Who Made the 1st 1/30 Polystone Armor (1 Viewer)

About 90% of collectors don't care much about scale and the finer details of the hobby, they're just out to have fun. When someone seems to be stirring things up for no apparent reason (in their minds), they get upset. I gave up trying to alter peoples perception of scale etc some time ago, at the end of the day you only have to please yourself, and it is just 'Toy Soldiers' as Andy once told me, and he's correct. I still don't understand how you can display 1/28 figures with 1/24 tanks etc as there's more variance in scales as you approach 1:1. For example 1/28 compared to 1/24 scale is a significant difference in mathematical terms than 1/28 to 1/30 scale. However you go for it you like that, but I suggest you reduce the number of threads you start on it as most people just don't care.

:salute:: .... GREAT WORDS, Matt ..... Count me in the 90%. I collect for fun, for history, for relaxation and for the great people in the hobby. A key word is HOBBY. This is supposed to be relaxing and enjoyable ... for everyone.

The last few months some people seem obsessed {sm5} with this scale issue, to the point of not buying this or that and ignoring a great piece. It seems to me that the "Metal" solders collectors are the ones that are most "OCD" over this trivia. In many of the others folders (plastic TS for example) I seldom see any heated debates on scale, on rivets/inch, on which manufacturer is better than another and so forth.

Lets just have fun and enjoy.

I truly hope that we have seen the last of these scale and comparison threads for a while. :)

Time to set up my 6" Marx WWII figures with my King and Country WWII sets ......

--- LaRRy
 
If one is tracing the development of 1/32 and 1/30 "Toy Soldier" armour - don't forget one of the first in the field - Britains Centurion tank ( in either green or sand) produced back in 1965.
 
About 90% of collectors don't care much about scale and the finer details of the hobby, they're just out to have fun. When someone seems to be stirring things up for no apparent reason (in their minds), they get upset. I gave up trying to alter peoples perception of scale etc some time ago, at the end of the day you only have to please yourself, and it is just 'Toy Soldiers' as Andy once told me, and he's correct. I still don't understand how you can display 1/28 figures with 1/24 tanks etc as there's more variance in scales as you approach 1:1. For example 1/28 compared to 1/24 scale is a significant difference in mathematical terms than 1/28 to 1/30 scale. However you go for it you like that, but I suggest you reduce the number of threads you start on it as most people just don't care.

I display 1/26-68mm figures made by TCS and K&C with 1/25-70mm Armor & Artillery; 2mm difference; is not very much! If you must criticise please get the numbers right.

1/24 is 75mm or 3" figures.
 
I display 1/26-68mm figures made by TCS and K&C with 1/25-70mm Armor & Artillery; 2mm difference; is not very much! If you must criticise please get the numbers right.

1/24 is 75mm or 3" figures.

With figures, anyone can juggle the numbers to suit their opinion, or products, as evident by the range in size of the '1/30' scale figures from the different manufacturers. Consequently we must form our own opinions on what 'matches' what. You ask for input about toy history and comments about your displays. Clearly you and I have very different opinions on your 1/24 mixes etc. If you are happy that's fine, let's leave it at that, I'm moving on.
 
Matt; thank you for the information. I have compiled a comparison chart of three Panzer IVs with very close measurements and considering that the three companies who made them are Figarti 1/29.6, First Legion 1/31, and 21st Century 1/30; it is very interesting IMHO!

Figarti Pz IV----------------------------First Legion Pz IV----------------------------21st Century Pz IV

Hull Lgth 7.8"--------------------------------------7.4"--------------------------------------------------7.6"
Without Gun.

Width------3.94"-------------------------------------3.9"--------------------------------------------------3.9"
Without Schurtzen

Height-----3.6"---------------------------------------3.2"--------------------------------------------------3.5"
Top of Cupola

Average---1/29.6---------------------------------1/31-------------------------------------------------1/30
Scale; L+W+H/3

Dimensions in Inches

Americans mostly use inches not millimeters in discussions other than scientific; where the metric system prevails. I explained the use of the wood scale in the photos was to avoid reflections spoiling the photos; perhaps you did not understand.

The purpose of the photos was to validate the measurements I made with a steel scale which you doubted the accuracy of. I stated that direct measurement was more accurate than the photos I provided because of parallax error and the photo accuracy was +/- .125 inch or 3mm. Sufficiently accurate to prove my point that the 21st Century Cold Steel Panzer IV H is 1/30 scale and compatable with First Legion and W. Britains 60mm figures. The 21st Century Panzer IV H ; as shown in the table is larger than the 1/31 scale First Legion Panzer IV and smaller than the 1/29.6 scale Figarti Panzer IV H.

I have also provided several photos showing the size compatability of the 21st Century Cold Steel Panzer IV H and Stug IV with the excellent 60mm figures from W. Britains and First Legion. Based on comments to this thread many were unaware the 21st Century Cold Steel AFVs were 1/30 rather than 1/32. The Cold Steel line was a premium Die Cast metal version of the plastic 1/32 line.

The availabilty of these Panzers at modest cost offers opportunities to suppliment the more expensive polystone and mixed media Panzers in dioramas. I would like to hear from anyone who has 21st Century Cold Steel AFVs and who can verify if other models in the line are 1/30 scale.
I have a 21st Century Cold Steel King Tiger on order and I will report on its size comapatibility in a future thread.
 
Americans mostly use inches not millimeters in discussions other than scientific; where the metric system prevails. I explained the use of the wood scale in the photos was to avoid reflections spoiling the photos; perhaps you did not understand.

The purpose of the photos was to validate the measurements I made with a steel scale which you doubted the accuracy of. I stated that direct measurement was more accurate than the photos I provided because of parallax error and the photo accuracy was +/- .125 inch or 3mm. Sufficiently accurate to prove my point that the 21st Century Cold Steel Panzer IV H is 1/30 scale and compatable with First Legion and W. Britains 60mm figures. The 21st Century Panzer IV H ; as shown in the table is larger than the 1/31 scale First Legion Panzer IV and smaller than the 1/29.6 scale Figarti Panzer IV H.

I have also provided several photos showing the size compatability of the 21st Century Cold Steel Panzer IV H and Stug IV with the excellent 60mm figures from W. Britains and First Legion. Based on comments to this thread many were unaware the 21st Century Cold Steel AFVs were 1/30 rather than 1/32. The Cold Steel line was a premium Die Cast metal version of the plastic 1/32 line.

The availabilty of these Panzers at modest cost offers opportunities to suppliment the more expensive polystone and mixed media Panzers in dioramas. I would like to hear from anyone who has 21st Century Cold Steel AFVs and who can verify if other models in the line are 1/30 scale.
I have a 21st Century Cold Steel King Tiger on order and I will report on its size comapatibility in a future thread.

I know US (and UK) are still using Imperial measurements, most countries do not, for several reasons, main reason being metric is more accurate. Which is why scientists use metric. I also understood you used the wooden ruler in your photo because of reflection issues, which could have been avoided by a slight change in viewpoint btw.

Did you understand my point about the wooden ruler on it's edge in your photo adding extra 'height' (3 mm) to that Panzer IV? It shouldn't be used in that way, Imo of course.

Of course direct measurement is more accurate than photos, that's why I avoid the use of 'measuring by photo' wherever possible. On earlier threads you seemed to think measuring by photo was accurate, seems like you've changed your mind.

21st Century (and FOV models) do provide a cheaper, and near enough scale, alternative for those members that collect First Legion and similar sized figures. If you check my earlier posts on that matter you will see I came to that conclusion long ago, as did many other collectors. You seem to be making out that this is something new, that you discovered.

The above are minor disagreements, the main issue I have is your claim that the artillery piece in your photo matches the figures in size. That canon was made as a toy many years ago, I don't think it matches well with figures, same as your 1/24 tanks. If you think it does, that's fine, just don't get bent out of shape if others don't agree with you.
 
I know US (and UK) are still using Imperial measurements, most countries do not, for several reasons, main reason being metric is more accurate. Which is why scientists use metric. u.

We use metric in the UK like the rest of the EU:wink2:
 
My scale with imperial measure is graduated in 1/64 inch or.015 inch. The scale is also calibrated in millimeters or .0394 inch; much better resolution with imperial measure using a scale IMO.
I prefer a Laser Interferometer for really fine measurements down to .00001 inch.
 
We use metric in the UK like the rest of the EU:wink2:

I know you are partly metricated there Neil, officially you can still use miles, yards and inches in the UK. Different in Australia, everything here is metric including speed and distances on road signs.
 
My scale with imperial measure is graduated in 1/64 inch or.015 inch. The scale is also calibrated in millimeters or .0394 inch; much better resolution with imperial measure using a scale IMO.
I prefer a Laser Interferometer for really fine measurements down to .00001 inch.

Good to know you have that potential, really looking forward to seeing future measurements to at least the Third decimal place.
 
Matt; The comment regarding photographic measurements was erronious. Ariel Photo Recon and Astrometrics are dependant upon accurate measurement of objects in photographs. The photos of the four model M26 tanks were accuratly measured. The key factor is using an object in the photograph of known size and thus calculating the scale of the photgraph. MGWs photos had a scale factor of .5. A 2x correction factor was sufficient to render the M26 models at 1:1 and make measurements accurate enough to determine scale.

I have measured Lunar Craters and Rills on Astrophotographs to within 1 Arc Second or 1.1 mile at a distance of 240,000 miles. Astronomey is a hobby of mine as well as Toy Soldiers. Too many hobbies, not enough time!

The comparison between measuring objects in a photograph and photographing an object being measured in three dimensions is spurrious! Measuring a two dimensional object with a scale is far more simple than photographing an object in three dimensions with scales measuring the three dimensions of the object. Parallax error is the prime source of error and a Macro lens is the preferred tool to use to reduce it. Unfortunatly I don't own a Macro lens and had to use what I had on hand. The photos were intended as demonstration of the validity of the data I provided within .125 inchs or 3mm. The actual measurment data provided in a table; which you questioned the accuracy of, was far more precise than the photos of the scale with the 21st Century Panzer IV H and the FOV M26. I remain convinced that the TCS M26 is 1/26, The Figarti M26 is 1/28 and the FOV M26 is 1/30 +/- .5. Contending otherwise without providing data is not a valid argument IMO.

Measuring Photos=Apples. Photgraphing Measuements=Oranges. Two different processes entirely; for two entirely different purposes, using different tools!
 
Thanks for the update Kat, I didn't know you were into "Astronomey". Btw, you guys sure do spell funny in America. Keep up the good work, I enjoy your posts, as good as those guys off The Big Bang Theory, but please don't post any 'Moon' photos.
 
Thanks for the update Kat, I didn't know you were into "Astronomey". Btw, you guys sure do spell funny in America. Keep up the good work, I enjoy your posts, as good as those guys off The Big Bang Theory, but please don't post any 'Moon' photos.

Matt; thanks for the edit . Moving between Gaelic and Anglo Saxon is difficult. Slange Var
 
My family immigrated to Delaware Colony in North America in 1746 after the Rising. Fought with Clan Donald at Culloden Moor. Fled the reprisals of German George.
 
Last edited:
I see, what some call the Jacobite risings. I didn't know much about my ancestors and spent most of the Easter break using a free trial period on an ancestry website to track them down. I spent about 8 boring hours each day on the computer researching leads, and making a few posts on Treefrog :wink2: Most of my ancestors were from England, with some from Ireland and Scotland. You use information from family trees previously compiled by other relatives. I found several had made a few errors, which I had to fix when compiling my tree.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top