7 ¼ verses 7 ½ How did this happen?

This forum is dedicated to the Live Steam Hobbyist Community.

Moderators: Harold_V, WJH, cbrew

Mike Walsh
Posts: 648
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 10:14 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO

Re: GAUGE SELECTION

Post by Mike Walsh » Wed Jun 18, 2008 2:36 pm

Curtis_F wrote:
But when it comes to hauling the public for profit, then 15" really is the "minimum gauge" Sir Heywood did his research and it still holds true today. I don't know a single for-profit entity running 12" gauge that doesn't say they'd like to go to at least 15" for higher hauling capacity.

Yes, you can haul people successfully on smaller gauges (Burnaby Live Steamers), but if profit is your end goal then bigger-is-better.


$0.02

Curtis F.
The WF&PRR pulls people every sunday, and we have no problems. We typically have x-6-x engines serving in revenue operations, along with #928, a mountain. All of these engines are capable of pulling 9 cars, with an average capacity of 5 to 7 per train. If the train is loaded, you can easily be talking about 45-60 people per train. #535 is probably one of the lighter engines in the roster, but it successfully pulls these trains over the right of way.

15" gauge being the minimum? I don't know.... I think 12" gauge can hold it's own!

Mike
Engineer, WFPRR

User avatar
Curtis_F
Posts: 829
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 10:14 am
Location: Reedley, Ca. 93274
Contact:

Re: GAUGE SELECTION

Post by Curtis_F » Wed Jun 18, 2008 5:02 pm

Mike Walsh wrote:
Curtis_F wrote:Yes, you can haul people successfully on smaller gauges (Burnaby Live Steamers), but if profit is your end goal then bigger-is-better.
Curtis F.
15" gauge being the minimum? I don't know.... I think 12" gauge can hold it's own!

Mike
As I recall the WP&FRR's gauge was decided by the equipment that was avaliable and affordable at the time, and not necessarily because it was determined to be the "best" gauge for the job.

And just to bring this all around: 7-1/2" gauge came into existance because of a typo, but it became wide spread because equipment/plans were avaliable in that gauge.
16 Years of SolidWorks experience...now I feel old.
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink."
"Winning an argument on the internet is like winning the Special Olympics."
www.facebook.com/HillcrestShops

User avatar
Curtis_F
Posts: 829
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 10:14 am
Location: Reedley, Ca. 93274
Contact:

7-1/4" = 7-1/16" w/ extra play?

Post by Curtis_F » Wed Jun 18, 2008 5:09 pm

A thought that has gone through my head a few times over the whole origins of the 7+ gauges, is this:

Could the origional stanard of 7-1/4" gauge have been decided upon with then intention of building 7-1/16" gauge engines but giving them extra play in the track?

Not unlike how gauge is widened in the curves to compensate for the long rigid wheel bases of steamers. Perhaps the original idea was just to lay track at 7-1/4" rather than varing gauge?


Just a thought,

Curtis F.
16 Years of SolidWorks experience...now I feel old.
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink."
"Winning an argument on the internet is like winning the Special Olympics."
www.facebook.com/HillcrestShops

User avatar
Jacob's dad
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2003 10:13 pm
Location: Florida

Post by Jacob's dad » Wed Jun 18, 2008 9:45 pm

This is what I have always wondered about the N.E. 7-1/4" folks: I have watched many of them retire and move to Florida and have to rebuild everything or sell the trucks and install new 7-1/2" trucks or just sell the entire train and buy another one, so why not just make the change now because you will have so much other stuff to do like build a new shop and mow grass at least once a week so you might as well build it to 7-1/2" to begin with to save time in the end. :lol:

Jeff

User avatar
alanstepney
Posts: 652
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2003 10:56 am

Post by alanstepney » Thu Jun 19, 2008 11:40 pm

The 7 1/4" standards were originally formulated by Henry Greenly, before WW1.
(H.G, was the chief designer for Bassett Lowke, and also designed the Romney Hythe & Dymchurch Rlwy.)

It became the standard and was accepted throughout the UK, and in most other countries.
Of course, back then it didnt really matter what standards were in different areas as few people travelled with their models.

It is a pity that part of the US has settled on a different "standard", but is a fact of life.
It does mean that the 7 1/2" guys are cut off from many designs, models, and parts, unless they modify them to suit.
Naturally, that adds to cost, and cuts availaibility, but having seen this argument thrashed around for 20 or 30 years, I doubt that there is the will to change things now.
http://www.alanstepney.info
Model Engineering, Steam and workshop pages.

User avatar
dnevil
Posts: 270
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 10:19 am
Location: Springtown, Texas
Contact:

Re: 7 ¼ verses 7 ½ How did this happen?

Post by dnevil » Wed May 15, 2013 11:02 pm

I've been researching this topic and have written what I have found so far.

http://ibls.org/mediawiki/index.php/7-1 ... -1/2_Gauge

http://ibls.org/mediawiki/index.php/Gau ... her_Answer

Regards,
Daris Nevil
IBLS webmaster
Daris Nevil
IBLS Secretary
North American Region
http://www.ibls.org

User avatar
Highiron
Posts: 633
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:04 pm
Location: Lancaster, PA

Re:

Post by Highiron » Thu May 16, 2013 9:35 am

Dick_Morris wrote:For what it's worth, I have a 1955 LE catalog. It lists the Northern, Atlantic, Pacific, American, and CP Huntington. All were 7-1/2 gauge. It was my impression that the Northern was the last developed of this group.

Dick

FWIW I believe this is wrong

I have gone back through my extensive collection of catalogs and found this, in my 1947 catalog there are NO 1 1/2"scale engines listed just 3/4, 1/2 and 1/4"...there IS however an interesting picture of the stock room and test engines, and in the picture is whatt I belive to be the pilot casting for the Nothern, which I know was on the drawing board starting in late 1946 (early drawings for this engine did not carry the little engines name but rather "Rancho-De-Loco"...which according to what Jim Krieder told me was the name on the sign of the back gate to the house

second, in my 1954 catalog, the only 2 engines in 1 1/2" scale were the Northern and the SP #3000 Atlantic
then the edition of the Pacific (which LE stats was just streching the frame of the 4-4-2) then the American and CP..these were added in mid 55 from what I can tell from the drawings...but can not completely confirm that,

So in fact the Big ALCO Northern was the first 1 1/2" scale loco they developed and marketed, development was from 1947 to 1951 hence the number on Seymour's engine 4751

Mike

User avatar
bcody
Posts: 954
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 12:07 am

Re: 7 ¼ verses 7 ½ How did this happen?

Post by bcody » Thu May 16, 2013 11:22 am

What are the odds of this ever coming to fruition ???

When will the 7.25" gauge realize they are out of step with over 90% of the United States live steamers and convert to 7.5" gauge? Why limit yourself to just a few tracks in the New England area of the US, convert to 7.5" gauge and open up your running area to the whole United States.


Bill

User avatar
DianneB
Posts: 733
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 3:05 pm
Location: Manitoba, Canada

Re: 7 ¼ verses 7 ½ How did this happen?

Post by DianneB » Thu May 16, 2013 12:39 pm

Considering that the rest of the world runs 7.25", maybe it is us 7.5" people who should change! :wink:

User avatar
cbrew
Posts: 2841
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 12:17 pm
Location: Vancouver Wa

Re: 7 ¼ verses 7 ½ How did this happen?

Post by cbrew » Thu May 16, 2013 1:12 pm

DianneB wrote:Considering that the rest of the world runs 7.25", maybe it is us 7.5" people who should change! :wink:
the problem with that idea, is the north American 7.25 is not compatible with the rest of the world :?
as i remember it, the back to back spacing is different.

and must of use do not have the means to take our toys across the pond, so
If it is not live steam. its not worth it.

User avatar
bcody
Posts: 954
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 12:07 am

Re: 7 ¼ verses 7 ½ How did this happen?

Post by bcody » Thu May 16, 2013 1:43 pm

I did not consider the rest of the world when I made my comment about the 7.25" gauge live steamers in the US, I specified the UNITED STATES, not the world.

The probability of my ever going to any part of the old world with my steamer is maybe 1 in 1000000 so I don't see any reason to even consider what they run outside of the US and Canada. I've run in Canada, in BC. Had a ball.

My $.02


Bill

User avatar
LVRR2095
Posts: 1393
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 6:50 pm
Location: Maine, USA

Re: 7 ¼ verses 7 ½ How did this happen?

Post by LVRR2095 » Thu May 16, 2013 1:54 pm

cbrew wrote:
DianneB wrote:Considering that the rest of the world runs 7.25", maybe it is us 7.5" people who should change! :wink:
the problem with that idea, is the north American 7.25 is not compatible with the rest of the world :?
as i remember it, the back to back spacing is different.

and must of use do not have the means to take our toys across the pond, so
That is not a problem. The world wide standard for 7 - 1/4" gauge calls for a back to back of 6 - 3/4". This is in fact the "standard" used by all of the east coast clubs that I am aware of at this time. That said....when the so-called "IBLS" standards were formulated, they changed the standard to 6 - 7/8" back to back. Equipment built to the "new" standard will still work perfectly on those tracks where the guard rails are set for the 6 - 3/4" back to back.
So there is no problem running N. American equipment of either back to back standard on tracks anywhere in the world where 7 - 1/4" gauge is used.
The probability of my ever going to any part of the old world with my steamer is maybe 1 in 1000000 so I don't see any reason to even consider what they run outside of the US and Canada. I've run in Canada, in BC.
Please bear in mind that in Eastern Canada...the "standard gauge" for 1 - 1/2" scale is also 7 - 1/4" gauge.

Keith

Post Reply