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

Re: [Z_Scale] Why 1:220 ?

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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]
    • 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 2 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
      • 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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 10 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 11 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 12 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 13 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.