Track Gauge - you're probably doing it wrong; I was.

[ShrikeArghast]

As a lot of you are probably aware, I've been posting a number of MOCs lately set to what I have been calling 2-foot gauge. However, the entire time I've been building, I have also been looking (naturally) at a lot of train photos, and for a while I've had a strong sense that what I've been calling 2 feet might have actually been closer to 3.

The problem comes down to how tall you assume a Lego figure to be, since they remain an enduring and unchangeable metric by which to judge scale. A lot of folks just settle on a five-foot height, where one stud equals 12 inches, and move on from there. The core of the issue is, aesthetically, the vast majority of Lego builders do not adhere to this logic when building objects in minifig scale. The human eye wants to assume that, proportionally, the minifig is actually taller than 5', and most buildings, ships, trains, etc. actually lean closer to the upward end of how tall a fig is. This is only natural... we do not live in a world populated by people (and particularly males) who are that short (at least not in Europe in the U.S.). Therefore, in practice, the actual height of a minifig for most builders is probably closer to 6', even if, inwardly, they maintain a simple-to-understand perception of a 60-inch tall minifigure.

All of this relates directly to how broad a gauge Lego track actually is, especially since the gap distance between the rails on generic Lego track is effectively 5 studs. Moreover, it ultimately defeats the notion that Lego track is anywhere near standard gauge. And, after doing some math, my hunch was confirmed. Even at the lowest height assumption (re: a figure is just 5 feet tall), Lego track is 60" in width - or 3.5 inches wider than standard gauge track at 56.5".

Sadly, it only gets worse from there. Assuming a middle-ground height of 5.5 feet for our brothers in brick, track gauge balloons (correspondingly) to 5'6" in gauge.

And, if you follow through logically, that means that a 6' minifigure would, of course, lead to a startling 6 foot broad gauge!

Ergo, even at the lowest end, my 2-foot gauge track was actually 3 feet! And it only goes up from there. Thus, even at the most modest height for a Lego minifigure, my track for "2-footers" was actually a robust Cape Gauge of 3'... which means that 2 feet is actually closer to a 2-stud gap between the rails.

More to the point, for a while now a lot of Lego train people have been advocating the expansion of locomotive and car width to account for this discrepancy, when they actually should have been begging Lego to reduce track size. To put that another way, the width of Lego trains right now isn't quite as egregious as it seems; it is a problem that is worsened significantly because the gauge of track is so wrong to begin with.

Just food for thought.

Edited May 11, 2016 by ShrikeArghast

[Daedalus304]

Unfortunately this is the sort of problem you run into whenever you anchor your scaling directly to minifigs. It is especially bad when trying to build scale cars, as minifigs are incredibly wide for their height.

With official LEGO trains, no matter how you base your scaling the gauge is far too wide; but LEGO is unlikely to change it after 50-some years. I don't think that's a problem, really, as it would be a real pain for anyone who has already invested in the hobby. There was enough of an outcry over the switch from 9v to PF, and that kept consistent gauge and turn radii!

For me personally, minifig consideration is very near the back of my concerns for scaling. As an 8-wide builder, I find it's easier to generally scale my locomotives to 1/48 and tweak it from there. My 4-8-4 is built to a slightly smaller scale because there are no drivers available that properly represent the behemoth 80 Inch drivers in 1/48. Minifigs fit pretty nicely in 1/48th scaled models without needing to skew any of the portions, even though their sizes aren't exactly proper.

None of that helps with the problem that the gauge is too wide, of course. Building 10 wide is closer to correct, but then the driver size problem becomes egregious and Minifigs start seeming even smaller. Are minifigs 6 feet tall and 3 feet wide? Or are they five feet tall and 2.5 feet wide? (Or perhaps if you want to build really big they are only 3 feet tall?) No matter which way you go, though, it is probably easier to choose a more clearly defined scaling method.

At the end of the day, there is no really "wrong" option for what scale you choose. 6, 7, and 8 wide are all going to look a little weird with the track gauge and between that and the very limited driver selection there is always going to be some selective skewing required. Then even beyond that you have the 10 wide builders or fellows like Alexander who decide to scale their models as if the standard LEGO train is narrow gauge - building models that are huge but gorgeous.

[Hod Carrier]

LEGO isn't really well suited to scale railway modelling, particularly, as has been pointed out, when it comes to minifigs.

For me, the answer is not so much tied up with questions of scale but of proportion. Quite simply if it looks right it generally is. I don't think many people are going to notice that your MOCs are not quite on the correct gauge track.

Edited May 11, 2016 by Hod Carrier

[ShrikeArghast]

I don't think many people are going to notice that your MOCs are not quite on the correct gauge track.

I know. I'm just anal :).

[Nemo57]

LEGO isn't really well suited to scale railway modelling, particularly, as has been pointed out, it comes to minifigs.

For me, the answer is not so much tied up with questions of scale but of proportion. Quite simply if it looks right it generally is. I don't think many people are going to notice that your MOCs are not quite on the correct gauge track.

And about the size of Lego wheels of locomotives compared to the minifigures too should not be forgotten.

I know. I'm just anal :).

You can do whatever you like, as long as it turned out beautifully. You have obtained.

[ALCO]

Very interesting discussion ShrikeArghast. I always find it fascinating to know what other builders think of scaling and how they decide to build in what scale or size. Shortly after coming out of my Dark Ages I found a cool diagram in determining scale size proportionally (I have since lost the diagram) which advocated for 10 wide. Ultimately I settled on the size standard set by my local Lego train club the NILTC (even though I am not currently a member).

For me, the answer is not so much tied up with questions of scale but of proportion. Quite simply if it looks right it generally is. I don't think many people are going to notice that your MOCs are not quite on the correct gauge track.

I think Hod Carrier has it right on. Pick your size, 6,7,8,9,10...whatever. And then make sure it is proportionally correct because track gauge and minifig size are all messed up anyway.

[dr_spock]

Alternatively pick the size your Train LUG (or the LUG you want to join) has set as their standard.

[greenmtvince]

I don't have a set of calipers or track handy at work, but I think the distance between the rails works out such that if you're modelling at 1 stud = 1 foot, you have standard gauge. The distance between the rails is slightly less than 5 studs. Hence why some modelers insist on 10-wide.

However, traditional scale modelers are known for looking the other way on track gauges as well. Typically to represent a narrow gauge, the equipment (tracks, wheels, and motorized components) of a full scale above or below the modelling scale is used for convenience (eg an HO scale modeler will use N scale track.) Thus, the same track is used for 2', 30", and 3' gauge alike. Only the most dedicated of hobbyists will handlay and scratchbuild to proper gauge.

I've chosen 1:48/8-wide as my modelling scale as the best compromise of detail, proportions to Lego elements, operations, and availability of traditional scale products like decals and couplers. I'm a stickler when it comes to my models, but like my traditional scale counterparts I'll look the other way on track gauge if it gives me good reliable performance.

Edited May 11, 2016 by greenmtvince

[Aaron]

I build in 10-wide. Sure, there are a lot of challenges to overcome, and the cost alone means that it can take years just to complete a few cars, but now that I'm getting closer to finishing some of them the effort is finally starting to pay off. It may still be slightly off (by a few inches) from the gauge of the track, but it definitely looks pleasing to the eye. Adhering to the "1 stud equals 1 foot" rule also simplifies a lot of things and makes scaling much easier. I find that a lot of pieces seem to be designed perfectly for this scale, such that compromises are minimal.

[Brickthus]

In Alternative 1 it is the gap between the trails that matters, not their centres. The gap is 37.8mm, which equates to a standard gauge of 4'8.5" in 8mm scale.

This makes the scale accuracy better than 'OO' and nearly as good as 'HO' if you scale from drawings of other models. I have a book of 4mm scale drawings for UK locos.

The minifigs can have 1 or 2 plates added to their short legs to improve their height to width ratio. There are also some longer legs from Woody in the Toy Story sets.

I use mostly an 8-wide base for UK protoypes with the ability to add multiples of 0.2M either side (4.8 inches at a time) where the book says the loco is wider, but I would build most vehicles with a 10-wide base for US prototypes.

Mark

[Lego Dino 500]

That's a pretty big issue. I mostly alleviate it by modifying my trains, cars, buses, and trucks to a certain width. I don't have anything physical built yet due to lack of funds, but I keep my cars to 4x12x4 studs, trains to 6, and trucks and buses to 5. When it comes to funky scales like minifigs your best bet is to scale relatively rather than exactly.