 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Models / July 2007Math/Scale Question
I was terrible at algebra. Anybody here know the answer to this one: 20 mm is equal to 1/76 scale 25 mm is equal to 1/72 scale 28 mm is equal to what? TIA, Tom >I was terrible at algebra. > >Anybody here know the answer to this one: > >20 mm is equal to 1/76 scale 20 mm * 76 = 1.52 m >25 mm is equal to 1/72 scale 25 mm * 72 = 1.8 m So you can see there's already a little slop in the scaling. >28 mm is equal to what? 1.8 m / 28 mm = 64 or, rather, 28 mm / 1.8 m = 1/64  Signature-Jack > >I was terrible at algebra. > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > So you can see there's already a little slop in the scaling. Which means that if the OP is talking about human figures, the first one is really 1/90 scale: 20 mm / 1.8 m = 1/90 > >28 mm is equal to what? > > 1.8 m / 28 mm = 64 > > or, rather, 28 mm / 1.8 m = 1/64 And in case the OP is also terrible at metric: 1.52 m * 3.28 ft/m = 5 ft 1.8 m * 3.28 ft/m = 5.9 ft = 5 ft 11 in Since I assume the OP is trying to work out the scale for a 28mm figure, I'll point out that people aren't all 6 feet tall, so you could use 20, 25, and 28mm figures together to represent people of different heights... At 1/76 scale: 20 mm * 76 = 1.5 m = 5 ft 0 in 25 mm * 76 = 1.9 m = 6 ft 3 in 28 mm * 76 = 2.1 m = 7 ft 0 in At 1/72 scale: 20 mm * 72 = 1.4 m = 4 ft 9 in 25 mm * 72 = 1.8 m = 5 ft 11 in 28 mm * 72 = 2.0 m = 6 ft 7 in At 1/64 scale: 20 mm * 64 = 1.3 m = 4 ft 2 in 25 mm * 64 = 1.6 m = 5 ft 3 in 28 mm * 64 = 1.8 m = 5 ft 11 in Part of the problem is figures versus mechanical things like tanks. The military miniatures (figures) were popular in what was called 54mm scale. That is the distance from the base to the eyes was 54mm. I believe this kind of measure was selected because head gear differed greatly in height - kepi versus bearskin hat as an example. Then much later military equipment standardized in scales like 1/32 and 1/35. Close to 54mm but not exactly. Many today refer to 54 mm as 1/35th - the figures are scaled to go with the tanks. The war game folks used smaller figures - and many of them - they called it 25 mm. Again selected independently of the 1/N scales. So its a matter of coming as close as you can. Scaling against a "standard height" as mentioned by other posters is the only way I know. But for 54 mm then you'd have to scale height of the figures eyes. Which is probably less than 6 feet. There were some interesting early sets I can remember when Tamiya scaled British troops the same as Japanese and they all looked too short. Then they overcorreceted with a set of 8th army infantry that looked like tall bean poles. - I also remember some sets where you couldn't match with each other - the figures were the same height - but the equipment was of different sizes. At any rate the formula provided in the earlier post is probably the best way to go. Val Kraut >I was terrible at algebra. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Tom > Part of the problem is figures versus mechanical things like tanks. The > military miniatures (figures) were popular in what was called 54mm scale. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > - Show quoted text - 1/64 scale it is. I think that the scale is a bit too large to fit 1/72-1/76 figures. The buildings and diorama items such as trenches should look right. I think that the equipment worn/carried by the figures would look out of scale, especially if used with 1/72 scale items, even worse with 1/76 items. Thanks guys, Tom >I was terrible at algebra. > >Anybody here know the answer to this one: Here is a handy little file that I picked up on the modeling forum in Compuserve a long while back - has come in very handy for me many times to answer just such questions. John Alger IPMS 10906 Charlotte Scale Modelers >I was terrible at algebra. > >Anybody here know the answer to this one: This forum does not allow binaries, so look in alt.models.binaries for my post for Scale Calculator. A nifty file I picked up on CompuServe a long while back that had been very handy. Small size (230k) but works great. John Alger IPMS 10906 Charlotte Scale Modelers > look in alt.models.binaries Oops! Make that alt.binaries.models.scale Sorry about that. John Alger IPMS 10906 Charlotte Scale Modelers |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.