A question of scale

GM:

Just a bit off topic, but since we are discussing the 1/83 scale Mayflower -

On the model, have you noticed that on the stern of the ship by the rudder there are represented two hinged doors for the use of cannons.

Problem is - they would appear to be BELOW the water line of the ship.  Were there cannon ports placed in such a manner?  If so, were they water tight?  Is this a mistake/oversight on the part of Revell when they made up the molds?

It's always been my understanding that while some cannon ports were indeed placed rather near the water - they were not placed under the water!

Just wondering . . . 

Silver Fox

GMorrison

Where problems with figures occur isn't so much the man as it is the equipment he is carrying. The shortest guy in the outfit still has the same sized rifle, canteen and probably helmet as the biggest kid.

Modern Kevlar helmets come in different sizes. I'm short at 5'2" but have an average sized head with a hat size of 7¼ and wore a medium helmet. There were soldiers of average height or those considered tall that wore smaller helmets. In 1/35 scale though, I think the size difference would be negligible. They came in small, medium, large and extra large.

The rest of the gear, gas mask case, canteens, rifles, etc. would be standard.

Want to spend an hour of your life that you'll never get back, read the Wiki article about the M1. Interesting stuff.

I had an old MP liner when I was a liitle kid that I wore everywhere. 1/48 kid in a 1/35 helmet.

GMorrison

Where problems with figures occur isn't so much the man as it is the equipment he is carrying. The shortest guy in the outfit still has the same sized rifle, canteen and probably helmet as the biggest kid. 

While some things like a rifle will be a constant size, some helmet types do come in sizes. The old M1 “steel pot” was a one size fits all deal. The replacement PASGT Kevlar helmet, AKA K-pot, comes in sizes. 

Regarding that Mayflower kit, it had some figures, as I recall.  Not a lot, but some.  So did the Golden Hind kit.  I also recall that they were appreciably smaller than the HO scale figures I had, like Airfix' Romans and Ancient Britons, or figures from my HO railroad sets.  Again, the difference in scale comes back to proportions.

But, as Brad was suggesting, you get into trouble with proportions.

Scale up a volume follows the law of cubes, just as scaling up a two dimensional shape follows the law of squares. So scaling a figure up 28% is a factor in all three dimensions.

Thats 1.28 x 1.28 x 1.28 the volume, or slightly more than twice the original. So your 200 lb six footer like me is now a 7’-8” 400 pound Right Tackle.

92.16", or 7'-8".

GMorrison:

To make sure I'm clear on the subject - let's use the same six foot tall example, this time between 1/25 scale and 1/32.   Divide the larger number (32) by the smaller number (25) which equals 1.28 or 28% larger.  Therefore, the six foot figure in 1/25 scale would now be approximately 7 foot 6 inches or so in 1/32 scale.  Correct?

Thanks - Silver Fox 

It's hard to say because the actual scale of the model may not be 1/83, but it sounds about right. A bigger challenge might be getting the clothing right. Some of the Revell kits came with really great little figures. It sounds as though yours did not.

That's a very nice kit.

Thanks for the replies to this thread regarding scale comparisons.

I take it then that a 1/87 HO scale figure would be within an acceptable range to place in my 1/83 scale Revell model of the Mayflower.   To the best of my knowledge there are no 1/83 scale figures commercially available.  Fortunately there are plenty available in the ever popular HO 1/87 scale.   1/72 scale however, would be too large for this particular application.

Thanks again for the clarification.

It's not simply a matter of comparing the height of two figures, each in a different scale.  It's the proportions that will become obvious, when you mix figures of different scale.  A 1/24 figure won't just look like a short person next to a 1/20 scale figure-its proportions won't look right.

And even when comparing figures of the same stated scale, but made by different manufacturers, we can find some subtle difference in how each maker executed that scale.

As GM mentions, there is a percentage of difference beyond which it will become very obvious to the average person looking at your model.

Your source is incorrect. It is not a constant difference.

1/2 scale is 100% larger than 1/4 scale. 1/24 scale is 4.1 % larger than 1/25 scale.1/100 scale is 1% larger than 1/101 scale.

The difference is calculated as a simple division to establish the proportion.

1/87 compared to 1/96 is 96/87 or 10 % larger. So a 72" man in 1/87 scale is a 79" man in 1/96 scale.

I find 5 %variation to be about the limit of acceptability to my own eye.

Several other things to keep in mind. The stated scale of a model varies quite a bit from accuracy.  And two figures at the same stated scale from two manufacturers can be very different in size.

Where problems with figures occur isn't so much the man as it is the equipment he is carrying. The shortest guy in the outfit still has the same sized rifle, canteen and probably helmet as the biggest kid.

I hope this helps.