But whenever reading MR, I shudder when I see a photo of a diesel and the handrails are far out of scale, if they were on a real locomotive you couldn’t get your hand around it, and those gigantic oversized windshield wipers destroy an otherwise great locomotive, (best to just leave them off!) can’t they make these to scale?, they look like they were made by lego.
Uh oh! Maybe just a rivit head of a different color?
Those oversize details are for people like me who wear no line trifocals.[;)]
That is the very reason I left N-scale in 1983. I wanted to scratchbuild a specific locomotive. I did the calculations to determine what size wire I would need to use for a scale 3/4" hand rail. The numbers shocked me back into the larger scales.
Look what happened when they went to scale size handrails. It’s hard to get the loco out of the box without damaging some hair thin details.
If you are worried something is not accurately to scale, then that might just make you a rivet counter.
SOme details may not be to scale, but that would only be really noticable or bothersome to a nit-picker.
So my diesel’s handrails are the size of a sewer pipe, and the wipers the size of a baseball bat, I don’t care. At least the “details” are there.
Too many compain about details that are NOT there, let alone the relative size of the ones that are there.
[2c]
[8-|]
This is a topic that comes up a lot in the scale modeling community, another interest of mine. I have decided its all about what your mind sees in your memories. All of my memories of trains and locomotives have handrails, windshield wipers and eyebolts. Therefore when I see a model today they seem OK when they are a little out of scale. N though yes the are way out of scale. For some reason though freight car details are not that important to me beyond real ladders and grab irons. Molded on looks to odd for me. But what I cannot see I don’t really care much about.
On the other hand in my memories of airplanes I just can’t see wire antennas. I think that is because a wire antenna on a P 51 seen from 25 feet away is going to be hard to see unless the lighting is just right. So when I see a 1/48 P51 with a strand of .010 wire I think it looks ridiculous.
But that is just me, everyones memories are different so you will see the model differently.
SB
Galaxy, just because your happy with out of scale detail doesn’t mean people that aren’t are nit pickers. [:^)]
“I’m not a rivethead… BUT”
Always ignore anything that comes before the word “BUT”… [:-^]
Never used to bother me, but as I have become a better modeler myself there are some things that now just stick out like a sore thumb (TO ME!). Caboose Ground Throws… They weigh a scale 16 tons I think… Look great with a little 1/87.1 scale man trying to move them… The little metal dohickeys on Kadee and other couplers… what the heck are they supposed to be??? The color of brass and even Nickel-silver rail… Yuch! And the list goes on…
OK, so on my ;layout I change all those annoying things that I guess make me a “Rivet Counter”… You want them on your layout… Be my guest, and I won’t ever tell you what you are doing “wrong” either. None of my business!
As a well known Master Model Railroader always says, “Are you having fun?”
73
Well, it always bothers me when I read a sentence like: “The drivers are 6 scale inches too close together”, as if your eye can detect a difference of .07".
Still, it’s important to some people.
For my money, though, thing have to be big enough to be robust. My stuff gets handled, gently, but handled never the less. Really fine details will break, so I’d rather not pay for them.
I’m no rivet head, but i get what you mean. The only reason i’m not a rivet head is that I don’t know enough to count them[(-D]
I get what you mean, boy do I get what you mean.
I’m in N scale myself, I have issues with bifocals, and my fingers are not as nonshaky as they once were BUT I prefer this scale to HO simply because it s what I used for so long.
I’ve converted handrails to as close to scale as I possibly can…even down to thin copper braid wire if need be. Windshield wipers are kept close to the edge …so as not to be really noticed. Ditchlights…as to era…when running late 1990’s as opposed to early 1970’s RS’s…they got them…
BUT…I don’t go muttering about others ‘unrealistic’ locomotives…why should I? 
Amen.
I’ll stick with the oversized grab rails.
Rich
It’s kind of a Catch-22. If you handle your locos at all–even VERY gently, there’s always the possibility of damaging scale-sized handrails, yet I agree, they do look odd, sometimes. I remember an RS-2 (I think) that I had briefly with scale-sized handrails. I spent more time re-adjusting the details than I did running it (and it didn’t run all that well, anyway, hence its retirement).
Myself, I’d rather live with something a little oversized but sturdy enough to be handled, because inevitably I’m going to have to pick up a locomotive or car to remove it from the layout and I’d rather not have little details either bending, breaking or falling off…
Tom
Oh? really? Well lets see:
you might be a rivet counter IF you:
-Count rivets and complain about their number, lack of, or size of
-Complain about lack of detail on a model
-complain aobut the size of details
Etc, etc etc. We wouldn’t HAVE the term “rivet counter” if it wasn’t an issue to those who complain…as homus said "everything after the BUT is to be disregarded…"another way is to use a bad word not acceptable here to describe anything afer the “But” thing. ANd as mentioned here a few times: WHen the handrails WERE scale sized they were easy to break, so there is a reason for them to be “outsized”.{there may be no excuse for the outsized wipers}
May I remind all of you gentlemen: According to Webster’s New American Dictionary, The word "MODEL" is defined as:
Well, I strive, to seek, to find the answers that suit me. I also think that some materials are more suitable than others, so for handrails metal guitar string is better than ultra fine plastic, but YMMV.
For me proportions are the key. So in the case of the 6 inch wheelbase error I would be looking to see if the wheels now looked liked they were evenly spaced, or looked like there was a difference between the spacing that was consistent with the proportions of the prototype.
Same goes for wheel spoke. I can instinctively see even versus odd numbers of spokes, but unless I count the number I’m not bothered by it unless way out of proportion.
S, I’d say I was a proportion counter, rather than a rivet counter per se.
God I love this forum sometimes.
Galaxy, thanks for the definition. You do realize, of course, that in most languages we are allowed, nay, encouraged, to use adjectives such as GOOD, ACCURATE, GREEN, FLUFFY, PORTLY, and BAD when it comes to a noun like MODEL.
So we can, by the dictionary, and our rules of grammar, say that’s a good model. Or an accurate model. Or, shockingly enough, a bad, or inaccurate model. Even magazines, like MR, when they review models, do this. But thanks for the definition.
I also find the last paragraph odd. You do realize that NASA is a (US) government agency, correct? They’re the only ones who’ve sent men to the moon, and returned them, had a stunningly successful rover program on Mars, and a re-usable space craft.
Huh.
Makes me think that “close enough for government work”, is pretty damn high standard; one that I would
Amen to that Ma’am
I think that that is what i was trying to get across on my first post here, but didn’t quite no what to say.
Let us rephrase the statement: WHY are handrails and windshield wipers on model locomotives seemingly larger?
No “buts” or right or wrong comments, just WHY?
I’m still amazed at the magnificent detail on the new plastic locos And the workmanship on the older brass models.
Easier to make, harder to break.