Greg,Tony only: Why wouldn't I like the result? I don't need you to foment trouble by baiting me here as you have done on MLS and LSC and other forums, I'll thank you to not do this in the future here. Leave me alone.
While on the results of the survey, I did find one comment interesting, and having been in the 1:29 camp for quite a while, deserves some "calibration"
The statement by Peter is:
"Note that 1:29 scale is common in the US and most respondents recorded it as G Scale although it is actually closer to 1:32Gauge 1. "
I'm not sure of the motiviation of this statement, but on the face of it, it seems misguided. It implies that 1:29 should be grouped with 1:32, just because they are close numerically.
. . . . . . .
At one point I was told that the 1/24 caboose was part of the "AristoCraft Classic" line, which was remanufactured Delton 1/24. The Delton Caboose normally didn't have an interior, Lewis had his folks design and add an appropriate interior.Thanks for putting up with my long-winded explanation Peter!
There are various theories, one that seems supported by evidence is that given the availability of 45 mm track, the 1:32 looked "small" especially compared to LGB locomotives, so they strove for a scale that could still pass as standard gauge without having the wheels too recessed under the body.
Clearly any scale as large as the 1:26 ish stuff LGB was using was way out of whack. Aristo Craft wanted something that looked more impressive than 1:32 in size but clearly wanted something in a scale.
As Aristo was in other train production, it apparently took HO drawings and tripled them (29 times 3 is 87, 1:87 is HO scale). There are other examples of simple scaling up of other in production models, the first large scale product from Aristo was actually a scaled up O scale caboose, from 1:48 to 1:24, which was produced until the end of the company, but this caboose was too large and a 1:24 standard gauge diesel did not look right on 45mm track.
This is the best I can do on the history, and there are places where Lewis Polk confirmed the caboose history, and did not deny the factor of 3 from HO scale for the 1:29...
The locos were a hit, and Aristo Craft really dominated the market while it was alive outselling it's nearest competitor between 2 to 1 up to 3 to 1 in sales.
When I was starting, coming from "strict" scales of HO and N, it was really hard for me to decide between the accurate 1:32, and the "wow factor" 1:29.... the larger locos and cars combined with much lower cost and broader range of locos and rolling stock convinced me.
20 years later, still happy.
I think Bachmann made a big mistake in going for what I believe is Fn3. I've got a few but they look out of place when running with USAT & Aristo. The Shay is a wondeful loco but it would have been so much more useful (and probably a bigger seller) if it had been a 1:29 model of a standard gauge Shay.Those results are interesting:
- It surprised me that battery power was such a high percentage.
- It didn't surprise me that Fn3 was such a low percentage.
The results from any survey are going to be led by the style of questioning, and therefore only a snapshot - but an interesting one nonetheless.
Fn3 was always going to be a bit of a hard road, because for pure size it was not as immediately compatible with 1:22.5, 1:29 and LGB's flexible scale.I think Bachmann made a big mistake in going for what I believe is Fn3. I've got a few but they look out of place when running with USAT & Aristo. The Shay is a wondeful loco but it would have been so much more useful (and probably a bigger seller) if it had been a 1:29 model of a standard gauge Shay.
The numbers who took part were very small so there may well be inaccuracies. Regarding battery RC. I, and I think many others, have a "mixed fleet" with some battery power and some track power. All my small locos are battery power while my big ones are track power. This works very well for me. I get extremely good running from my small locos and can quickly get one out for a run in the winter. My big locos can pull fairly heavy trains all day long straight off the shelf and I only bring out long trains of wagons during the kind weather months.
Mylocosound diesel chips seem fine for small diesels but somehow just don't sound right in a big loco. If it did I would have bought more over the years.
A single train crew is responsible for the entire lash-up of locos, they are connected together via a special hook-up called an MU - see here - http://www.ogaugerr.com/images/RPM/221_MU_Setup.pdfTac, are the rear locos running under control of the driver at the front of the train or do they have their own driver(s)?