TheRailwire
General Discussion => N and Z Scales => Topic started by: johnt48618 on December 05, 2018, 04:37:06 AM
-
After about 25 years of service, the scales that I use to bring my N scale rolling stock up to the NMRA Recommended Practice formula for weighing cars has finally stopped working. Thus, I need to purchase a new scales. I've searched Amazon, eBay and the Railwire search function with no success in finding a scales that I like. Also, same with the scales offered by Micro-Mart.
What are you folks using to weigh your rolling stock? I'm looking in the $20-$35 range. Scales will almost exclusively be used weigh N scale rolling stock.
John
-
I use a postal scale similar to this ($23.80):
https://www.amazon.com/American-Weigh-Scales-PS-25-Postal/dp/B004W7IOV4
-
DKS, that link goes to a scale that has specs that say "0.01 pounds resolution". If not incorrectly translated from some other language, that means it has a resolution of only 0.16 ounce. Considering that the NMRA spec for N scale cars is 0.5 ounce plus 0.15 ounce per inch of car length, it seems that scale is not able to resolve the needed car weight changes closely enough. The scale specs also say that it goes to a max weight of 55 pounds. So, I am thinking that it is not what an N scaler really needs. My wife has a "cooking scale" she purchased from Amazon that reads to 0.01 grams and goes up to a few pounds. I think that is a better choice, and it is cheaper. I have already used it to weigh some of my cars, and it is entirely satisfactory. When she gets back, I will find out what it is and post a link.
-
Look on ebay for "digital jewelry scale".
I use something like this:
https://m.ebay.com/itm/Mini-Precision-Digital-Gram-Jewelry-Scale-Kitchen-Food-Weigh-Balance-3000g-0-1g-/281746856569?nav=SEARCH
Mine isn't that exact one, as I bought it several years ago, but it's similar.
With 0.1g resolution, it does the trick and can measure in grams or ounces.
-
Think Metric
I picked up a AMIR Digital Scale 500g x 0.01g on Amazon for $12 or so last year, I'll see if I can dig up a part number for you.
https://www.amazon.com/GDEALER-Digital-Kitchen-0-001oz-Stainless/dp/B01E6RE3A0/ref=sr_1_1_sspa?ie=UTF8&qid=1544035866&sr=8-1-spons&keywords=500g+x+0.01g&psc=1&smid=A1FVLJQ2H4ONOD
-
If you are willing to pay about $10 more, then this Fisher Scientific scale would be perfect for you. It looks like it has light, general use and you can make an offer. I use an older Fisher-Ainsworth scientific scale myself.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Fisher-EMD-200-200g-01g-Lab-Benchtop-Electronic-Digital-Balance-Scale-S40119-1A/312344329924?hash=item48b92c3ec4:g:5soAAOSwfhxbhe1l
-
Most of contemporary digital scales can be switched between imperial and metric units.
-
This
https://www.harborfreight.com/digital-pocket-scale-93543.html
or
https://www.harborfreight.com/1000-gram-digital-scale-60332.html
Both reads down to Grains. Second one's published accuracy is +/- 0.1 gram. First one is about 0.15 gram as reported by a reviewer.
20% off their already low prices with Harbor Freight coupon (found everywhere).
-
That second link scale, reading to 0.1 gram should be more than satisfactory, because that is 0.0035 ounce, and the NMRA standard is specified down to 0.01 ounce. It also has a maximum of 1 kilogram, which is 2.2 pounds, so it can probably weigh any n scale locomotive, too.
The scale my wife uses for cooking turns out to go down to 0.01 gram or 0.001 ounce, which is apparently needed for measuring some spices. So, it is about ten times as sensitive as needed to weigh N scale cars. Its maximum capacity is only 1 pound (or 500 grams, which is really 1.5 ounces more than an a pound). That will weigh an N scale Bachmann 2-8-8-4 EM-1 with tender (13.15 ounces, including a jew case lid that is needed to hold the model on the scale pan). But, it is getting close to the limit, so I can't vouch for weighing "Big Boys" with it.
My wife's scale is a Salter 1250BK. She got it from Amazon. Here's the link: https://www.amazon.com/Salter-1250BK-Colorado-Compact-Electronic/dp/B000A8PO7G/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1544054099&sr=8-10&keywords=salter+digital+scale (Apparently Salter sales people are targeting the pot smokers in Colorado with this one.) I like it because it is small enough to fit into my shirt pocket and still large enough to do the job.
-
I've had this for several years. It works fine. https://www.harborfreight.com/1000-Gram-Digital-Scale-60332.html
-
Get a German-designed scale. Most scales are built in China, so you need to check out where each one was designed.
http://myweigh.com/
30 year guarantee.
-
I use an old triple beam Ohaus scale that was surplus from where I work. It was free.
-
DKS, that link goes to a scale that has specs that say "0.01 pounds resolution". If not incorrectly translated from some other language, that means it has a resolution of only 0.16 ounce. Considering that the NMRA spec for N scale cars is 0.5 ounce plus 0.15 ounce per inch of car length, it seems that scale is not able to resolve the needed car weight changes closely enough. The scale specs also say that it goes to a max weight of 55 pounds. So, I am thinking that it is not what an N scaler really needs. My wife has a "cooking scale" she purchased from Amazon that reads to 0.01 grams and goes up to a few pounds. I think that is a better choice, and it is cheaper. I have already used it to weigh some of my cars, and it is entirely satisfactory. When she gets back, I will find out what it is and post a link.
In my haste to respond, I linked to the wrong product. I have a postal scale that measures down to fractions of an ounce. But it seems there are more than enough options provided in subsequent posts, so you can ignore mine.
-
I use a three-beam Ohaus scale also. I bought it used decades ago and it has all the accessory weights and box.
However, when ya think of "precision" and "repeatability"...the type of scale you should be looking at is a scale used for ammunition reloading. You can buy expensive ones with lots of useless extras (for you) or inexpensive lesser scales, that are simple, still accurate, have a brass weight standard to calibrate it with, and will weigh in ounces, grams and grains.
Here's an example at Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Frankford-Arsenal-Digital-Reloading-Display/dp/B002BDOHNA/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1544047196&sr=8-7&keywords=lyman+digital+reloading+scale
Although the platform on this scale is small, you could probably put an aluminum rectangle (or wood or plastic) on it, reset the zero and have a highly accurate (to .01 gram) and easy to use scale that won't take up a lot of space...and is a good buy at $22.90 with free shipping.
If you don't like this one, there are lots of other reloading scales out there you can choose from.
Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore
-
Bob,
Scales designed for reloading are not really that great for weighing N scale rolling stock. Because gun powder charge weights must be reliably weighed to 0.1 grain, and a grain is only 1/7,000 of a pound, they are both more sensitive than necessary and also typically don't have a very high maximum weight. For instance, the one in your link only goes to 750 grains or 50 grams, which is 1.71 or 1.75 ounces. Although that is theoretically good for the NMRA weight of a car up to 8.3" long in N scale, it certainly won't work for locomotives. And, at least my reloading scale is pretty "touchy", compared to my wife's cooking scale - I need to support the weighing platform whenever I put it away. And florescent lights can affect the reading if they are nearby, at least to the point of affecting powder charges at the 0.1 grain level.
-
Bob,
Scales designed for reloading are not really that great for weighing N scale rolling stock. Because gun powder charge weights must be reliably weighed to 0.1 grain, and a grain is only 1/7,000 of a pound, they are both more sensitive than necessary and also typically don't have a very high maximum weight. For instance, the one in your link only goes to 750 grains or 50 grams, which is 1.71 or 1.75 ounces. Although that is theoretically good for the NMRA weight of a car up to 8.3" long in N scale, it certainly won't work for locomotives. And, at least my reloading scale is pretty "touchy", compared to my wife's cooking scale - I need to support the weighing platform whenever I put it away. And florescent lights can affect the reading if they are nearby, at least to the point of affecting powder charges at the 0.1 grain level.
I never have weighed a locomotive. Is there an NMRA recommended practice for this? Some of my brass light Mikes and FEF's are filled with low-melt metal and they seem to weigh a couple of pounds, but...I've never weighed 'em...but they'll pull over 70 cars.
I didn't take too long looking for a scale for the OP, but I assume there may be a reloading digital scale that will be in his price range and meet his precision requirements, plus provide a brass weight "standard" to calibrate his scale...which kitchen scales don't do...unless "zeroing" them does the same thing.
Of course I know about "grains" since I am an avid reloader and shooter, but most digital scales have the capability to change between imperial, metric or "grains" (whatever standard that is???) and since accuracy seems to be important to the OP, it's better to have more of it than less.
Fluorescent lights affecting accuracy??? That's weird. I wonder what that's all about?????
In any case, it give the OP another avenue to maybe find what fits his needs. :)
Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore
-
I don't see any real need to accurately calibrate a scale used for N scale rolling stock. (On the other hand, I definitely calibrate my reloading scale, or at least check it every use with a calibration weight in the range of the powder charge I intend to weigh - there is a safety issue involved with reloading that isn't a problem with model railroading.)
Most scales come with a "zero" button that sets the current reading to zero and gives the difference between that and subsequent readings. This allows setting a "tare" weight to zero, and should not be confused with a calibration. This "zero" function is useful when you need to put something on the scale to support the item being weighed (such as a jewel case lid to support all wheels of a steam locomotive), or perhaps to keep the item from making the scale's platform messy (such as when weighing food).
But, even though the tare weight has been "zeroed" out of the reading, if the scale is not properly calibrated, then the reading of the object will still be off by the amount that the scale is out-of-calibration. With electronic scales, the calibration error may not even be the same fraction of the reading over the entire range of possible weights. My reloading scale came with a "calibration" function that uses 2 weights and uses a mathematical function to make the calibration apply more closely over the whole range, base on the 2 weights provided. Even greater accuracy can be had by using more calibration weights and a more complex mathematical calibration curve. A scale that has a calibration function comes with the appropriate weights for whatever math it uses to do the calibration over its range. Of course, it is up to the user to make sure those calibration weights don't change by getting worn (lose weight), getting dirty or corroded (gain weight), etc.
But, this complexity is driven by need for particular applications. For model railroading, I don't see a need to be very accurate. Today, most electronic scales are going to be well within 1% accuracy in the middle of their design ranges, and I would not care if I weighed a 3" long car that should (according to NMRA) weigh 0.95 ounce, but my scale is 1% off, so it only really weighs 0.94 ounce. That NMRA recommended weight is only based on a mathematical approximation of the collective results of some testing that was somewhat subjective, anyway.
Weighing really just puts your cars "in the suggested ballpark" for smooth operation. Even without a scale, you could just add weight to cars that are sting-lining and reduce weight to cars that your loco can't pull up your grade (or shorten your trains or add more locomotives to the rear, etc.) and probably arrive at approximately the NMRA recommendations after a lot of futzing (and cursing).
-
As with everything else in the Interwebs, everybody here has an opinion, idea, or recommendation. There are plenty (too many actually) choices already presented here for someone to make a decent choice of scales for weighting N scale cars. Both from the accuracy standpoint and price. If Bob wants to have accuracy to 1 femto-gram, so be it. Others might be satisified with less accurate scale. And yet some people, like our own Cody, remove as much weight from their rolling stock as possible. Different strokes . . .
As for Bob, I think he is confusing NMRA with NRA. Yes, I made a joke. :D
-
As for Bob, I think he is confusing NMRA with NRA. Yes, I made a joke. :D
If there was a National Model Rifle Association, I am sure they would recommend calibration for femto-gram accuracy for reloading ammo for N scale rifles!
Seriously, the OP is looking for criteria for choosing a scale, and that is what he is getting various opinions about - which is what makes this forum great.
But, when Peteski feels he has to make sure we know he is joking, are things getting that serious?
-
Get a German-designed scale. Most scales are built in China, so you need to check out where each one was designed.
http://myweigh.com/
30 year guarantee.
I assumed all these cheap scales on eBay were made in China. What I did NOT assume was that a good, calibratable scale from Germany or the US (like the myweigh you cited) would be available for a tolerable price. But actually, balances.com carries MyWeigh, and there are plenty of good options there for scales in the $20 - $50 range that would be perfect for weighing N Scale rolling stock and engines.
-
But, when Peteski feels he has to make sure we know he is joking, are things getting that serious?
It is not me - it is the world around me that has changed. :facepalm: I had few bad experiences by having something humorous being interpreted in a way I did not intend, so I just want to make sure to show my intentions (to reinforce the emoticon I also used).
I'm pretty sure, in this instance, that Bob would understand the humor, but some others here might get their knickers in a twist.
-
I assumed all these cheap scales on eBay were made in China. What I did NOT assume was that a good, calibratable scale from Germany or the US (like the myweigh you cited) would be available for a tolerable price. But actually, balances.com carries MyWeigh, and there are plenty of good options there for scales in the $20 - $50 range that would be perfect for weighing N Scale rolling stock and engines.
I think that most (if not all) digital scales use the same Chinese-made off-the-shelf components (like the strain gauge and other electronics) inside those scales, so it is not all that important where the scale was designed. I suspect that most use the same pre-canned design using the same controller integrated circuits.
Kitchen scales are also pre-calibrated (since there is really no need to calibrate those for extreme accuracy). Plus in order to calibrate a scale one needs a precision reference weight set (which most mortals do not own), so the calibration is a moot point. And strain gauges are quite sturdy, eliminating need for periodic calibration (at least for what we use them). A model train car will still work, even if it is' mass is slightly out of spec. You won't see any difference in car's trackign whether the car is 1.200 or 1.205 oz. BTW, the specs themselves are just recommendations (not absolute rules). I'm all for accuracy and precision where it *REALLY* makes a difference, but here we are *REALLY* overthinking this thing.
-
We verify scales weekly where I work using 2 different reference weights (100 g and 1000 g) and track the results to determine if the scale is drifting over time. The verification weights are stored in a plastic case to protect them. We also have a company come in once a year to calibrate our scales using standards that are traceable.
If you are concerned with scales drifting over time and losing accuracy, I would get a couple of brass weights of different mass amounts 50-100 grams and 500-1000 grams and record the mass of each weight 3-5 times to determine an average weight.
You can then check the mass of these weights weekly or monthly to see if there are changes over time. This will help determine if your scale is drifting out of calibration. The verification weights should be stored in a case or box to protect from damage. You also want to make sure your scale is level. Do any of the scales have a bubble to determine if it is level? I didn't check any of the links to look at the scales.
-
If I were to succeed in getting my rolling stock to within a whole gram :o of whatever weight standard I deem optimal, I'd be quite happy with myself. I'd do a dance... Going beyond that is silly, imho, unless one is dealing with munitions or precious metals and such. YMMV. And yes, I do weigh my locomotives; tracking, tractive effort, and electrical conductivity are all a function of weight (and weight added).
Otto K.
-
For my resin castings projects I use a little digital scale I purchased a local full service drug store (London Drugs). I don't remember the price, maybe $40.00 Cdn. It measures to 1/100 of gram or in oz's, and it can be 'zero'd' as required for additive weighing. It's about 2 1/2 X 3 1/2" and is battery powered, which are replaceable, but seem to last forever. I managed to mess one up with spattered resin long before the battery died. It would be great stocking stuffer for a loved one, and then you can use it as required without having to dip into the hobby funds.
Geoff
-
One reason it might pay to measure car weight fairly accurately (or maybe I should say precisely), would be to conduct tests on freeness of rolling. I am planning to do that with a rig that allows me to change grade under a car to better than 0.1% (grade) precision, to see what force makes it starts to roll, and what force will barely not keep it rolling. Because the force that makes the car roll is provided by gravity, making all of the test cars the same weight is useful for making the results comparable for different cars. I plan to use bird shot for weight adjustment. One #8 pellet weighs 0.07 grams (1.09 grains), so I am only interested in the scale distinguishing weight difference to a little less than that level. Of course, that is only about a quarter of one percent of the recommended weight for a 3" N scale car. But, when looking for thresholds against force, I want to make sure that the force is well known so that it does not introduce any more variation in the results than I am already going to have to contend with from other parameters.
The idea is to make all the cars weigh the same for the test, no matter what length, so they all have the same gravitational force pushing on their trucks when they are at the same grade angle. That way, I can make sure that the trucks meet a standard for free rolling (once I decide what value to establish as a standard). Of course, when the test is over, I would return the cars to whatever weight I decide works best for me. Because I want some long trains, I may decide that car weights less than NMRA recommendations are better, provided they run reliably in my operations on my layout. If I was running them on a bunch of different layouts, I might decide to use the NMRA recommendations.
-
I never have weighed a locomotive. Is there an NMRA recommended practice for this? Some of my brass light Mikes and FEF's are filled with low-melt metal and they seem to weigh a couple of pounds, but...I've never weighed 'em...but they'll pull over 70 cars.
I didn't take too long looking for a scale for the OP, but I assume there may be a reloading digital scale that will be in his price range and meet his precision requirements, plus provide a brass weight "standard" to calibrate his scale...which kitchen scales don't do...unless "zeroing" them does the same thing.
Of course I know about "grains" since I am an avid reloader and shooter, but most digital scales have the capability to change between imperial, metric or "grains" (whatever standard that is???) and since accuracy seems to be important to the OP, it's better to have more of it than less.
Fluorescent lights affecting accuracy??? That's weird. I wonder what that's all about?????
In any case, it give the OP another avenue to maybe find what fits his needs. :)
Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore
Hey Bob,
I was wondering what you use when you say "low melt metal"?
Thanks!
-
...As for Bob, I think he is confusing NMRA with NRA. Yes, I made a joke. :D
HAHAHA...thanks for letting us know Peter! :trollface:
Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore
-
Hey Bob,
I was wondering what you use when you say "low melt metal"?
Thanks!
I use low melt-temperature metal to add weight to both brass and plastic locomotives sometimes to increase their pulling capacity. I also use these casting metals to cast up parts in RTV molds sometimes.
I buy them at MicroMark here: https://www.micromark.com/search?keywords=casting
I use the Type 160 and Type 280, which are categorized by their melting temperature in deg. F
You can read on MicroMark's page the composition of each of these alloys.
I melt the Type 160 by putting a chunk of it in an aluminum cup and then setting the cup in a shallow pan of boiling water. I use a silicon heat-resistant kitchen glove to hold the cup while I'm pouring it. I've added weight to several plastic and brass locomotives and to all of my highly kitbashed cabooses.
I melt the Type 280 with a propane torch, being careful to not apply too much heat as I don't want the melted metal to get much hotter than its melt temperature. I use an aluminum cup for this too, holding the cup with long-nose Vice Grips, and wearing silicone heat resistant gloves for protection. I generally use this higher temperature metal to cast parts in RTV molds because my logic says that it will be more durable than the lower temperature alloy. However, I have cast parts using Type 160 as well, and I haven't had a durability problem with either alloy. Some of the models that have parts on them I cast using these alloys are over 20 years old nowadays, so I guess my assumption about durability doesn't matter as either alloy evidently holds up over time.
Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore
-
I use low melt-temperature metal to add weight to both brass and plastic locomotives sometimes to increase their pulling capacity. I also use these casting metals to cast up parts in RTV molds sometimes.
I generally use this higher temperature metal to cast parts in RTV molds because my logic says that it will be more durable than the lower temperature alloy. However, I have cast parts using Type 160 as well, and I haven't had a durability problem with either alloy. Some of the models that have parts on them I cast using these alloys are over 20 years old nowadays, so I guess my assumption about durability doesn't matter as either alloy evidently holds up over time.
Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore
Not sure about your reasoning. You thought that just because a metal alloy has low melting temperature, it would somehow degrade over time (even if kept in temperatures under its melting point)? What sort of degradation did you expect? Crumbling or flowing maybe? Used as weight, it is not really subjected to any stress or even strain.
-
Not sure about your reasoning. You thought that just because a metal alloy has low melting temperature, it would somehow degrade over time (even if kept in temperatures under its melting point)? What sort of degradation did you expect? Crumbling or flowing maybe? Used as weight, it is not really subjected to any stress or even strain.
Peter, truth is, I didn't know. Time has let me know now that my "logic" was wrong, and that either alloy works the same for me. Yeah...I'm not sure about my reasoning either since it was based on an erroneous assumption...that a lower melting point means less durability...or maybe more oxidation or something negative.
Time has shown that I didn't need to worry about it.
Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore
-
Folks were not planning sniper one shot kills from 953 yards, these are model trains. For 20 years +/- 0.5g was good enough for routine operations. If that scale hadn't died I would never have looked for another. As my old boss used to say "we're not finding atomic masses here, get it done" the more accurate you want to be the longer it takes to get there.
-
0.5 gram is 0.0175 ounce, so, yes, that should be fine for weighing cars against a standard that deals with about an ounce, even though the standard is stated to a precision of 0.01 ounce. Something like 2% "error" isn't going to be noticeable for operations.
By the way, "g" in scale parlance usually means "grains" not "grams". One gram is 15.4 grains, so there is more than a factor of 10 difference - something worth realizing when looking over specs. But, a lot of people are not even aware of that and write "g" for grams instead of "gm". (I have also seen "gr" for "grains", but that doesn't help a bit.)
-
...and then there's this, from Wikipedia:[attachimg=1]
Of course, I come from a metric background :P
Otto K.
-
I also come from a metric background and have not seen anything but "g" representing grams. Even in this USA. But I have seen "gr" (in the USA used to represent grains, of which I have never heard until coming to USA).
I'm really enjoying following this thread. So many ideas here. . . :) Typical example of Internet over-delivery of information, with various levels of usefulness, and of course a dose of related and even unrelated commentary.
-
What I would like to have is a side by side double scale for balancing front truck to rear truck , or first driver to last driver .
-
-
Folks were not planning sniper one shot kills from 953 yards, these are model trains. For 20 years +/- 0.5g was good enough for routine operations. If that scale hadn't died I would never have looked for another. As my old boss used to say "we're not finding atomic masses here, get it done" the more accurate you want to be the longer it takes to get there.
As my dear old mom used to say "Never complain when a restaurant brings you too much food..."
I find it difficult to complain about a scale (or any other measuring instrument) giving me too much accuracy...and at a digital level, it ain't going to take longer to do it.
Everything else being equal, if one instrument is more accurate...I'll take it over the less accurate one every time.
To actually PREFER a less accurate scale seems really ummmm...(what's a nice way to say it?)....you figure it out :trollface: (edit: the perfect phrase... "un-TRW-ish" :) )
Merry Christmas!!
Bob Gilmore
-
I've weighted all my locomotives with a kitchen scale .. I use the gram setting .. most of my locos weigh somewhere between 90-100 gms .. a few are heavier, but I've put lead weight bbshot in them to increase traction
Most cars are light -- I find that one or two pennies generally brings them close to NMRA weight .. I make no attempt to be "exact" but settle for close enough .. I haven't experienced any apparent problems with close enough weighted cars. Derailments are mainly attributed to crappy track
-
A couple of comments:
1. If you look through enough web sites, books, and instruction manuals, covering all sorts of subjects, including reloading, cooking, science, etc., you will indeed find gram abbreviated as both "g" and "gm". You will also find grain abbreviated as "g", "gr" and "gn". It really doesn't matter what somebody in one group decides to "support" if another group is not listening to them because the two groups are not really involved with each other. And, with the Chinese making most of our electronic goodies, these days, it is not clear that the people translating the instructions are always going to follow the same pattern. So, I think it is important for people evaluating scales for a particular application to make sure that they know what "g" or "gr" means in a particular piece of written material. It can't hurt to check, but it can hurt to buy the wrong thing because you assumed incorrectly.
2. "Unnecessary" accuracy is not a problem in itself. But, it typically comes with additional purchase cost, and/or additional complexity of use, and/or greater fragility of the mechanism. It also typically comes with reduced maximum weight. The scales mentioned in this thread which seem to be the most well "centered" on the needs for weighing N scale rolling stock (including engines) are the ones with at least 0.01 ounce resolution and at least 1 pound maximum weight. Greater accuracy can probably be had without penalty, perhaps 0.001 ounce, before the max weight becomes less or the need for "calibration" comes in. Greater max weight can probably go up to 2 or even 5 pounds before the resolution of the measurement gets above 0.01 or 0.02 ounce. Remember, the NMRA is talking about changing the weight of a car by about 0.04 ounce per 1/4" of length.
3. This is the "N and Z Scales" sub-forum, so somebody may be wondering how this applies to Z scale. Good luck!. The NMRA standards that I can find on the 'Net don't include Z or T scales. By volume, Z scale is about 38% of N scale. So, a Z scale car should probably be about 38% of the weight of an equivalent N scale car only if built with material thicknesses that are scaled down by the ratio of the scale factors. I have no experience with Z Scale, but I suspect that the Z models have proportionally thicker wall sections, etc. than a scaled-down version of N scale, so I really don't have any idea how much Z rolling stock typically weighs. And, I also have no clue how much weight is optimum for good operation (other than the locos should probably be as heavy as possible).
-
As my dear old mom used to say "Never complain when a restaurant brings you too much food..."
To actually PREFER a less accurate scale seems really ummmm...(what's a nice way to say it?)....you figure it out :trollface: (edit: the perfect phrase... "un-TRW-ish" :) )
Merry Christmas!!
Bob Gilmore
It may be "un-TRW-ish" but if you only need 1/10 of a gram accuracy why spend model $$ on a more accurate scale? Also I find that a lot of the modelers I know tend to obsess ( :) ) on the most minute of details, should a 40' car weigh 24.00 grams or is 23.95 OK? I know I've done that. Don't get me started on speed matching. :)
-
I don’t know how I’ve made it 30+ years in the hobby having never once weighed a car.
-
I don’t know how I’ve made it 30+ years in the hobby having never once weighed a car.
You must not be a true :ashat:! :trollface:
-
Making all your freight cars weigh the same does help, especially when backing trains and going through curves. I consider it an equal partner along with body-mounting couplers in making trains run more trouble free.
But I also agree that this thread has become absurdly obsessive. I get all my cars close to 24g, and I do use a scale, but it isn't going to matter if they are 23.5 or 24.1.
Oh.. and I am one of those who uses it to weigh locomotives, especially when I am adding weight to improve traction. It's good to know how much you have actually added when you are packing lead or tungsten in there, in order to know how much you need to see an improvement. It's also important to add it in a balanced way over the frame. You don't want to add 10g at one end and nothing at the other.
-
Wow!!! The response to my original post has been outstanding. I've learned a lot of things that will help me choose a scale that will satisfy my needs. Thanks a million to those who responded. This is a great discussion group.
Happy Holidays to all.
John
-
Well, that will teach you to/not to ask questions on TRW :D
Welcome to the group, John!
Otto K.