about “grille scale,” but it fits.

There’s a scene in the great movie "The King’s Speech in which the speech therapist rewards the future George VI by letting him glue a piece onto what looks like a Frog Penguin.

It’s interesting that the boxes of Airfix military vehicles sometimes say 1/76 and sometimes 1/72 - though the kits are identical.

A guy who used to wort for Monogram told me that the company was proud to be a leader in 1/32 scale for military vehicles. On 1/32, you can measure stuff with a ruler marked in 32nds without doing any complicated conversions. Every 1/32" on the model equals an inch on the prototype. I imagine the popularity of 1/35 in Japanese kits had to do with the metric system .Nowadays Tamya makes 1/35 vehicles and 1/32 aircraft. Ouch.

Most of this is based on my recollections of stuff I think I remember reading. I’m anxious to be corrected.

I’m on a long-term crusade to ban the use of “quarter scale.” When modelers say that, they almost invariably mean 1/48 scale, or 1/4"=1’. Given the current trends in the kit industry, one of these days some company is going to release a genuine 1/4 scale (i.e., 3"=1’) P-51, and everybody will be thoroughly confused. I think there are enough confusing things in the world. End of sermon.

9

wooden ship builders use the term quarter scale. they also use phrases like eighth scale (which would be 1/96) and other inch ways to measure scale that drives me nuts (short trip) in my ship club meetings. of course i always ask “what is that in real scale?” which annoys them too. but since i do the newsletter i usually win.

10

Bravo waynec. That makes two of us on crusade.

11

thanks for the clarification on the term. I used English, as referred to in tool sets, particularly wrenches, which I have seen labelled as SAE or English for that system, or metric ;-). Now if somebody here can define SAE in tools…

12

This is an interesting thread.

I’ve always wondered a lot about this myself.

That’s some great info you’ve got there jtilley - especially about the FROGs. Very clever regarding their FROG Penguin branding.

13

I seem to remember in the field of scale models something about the scale being determined by what would fit in a standard size box. Having only a few box sizes made it easier and economical to ship and stack on store shelves. That is in a given box a plane at 1/72 would fit nicely but one in 1/76 would be to long so you go with the 1/72 to avoid the expense of designing and producing a longer box that wouldn’t fit nicely with the other boxes on store shelves.

I believe in some cases its because of the differences in measurement standards in the U.S and Europe. English system vs Metric system.

Also many fields of hobby interest like trains, doll houses, scale models, figures, etc all started out being isolated unrelated hobbies that each developed their own standards. Over time these hobbies began to share common interests but still have their old historical standards.

Until fairly recently I never even thought about using items from model railroads, doll houses, or miniatures. Heck, I’ve even used ideas from the ladies that use Sculpy to make miniature food items. These cross hobby items/ideas have been wonderful for me

14

Ahem (used to represent the noise made when clearing the throat, typically to attract attention or express disapproval or embarrassment) —

1 Imperial gallon = 4.54609188 liters
1 US gallon (liquid) = 3.78541178 liters

1 Imperial gallon = US gallon (liquid) * 0.83267 (NOT 2/3)
1 US gallon (liquid) = Imperial gallon * 1.20095

And 355/113 [1/(113/355)] is an approximation for π within a third of a millionth of the exact value.

15

“Box scale” is something a bit different. Model companies used a few standard size boxes, and the kits were designed and engineered to fit in said boxes. For example, in the early 70s, Monogram came out with several modern US Navy surface warships. A Brooke Class DEG/FFG, a Halsey Class DLG/CG, and a Chicago Class CG. All were marketed in the same size box. But none were the same scale to one another. The Brooke worked out to being roughly 1/300 scale, the Halsey 1/400, and the Chicago in 1/500. Box scale kits also were usually uniformly priced based upon the box size.

16

Scales that translate into so many fractions of, or multiples of, " inches per foot" are sometimes call architectural scales, and are used in the architecture profession. There is even an object known as the architectural scale, a triangular scale (ruler) with twelve different sets of markings, with 1:12 scale, 1:24 scale, and 1:48 scale sets, among others. These are available in stores that sell drafting supplies. These scales go way back, and are undoubtedly the inspiration for the use of these scales in the model building hobby. Some other scales originate in countries that use the metric system.

In both cases the objective was to make calculations easier. Obviously developing drawings for something that is one inch per foot does not stress folks’ math that much, and the various ones that are quarter, or half or two inches per foot are not much harder. This also gives rise to phrases such as quarter scale, half scale, when these scales are not really 1:4 or 1:2, but rather 1:48 or 1:24, because we leave out the … inches per foot.

Of course the introduction of cheap calculators has eased the problem a lot, but the traditional scales remain.

17

Now those explanations make perfect sense to me… especially the reason for selection of 1/32 scale.

18

stikpusher, read this link about sae en.wikipedia.org/…/SAE_International

19

I think one of the nicest developments in the history of modeling was the demise of the “box scale.” As I remember, most of the manufacturers generally settled on standardized scales by the late sixties or early seventies: 1/72, 1/48, 1/144, and 1/32 for aircraft, 1/24, 1/25, and 1/32 for cars, etc.

The last ones to settle on consistent scales were ship kits. Airfix (1/600) and Frog (1/500), and Renwal (1/500) tried it starting in the fifties, and 1/1200 cast metal warships had been around longer than that, but the idea didn’t really catch in the plastic kit field until Tamiya, Hasegawa, Fujimi, and Aoshima started the waterline series in the seventies. As I remember, the big Tamiya battleships kicked off the 1/350 craze in the late seventies.

The only type that’s never really had a standardized scale is the plastic sailing ship. Revell and Heller released a few in 1/96, 1/100, and 1/150, but otherwise sailing ship kits have been all over the map.

It’s to laugh about old Aurora kits, and by modern standards they were pretty crude. But Aurora deserves some credit for using a consistent scale (1/48 or 1/4"=1’ - NOT “quarter scale”) almost from the beginning.

20

Don’t forget about the 1/400 ship kits from Europe before Tamiya started their 1/350 ships.