Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Why 1:220 ?

Expand Messages
  • mark2playz
    Recently I was asked a question about Z scale I couldn t answer: why is it 1:220 scale? Why not 1:200 or 1:250? I really didn t have an answer and was
    Message 1 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Recently I was asked a question about Z scale I couldn't answer: why is it 1:220 scale? Why not 1:200 or 1:250? I really didn't have an answer and was wondering if anyone here has a good story to go with "why 1:220?"

      Mark
    • Don Avila
      *Try Rob Kluz. Since Marklin started it I d suspect it has something to do with so many EVEN millimeters to scale size. Just a guess. * ..don ... -- *...don a
      Message 2 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        *Try Rob Kluz. Since Marklin started it I'd suspect it has something to do
        with so many EVEN millimeters to scale size. Just a guess.
        *

        ..don


        On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 10:30 AM, mark2playz <mark.markham@...>wrote:

        > **
        >
        >
        > Recently I was asked a question about Z scale I couldn't answer: why is it
        > 1:220 scale? Why not 1:200 or 1:250? I really didn't have an answer and was
        > wondering if anyone here has a good story to go with "why 1:220?"
        >
        > Mark
        >
        >
        >



        --
        *...don a * * **- Northern Ohio, USA*


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • ladyrejoicer@charter.net
        No doubt it has something to do with the smallest motor available at the time which in turn determined the proper scale and gauge of track. But I m sure we ll
        Message 3 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          No doubt it has something to do with the smallest motor available at the
          time which in turn determined the proper scale and gauge of track. But I'm
          sure we'll hear other reasons.




          -------Original Message-------

          From: mark2playz
          Date: 9/1/2012 7:30:14 AM
          To: Z_Scale@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [Z_Scale] Why 1:220 ?

          Recently I was asked a question about Z scale I couldn't answer: why is it
          1:220 scale? Why not 1:200 or 1:250? I really didn't have an answer and was
          wondering if anyone here has a good story to go with "why 1:220?"

          Mark



          ------------------------------------

          Z-scale: minimum siZe, MAXIMUM enjoyment!
          Yahoo! Groups Links




          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Loren Snyder
          Well Karin, that answer may hold weight, and it will be interesting to find out. Rob, if you are watching, Don and I are betting you have the answer. Even if
          Message 4 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            Well Karin, that answer may hold weight, and it will be interesting to find
            out.

            Rob, if you are watching, Don and I are betting you have the answer.

            Even if you don't know, we'll still figure you know something we don't......
            .:o)

            Loren




            -------Original Message-------

            From: ladyrejoicer@...
            Date: 9/1/2012 9:47:57 AM
            To: z_scale@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: Re: [Z_Scale] Why 1:220 ?

            No doubt it has something to do with the smallest motor available at the
            time which in turn determined the proper scale and gauge of track. But I'm
            sure we'll hear other reasons.




            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Reynard Wellman
            Hi Loren, I also suspect that it had something to do with the track gauge of exactly 6.5 mm that Marklin came up with and the diameter of the available motors
            Message 5 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Loren,
              I also suspect that it had something to do with the
              track gauge of exactly 6.5 mm that Marklin came up with
              and the diameter of the available motors that would
              work within that range.

              We Electro/Mechanical folks have to design around numbers
              for solids. (Organics are another matter entirely, just add water
              and fertilizers ;>)

              Reynard
              http://www.micronart.com


              On Sep 1, 2012, at 11:51 AM, Loren Snyder wrote:

              > Well Karin, that answer may hold weight, and it will be interesting to find
              > out.
              >
              > Rob, if you are watching, Don and I are betting you have the answer.
              >
              > Even if you don't know, we'll still figure you know something we don't......
              > .:o)
              >
              > Loren
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > -------Original Message-------
              >
              > From: ladyrejoicer@...
              > Date: 9/1/2012 9:47:57 AM
              > To: z_scale@yahoogroups.com
              > Subject: Re: [Z_Scale] Why 1:220 ?
              >
              > No doubt it has something to do with the smallest motor available at the
              > time which in turn determined the proper scale and gauge of track. But I'm
              > sure we'll hear other reasons.
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
              >



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • ztrack@aol.com
              I had heard that Marklin engineers looked at the smallest trains that was feasible to produce with the technology at the time. Their calculations came up with
              Message 6 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                I had heard that Marklin engineers looked at the smallest trains that was
                feasible to produce with the technology at the time. Their calculations came
                up with a track gauge of 6.5mm, which equated to 1:220. This was over 25%
                smaller than N scale which was still in it's infancy.

                Marklin had actually looked at producing N scale in 1968 but stopped
                production in lieu of going to Z scale. They had a few prototypes that showed off
                during that period.

                Another interesting note is the motors Marklin uses. These originated as
                slot car motors. They were readily available at that time.

                Somewhere in my notes. I have the name of the chief engineer who developed
                Z. His is the true father of Z scale.

                Rob



                Ztrack Magazine Ltd.
                Distributor American Z Line
                Authorized MTL, Full Throttle, Tenshodo
                and Rokuhan dealer.
                www.ztrack.com
                www.ztrackcenter.com
                www.ztrackresale.com
                www.rokuhan-store.com
                6142 Northcliff Blvd
                Dublin OH 43016
                (614) 764-1703

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Lee Barry
                I thought you were. Boy how disheartened you made me, ha ha. ... From: ztrack@aol.com Subject: Re: [Z_Scale] Why 1:220 ? To:
                Message 7 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  I thought you were. Boy how disheartened you made me, ha ha.

                  --- On Sat, 9/1/12, ztrack@... <ztrack@...> wrote:


                  From: ztrack@... <ztrack@...>
                  Subject: Re: [Z_Scale] Why 1:220 ?
                  To: z_scale@yahoogroups.com
                  Date: Saturday, September 1, 2012, 6:53 PM


                  I had heard that Marklin engineers looked at the smallest trains that was feasible to produce with the technology at the time. Their calculations came up with a track gauge of 6.5mm, which equated to 1:220. This was over 25% smaller than N scale which was still in it's infancy.

                  Marklin had actually looked at producing N scale in 1968 but stopped
                  production in lieu of going to Z scale. They had a few prototypes that showed off during that period.

                  Another interesting note is the motors Marklin uses. These originated as slot car motors. They were readily available at that time.

                  Somewhere in my notes. I have the name of the chief engineer who developed Z. His is the true father of Z scale.

                  Rob

                  Ztrack Magazine Ltd.
                  Distributor American Z Line
                  Authorized MTL, Full Throttle, Tenshodo
                  and Rokuhan dealer.
                  www.ztrack.com
                  www.ztrackcenter.com
                  www.ztrackresale.com
                  www.rokuhan-store.com
                  6142 Northcliff Blvd
                  Dublin OH 43016
                  (614) 764-1703









                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Kevin Brady
                  Hi all, True! In late 60 s and early 70 s I and several friends had HO size slot cars(Aurora)?Which as one can imagine had tiny motors,which we use to modify
                  Message 8 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi all,
                    True! In late 60's and early 70's I and several friends had HO size
                    slot cars(Aurora)?Which as one can imagine had tiny motors,which we use to
                    modify for -speed- :-) So I think that was the reason for M to go about
                    Z,.....

                    Kev

                    On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 2:53 PM, <ztrack@...> wrote:

                    > **
                    >
                    >
                    > I had heard that Marklin engineers looked at the smallest trains that was
                    > feasible to produce with the technology at the time. Their calculations
                    > came
                    > up with a track gauge of 6.5mm, which equated to 1:220. This was over 25%
                    > smaller than N scale which was still in it's infancy.
                    >
                    > Marklin had actually looked at producing N scale in 1968 but stopped
                    > production in lieu of going to Z scale. They had a few prototypes that
                    > showed off
                    > during that period.
                    >
                    > Another interesting note is the motors Marklin uses. These originated as
                    > slot car motors. They were readily available at that time.
                    >
                    > Somewhere in my notes. I have the name of the chief engineer who developed
                    > Z. His is the true father of Z scale.
                    >
                    > Rob
                    >
                    > Ztrack Magazine Ltd.
                    > Distributor American Z Line
                    > Authorized MTL, Full Throttle, Tenshodo
                    > and Rokuhan dealer.
                    > www.ztrack.com
                    > www.ztrackcenter.com
                    > www.ztrackresale.com
                    > www.rokuhan-store.com
                    > 6142 Northcliff Blvd
                    > Dublin OH 43016
                    > (614) 764-1703
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                    >
                    >



                    --
                    Dr. Dirt's Weathering Service


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Kevin Brady
                    Hi all, see:http://www.guidetozscale.com/html/history_of_z-scale.html Best,Kev ... -- Dr. Dirt s Weathering Service [Non-text portions of this message have
                    Message 9 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hi all,

                      see:http://www.guidetozscale.com/html/history_of_z-scale.html

                      Best,Kev

                      On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 2:53 PM, <ztrack@...> wrote:

                      > **
                      >
                      >
                      > I had heard that Marklin engineers looked at the smallest trains that was
                      > feasible to produce with the technology at the time. Their calculations
                      > came
                      > up with a track gauge of 6.5mm, which equated to 1:220. This was over 25%
                      > smaller than N scale which was still in it's infancy.
                      >
                      > Marklin had actually looked at producing N scale in 1968 but stopped
                      > production in lieu of going to Z scale. They had a few prototypes that
                      > showed off
                      > during that period.
                      >
                      > Another interesting note is the motors Marklin uses. These originated as
                      > slot car motors. They were readily available at that time.
                      >
                      > Somewhere in my notes. I have the name of the chief engineer who developed
                      > Z. His is the true father of Z scale.
                      >
                      > Rob
                      >
                      > Ztrack Magazine Ltd.
                      > Distributor American Z Line
                      > Authorized MTL, Full Throttle, Tenshodo
                      > and Rokuhan dealer.
                      > www.ztrack.com
                      > www.ztrackcenter.com
                      > www.ztrackresale.com
                      > www.rokuhan-store.com
                      > 6142 Northcliff Blvd
                      > Dublin OH 43016
                      > (614) 764-1703
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                      >
                      >



                      --
                      Dr. Dirt's Weathering Service


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Lee Barry
                      thanks for the info Kevin ... From: Kevin Brady Subject: Re: [Z_Scale] Why 1:220 ? To: z_scale@yahoogroups.com Date: Saturday, September 1,
                      Message 10 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
                      • 0 Attachment
                        thanks for the info Kevin

                        --- On Sat, 9/1/12, Kevin Brady <kbvrod@...> wrote:


                        From: Kevin Brady <kbvrod@...>
                        Subject: Re: [Z_Scale] Why 1:220 ?
                        To: z_scale@yahoogroups.com
                        Date: Saturday, September 1, 2012, 7:07 PM


                        Hi all,

                        see:http://www.guidetozscale.com/html/history_of_z-scale.html

                        Best,Kev
                      • ztrack@aol.com
                        Thanks for posting the link! I was looking for that... Rob Ztrack Magazine Ltd. Distributor American Z Line Authorized MTL, Full Throttle, Tenshodo and Rokuhan
                        Message 11 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Thanks for posting the link! I was looking for that...

                          Rob



                          Ztrack Magazine Ltd.
                          Distributor American Z Line
                          Authorized MTL, Full Throttle, Tenshodo
                          and Rokuhan dealer.
                          www.ztrack.com
                          www.ztrackcenter.com
                          www.ztrackresale.com
                          www.rokuhan-store.com
                          6142 Northcliff Blvd
                          Dublin OH 43016
                          (614) 764-1703

                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Kevin Brady
                          Hi Lee,all, Your most welcome! All the best,Kevin. ... -- Dr. Dirt s Weathering Service [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          Message 12 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Hi Lee,all,
                            Your most welcome!
                            All the best,Kevin.

                            On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Lee Barry <z_scale2@...> wrote:

                            > **
                            >
                            >
                            > thanks for the info Kevin
                            >
                            > --- On Sat, 9/1/12, Kevin Brady <kbvrod@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > From: Kevin Brady <kbvrod@...>
                            >
                            > Subject: Re: [Z_Scale] Why 1:220 ?
                            > To: z_scale@yahoogroups.com
                            > Date: Saturday, September 1, 2012, 7:07 PM
                            >
                            >
                            > Hi all,
                            >
                            > see:http://www.guidetozscale.com/html/history_of_z-scale.html
                            >
                            > Best,Kev
                            >
                            >
                            >



                            --
                            Dr. Dirt's Weathering Service


                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Loren Snyder
                            Reynard, Some good and interesting info has been posted and I think we are all enjoying catching up on our Z history. We certainly have a wealth of product
                            Message 13 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Reynard,

                              Some good and interesting info has been posted and I think we are all
                              enjoying catching up on our Z history.

                              We certainly have a wealth of product lines compared to the early days of Z.

                              A great time to be modeling,

                              Loren




                              -------Original Message-------

                              From: Reynard Wellman
                              Date: 9/1/2012 10:56:50 AM
                              To: z_scale@yahoogroups.com
                              Subject: Re: [Z_Scale] Why 1:220 ?

                              Hi Loren,
                              I also suspect that it had something to do with the
                              track gauge of exactly 6.5 mm that Marklin came up with
                              and the diameter of the available motors that would
                              work within that range.

                              We Electro/Mechanical folks have to design around numbers
                              for solids. (Organics are another matter entirely, just add water
                              and fertilizers ;>)

                              Reynard
                              http://www.micronart.com



                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Alan Cox
                              On Sat, 1 Sep 2012 14:53:09 -0400 (EDT) ... On the business side it s been said in several places they did it because they wanted their own scale or system
                              Message 14 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
                              • 0 Attachment
                                On Sat, 1 Sep 2012 14:53:09 -0400 (EDT)
                                ztrack@... wrote:

                                > I had heard that Marklin engineers looked at the smallest trains that was
                                > feasible to produce with the technology at the time. Their calculations came
                                > up with a track gauge of 6.5mm, which equated to 1:220. This was over 25%
                                > smaller than N scale which was still in it's infancy.

                                On the business side it's been said in several places they did it because
                                they wanted their "own" scale or system so they could get more money out
                                of it than joining the standards. Just as they've always done with their
                                weird AC HO control systems.

                                Alan
                              • Alan Cox
                                ... But not always sane ones. CD capacity came from the length of a particular classical piece. T scale model trains come from someone looking at the top of
                                Message 15 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  > We Electro/Mechanical folks have to design around numbers
                                  > for solids. (Organics are another matter entirely, just add water
                                  > and fertilizers ;>)

                                  But not always sane ones. CD capacity came from the length of a
                                  particular classical piece. T scale model trains come from someone
                                  looking at the top of their laptop and thinking I want my trainset to fit
                                  that space.
                                • Kevin Brady
                                  Hi Alan,all, Read Prey by Michael Crichton. That might help or hurt. :-) Best,Kev ... -- Dr. Dirt s Weathering Service [Non-text portions of this message
                                  Message 16 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Hi Alan,all,
                                    Read 'Prey" by Michael Crichton.

                                    That might help or hurt. :-)

                                    Best,Kev

                                    On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Alan Cox <alan@...> wrote:

                                    > **
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > > We Electro/Mechanical folks have to design around numbers
                                    > > for solids. (Organics are another matter entirely, just add water
                                    > > and fertilizers ;>)
                                    >
                                    > But not always sane ones. CD capacity came from the length of a
                                    > particular classical piece. T scale model trains come from someone
                                    > looking at the top of their laptop and thinking I want my trainset to fit
                                    > that space.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >



                                    --
                                    Dr. Dirt's Weathering Service


                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  • Larry
                                    Here is a rough translation taken from the Koll s Intro portion of the book on Maerklin Z scale. Please excuse all the errors. I did say rough Quote: From the
                                    Message 17 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Here is a rough translation taken from the Koll's Intro portion of the
                                      book on Maerklin Z scale.

                                      Please excuse all the errors. I did say rough

                                      Quote:

                                      From the outset there were toy railways in different sizes. Also the
                                      tracks had different mass, so that the locomotives and car manufacturer
                                      on the tracks of the other one could not drive. That changed only, after
                                      Maerklin had standardized the track widths and most offerers had adapted.

                                      Already 1895 offered "l" (45 mm) to Maerklin apart from the then most
                                      common track width the larger systems "2" (51 mm) and "3"(72 mm), which
                                      were manufactured however in very small numbers of items after
                                      vorbestellung and therefore today are extremely rare. The track width
                                      "0" (32 mm), likewise already 1895 in the program, could be offered
                                      clearly more cheaply. Still smaller courses were offered to 1902 by the
                                      Nuernberger company Schoenner: "00" (30 mm) and "000" (23 mm). There
                                      were however in addition no switches. 1912 brought then a table course,
                                      the "Liliput railway" (23 mm) to Maerklin, which was offered to 1932.
                                      Also it did not possess switches, which did not promote its success. The
                                      production of smaller courses made problems, because one could make the
                                      drive smaller at that time not yet at will.1923 appeared then the first
                                      toy course in the track width 16.5 mm, of Bing in Nuernberg manufactured
                                      for the Englishman W. J. Bassett Bassett-Lowke. 1925 manufactured the
                                      French company JEP their "Mignon trains" with same track width. Only
                                      1935, ten years later, came the companies Trix and Maerklin nearly at
                                      the same time with its track width 00 (16.5 mm. Yardstick 1:87). Saving
                                      in material and thus a small price, as well as space saving, were the
                                      motives for the introduction on the market. The toy courses had not
                                      formed themselves as table courses angepriesen at that time and yet as
                                      model courses. This changed however in the run the time, when one was
                                      able to manufacture ever nature-more faithful models.

                                      The stationary model railway facility had become now the worthwhile goal
                                      of the railway friends, but it caused a very large space requirement,
                                      wanted one also only to some extent realistic railway facilities to
                                      develop. Also after that 2. World war was not missing it at attempts to
                                      make the toy railway smaller further. Thus the "Mignon" railway from
                                      1947 to 1950 (track width 10 mm became. Yardstick 1:150) offered,
                                      obviously their time too far ahead. 1950 saw many model railway friends
                                      in the track width "TT" (12 mm, yardstick 1:120) the chance to carry out
                                      a realistic model railway facility. The company Rokal developed within a
                                      short time a rich model course program, which however 1971 was stopped.
                                      In the GDR the track width "TT" came 1958 on the market and could create
                                      itself a large friend circle, which is still very active also today.

                                      1959 appeared Trix with unpowered soil runners "Minitrix" on a scale
                                      1:180. 1961 came Arnold with the electrical "Arnold Rapido" (9 mm.
                                      Yardstick 1:200), which was improved from year to year and then the
                                      yardstick 1:160, track width "N" received. 1964 brought also the company
                                      Piko a course in track width "N" and Minitrix electric appeared now with
                                      track system.

                                      Meat man came 1968 first with a truck course and one year later also
                                      with tracks into track width "N". In this yardstick now a large railway
                                      facility at small place could be realized very well. To today continuous
                                      success of the track width "N" appeared fast and led also in Goeppingen,
                                      with Maerklin to activities.

                                      one began 1962 with the development of a course in track width "N",
                                      which was final with production stage two years later. One was not
                                      convinced however of an economic success and began with the development
                                      of a still smaller model railway. Investigations on the dependence of
                                      the manufacturing costs on the yardstick had resulted in that a
                                      continuous lowering of the costs with the reduction took place. If one
                                      made smaller however too strongly, the costs rose again dramatically.
                                      Maerklin selected a yardstick, which lay still reliably in the range of
                                      economy: 1:220 (track width 6.5 mm).

                                      one cleared first the model course municipality in the magazine Miba for
                                      1968 up over the fact that Maerklin had the trace "N" in the drawer, but
                                      is evenly not convinced of this track width. That worked something
                                      disconcerting, where itself nevertheless straight only meat man had
                                      decided to mix together with "N" could not however success in the long
                                      run not stop.

                                      The considerations assumed with Maerklin

                                      1. should be obtained during the introduction of a new track width a
                                      maximum space gain. Here the yardstick 1:220 of the track width "Z"
                                      offers clear advantages in relation to the yardstick 1:160 of the track
                                      width "N".

                                      2. It would be more economical to create its own standard to be than an
                                      offerer under many with the track width "N".

                                      3. The however position with the superlativ "smallest electric train of
                                      the world" would offer large advantages in press and advertisement.

                                      4. It could not be correct for a market leader with large tradition to
                                      attach itself to a trend but one would have to make a trend.

                                      5. One would select children as a Kem target group not, but adults.

                                      6. The "mini club" should be positioned as gift.

                                      7. One the women strengthened to respond, because Mrs. small, nice
                                      things to like.

                                      Unquote.


                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    • dks2855
                                      And the last of the floppy discs, the 3-1/2 inch, was designed to fit into a standard shirt pocket. A few others: Barometric pressure in inches, temperature in
                                      Message 18 of 22 , Sep 1, 2012
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        And the last of the floppy discs, the 3-1/2 inch, was designed to fit into a standard shirt pocket.

                                        A few others:
                                        Barometric pressure in inches, temperature in Fahrenheit degrees, AM and FM broadcast bands, all were totally arbitrary--someone just made a few tick marks on a stick, or used whatever hardware was at hand to start sending and receiving radio transmissions with no regard for the frequency.

                                        Regards,
                                        David

                                        --- In z_scale@yahoogroups.com, Alan Cox <alan@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > > We Electro/Mechanical folks have to design around numbers
                                        > > for solids. (Organics are another matter entirely, just add water
                                        > > and fertilizers ;>)
                                        >
                                        > But not always sane ones. CD capacity came from the length of a
                                        > particular classical piece. T scale model trains come from someone
                                        > looking at the top of their laptop and thinking I want my trainset to fit
                                        > that space.
                                        >
                                      • Uwe Liermann
                                        Hello Larry, thank you for your translation... ... Meat man means the modeltrain manufacturer Fleischmann :
                                        Message 19 of 22 , Sep 2, 2012
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Hello Larry,

                                          thank you for your translation...

                                          > Please excuse all the errors. I did say rough

                                          that's ok with me, until I came to this line:

                                          > Meat man came 1968 first with a truck course...

                                          "Meat man" means the modeltrain manufacturer "Fleischmann":

                                          http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleischmann_%28Unternehmen%29

                                          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleischmann_%28model_railroads%29

                                          ...but I have to admit that "Meat man" is the direct translation for the
                                          pure words. I don't know which translation software you used, since I
                                          got the correct result ("Fleischmann" = "Fleischmann") in Google.


                                          An interesting detail for Fleischmann can be found in the German
                                          Wikipedia text. Fleischmann also had a slotcar system from 1967 until
                                          1989, which is stated to be better then the market leader Carrera:

                                          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrera_%28slot_car_brand%29

                                          and that the model quality from Fleischmann slotcars were better then
                                          all other brands, except the Maerklin Sprint system.

                                          GreetingZ

                                          Uwe
                                        • mark2playz
                                          All, Thanks for a lot of interesting info. I was hoping for an interesting story: a rational fraction of some obsure european scale (like O vs. HO ) or a
                                          Message 20 of 22 , Sep 4, 2012
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            All,
                                            Thanks for a lot of interesting info. I was hoping for an "interesting" story: a rational fraction of some obsure european scale (like "O" vs. "HO") or a story like David's that rolling stock had to fit in the pocket.

                                            Mark

                                            --- In z_scale@yahoogroups.com, "dks2855" <david@...> wrote:
                                            >
                                            > And the last of the floppy discs, the 3-1/2 inch, was designed to fit into a standard shirt pocket.
                                            >
                                            > A few others:
                                            > Barometric pressure in inches, temperature in Fahrenheit degrees, AM and FM broadcast bands, all were totally arbitrary--someone just made a few tick marks on a stick, or used whatever hardware was at hand to start sending and receiving radio transmissions with no regard for the frequency.
                                            >
                                            > Regards,
                                            > David
                                            >
                                            > --- In z_scale@yahoogroups.com, Alan Cox <alan@> wrote:
                                            > >
                                            > > > We Electro/Mechanical folks have to design around numbers
                                            > > > for solids. (Organics are another matter entirely, just add water
                                            > > > and fertilizers ;>)
                                            > >
                                            > > But not always sane ones. CD capacity came from the length of a
                                            > > particular classical piece. T scale model trains come from someone
                                            > > looking at the top of their laptop and thinking I want my trainset to fit
                                            > > that space.
                                            > >
                                            >
                                          • Rick Saviano
                                            Beethoven s 9th, to be precise; Mrs. Sony didn t want to have to switch CDs: Sony had initially preferred a smaller diameter, but soon after the beginning of
                                            Message 21 of 22 , Sep 4, 2012
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Beethoven's 9th, to be precise; "Mrs. Sony" didn't want to have to
                                              switch CDs:

                                              Sony had initially preferred a smaller diameter, but soon after the
                                              beginning of the collaboration started to argue vehemently for a
                                              diameter of 120mm. Sony’s argument was simple and compelling: to
                                              maximize the consumer appear of a switch to the new technology, any
                                              major piece of music needed to fit on a single CD…Beethoven’s Ninth
                                              Symphony was quickly identified as the point of reference — according to
                                              some accounts, it was the favorite piece of Sony vice-president Norio
                                              Ohga’s wife. And thorough research identified the 1951 recording by the
                                              orchestra of the Bayreuther Festspiele under Wilhelm Furtwängler, at
                                              seventy-four minutes, as the slowest performance of the Ninth Symphony
                                              on record. And so, according to the official history, Sony and Philips
                                              top executives agreed in their May 1980 meeting that “a diameter of 12
                                              centimeters was required for this playing time.”


                                              http://www.neatorama.com/2011/04/03/what-determined-the-length-of-an-audio-cd/

                                              - Rick Saviano



                                              On 9/4/2012 9:48 AM, mark2playz wrote:
                                              > But not always sane ones. CD capacity came from the length of a
                                              > particular classical piece.
                                            • FT. Dewey
                                              Beethoven s 9th, to be precise; Mrs. Sony didn t want to have to switch CDs: Good thing it wasn t Wagner s Ring Cycle !!
                                              Message 22 of 22 , Sep 5, 2012
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                "Beethoven's 9th, to be precise; "Mrs. Sony" didn't want to have to
                                                switch CDs:"

                                                Good thing it wasn't Wagner's Ring Cycle !!
                                                                                                                                             DEWEY

                                                 
                                                Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is an oncoming train.
                                                o o o o o o o . . . ______________________________
                                                o _____ || |
                                                .][__n_n_|DD[ ====_____ | |
                                                >(________|__|_[_________]_|____________________________|
                                                _/oo OOOOO oo` ooo ooo 'o!o!o o!o!o`
                                                -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


                                                ________________________________
                                                From: Rick Saviano <saviano@...>
                                                To: z_scale@yahoogroups.com
                                                Sent: Tuesday, September 4, 2012 7:49 PM
                                                Subject: Re: [Z_Scale] Re: Why 1:220 ?

                                                Beethoven's 9th, to be precise; "Mrs. Sony" didn't want to have to
                                                switch CDs:

                                                Sony had initially preferred a smaller diameter, but soon after the
                                                beginning of the collaboration started to argue vehemently for a
                                                diameter of 120mm. Sony’s argument was simple and compelling: to
                                                maximize the consumer appear of a switch to the new technology, any
                                                major piece of music needed to fit on a single CD…Beethoven’s Ninth
                                                Symphony was quickly identified as the point of reference — according to
                                                some accounts, it was the favorite piece of Sony vice-president Norio
                                                Ohga’s wife. And thorough research identified the 1951 recording by the
                                                orchestra of the Bayreuther Festspiele under Wilhelm Furtwängler, at
                                                seventy-four minutes, as the slowest performance of the Ninth Symphony
                                                on record. And so, according to the official history, Sony and Philips
                                                top executives agreed in their May 1980 meeting that “a diameter of 12
                                                centimeters was required for this playing time.”


                                                http://www.neatorama.com/2011/04/03/what-determined-the-length-of-an-audio-cd/

                                                - Rick Saviano



                                                On 9/4/2012 9:48 AM, mark2playz wrote:
                                                > But not always sane ones. CD capacity came from the length of a
                                                > particular classical piece.



                                                ------------------------------------

                                                Z-scale:  minimum siZe, MAXIMUM enjoyment!
                                                Yahoo! Groups Links



                                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.