19mm gauge 00

[mogman1969]

I've done a bit more delving. There was a small flurry of modellers using 19mm gauge or thereabouts just before the war and in March 1937 J.N.Maskelyne the editor of Model Railway News suggested that henceforth 16.5mm should be H0 gauge (by then well established in the USA) and 00 should be the 19mm gauge adopted by a "but few but growing" number of modellers.

 

The Wimbledon Club - where H0 was developed- reported in May 1939 a new clubhouse in which 0, H0 and 19mm gauge layouts were being built. The next month H.D. Pinnington started a series of very useful articles describing the step by step construction of his new shelf layout with a gauge of between 18.5 and 19mm. He was the first person I've yet come across who quoted the exact gauge for 4mm/ft as 18.83mm. In his third article he went into some detail about track standards and laying out points but quickly concluded the series with a look at scenery soon after the outbreak of war in 1939. He did contribute one short piece in August 1940 about a bridge section to cross a doorway in his room and resurfaced once in 1948 with a description of West Kilbride station where he and his brother (who had briefly described a small folding layout in a letter to MRN in 1939 ) had served together in the army during the war.

 

So far, Norman Mathews is the only post-war modeller I've come across who used 19mm gauge but presumably it was generally replaced by EM once 18mm gauge became the preferred "fine scale" gauge for 4mm/ft

[mogman1969]

The clubhouse was hit by a bomb in ww2 alas , there was a small collection of items pertaining to ho 2mm and 19mm held by the Wimbledon model railway club , mostly photographs as I recall

[Pacific231G]

The clubhouse was hit by a bomb in ww2 alas , there was a small collection of items pertaining to ho 2mm and 19mm held by the Wimbledon model railway club , mostly photographs as I recall

Thanks Mogman.

Was that small collection what was left after the bomb or what they had that was destroyed by it? If the first then presumably they might still at least have the photographs. 

[mogman1969]

A collection of pre war photos and interestingly some copy's of the wmrc's magazine which if I recall correctly had articles on scratch building in 2 & 3.5 mm . I was the clubs librarian in the 90s and made sure the old stuff was all in one place lol

[John_Miles]

I suggest that someone sets up a society to promote 19mm gauge 1 to 76 modelling. They can then post derogatory comments about the alternatives while also devising a set of standards. The obvious thing then is for the members to have a huge row and split into two groups who don't speak to each other. This is what finescale modelling is all about.

[Pacific231G]

I suggest that someone sets up a society to promote 19mm gauge 1 to 76 modelling. They can then post derogatory comments about the alternatives while also devising a set of standards. The obvious thing then is for the members to have a huge row and split into two groups who don't speak to each other. This is what finescale modelling is all about.

Starting with whether the scale is 1:76 or 1:76.2

American HO is 1:87.1 while European H0 is 1:87 though we should never lose sight of the fact that the American standard gauge of 4ft 8.5ins is 0.1mm wider than our 1435mm  !!

[kevinlms]

The exclamation mark next to mention of making motors is understandable, but I recall Ross Pochin making his own motors in 60s mags.  His had very neat integral flywheels.

 

Regards,

Boatman

IIRC Ross Pochin used 24 Volt motors, so had to make his own. He believed 24 Volt to be more reliable than 12 Volts. Alex Jackson did too. It must have been a Manchester MRC de facto standard.

[Phil Copleston]

I've just come across this thread. Most interesting.

 

I have a friend in Southwold, Suffolk who has some American OO, 19mm gauge stuff (or he did until a while ago). Compared to American HO it has a nice "chunky" appearance. The American OO scale/gauge combo is an interesting survivor from the 1940/50s "scale/gauge wars" - a bit like British HO is today.

 

American OO is actually still very much alive and and now a bit of a niche interest: http://americanoo.blogspot.co.uk/ 

[Orange Cat]

 The American OO scale/gauge combo is an interesting survivor from the 1940/50s "scale/gauge wars" - a bit like British HO is today.

 

 

 

Now that correspondence in the model railway press of the day makes present day scale and gauge arguments look a bit tame.

[PhilJ W]

I've just come across this thread. Most interesting.

 

I have a friend in Southwold, Suffolk who has some American OO, 19mm gauge stuff (or he did until a while ago). Compared to American HO it has a nice "chunky" appearance. The American OO scale/gauge combo is an interesting survivor from the 1940/50s "scale/gauge wars" - a bit like British HO is today.

 

American OO is actually still very much alive and and now a bit of a niche interest: http://americanoo.blogspot.co.uk/ 

Does your friend follow the blogspot? There is also a group on Facebook for American 00.

[Phil Copleston]

Does your friend follow the blogspot? There is also a group on Facebook for American 00.

 

Hi Phil,

 

I doubt it: he is quite elderly now. And I think he eventually decided to sell his American 00. If I wasn't committed to American S scale, I'd certainly be looking at American 00 as an alternative - something else which is a bit 'different'!

 

Thanks for the suggestion - I shall check out that American 00 Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/American-OO-Today-117946588236096/

[Phil Copleston]

Also, I have another friend who scratchbuilds American 3-foot narrow gauge railroads in 4mm scale on TT track - OOn3. Most unusual. Not 19mm gauge, for sure, but American 4mm scale nonetheless.

 

Here are a few photos (by me) of the characterful scratchbuilt 4mm (1:76) scale, 12mm gauge models by Graham Ray:

 

 

 

OOn3 2-truck Climax scratchbuilt circa 1965 by Graham Ray

 

 

 

OOn3 Mitch-Cal 2-cylinder Shay by Graham Ray

[Phil Copleston]

More American 4mm scale models (OOn3) by my friend Graham Ray:

 

 

 

Logging 2-6-6-2T Mallet locomotive, 4mm scale, 12mm gauge

 

 

 

 

Log cars and logging caboose. All scratchbuilt in 1:76 scale

[Phil Copleston]

And lastly, some rather more 'mainline' American narrow gauge models and structures by Graham Ray - all 4mm scale, OOn3.

 

 

 

 

 

This charming little 'Consolidation' was entirely scratchbuilt by Graham Ray; his first model in American 4mm scale

 

 

 

A couple of passenger cars to go with the 2-8-0

 

 

 

Two more views of Graham's 2-8-0

 

 

 

And finally, some of the 4mm scale American buildings from Graham Ray's 'Forks Creek Bridge' layout - seen here temporarily relocated to a 'Slim Gauge Circle' meeting in Bilton, near Rugby.

 

Needless to say, nearly everything on Graham's home layout is perforce hand-made, excepting a few items adapted from HO or British OO. Graham tells me that he first started working in American OOn3 by accident several decades ago as he was in the forces at the time and largely unaware of other scale options, and as 12mm gauge TT track was then available, building 3-foot gauge prototype models to suit that track seemed logical. Mostly out of habit, he has stuck with it!

 

Although quite plain in fine detail compared to commercial HOn3 models, I rate Graham's scratchbuilt 4mm models to be the work of a skilled and dedicated modeller. I think they are super and exude bags of prototype character and charm. I hope you agree?

 

Please forgive this 'incursion' of OOn3 narrow gauge models into this discussion about '19mm gauge OO', but as it is sort of related I thought you might be interested to learn of the wider modelling being done in American 4mm scale.

 

All the photos were taken by me in 2003 and 2004 and have never been published before.

[bertiedog]

The reason that 19mm never took of here was the same as HO, if you build a scale model to run on a scale track, then you have to have scale curves, mainly due to the drivers usually being fitted with splashers on UK prototypes.

The nearer to scale you go, then you must accept the limitations are to be the same as the real thing.

Just before the war Wimbledon was mentioned and Stewart Reidpath was involved with 16.5 HO and 4mm on 19mm.

He determined from tests that the average wheel profile would not keep the train on the tracks in either scale if the wheels were thinned down, also he worked out the minimum curves at about 8foot radius, far to much for British size rooms. HO was adopted as the Continental scale as locos had few splashers, and could have added sideplay.

 

But in 19mm or 18mm, the sideplay problem was insoluble, ( we know it can be done with P4), but in those days P4 would never have got off the ground.

 

To most peoples minds the best solution was to adopt a fine scale standard that compromised on the wheels being far wider than scale, these were the so called fine scale Essar Wheels, Romford, or Hamblings.

 

However the other issue resurfaced, that of curves and only )) with 16.5 appeared to offer a solution. This was supported by Arthur Hambling, although he also supported 18 ( EM), as it used the 00 components in a different way.

 

00 allows a railway to operate in the average 12x12 room common in the UK, and in lofts spaces.

 

The American 4mm size also used HO wheels etc., but without splashers and with an average of 20x20 or more size available was practical. A lot of US houses have cellars that are vast, so no curve problems.

 

However 4mm in the US seems to have got at the time, (Post 42/43) into a small group of enthusiasts, and just a few specialist makers. The bigger makers like Varney pushed HO hard after the war, writing several articles about the advantages of the slightly smaller scale in landscaping terms, more railroad for your dollar!!

 

The technical arguments disappeared into the mists by about 1950, and HO won the battle.

 

In the UK the arguments rumble on, but of one thing we can be pretty certain, in Frank Hornby had adopted 19mm he would have had to distort the designs to fit the gauge more than he did with 00.

 

00 allowed the unique British outlines to be modelled in a practical and pragmatic way, at the expense of true scale, some thing neither HO or 4mm 19 gauge could offer, without severe compromises.

 

It is all done and dusted now, use P4 and scale dimensions! or HO and scale dimensions, or the messy compromises of OO gauge......which at least work.......

 

Stephen

[bertiedog]

Try the site

 

http://hoseeker.net/

 

Which has almost every US maker of HO and 4mm listed with catalogues and brochures, parts lists etc, there are thousands to plough through. For the life of me I cannot remember the names of the 4mm makers, but I assure you they are in the lists, as are Varney's articles about HO and it's advantages over 4mm and S gauge. There were a couple of makers in New York that supplied cast brass boilers for 4mm scale and one did complete kits. A GG1was offered in cast brass 19mm 4mm scale.

 

Kemtron, who did the lost wax brass ranges did some 4mm parts, but advised users to just use the 3.5 anyway for most details!!

 

There were lots of makers of HO and 4mm/19mm gauge in the 1940's, far more than the UK, which suffered a ban on models and toys till about 1950, putting back model developments for many years. The ban on toy production, unless for export, was broken by kit makers, but they had to show the kit was for a model, not toy uses.

 

Some US 19mm production was for boxcar kits, and very basic solid wood kits as well. but as soon as HO with Varney and Mantua got going it finished off these cottage industry producers.

 

Stephen

[Jeff Smith]

Ah, but as has been stated elsewhere, OO happens to work to advantage for P4 modellers as P4 wheelsets are very little wider than OO wheelsets so in many cases can be installed in OO bodies without major modification. Many HO bodies are over scale width in order to accommodate wider than scale width wheelsets.

[bertiedog]

A net search shows a dedicated 4mm 19mm gauge website with lots of information, mostly for collectors of course, but it mentions the makers.

Site is : American 00 Today.       http://americanoo.blogspot.co.uk/

 

Stephen.

[bertiedog]

Ah, but as has been stated elsewhere, OO happens to work to advantage for P4 modellers as P4 wheelsets are very little wider than OO wheelsets so in many cases can be installed in OO bodies without major modification. Many HO bodies are over scale width in order to accommodate wider than scale width wheelsets.

A case in point is the Tri-ang "Lord of the Isles", where the existing wheels can be machined to P4 and still fit in the body work at correct width, it is a tight squeeze! It was a good job the wheels were usable as there were no others made at the time. The tyre is moved outwards and the excess machined away before the flange is turned, the wheels are actually a very fine production.

 

Stephen.

[PhilJ W]

Also, I have another friend who scratchbuilds American 3-foot narrow gauge railroads in 4mm scale on TT track - OOn3. Most unusual. Not 19mm gauge, for sure, but American 4mm scale nonetheless.

 

Here are a few photos (by me) of the characterful scratchbuilt 4mm (1:76) scale, 12mm gauge models by Graham Ray:

 

Dscn5640 OOn3 2-truck Climax scratchbuilt circa 1965 by Gra (1000).jpg

 

Dscn5644 OOn3 2-truck Climax by Graham Ray - Bilton, 2 Nov 2003 (1000).jpg

 

OOn3 2-truck Climax scratchbuilt circa 1965 by Graham Ray

 

Dscn5650 OOn3 Mitch-Cal 2-cylinder Shay, scratchbuilt circa (1000).jpg

 

Dscn5652 OOn3 Mitch-Cal 2-cylinder Shay by Graham Ray - Bil (1000).jpg

 

OOn3 Mitch-Cal 2-cylinder Shay by Graham Ray

I remember an American narrow gauge (12mm) 00 scale layout doing the rounds in the late 60's early 70's. Most of the rolling stock was H0 re-gauged and modified to disguise its origins.

[Pacific231G]

The reason that 19mm never took of here was the same as HO, if you build a scale model to run on a scale track, then you have to have scale curves, mainly due to the drivers usually being fitted with splashers on UK prototypes.

The nearer to scale you go, then you must accept the limitations are to be the same as the real thing.

Just before the war Wimbledon was mentioned and Stewart Reidpath was involved with 16.5 HO and 4mm on 19mm.

He determined from tests that the average wheel profile would not keep the train on the tracks in either scale if the wheels were thinned down, also he worked out the minimum curves at about 8foot radius, far to much for British size rooms. HO was adopted as the Continental scale as locos had few splashers, and could have added sideplay.

 

.

 

Stephen

Hi Stephen

This business about splashers meaning that British modellers couldn't use a closer gauge to scale relationship so had to adopt 00 whereas "foreign" modelllers didn't have that problem has been repeated so many times that it's almost become gospel. I decided to do a little fact checking and it's quite simply not true that "few" Continental steam locos had splashers.

 

I happen to have a 1958 edition of the Observer's Book of Railway Locomotives of Britain as well as Vie du Rail's equivalent for SNCF steam locos for the same year. Both include descriptions and photos of every class then in service. 

 

for tender locos my count for SNCF was 31 classes with and 40 classes without visible splashers and for British Railways 78 classes with and 50 classes without

 

For tank locos the almost universal use of long side tanks in France meant that only two or three classes had visible splashers whereas in Britain the use of short side,  saddle and pannier tanks meant that 43 out of 101 had splashers though,  apart from GW/WR panniers, these were most commonly just over the leading driver. Also, of the British locos with splashers, a fair proportion had continuous splashers, or in the case of many tank locos sand boxes merged with splashers, and these normally extended to the full width of the footplate so much wider than the outer wheel faces.

 

So, though the question of splashers may be slightly more of an issue for modellers of Britain's railways it's not vastly so. It's also arguable that the far more common use of inside valve gear and inside cylinders in Britain actually made it easier for British modellers to use a closer gauge to scale relationship.

 

This doesn't by the way only apply to France. A number of the classes listed for SNCF were ex German types and splashers were pretty common on many of those as well as pre war types in other European countries. Also, far more of the earlier classes that more often had splashers seem to have disappeared by 1958 in France than was the case in Britain.

 

Reidpath's figure of 8ft minimum radius is interesting but I've not heard of P4 (or for that matter P87) modellers having to go quite that far.

 

I am of course well aware that my own RTR H0 locos (and other vehicles) incorporate compromises to get round tramway radius curves but slightly wide splashers on some steam locos seems a lot less glaring than compromising everything by running on narrow gauge track that's closer to Cape Gauge (3ft 6ins) than to 4ft 8¹/₂. This is of course academic now as we're hardly likely to change the entire British hobby from OO and the BRMSB's assumption that 18mm would soon become the normal track gauge for 4mm/ft adopted for all but coarse scale RTR is a train that left the station seventy years ago. 

 

Here's an example of a "continental" loco with splashers taken at the Baie de Somme steam festival last year. Not so much to labour the point but more to enjoy the magnificently restored loco (231K8) that used to haul the Golden Arrow. 

[Jeff Smith]

Compensation had probably not been considered in the early days. Scale flanges will ride up on the track when trying to negotiate tighter radii and this may have been the reasoning behind limiting to 8'. Compensation/springing does allow many P4 vehicles to stay on 6' and even down to 4' with short wheelbase rolling stock. OO/HO flanges and plenty of play allow use of 'train set' radii in OO and HO. I have not dabbled with P87 but I would think compensation/springing would also be required.

[bertiedog]

    Apologises for those who know the background, but there are a lot of youngsters who do not know why 00 exists or have heard nonsense about it from some very partisan people.

 

    The business of splashers being more common in the UK is important, but the fact is that HO builders were prepared to compromise on widening the splashers, whereas the UK modellers wanted a scale body. It was all down as to what people would accept, and Hambling and Reidpath choose the best route to retain the ability to convert upwards from 00 to more scale standards.

 

    Reidpath's position at first was that HO was better, as long as the bodies width was not too compromised, as the smaller scale gave smaller curves, more suited to the UK.

 

    He changed his view under pressure from Mr Hambling, when the splasher issue was worked through, and involving Henry Greenly's input. He was responsible for suggesting that HO models used undersized frames to try to get more side movement, something all HO makers do to this day.

 

     The HO back to back measurement never allows scale frames in any, repeat, any, HO loco. Only if fine scale 87 is used can the frames width be correct, and frankly most continental modellers in proto 87 etc., leave the frames at HO thickness, whilst fitting very fine wheels, which leaves them with a hidden bonus, the locos can go around tighter curves than P4 by a long margin, some converted Roco can still manage set track curves!

 

As the demand for HO was there, at first Stewart Reidpath put HO into production at his new Herne Bay factory. But the trouble with the body clearances plagued the loco designs, and a rapid change was made to 00 to cure the issue.

 

Both Hambling and Reidpath made versions of the 00 locos with 18 or 19mm gauge to order. It resulted in locos that could only run on larger curves, but they were completely scale. Jim Howard of Hamblings said the 18/19mm locos amounted to a hand full of models made in 1939. In contrast they made several thousand 00 models.

 

The whole point was the body of the 18mm version was identical to the 00 version, only the chassis and gauge was narrowed.

 

There were few serious modellers in HO before the war on the continent, it was a Toy Train market at H0 scale, with few builders of scratchbuilt locos, unlike the UK, where scale building had been common for over 30 years in all scales

.

If a King is made with widened splashers to fit 18/19mm gauge and the use of Average thickness wheels, (forget P4), and was expected to go around curves that could fit a UK house room, of say 12x12 and approx 3 foot radius, then after adding the side movement of the wheels the splashers would be flush with the valence, and you might have to widen the foot plate as well.

 

P4 is different, it just uses the real dimensions, but 19mm British outline would all have nasty compromises far beyond the ones that 00 have, where a perfect scale body can be converted to P4.

 

Back to the US 19mm 4mm scale, the models are very impressive in size, and stood along with UK 4mm locos shows clearly the massive loading gauge.

 

Originally the compatibility with UK 4mm was a big plus point in 1930's America, where most US modellers were looking at the UK as the developers of model railways, and 19 mm gauge 4mm gave the chance to buy UK coaches and stock in a matching scale.

 

But the rapid development of HO killed the interest, and the home produced product was favoured. Varney credited the landscape aspect as well as tempting to US modellers, it's a small difference on paper but does mean more railway in HO.

 

Pre war several US makers were sold in the UK, Mantua was wholesaled and shop sold by Hamblings, who marketed the Fibre based flexible track from Mantua for 2 years, before the war stopped imports. They also stocked the Mantua made motors.

Hamblings also sold Varney parts and motors before the war. The Fibre track idea was adopted by Graham Farish and Wrenn in the UK after the war, much to Mantua's annoyance, but they had moved to plastic bases anyway.

 

Mantua listed the Fibre track in 19mm gauge at one point, but how much was made before the US entered the war remains unknown. I doubt any was imported to the UK. I saw a wartime Model Railroad magazine article, where the 16.5 mm fibre based track was sawn down the middle to widen it to 19mm, complete with infill scraps of cardboard!

 

Track for 19mm was never a problem in the States, most was home made on sleepers with spikes, so you just adjusted the dimensions to your gauge.

 

Stephen..

[bertiedog]

Compensation had probably not been considered in the early days. Scale flanges will ride up on the track when trying to negotiate tighter radii and this may have been the reasoning behind limiting to 8'. Compensation/springing does allow many P4 vehicles to stay on 6' and even down to 4' with short wheelbase rolling stock. OO/HO flanges and plenty of play allow use of 'train set' radii in OO and HO. I have not dabbled with P87 but I would think compensation/springing would also be required.

The Eight foot figure was a quote from an old article on Essar wheels and the influence of the flanges on curves. Essar are frankly pretty scale wheels compared to Romfords. I dare say that the wheels would go around far tighter when the side play was added as we all know. But the point of his test was a scale body on a scale chassis with scale play under the bodywork, and that's where the 8 foot came in. The extra play that 00 allowed makes an incredible difference to the minimums, all right not as tight as Trix!!!, but it made models compatible with British homes.

 

The Elephant in the Room was Frank Hornby, who watched all of this very closely and very sensibly went for 00, and that was it!!!

 

Would Dublo have worked if it was restricted to 4foot + curves?, the 00 choice gave table top use,and opened the popular market place in the UK for Model railways.

[Jeff Smith]

And then came TT from Triang, but somehow it was bypassed by N......

 

By the way, around the time of the US civil war (1880ish) US standard gauge was 5 feet which if modelled would require either 20mm or 17.5mm track for OO or HO.....