[manitouguy]

greetings all - i am very excited to have found this forum ... i am just beginning my foray into the world of g model railroading and i can tell i am 'hooked' already!

i have plans to do a very simple initial inddor layout (as a compliment backdrop / addition for a large collection of vintage 1/32 slot cars and slot car track diorama)

I have done some initial research and can see that options appear to be usa trains or aristocraft at approx 1:29, and mth trains for 1/32.

i am in vancouver bc canada - and the only real choice for purchasing locally seems to be a store called Art Knapp - specializing in garden trains.

I went and had a look - i picked up a section of 3' usa trains track and a nice usa auto carrier car -

question #1 - can someone please give me what the real world dimensions (length, height and width) of one of the usa double decker auto carrier cars would have been? i have searched the internet for the dims, or plans, or even vintage photos but have turned up nothing - when i place my slot cars on the carrier they look fantastic ... height seems right, at store they told me this car wasn't as long as it should be, AND to me the width of the carrier appears a fair bit too wide??? (i am an architect by profession and so try to stay reasonably close to scale - more just curious if the older carriers, not sure what year this usa one would have been on the rails, were a bit wider than some of the newer carriers?) any info much appreciated - i plan to buy several of these to haul my car collection around on - and am considering if i should pull out the hack saw and try to narrow them, if in fact they are too wide?

question #2 - was considering using the usa track - but was just at another local hobby store who is a marklin dealer - i really liked the marklin track and switches - i believe the marklin track is truer to 1/32 scale? code something or other (help!) because it is lower in profile - at any rate i am seriously considering going with marklin track as i can get it more readily and it doesn't appear any more expensive than the usa trains items BUT when i placed my usa trains auto carrier on the track ... problem - it didn't roll smoothly - i think it is because its trucks or wheels are set up to roll on the higher rails of the usa style - and are bumping over every railroad tie connection on the marklin track ??? any ideas for a solution - can i replace the wheels on my usa cars with something like true 1/32 trucks or wheels to fix this???

question #3 - i really like the mth engines - can anyone verify if i will have the issue mentioned in #2 above if i try to run an mth train on some marklin track???

oh so much to learn - but am loving it already - and i must admit that the railroaders i have met so far have been absolutely fantastic in helping out with info, experience, etc. etc.


regards, Ron


ooops one last one - are the mth diesel vo1000 engines available for purchase yet???

 

[Semper Vaporo]

Being an architect you will probably have some problems with the 1:29 and 1:32 scale discrepancy. This is probably why the autoracks seem too wide to you for your 1:32 scale cars. (about 10% too wide).

Another problem, similar to the scale differences, is the use by some manufactures of over-sized flanges on the wheels. In the real world, flanges are barely an inch tall over the tread of the wheel, but in scale toys that would be about 1/32 of an inch, thus much too small and there would be big problems with derailments. The larger rail lifts the wheels high enough so the over-sized flanges miss the spike detail and the more accurately scaled rail lets them hit. Wheels with more accurately scaled flanges are available, but are still a bit out of scale regardless of the 1:32 or 1:29 differences.

Personally, I prefer to stick with 1:32 scale, but that severely limits the choices for rolling stock and locomotives as the larger manufacturers and largest selections are in the erroneous scale of 1:29. I have all MDC rolling stock and Aster Live Steam locomotives and all are 1:32 scale, but MDC no longer make Garden scaled products. I am using code 215 track (the "code" is the height of the rail in decimal... code 250 is 1/4 inch, which is probably what the Marklin track is, and "I think" the USA track is code 332).

Welcome to the wonderful world of garden trains (and the "1:32 vs 1:29 scale wars"!

)

 

[manitouguy]

semper, thanks for the info!

i understand that 1/29 is around 10% larger than the 1/32 - and for the most part i really like the auto carriers - and scale seems ok - the width is curious because any photos i find of auto carriers show the automobile (lets call it a standard sized auto for the day ...) appearing reasonably tight to the side walls of the auto carrier - when i sit an average 1/32 car on the carrier there seems to be about 3 to 4 feet of scale space each side of the car?? so was just curious if this type of carrier was a wider one - will post some pics to show -

do you think trimming the wheel flanges is dodgy ?? that might be the most cost effective means of getting them to roll on the marklin track?? but i worry about the mth engines ???

- this will be a fun journey - not only am i an architect but nearly completed my masters in landscape architecture as well - and have plenty of ideas for my garden railway ... eventually!

anyhow - thanks again for the kind info
Ron

 

[altterrain]

I believe the auto carriers are all based on their flat cars which are part of the USAT "American series" which is 1:24 scale. Plus most use 1:24 and 1:25 scale diecast cars and they would have made them to accomodate cars of that size.
You will want to replace the plastic wheels with metal ones if you plan on running anyway. You can find fine scale flanged wheel sets from Gary Raymond or Sierra Valley Enterprises.


-Brian

 

[East Broad Top]

The Marklin track is code 200 (if I'm reading correctly). That's decidedly on the small end of what would be workable in large scale. Turning the flanges down is certainly an option. Its difficulty would vary based on the equipment. In some cases, you can chuck the wheel directly in a drill press and have at it with a file. The replacement wheels Brian mentions are also a very viable option. The locos would be a bit more challenging, but--again--not beyond the realm of possibility. It's the trade-off you make for a more scale-looking rail. Being indoors, I'd say go for it! Code 200 outside might be pushing things a bit. (Again, not unprecedented, though.)

Later,

K

 

[Semper Vaporo]

Back of the cover for November "Trains" magazine has an advert for TTX showing their Railcar design for what they call "The heavy stuff" (busses, Fire Trucks, Motor Homes, etc.) and it has a line drawing with dimensions of the carrier. I figure the outside dims are probably pretty close to just about all rail cars and the interior would only vary from any others in height. Lengths are probably different than "standard"(?) automobile carriers.

Outside width = 10' 5-1/2",
Top of rail to roof = 18' 5-1/2"

Door width = 8' 1-3/4",
Door height = 14' 8" (doors are in the ends of car.)

Interior width = 10',
Interior height - 14' 8" (same as door)

Top of rail to floor = 3' 7"

End sill to end sill = 81' 8"
End sill to center of truck = 11' 8"
Truck center to truck center = 58' 4"

Coupled length = 86' 2"

 

[DennisB]

I have sent you a private message.
Dennis

 

[manitouguy]

Dennis thanks - i will check

also, i just tried to post some photos ... ??? but couldn't figure it out
on my slot car forum when adding a reply there are handy buttons for inserting images, links etc (i use photobucket)

can someone please school me on posting images - then i can show a few of my situation

thanks, Ron

 

[NavyTech]

In order to post a picture you need to have img in Square brackets at the beginning of the link to your picture and /img in square bracket at the end of the link.

 

[manitouguy]

thanks - but your last post is a bit unclear ?
what do i need at the end of the link?

options in photobucket are

'direct link'
html

and a couple of others -

not sure which to copy and paste into my post?

regards, Ron

 

[manitouguy]

lets see which one works ...

img code



here goes?

Ron

 

[manitouguy]

ah there we have it

img code it is then

 

[NavyTech]

Looks great and it does seem wide but I would not change it as it could hold large trucks like that too. And to let you all know I am the Son of DennisB. Hi Dad...lol

 

[manitouguy]

ok now that i have figured out image posting (i think)

for those interested - a few shots of my scenario

apologies for the state of my work bench ... way too much on the goe as usual!

regards, Ron

 

[NavyTech]

My workbench is clean but not every day

 

[Semper Vaporo]

Yes, the 1:29 -- 1:32 scale descrepancy is what you are seeing. Some (or most) will not notice, but it is very apparent to those of "us" with a discerning eye (Oh boy am I in troube now! DUCK!).

As for your work bench! THAT IS CLEAN! I cannot show a photo of my benches (note, PLURAL)... OR my dining room table... well, you could not "see" them in any photo anyway.

 

[Dick Friedman]

Code 200 or 215 is pretty small for G trains, as others have noted, due to the deep flanges. As a compromise (one MORE), you could use code 250 rail. I've got equipment from all over the map, and all of it runs on code 250. If you really like the look of smaller track, check with
Gary Raymond, who makes scale wheels.

 

[Guest]

i allways suspect, that men with an orderly workbench must be bachelors...

a couple of weeks ago i started on a bridge:

a couple of "darling-do" jobs later:

 

[Semper Vaporo]

Posted By kormsen on 10/04/2008 2:30 PM
i allways suspect, that men with an orderly workbench must be bachelors...





I figured it was the other way round. Bacherlors have nobody to yap at them to clean up.

 

[Guest]

Bacherlors have nobody to yap at them to clean up.

you got a point there.
but then who are these people with orderly hobbyrooms?