It looks like the term 'Christmas garden' was still in circulation in 1952 if this Bachmann Brothers ad that appeared in the September '52 issue of Model Railroader is anything to go by.
I also found it interesting that the scale of these items is listed as 1/8" = 1', which is just a tad smaller than HO scale. I have a few of those bungalow models shown on the left, and have felt that they were much too small for HO. I don't think it's because they're made to 1/8" scale, but simply because they're too small to seem like credible houses. The ad implies that they were deliberately made on the small side (... occupy a space 1/4 of that required for ordinary size train accessories ...) as this allows more time and space for actual railroad operation.
Regardless, those houses can be quite useful when a little mid-century forced perspective is wanted.
I never liked those smaller than scale structures. You definitely cannot use these structures anywhere near the front of the layout and forget standing a HO scale figure in front of it. They have to relegated to middle or back of the layout. I believe it is just all about production costs. Make them a bit smaller and see if you can get away with it. That is my opinion on the subject. All in all though the house looks like a standard track house and would look great in a model housing development.
ReplyDeleteJF
I agree. These 'models' were clearly made with the goal of selling low cost - and low quality - items in mass quantities to serve what they perceived to be a market. I think this line of structures helped to give plastics a bad name in that era until Revell came around and released some much higher quality kits.
DeleteA glance at the online auction site has many of those Plasticville kits boxed as 'HO', no mention of 1:96 scale. I don't imagine that the moulds were recut to be 10% larger?
ReplyDeleteOlder Preiser figures are boxed as 1:90, where the same figures are still in the catalogue they are now 'HO', 3.5% smaller is assumed to be ok?
Not as glaring as the many OO/HO offerings, a 12.5% difference, I guess if not side by side then we're not expected to notice? Though Preiser do offer 1:76 and even 1:72 for the pedants.
British TT is 1:100 continental 1:120, even N is 1:150 to 1:160.
I guess those of failing eyesight are expected to not notice, or not buy from Johnny foreigner?
As a kid I used many of Airfix's civilian figures that on the box claimed to be suitable for HO/OO. In reality they were OO and looked like giants when placed near HO figures, or just about anything in HO scale.
DeleteIt's a mystery to me why the companies chose the scales they did. I suspect it had something to do with what they were capable of manufacturing and their views on what could capture the largest market. Here in Canada, since there were no domestic figure manufacturers, and still aren't that I'm aware of, everything 'comes from away', so buyer beware and all that :-)
1:87 is 'Half O' that is 1:43.5 don't know why 1:43.5 it's in the dim recesses of history, but why OO at 1:76 or even 1:72, one of the many aircraft scales.
ReplyDeleteN is 'close-ish' to half HO at 1:160 should be 1:174!!
So it is mostly just arbitrary it seems, all before we had computers to work it all out and CAD to set up the CNC equipment.
I think HO is a weird scale, and to keep my head on straight I think in terms of 3.5mm = 1 ft instead of ratios. 4mm = 1ft (which I believe is OO, 1:76) seems much more sensible: 1mm = 3 inches, and 0.5 mm, which is easily measurable on a regular ruler, is 1.5 inches. The very first model railroad item I ever bought was a steel Walthers model railroad scale with an HO scale engraved on it - it solved all my measuring problems and was quite happy although I paid what I thought was an outrageous price for it at the time, $2.95 I seem to recall. I still have it and use it, at least it has paid for itself :-)
Delete