are HO and 1:87 the same thing?

Affiliate Disclosure: We may receive a commision from some of the links and ads shown on this website (Learn More Here)
#1
the past few weeks I've picked up a few 1:87 scale vehicles, the prices were right so I blindly purchased them for that reason, I took one item home and it seemed like the dimensions were off,

I purchased a Greyhound bus ($16...can't beat that) but I took it home and compared it to a few things I have, it seemed short and narrow though. and a few days ago I picked up a 1:87 Scale Loves Tanker. ($10, I should have bought 2)

but are HO and 1:87 the same? I've read somewhere that its actually 1:87.1, what difference will that .1 make?

i'll post pictures in a few seconds, y'all be impressed with the details
 

HOexplorer

Well-Known Member
#3
I'm no math major but .1 in a Greyhound bus may be an inch or so. Not enough to have you make a comment about it. I guess all you can do is find out the dimensions of the bus and measure for yourself. To actually answer your question I would have to say that HO is indeed 1:87. Jim:)
 

NH Mike

CEO & Wheel Cleaner
#5
I've noticed that 1:87 is a bit flexible for vehicles and is more of a nominal size not an exact size. Some measure out a bit small while others measure out slightly bigger in one dimension or another. Since they are accessory and scenic items I don't get too concerned about it. Alloy Forms and Model Power both have 1:87 1955 Chevys. Side by side they are not the exact same size. Separate them by a few feet and they look just fine.
 

Rico

BN Modeller
#6
HO and 1:87 scale should be the same, manufacturers do take a little liberty in dimensions at times.
Yes a newer bus as you have would be around 9'6" or so, there'd be at least 6'6" cabin space and somewhere around 3' cargo and structure.
(more or less)
 

Selector

Well-Known Member
#8
I have encountered a LOT of variance in the supposed HO scale world. For the most part, the trains are accurate to within 94%+, but human figurines, water vessels not meant to be fine models, and vehicles are all over the map. A modern Greyhound bus should be the better part of 133 inches tall, or about 1.5" tall in scale.
 
#9
I guess we've just got to work with what we have. So stuff that is underscale goes to the back and the over scale stuff to the front. That will force perspective a bit and add some depth to te scene.


On a tangent, HO scale (half O scale) was always an odd term. O scale had at least three scales, 1:43.5, 1:45, and 1:48. Now, oddly, 1:87 is half 1:43.5, or half the UK O scale. Yet British modelers use 1:76 scale (OO). The US O scale is 1:48 but US modelrs use 1:87 as 'half O'. Logic would suggest the UK modeler ought consider 1:87 as half O, and the US modeler ought consider 1:96 as half O.

Anyway, I guess tradition was never big on the consistency thing.
 
#10
G'day...Sometimes it confuses people when you tell them that HO is 1:87 , OO is 1:76 but they share the same track width..Here in Australia that happens a lot. If you end up buying accidentally a vehicle or even rolling stock container by OO it looks ridiculous..it really does..I've done it a couple of times , just not double checking first..A useless bit of information..1:87 scale , 1:160 scale , even more so.. but with dimensions...I'll use HO....as example... theoretically if you took 87 models and put them end to end ,that should be the length of the prototype , but scale weight would mean that each model would have to weigh way more than a family car...a big SD70 or ES44 etc are about 170-180 tons.., divide that by 87 and you're looking at about 2 tons each...How crazy is that ?....so one day we'll calculate the actual weight ratio of a model locomotive..how good is someone's maths.... Cheers Rod...
 
C

catt

Guest
#11
HO has never been half O scale.That comes from the O scale folks back in the day that HO was gaining in popularity that it looked half the size of O scale.
 

tootnkumin

Well-Known Member
Staff member
#12
I've always understood that it was OO scale that was invented as a 1/2 size O scale by Hornby Trains and marketed by them as "Dublo", because the gauge being 5/8th" was 1/2 of the then O scale at 1-1/4".

HO came about because of a desire to more accurately represent that 5/8th gauge as Standard gauge, henceforth the 1/87th rather than 1/76th being used by Hornby.
 
#14
HO has never been half O scale.That comes from the O scale folks back in the day that HO was gaining in popularity that it looked half the size of O scale.

Are you sure? Wikipedia seems to agree with me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HO_scale

The name HO is derived from the fact that its 1:87 scale is approximately half that of O scale which was the smallest of the series of older and larger 0, 1, 2 and 3 scales introduced by Märklin around 1900.
 

Selector

Well-Known Member
#15
You two are talking at cross purposes. One sez, "...never been half O scale [which is correct...it isn't even mathematically.]...", while the other sez, "...the name is derived from the fact that its (scale) is approximately half...[and has the associated appearance leading to the assumption that the scale was indeed mathematically halved...which it is not.] HO was widely accepted as a proper halving, but we should all understand that it isn't technically so. It looks that way, and is conveniently taken to be the half.
 

Rico

BN Modeller
#17
Stoker... ouch, my brain! :)
Pretty interesting topic... can't wait to get started on the old "what scale is G scale" theory, now there's a big old can o' worms!
 

Sirfoldalot

Plucked Tailfeathers
Staff member
#19
Volume, and therefore weight, is calculated using the cube of the dimensions Rodney. Example: If you had a container that was 1 cm x 1 cm x 1cm it would hold 1 gram of water. If that 1 cm cube were a 1:87.1 (HO scale) model , the original would be 87.1cm x 87.1 cm x 87.1 cm . The original would not however weigh 87.1 grams if full of water, it would weigh 87.1x87.1x87.1 grams, or 660,776.3 grams. In other words, if a model were exact in all materials at 1:87.1 scale, it would weigh 1/660,776.3 of the original, not 1/87.1. I had this discussion on another forum where someone could not fathom why a real freight car will crush uneven heavy gauge steel track into place and ride steady and a perfect scale model of that car will bounce around like a paper bag on even slightly uneven scale rails.
STOKER:

My receptors seem to be misfiring ..
What should my LT WT 59500 car weigh?
I am losing sleep over this!
 

tootnkumin

Well-Known Member
Staff member
#20
I had this discussion on another forum where someone could not fathom why a real freight car will crush uneven heavy gauge steel track into place and ride steady and a perfect scale model of that car will bounce around like a paper bag on even slightly uneven scale rails.
Should'a told him to fill his freight cars with lead, 'course then he'd be wondering why his 1/87th locos wouldn't pull them.
 



ModelRailroadForums.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com

RailroadBookstore.com - An online railroad bookstore featuring a curated selection of new and used railroad books. Railroad pictorials, railroad history, steam locomotives, passenger trains, modern railroading. Hundreds of titles available, most at discount prices! We also have a video and children's book section.

ModelRailroadBookstore.com - An online model railroad bookstore featuring a curated selection of new and used books. Layout design, track plans, scenery and structure building, wiring, DCC, Tinplate, Toy Trains, Price Guides and more.



Top