# A question of scale.



## marshall (Jul 7, 2011)

I would like to get to know others opinions about few things that I have been wondering on for some time. Also I need to learn english more, so it's another reason for this thread. In other words please be understanding for my language skills. 


Ok, back to the point.


Similar scales like for example 1/32 and 1/35 or 1/24 and 1/25. Should have model makers decide on one of these close scales? Make some agreement and start to produce only in 1/35 for example and kill 1/32? Or the other way around? What do you think?


Another thing, I know this is a personal matter, but do you think is it better (or how to say it, maybe more challenging or maybe what is more desirable in modeling) to try to make the model as small as possible and as detailed as possible. For instance a 1/72 scale aircraft model with open engine, open gun bays and so on. Or try to make the model bigger but with a lot more details that just wasn't possible to do in smaller scale. For instance 1/24 super detailed model with just about everything open and if you had a 1/24 scale living pilot he would fly that model. What do you think about this?

Another aspect of the issue small scale vs big scale. What is more desirable on a modeling competition. Smaller scale (e.g. 1/72) model with reasonable ammount of detail or a super detailed bigger scale (e.g. 1/24) model?


And one more question. Why on the site there is a "*Modeling* Section" but on the forum banner is "Aviation, Discussion, *Modelling*"? Which is the correct form?


I hope that the above post is understandable...


----------



## B-17engineer (Jul 7, 2011)

Alright, for the first part I think it's a little tough to narrow down scales but 1/25 USUALLY applies to cars and 1/24 Aircraft. 1/35 Applies to armour and 1/32 applies to aircraft.

1/72 models are immediately harder to detail just because of their size alone. It'd be a lot easier to go crazy on a 1/24th model IMO. 

As for competitions Andy, Wayne or someone else will have to answer. 

I've always thought it was Modeling and Diorama (just another word) but here I've seen *Modelling and Diarama*


----------



## buffnut453 (Jul 7, 2011)

Hi Marshal,

Great questions to which there are few definite answers. Regarding the spelling of modelling (or modeling), assuming it's not a simple spelling mistake, then we're looking at the difference between American English (modeling) and British English (modelling).

As to scale, it would be helpful, not least for diorama builders, if companies would standardize on a smaller number of "common" scales but I doubt it will happen - armour modellers are unlikely to be shifted from 1/76 or 1/35, nor will aircraft modellers move from 1/72 or 1/32. I've long suspected that the origin of some "standard" scales came down to how big the final model would be (eg 1/35 seems to be a handy size for all things military). My final non-answer is that modellers are a fickle bunch - some of us like to detail very small-scale kits while others will build large-scale kits "out of the box" so I guess there is no common "preferred standard" for detail in any scale. My personal preference is 1/48 but I started out in 1/72 - can you guess what type of models I make??

Cheers,
Mark


----------



## vikingBerserker (Jul 7, 2011)

Well said Mark.


----------



## Coors9 (Jul 8, 2011)

Cars come in both 1/24 1/25. I personally love 1/32 birds. Big , but they look so sweet.


----------



## Wayne Little (Jul 8, 2011)

In the competition stakes.....it can be as simple as WOW factor and more often than not BIG gets more attention than Small does, that's not to say one is better than the other it's just that you WILL notice BIG and be drawn to it than something small.

But when you get down to it it's simply preference that's why there is normally a wide range of categories to cater for the different types and scales and the work put into it.
Competition is still about getting the basics right first and formost, Primarily construction and then painting and finish and accuracy to references etc...WOW factor is nice but if you don't get the basics right you won't be taking a place in the finals.

I recall a discussion recently about a comp in the US where a super detailed Jet with WOW factor didn't win and was beaten by another without WOW factor, he simply got ALL or most of the Basics right while the other creating a super detailed kit missed a thing or two that just could not give it the win many thought it deserved.


----------



## marshall (Jul 8, 2011)

buffnut453 said:


> As to scale, it would be helpful, not least for diorama builders, if companies would standardize on a smaller number of "common" scales but I doubt it will happen - armour modellers are unlikely to be shifted from 1/76 or 1/35, nor will aircraft modellers move from 1/72 or 1/32.



I agree, some standardization would be nice. Especially it would be useful for cars (1/24 and 1/25, very annoying when one model is longer for about 1cm) and for planes and armour (1/32 and 1/35)



buffnut453 said:


> I've long suspected that the origin of some "standard" scales came down to how big the final model would be (eg 1/35 seems to be a handy size for all things military).



And this is something I don't understand, if 1/35 seems to be a good size for armour why you make airplanes just slightly larger?





Wayne Little said:


> In the competition stakes.....it can be as simple as WOW factor and more often than not BIG gets more attention than Small does, that's not to say one is better than the other it's just that you WILL notice BIG and be drawn to it than something small.
> 
> But when you get down to it it's simply preference that's why there is normally a wide range of categories to cater for the different types and scales and the work put into it.
> Competition is still about getting the basics right first and formost, Primarily construction and then painting and finish and accuracy to references etc...WOW factor is nice but if you don't get the basics right you won't be taking a place in the finals.
> ...


 
Nicely said, this is exactly what I wanted to ask, just couldn't find the right words. I will remember the WOW factor.

But if the basics are the most important thing, and You say that one part of the basics is accuracy to references than a BIG model gives the possibility to be more accurate as in a small model some things are impossible to achieve.



Also does anyone know if there ever were some efforts on any standardization of scales?

And does some scales develop better than others? I mean that for example at present there is much more new models in lets say 1/72 than in 1/48? Or the other way around, or maybe 1/32 or 1/24?


----------



## vikingBerserker (Jul 8, 2011)

I remember there used to be a lot of 1/32 Tank kits when I was a lad, so at one time I think they were using the same size.


----------



## Airframes (Jul 8, 2011)

The first larger scale armoured vehicle kits, in general, were in 1/32nd scale, following the 'norm' for car models, both kit and die cast. Aircraft kits followed this scale in 1/32nd. It wasn't until the mid 1960s when the first Japanese armour kits appeared in the then very odd 1/35th scale, and a sort of mini 'battle of the scales' continued for some years, before the standard became 1/35th.
Curiously, some manufacturers are now producing a few aircraft kits in 1/35th scale, aimed at the diorama builder. (Note:, DIOrama, from the Greek, never DIArama, the latter being bad spelling !)


----------



## stona (Jul 8, 2011)

To confuse things further some models are not in the scale stated on the box!

In model competition terms "basics" really refers to construction. How well you've painted your model,matched paints and references is irrelevant if you've got bad seams and a canopy that doesn't fit properly. This is common to all scales. This is not to deny the wow factor. I recently accompanied a friend and his superb 1/24 scale P-47 to a competition table. Two people walking past were overheard commenting that "their goes the winner..." They were right,it's a superb model but also has that wow factor.
Cheers
Steve


----------



## marshall (Jul 8, 2011)

stona said:


> I recently accompanied a friend and his superb 1/24 scale P-47 to a competition table. Two people walking past were overheard commenting that "their goes the winner..." They were right,it's a superb model but also has that wow factor.
> Cheers
> Steve



A P-47 in 1/24, nice. 8)


----------



## stona (Jul 9, 2011)

marshall said:


> A P-47 in 1/24, nice. 8)



It's the Vintage Fighter Series kit. Built by Nigel Julian (Lampie) who runs the P-47 SIG,P-47 Heaven, over on aeroscale. I'm sure he won't mind me posting a piccy.








1/35 scale originated with Tamiya didn't it? I've no idea why. All the other common scales are related to imperial units,specifically the inch.
1/72 : 1/6" = 1' 
1/48 : 1/4" = 1' hence "quarter scale".
1/32 : 3/8" = 1' 
1/24 : 1/2" = 1'
Simples......as long as you're not working in a metric system.
Cheers
Steve


----------



## Airframes (Jul 9, 2011)

Yep, the scale 'change' was all down to Tamiya with their first armour kits. Weight of numbers seems to have won the battle !


----------



## bob3170 (Jul 10, 2011)

Interestingly enough, U.S. model companys, (AMT, MPC, Revell, with Monogram being the exception) using the imperial measurement system, made car models in 1/25 scale. Japanese companys, on the other hand, using the metric system, made car models in 1/24 scale. ??? Monogram's car kits were 1/24, with some later kits in 1/25.


----------



## Wurger (Jul 10, 2011)

> Also does anyone know if there ever were some efforts on any standardization of scales?



As far as the standardization of scales is concerned.... have you ever seen a 1/72 scale Revell Spitfire and 1/72 scale U-565 Type VIIC U-Boot standing together on the same shelf? I can imagine these models being of 1/24 scale standing next to Tirpitz maguette of the same scale. But the room for a such exibition is a different thing.


----------



## marshall (Jul 10, 2011)

I was thinking only about standardization in terms of the "close scales" for instance 1/24 and 1/25, 1/32 and 1/35, etc.


----------



## stona (Jul 10, 2011)

As far as standardisation goes I reckon 1/32 is the logical scale in the sequence of classic scales and 1/35 is a one manufacturer anomaly. 
Why 1/25 and 1/24 I've no idea. I bet you could put two models of the same subject in those two scales on a shelf and not tell them apart from six feet away.
There's always a demand for different scales. Space is an issue for some people who will always like 1/72. 1/48 is popular for the detail that can be achieved and 1/32 seems to be growing in popularity these days. I've been building in large scale (1/32) for years and there has been a big increase in what's available in recent times. 
I've seen it said that 1/32 is increasing in popularity with an ageing customer base due to the larger parts. Whoever said that obviously hasn't built in this scale as the potential for detailing leads to some very small parts indeed. I just struggled with the handles for the sliding panels on a canopy which were no bigger than pin heads.Individual instrument decals can be fun too,turning the air blue may not help but it makes me feel better!
Cheers
Steve


----------



## marshall (Jul 10, 2011)

stona said:


> As far as standardisation goes I reckon 1/32 is the logical scale in the sequence of classic scales and 1/35 is a one manufacturer anomaly.



Damn Japaneses... just kidding 




stona said:


> Why 1/25 and 1/24 I've no idea. I bet you could put two models of the same subject in those two scales on a shelf and not tell them apart from six feet away.



For me it's enough that I know that these two models are not in the same scale, besides it's about 0.5cm to 1cm difference in case of cars, and that irritates me.




stona said:


> There's always a demand for different scales.


 
I'm absolutely not questioning that there should be different scales, that's obvious.


----------



## stona (Jul 10, 2011)

marshall said:


> For me it's enough that I know that these two models are not in the same scale, besides it's about 0.5cm to 1cm difference in case of cars, and that irritates me.



That's fair enough and I understand why,knowing the different scales,it would be irksome but I bet most people wouldn't notice it. You're talking 6-8mm on the length of a typical saloon car. I've seen 1/35 armour with 1/32 aircraft and knowing the difference does make it feel "wrong".
I absolutely agree that having two such similar scales is a nonsense. I'd dispense with 1/25 and go with 1/24 for the same reason that I'd go for 1/32 over 1/35.
I know nothing of railway scales but does 1/25 have something to do with one of them?
Cheers
Steve


----------



## vikingBerserker (Jul 10, 2011)

Then you get these weird scales such as 1/64, 1/76 and 1/60. What the heck?????


----------



## marshall (Jul 10, 2011)

stona said:


> I know nothing of railway scales but does 1/25 have something to do with one of them?


 
Me neither but it seems even worse than with aircraft and car scales:

O scale - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## VALENGO (Jul 17, 2011)

As stona said before, any scales come from empire units. My father maked model trains and I learnt with him that all is a matter of "how much inches represent a foot". In the real world, 12 inches equal 1 foot; so, if in my model one inch represent 4 feet, I have an 1:48 and so on. Scales ended in 5, as 1:35, doesn´t follow this rule.


----------



## Edgar Brooks (Aug 1, 2011)

This is a complex subject, so bear with me. One of the first manufacturers of kits was based in the U.K., long before metric measurements were imposed on us, and he decided that the ideal would be to have a 6' (6 feet) tall man represented by a figure 1" (1 inch) tall, whch gave the original scale of 1/72 (or 1:72) since there are 72 inches in 6 feet.
For some reason railway modellers decided to make things really complicated, so combined metric with imperial, making 4mm = 1 foot, which began the 1/76 scale, aka "OO" gauge; they also decided that another scale should be 7mm = 1 foot, which became 1/43 scale, aka "O" gauge. They went a little less complicated with Gauge 1, making that 1" to 2'8" (32 inches) or 1/32 scale. 
When Tamiya started, they assumed that the world would accept metric scales (it didn't) so produced aircraft to 1/100 scale; this drew a general "raspberry" ("Bronx cheer," in the U.S.,) and it fell flat, largely because Airfix and others had caught on to 1/72, and it was the perfect scale for schoolchildren, since it didn't take up too much room.
However, Tamiya had also decided to produce military vehicles, preferably with electric motive power, and found that 1/35 was the ideal scale in which to fit their electric motors, and that did stick, probably because there was no other scale to compete.
Manufacturers in the U.S. began to produce 1/48 scale, or 1" to 4' (1:48 ) since there are 48 inches in 4 feet; Revell also started to produce 1/32 aircraft kits, maybe to match the railway Gauge 1, or possibly because there's a heck of a lot more elbow room in the U.S.
Airfix countered this, by starting their 1/24 range of aircraft, which caught the rest of the world on the hop, being totally unexpected.
Revell, also, for some unknown reason, decided to make a "fit-the-box" series, in which the criteria seemed to be 1/. fix on a box size, then 2/. make a kit to fit inside; this gave rise to some really weird scales, too numerous to mention here (and I can't remember them all, either.)
There is a (sort of) logical reason for the two car scales of 1/24 1/25, but that's beyond my fading memory.
Edgar


----------

