darkdaniel100
Registered
Hello folks ... Bit of a random request! Could someone post a picture of a side by side comparison of a 1.20.3 boxcar next to a 1.22.5 version?
Cheers,
Dan
Cheers,
Dan
Bachmann 1.20.3 / 1.22.5
- Thread starter darkdaniel100
- Start date
Re:Bachmann 1.20.3 / 1.22.5
Hi spike,
yes, that gives the difference very good.
I have Boxcars, but no photo, if Dan wants to have, i will make one.
But those of spike are ok...because they show something other: The 1:20,3 line is much better in appearance than the other stuff. Especially the Wheels and Trucks and some details, that makes the thing "whole".
I changed from 1:22,5 to 1:20,3 and would never go back.
Hi spike,
yes, that gives the difference very good.
I have Boxcars, but no photo, if Dan wants to have, i will make one.
But those of spike are ok...because they show something other: The 1:20,3 line is much better in appearance than the other stuff. Especially the Wheels and Trucks and some details, that makes the thing "whole".
I changed from 1:22,5 to 1:20,3 and would never go back.
Rhinochugger
Retired Oik
Re:Bachmann 1.20.3 / 1.22.5
I'm not sure about that. What Bachmann tend to do is to make a fairly accurate model of an item, then engage in various acts of badge-engineering. It just depends what prototype was modelled. They have also modelled some 2 foot prototypes at 1:22.5 for 45 mm track, so again, these will look small against a model of a 3ft prototype.
Let's face it - the 1:22.5 range is really quite reasonably detailed for garden railways, especially if you follow the 10ft rule. it may not stand up to very close scrutiny, but then, when your railway is running, how often do you stick your nose 9 inches away from the track?
And for the price, the Bachmann stuff is excellent
funandtrains said:
I'm not sure about that. What Bachmann tend to do is to make a fairly accurate model of an item, then engage in various acts of badge-engineering. It just depends what prototype was modelled. They have also modelled some 2 foot prototypes at 1:22.5 for 45 mm track, so again, these will look small against a model of a 3ft prototype.
Let's face it - the 1:22.5 range is really quite reasonably detailed for garden railways, especially if you follow the 10ft rule. it may not stand up to very close scrutiny, but then, when your railway is running, how often do you stick your nose 9 inches away from the track?
And for the price, the Bachmann stuff is excellent
KleineDicke
Trains, trains, and trains. Oh, did I mention tra
Re:Bachmann 1.20.3 / 1.22.5
Obviously, the Bachmann cars attract more dirt as well.
Richie said:Have a AMS reefer in top photo and Bachmann reefer in bottom pic taken same location on my line if this helps .
Obviously, the Bachmann cars attract more dirt as well.
darkdaniel100
Registered
Re:Bachmann 1.20.3 / 1.22.5
Cheers for responses , I was just interested to see how the cars looked together ... I was thinking about mixing scales together but I think that they will look alittle odd !
Probably slowly replace all my smaller items with 1.20.3 rolling stock ! Cheers
Cheers for responses , I was just interested to see how the cars looked together ... I was thinking about mixing scales together but I think that they will look alittle odd !
Probably slowly replace all my smaller items with 1.20.3 rolling stock ! Cheers
Rhinochugger
Retired Oik
Re:Bachmann 1.20.3 / 1.22.5
the picture's not that good, but, incidentally, the last boxcar is one of Bachmann's 20 footers, based on a 2 ft gauge prototype. so even smaller in outline than the standard 1:22.5 boxcar
One of the things that looks OK, is to run the 1:20.3 cars at the front of the train, and follow these up with the 1:22.5 stock. Both Spike and I have done this. I blew it when I bought a 1:20.3 caboosedarkdaniel100 said:
the picture's not that good, but, incidentally, the last boxcar is one of Bachmann's 20 footers, based on a 2 ft gauge prototype. so even smaller in outline than the standard 1:22.5 boxcar
The Devonian
Registered
Re:Bachmann 1.20.3 / 1.22.5
My initial purchases, nearly four years ago were Bachmann Big Hauler stock, quoted as 1:22.5 and sometimes mistakenly as 1:20.3 and as Funandtrains states most likely near the 1:24 of Aristo Classics(Delton) models.
I don't remember seeing much reference, at that time to the larger 1:20.3 stock except the 'monster' 44T diesel. Subsequently graduating to 1:29 stock I quickly realized that the two scales sat harmoniously together, in my opinion, particularly as the smaller Bachmann stock was smaller than the 1:29 as it was in the 1:1 railroads. My modeling period is based in the 1950/1960 era.
My initial purchases, nearly four years ago were Bachmann Big Hauler stock, quoted as 1:22.5 and sometimes mistakenly as 1:20.3 and as Funandtrains states most likely near the 1:24 of Aristo Classics(Delton) models.
I don't remember seeing much reference, at that time to the larger 1:20.3 stock except the 'monster' 44T diesel. Subsequently graduating to 1:29 stock I quickly realized that the two scales sat harmoniously together, in my opinion, particularly as the smaller Bachmann stock was smaller than the 1:29 as it was in the 1:1 railroads. My modeling period is based in the 1950/1960 era.
Rhinochugger
Retired Oik
Re:Bachmann 1.20.3 / 1.22.5
Part of that confusion was Bachmann's own website. However, to further demonstrate that the 1:22.5 boxcar may not be all bad, I've borrowed one of Cyril's (Glengrant) pictures.
The Devonian said:
Part of that confusion was Bachmann's own website. However, to further demonstrate that the 1:22.5 boxcar may not be all bad, I've borrowed one of Cyril's (Glengrant) pictures.
Rhinochugger
Retired Oik
Re:Bachmann 1.20.3 / 1.22.5
Yes, that's why Aristo and USA trains have gone for a non-scale 1:29 on 45mm track, as opposed to MTH who have gone for a scale 1:32.
am I boring people ?
The Devonian said:
Yes, that's why Aristo and USA trains have gone for a non-scale 1:29 on 45mm track, as opposed to MTH who have gone for a scale 1:32.
am I boring people ?
Rhinochugger
Retired Oik
Re:Bachmann 1.20.3 / 1.22.5
No Steve, ignore the loco, look at the height of the boxcar against the coaches, then look at a Bachmann boxcar against their coaches - it's on the button
funandtrains said:Rhinochugger said:The Devonian said:
Part of that confusion was Bachmann's own website. However, to further demonstrate that the 1:22.5 boxcar may not be all bad, I've borrowed one of Cyril's (Glengrant) pictures.
The K-36 and K-37 locos were the largest fixed wheel base locos ever made, with only the Garrets and Kitson Meyers supplied to South America being larger, they were as large and powerful as LNER A4 pacifics. I've attached a photo of my Kiss K-36 which is 1:22.5 scale next to LGB coaches and you can see how small it makes them look. It is a similar size to my Bachmann K-27 at 1:2.3 scale and is too wide to fit through LGB 600mm long girder bridges.
No Steve, ignore the loco, look at the height of the boxcar against the coaches, then look at a Bachmann boxcar against their coaches - it's on the button
jegametren
Registered
Re:Bachmann 1.20.3 / 1.22.5
Not so. Althought a little wider than 91,5 cms., Argentina meter gauge lines had 2-8-2s, 4-8-0s. 4-8-2s, 2-10-2s and 0-12-2s fixed coupled locomotives, and 2-6-6-2s, 2-4-6-2s. 4-6-0+0-6-4s, 0-6-8-0s and other articulateds Kitson Meyers and Garrats, and now 2.475 H.P. diesels. Pictures on request.
And thank you very much for scale photo comparison, living not so near a G gauge hobbyshop is difficult for me know what items are useful. Thanks again
Jorge from Buenos Aires
Not so. Althought a little wider than 91,5 cms., Argentina meter gauge lines had 2-8-2s, 4-8-0s. 4-8-2s, 2-10-2s and 0-12-2s fixed coupled locomotives, and 2-6-6-2s, 2-4-6-2s. 4-6-0+0-6-4s, 0-6-8-0s and other articulateds Kitson Meyers and Garrats, and now 2.475 H.P. diesels. Pictures on request.
And thank you very much for scale photo comparison, living not so near a G gauge hobbyshop is difficult for me know what items are useful. Thanks again
Jorge from Buenos Aires