Piko G containers

[Pipalya]

Has anyone noticed the latest offerings of G scale containers seem to be flat sided and possibly not correctly signed for what should be refridgerated containers (these items do not correctly show the details at the non opening end.
However Piko seem to have forsaken the corrugated sided containers. The last I have seen is the 2 container Deutrans model.
Is there any interest in these models among the community?

 

[PhilP]

Has anyone noticed the latest offerings of G scale containers seem to be flat sided and possibly not correctly signed for what should be refridgerated containers (these items do not correctly show the details at the non opening end.
However Piko seem to have forsaken the corrugated sided containers. The last I have seen is the 2 container Deutrans model.
Is there any interest in these models among the community?

Intermodal containers, are of interest to me..

There seems to be a monopoly on these (in the larger scales) and they seem expensive for what they are?

Perhaps, it requires a sophisticated machine to mould / release the corrugated sides?

PhilP

 

[Gizzy]

I have a few of the LGB versions, but I don't know if they are the same size as the PIKO containers. I have both 20 and 40 foot ones

I would imagine that PIKO would have made them compatible if they've used the same scale as LGB....

 

[Pipalya]

I have a few of the LGB versions, but I don't know if they are the same size as the PIKO containers. I have both 20 and 40 foot ones

I would imagine that PIKO would have made them compatible if they've used the same scale as LGB....

View attachment 316574

It seems to me that the Piko containers are identical in size to the larger LGB ones. The mouldings seem better and the door detail is superior to the LGb variety. However they do not scale correctly for 20' or 40' containers. I believe they scale about 5' too long for a 20' container which is disappointing. The original LGB container I think was scaled to match those used on the White Pass which were not standard as used today.

 

[Gizzy]

It seems to me that the Piko containers are identical in size to the larger LGB ones. The mouldings seem better and the door detail is superior to the LGb variety. However they do not scale correctly for 20' or 40' containers. I believe they scale about 5' too long for a 20' container which is disappointing. The original LGB container I think was scaled to match those used on the White Pass which were not standard as used today.

You are probably right about the container scale sizes. To my eye, the 20 ft ones look too short.

I guess I could work out the scale from the height as an ISO container is 8 ft tall. My 40 ft ones are slightly taller possibly 8 ft 6 in.

I might take a measure to one later this week and work out the true scale for you....

 

[Gizzy]

I've done some research and ISO containers are normally 8 ft wide, and either 8 ft 6 or 9 ft 6 (hi cube).

My short LGB containers are 90 wide, 92 tall and 170 long. If my maths is correct this equates to 20 ft, if I divide those numbers by 8.5.



My long containers are 101 wide, 106 tall and 300 long, which using 8.5 again, makes the 40 ft box too short at 35.3 ft long.

It's another LGB compromise I guess, but my intermodal train does look good, especially with a mix of both sizes of container. My Toytrain LB flats carry either a long container or 2 short ones, so they would scale out at aroung 40 ft.

Most UK container flats are 60 ft, so it's a compromise I'm happy to accept....

 

[Pipalya]

I decided to measure my Containers and got close to the same measurements.
mm Length Width Height
LGB Small Container mm = 170 x 90 x 90 (right hand side below)
Piko Large Container mm = 300 x 102 x 107(centre below)


I believe that the Piko Large Container (centre above) which is basically the same size
as the large LGB one (left above) is supposed to represent a standard 20' dry container not a 40' one.
Starting from the external measurements of an actual dry 20' standard container
which is 6.06m x 2.44m x 2.6m and then dividing by 22.5, which is the common scale used by LGB, I get the following results in mm (after x 1000 and rounded off to whole numbers) and assuming LGB models of the White Pass are 1:22.5 (White Pass track gauge is actually 3 foot not one metre) then a.....
20' container to scale should measure as follows...

gauge	scale	L (mm)	W (mm)	H (mm)
metre	1:22.5	269	108	116
3'	1:20.3	299	120	128
3'6"	1:24	253	102	108
	1:29	209	84	90
standard gauge	1:32	189	76	81

Piko / LGB container

300

102

107

Thus width and height measurements are closest to 1:24 and length to 1:20.3
This is why the container looks too long proportionally to height.

My first thought why this has happened is that originally LGB modelled the container for the White Pass which pioneered Containers in the 50s long before they became common and containers were standardized. The White Pass called itself "The Container Route".



Its large containers were 25,3' x 8' x 8' or 7.71144m long (see above)
At 1:22.5 scale 25.3' measures 343mm which is too long so maybe that theory is wrong.


LGB's version of the White Pass container.

My other thought was the LGB White Pass flat car was originally designed for carrying 2 anvil ore containers which were unique to the WP and look prototypically accurate. So maybe the container was lengthened to fit this car or maybe the WP containers were 25'. But it does look right so I am probably wrong and/or my calculations are screwed!
However in the end it looks good rather than looks right? If they were proper 20' containers they would be shorter.

So I enjoy my container train and never get bored watching it.

 

[Software Tools]

LGB also made the Swiss RhB containers, which are a bit larger than the White Pass ones.

 

[dunnyrail]

I think you are overthinking trying to find reasons for odd sizes, it believe it simply boils down to LGB’s flexible ruler to make things work for height/width and clearly length to fit with differing scales in their range. It would appear that other manufacturers of boxes have got caught up in this scale malarkey.

I decided to measure my Containers and got close to the same measurements.
mm Length Width Height
LGB Small Container mm = 170 x 90 x 90 (right hand side below)
Piko Large Container mm = 300 x 102 x 107(centre below)

View attachment 316918
I believe that the Piko Large Container (centre above) which is basically the same size
as the large LGB one (left above) is supposed to represent a standard 20' dry container not a 40' one.
Starting from the external measurements of an actual dry 20' standard container
which is 6.06m x 2.44m x 2.6m and then dividing by 22.5, which is the common scale used by LGB, I get the following results in mm (after x 1000 and rounded off to whole numbers) and assuming LGB models of the White Pass are 1:22.5 (White Pass track gauge is actually 3 foot not one metre) then a.....
20' container to scale should measure as follows...

gauge	scale	L (mm)	W (mm)	H (mm)
metre	1:22.5	269	108	116
3'	1:20.3	299	120	128
3'6"	1:24	253	102	108
	1:29	209	84	90
standard gauge	1:32	189	76	81

Piko / LGB container

300

102

107

Thus width and height measurements are closest to 1:24 and length to 1:20.3
This is why the container looks too long proportionally to height.

My first thought why this has happened is that originally LGB modelled the container for the White Pass which pioneered Containers in the 50s long before they became common and containers were standardized. The White Pass called itself "The Container Route".

View attachment 316920

Its large containers were 25,3' x 8' x 8' or 7.71144m long (see above)
At 1:22.5 scale 25.3' measures 343mm which is too long so maybe that theory is wrong.

View attachment 316919
LGB's version of the White Pass container.

My other thought was the LGB White Pass flat car was originally designed for carrying 2 anvil ore containers which were unique to the WP and look prototypically accurate. The flat car then would have been too short for the 20' container so maybe the container was shortened to fit this car. But it does look right so I am probably wrong and/or my calculations are screwed!
However in the end it looks good rather than looks right?

So I enjoy my container train and never get bored watching it.
View attachment 316921

 

[Pipalya]

I agree with dunnyrail.
Here is a better view of the elastic ruler... Compare -
Real 20' container


Piko container


The Piko container has 26 corrugations compared to the actual container only 20.
This shows clearly that the Piko / LGB 20' containers are scaled incorrectly. They are clearly too long.
Note: Both containers contain the correct ISO codes for a 20' container.
22U1 and 22G1 respectively -
2 = Length 20' 2 = Height 8'6" G1= General purpose U1 = Open Top Container.
A 40' High Cube refrigerated container would be 45R1.
4 = 40' 5 = 9'6" (High Cube) R1=refrigerated.

LGB seemed to have paid a lot more attention to the local Swiss container models. They look really good with much attention to detail evident.

 

[Gizzy]

LGB seemed to have paid a lot more attention to the local Swiss container models. They look really good with much attention to detail evident.

I'm not sure that the RhB containers are ISO, especially the CO-OP ones. They were made so they could fit on redundant wagon under frames.

For the Post containers they have a special 'well' wagon, so that they fit through tunnels....

 

[Software Tools]

For the Post containers they have a special 'well' wagon, so that they fit through tunnels....

As far as I can tell, the RhB containers are all built to the same loading profile, whether for Post or other goods (refrigerated or not).

 

[Pipalya]

I'm not sure that the RhB containers are ISO, especially the CO-OP ones. They were made so they could fit on redundant wagon under frames.

Neither does the Geest container - No ISO markings evident.

Some of the Piko containers are also incorrectly coded.

My Safmarine container is coded 45R1 for a refrigerated container but it has corrugated sides
not flat. Otherwise the colours are correct. Detail for a refrigerated container missing on the end.
The 4 indicates it should be a 40' container which it is not.


Recent G scale 2 Container wagen MSC/OCL has two containers with flat sides yet they are coded 42G1 and 45G1 respectively which means they should both have corrugated sides and be 40' containers.



My MSC container is the same yet it has corrugated sides and correctly coded G1.


It would take little effort for the people at PIKO to get these details right, you would think?

 

[dunnyrail]

Neither does the Geest container - No ISO markings evident.

Some of the Piko containers are also incorrectly coded.

My Safmarine container is coded 45R1 for a refrigerated container but it has corrugated sides
not flat. Otherwise the colours are correct. Detail for a refrigerated container missing on the end.
The 4 indicates it should be a 40' container which it is not.
View attachment 316944

Recent G scale 2 Container wagen MSC/OCL has two containers with flat sides yet they are coded 42G1 and 45G1 respectively which means they should both have corrugated sides and be 40' containers.

View attachment 316945

My MSC container is the same yet it has corrugated sides and correctly coded G1.
View attachment 316946

It would take little effort for the people at PIKO to get these details right, you would think?

I agree with you about getting printing right, a little bit of research and perhaps using a picture would hellp. Though I worked for Freightliner Containers are not really my thing, but is is possible amongst the many thousands of boxes around that what is essentially the same box could not be both ribbed and straight sided?

 

[Pipalya]

I think this thread is finished. Perhaps a few images to send it on it's way.

Going . . .

going. . . .

Gone.