Standard Gauge
- Thread starter Jaymom
- Start date
kenneth18278
Member
No, Standard Gauge is 4ft 8.5ins, at least in the UK. 36" is one of the narrow gauges.
Ken
Ken
What horse's rump came up with this?
Actually it was decided long ago by two horse's rumps. The ancient Romans built their first chariots based on the width of two horses side by side, carts and wagons were also built on the same standard, so the wheels were four feet, eight and one half inches apart. The Romans built roads across most of their conquered territories, that 4'8-1/2" wheel spacing became standard over most of Europe. When it came time to invent railroads the first cars were made by adding flanges to the standard wagons of the time, most of which had 4'8-1/2" wheel spacing, so the rails were laid that distance apart to accommodate the most common wheel spacing already available. Some railroads used "wide gauge" and others narrow gauge, but most standardized eventually on 4'8-1/2".
Actually it was decided long ago by two horse's rumps. The ancient Romans built their first chariots based on the width of two horses side by side, carts and wagons were also built on the same standard, so the wheels were four feet, eight and one half inches apart. The Romans built roads across most of their conquered territories, that 4'8-1/2" wheel spacing became standard over most of Europe. When it came time to invent railroads the first cars were made by adding flanges to the standard wagons of the time, most of which had 4'8-1/2" wheel spacing, so the rails were laid that distance apart to accommodate the most common wheel spacing already available. Some railroads used "wide gauge" and others narrow gauge, but most standardized eventually on 4'8-1/2".
LOL - somebody always trots out the chariot myth!
The first iron railways had a gauge of 4'8", which sounds odd but it's four and two-thirds feet. In the modern era we tend to automatically divide things into halves and quarters and tenths, but 'thirds' used to be a much more common division than it is now. Anyway four and two-thirds feet was 'standard' for a few years. It wasn't long though before improvements in steam technology led to larger wagons with longer wheelbases and the wheel/track standard in use failed because the longer wagons (all with rigid wheelbase at that stage) tended to bind in curves. Obviously more tolerance was needed between the track gauge and the wheel spacing and it was quicker, easier and cheaper to knock one rail out 1/2 an inch than replace all the wheels in use. And that's where the odd number 4' 8.5" came from. At first the track was only widened on curves, but it didn't take the engineers long to work out that the the slightly wider gauge allowed for easier running on straight track also, so they widened the lot. That is what is referred to as 'Standard Gauge'. Any gauge narrower than that is 'Narrow Gauge', any track spacing wider than that is 'Broad Gauge'....
The first iron railways had a gauge of 4'8", which sounds odd but it's four and two-thirds feet. In the modern era we tend to automatically divide things into halves and quarters and tenths, but 'thirds' used to be a much more common division than it is now. Anyway four and two-thirds feet was 'standard' for a few years. It wasn't long though before improvements in steam technology led to larger wagons with longer wheelbases and the wheel/track standard in use failed because the longer wagons (all with rigid wheelbase at that stage) tended to bind in curves. Obviously more tolerance was needed between the track gauge and the wheel spacing and it was quicker, easier and cheaper to knock one rail out 1/2 an inch than replace all the wheels in use. And that's where the odd number 4' 8.5" came from. At first the track was only widened on curves, but it didn't take the engineers long to work out that the the slightly wider gauge allowed for easier running on straight track also, so they widened the lot. That is what is referred to as 'Standard Gauge'. Any gauge narrower than that is 'Narrow Gauge', any track spacing wider than that is 'Broad Gauge'....
Last edited:
Happy I could help you with that great and easy access to a lot of information.
If you had followed the first link on google, which I also posted in my first reply, I think you would have got your question answered. I know a lot of people are still a bit sceptic about wikipedia, but you can trust them about this topic.
If that for some reason still did not answer your question, consider rewriting your question; maybe I dont understand your question.
Last edited:
Believe what you will !!
Extract from Wikipedia:
A popular legend, which has been around since at least 1937, traces the origin of the 4 ft 8½ in gauge even further back than the coalfields of northern England, pointing to the evidence of rutted roads marked by chariot wheels dating from the Roman Empire. Snopes categorized this legend as false but commented that “...it is perhaps more fairly labeled as 'True, but for trivial and unremarkable reasons.'..."Full entry here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_gauge
Anyway I.K.Brunel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isambard_Kingdom_Brunel) got it right, but Stephenson ruled ...
.
Last edited:
Whatever the origin, practicality came into play eventually - Brunel's 7 foot gauge was more expensive, narrow gauge is used on shortlines and for mining and logging railroads because it's cheaper, but more limited as to size and carrying capacity. 4'8 1/2" won out eventually because it was a good middle ground, altho 5 feet is still common in some countries like Russia.
So the answer, in prototype "Standard gauge" is four feet eight and a half inches, in toy trains Joshua Lionel Cohen decided to call his creation "Standard gauge" to make the other sizes put out by Ives, Hornby, and American Flyer seem odd by comparison. O scale eventually became more popular, toy train Standard gauge today is known as "G scale".
So the answer, in prototype "Standard gauge" is four feet eight and a half inches, in toy trains Joshua Lionel Cohen decided to call his creation "Standard gauge" to make the other sizes put out by Ives, Hornby, and American Flyer seem odd by comparison. O scale eventually became more popular, toy train Standard gauge today is known as "G scale".
Well my comment about Brunel was tongue in cheek 
but I doubt it was more expensive, it's just that it came too late and most of the UK railways built at the time were using Stephenson's 4' 8.5" gauge - so the majority won out and Brunel's lines were converted, initially some to dual gauge and in the end to standard gauge.
What?!! The G scale standard in Europe is metre (Meter) gauge track i.e. 3 feet 3 and 3/8 inches, a narrow but common gauge. The discrepancy is best explained in the following extract from Wikipedia:
"Model trains are built to represent either a real train of standard or narrow gauge. In a HO model, for example, HO track is used to represent real standard gauge and some narrower-guage track such as N is used to represent real narrow gauge.
G model-railways depart from this and always use the same gauge. Trains are instead built in different sizes depending on whether they are intended to represent standard-gauge or narrow-gauge trains. Because of this it might be more correct to speak of "G Gauge", the consistent aspect being the gauge, 45 mm (1.772 in), and not the scale.
G scale is thus the use of 45 mm (1.772 in) gauge track to represent both real standard gauge trains and real narrow-gauge trains, originally those of the European 1000mm gauge, at 1:22.5. Other narrow-gauge trains are modelled at other scales."
Full link here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_scale
but I doubt it was more expensive, it's just that it came too late and most of the UK railways built at the time were using Stephenson's 4' 8.5" gauge - so the majority won out and Brunel's lines were converted, initially some to dual gauge and in the end to standard gauge.What?!! The G scale standard in Europe is metre (Meter) gauge track i.e. 3 feet 3 and 3/8 inches, a narrow but common gauge. The discrepancy is best explained in the following extract from Wikipedia:
"Model trains are built to represent either a real train of standard or narrow gauge. In a HO model, for example, HO track is used to represent real standard gauge and some narrower-guage track such as N is used to represent real narrow gauge.
G model-railways depart from this and always use the same gauge. Trains are instead built in different sizes depending on whether they are intended to represent standard-gauge or narrow-gauge trains. Because of this it might be more correct to speak of "G Gauge", the consistent aspect being the gauge, 45 mm (1.772 in), and not the scale.
G scale is thus the use of 45 mm (1.772 in) gauge track to represent both real standard gauge trains and real narrow-gauge trains, originally those of the European 1000mm gauge, at 1:22.5. Other narrow-gauge trains are modelled at other scales."
Full link here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_scale
Well, they have been odd since Britain started playing with them weird French Fortnights, as I recollect (admittedly my recollector ain't recollecting too well these days, assuming it ever did work which I can't recollect have they invented alzheimers medication yet? Or did I ask that already?) HO scale track wasn't compatible with whatever Brits were using in that newfangled millimeter - was it 00? Anyway I'm wrong, looks like O gauge became G, Standard gauge became F. I heard some model railroaders years ago referring to O gauge as standard and the other as wide gauge, when S gauge was fairly popular and HO was just becoming popular and TT gauge was becoming extinct, best I recollect (see above I'm not going through THAT again) TT was similar to N scale. Now we got Z scale which is even teenier.
Don't think so, but I can't remember either !!!
TT was (is) a great compromise between HO/OO,TT it's big enough to "feel right", small enough to fit a reasonable model railway layout in a small space.
Cheers
Last edited:
NewSouth41
Wolf In Sheeps Clothing
@sniper297 oh and don't forget T scale which is smaller than Z scale.
Sorry, even after I clean my greasy bifocals I can't even see Z scale, sometimes I wonder if they're pulling my leg that it actually exists. :hehe: Anyway all my old TT, S gauge, O gauge, standard gauge, HO gauge stuff is long gone, once I got into virtual railroading with train simulators the model stuff was merely clutter so I sold it all between 2001 and 2003.
Blast from the past, here's me (far left holding the Marx torpedo boat) with two of my brothers and one of my sisters, getting assorted Gilbert American Flyer S gauge trainsets, Christmas 1956;
Blast from the past, here's me (far left holding the Marx torpedo boat) with two of my brothers and one of my sisters, getting assorted Gilbert American Flyer S gauge trainsets, Christmas 1956;
NSWGR_46Class
Just call my Captain Rude
1 scale 1/32 roughly 10mm = 1 foot is a popular large scale it shares the same track Gauge as G scale 45 mm
its the standard gauge version of G scale
Thers is also
its the standard gauge version of G scale
Thers is also
Engineerkenny
New member
good times well what someone with such a good memory would say on a show i guess
Jim
The historical reason for the difference between British 00 and the rest of the world's H0 lies in the fact that the British loading gauge is smaller than anybody else's (because we were first). When H0 was created in the 1930s the motors then available were too large to fit in British outline locos. So they scaled the bodies up to 4mm scale while still leaving the gauge at 16.5mm. Consequently British models have been overscale ever since and like our driving on the left, it is too much trouble to change now. Really keen modelers over the years have tried to get round this by a more accurate gauge such as EM and Protofour. Rivarossi (I think) did try to introduce 3.5mm trains and Trix tried a bastard 3.8mm scale but both failed because of the lack of British outline 3.5mm building and lineside kits.
The historical reason for the difference between British 00 and the rest of the world's H0 lies in the fact that the British loading gauge is smaller than anybody else's (because we were first). When H0 was created in the 1930s the motors then available were too large to fit in British outline locos. So they scaled the bodies up to 4mm scale while still leaving the gauge at 16.5mm. Consequently British models have been overscale ever since and like our driving on the left, it is too much trouble to change now. Really keen modelers over the years have tried to get round this by a more accurate gauge such as EM and Protofour. Rivarossi (I think) did try to introduce 3.5mm trains and Trix tried a bastard 3.8mm scale but both failed because of the lack of British outline 3.5mm building and lineside kits.
Bigger rumps on the horses in Ireland (though sometimes when walking down the streets i fInd biggers rumps on the Mná na hÉireann)