"28mm vs 1:48" Topic

28mm is a "fuzzy" scale – it is not a ratio, but a reference and an unclear one: to the top of the head?, to the eyes? to the top of the theoretical bare head? what is the average "real world" height it scales to?

While it is not possibly to absolutely say what 28mm is, it is possible to say what it is not. I am concerned because a commercial venture (if you know who it is, please leave that out of this discussion; I don't want to discuss they, I want to discuss the issue) has equated the two, which I think is deterimental to the hobby overall.

Granted, most people with some experience would know better than to equate 28mm with 1:48. In general, customers would avoid purchasing from a "confused" company and retailers wouldn't want to be painted with the same brush. The second issue has two parts: (1) a retailer wouldn't want knowledgable customers to be suspicious of their wares, (2) repeat business would be harmed by frusrated customers.

It is this last issue of new hobbyists being put off minatures that bothers me. Granted, there will always be frustration – even with ratioed scales there is variability. But 28mm and 1:48 are so fundamentally mismatched that it would be a rare case where the figures worked well together.

I, myself, actually like to use 1:48 (and even 1:35) vehicles and (some) terrain with 28mm figures. The extra roominess helps get figures into the vehicles and terrain. But when I am doing this, I am consciously making a decision to use mismatched pieces for an effect, not because they are inherently compatible scales.

So … if we don't police ourselves …

I was under the impression that true 25mm figures were 1/60 scale and 28mm figures were 1/56 scale , if thats helpful.

Where "heroic 28mm" figures (whatever the hell that is supposed to mean) are approaching 36mm tall it is probably more honest to call them 1/48 scale.

As far as I'm concerned, 28mm = 1:56th scale.

See my comments at link

I agree that 28mm is 1/56, however I use 1/48th scale vehicles for my WWII, as I feel they look better.

What we call our minis as far as the MMs is funny thing? Some years back the Wargames Foundry figures were originally called 25MM --then "Gurnsey foundry" entered the scene --soon after merged with Wargames Foundey as they wre always one and the same and suddenly --zim,zam,bam the exact same figures that were refered to as 25mm two weeks prior were now called 28mm? As far as scale I have purchased models and die cast vehicles from different companies that are listed as the same scale and there will be a noticable size difference even though they claim to be "the same scale" ?? Same with model railway stuff.
My final oponion --I think where the human hand is involved in doing something repitiously over and over hundruds of times it will be very difficult to get exact perfection?
Regards
Russ Dunaway

28mm is neither 1/56 or 1/48.
The fact that a few companies have, as you put it, equated 28mm with 1/56 and a large group of people have bought into this does not make it true.
However, for many reasons already stated many times over many years, I think 1/48 is the better match.

It is actually more correct to say that depending on manufacturer, 28mm is BOTH 1/56 AND 1/48th.

1/48th is a better match with some 28mm minis and not others. Same goes for 1/56th.

A West Wind miniature is very different than a Chiltern.

This isn't that difficult to figure out that miniatures are different sizes depending on who made them thus they will fit with different scale vehicles.

There's room for everyone to be "correct" and to match to their taste.

TMP scale page:

TMP link

i would like to add my two pennyworth:-
when the ww2 25mm+ figs came out there was very little in suitable vehicles for them, then one company started to import the old 1/48th bandai range, (called frog/fuman) to use with them, as i suspect that they looked at the figures that come with the tanks, which are far smaller than 1/48th and thought hey these are spot on as they are way underscale.
when we went into 28mm vehicles we looked at what was available and chose 1/60th as the best and nearest scale and to be compatable with the biggest range then, i.e. westwind, although we only had access to a few vehicles.
i now know, with hindsight, that 1/56th would have been a better option.
when you start actualy stand figs on a large thick base the real scale vehicles do look too small, so it is a case of perception, when you have modeled and studdied vehicles, it is only then that you realise that the average family car is not that big, and nor is a tiger tank.
my answer now is buy what you feel looks right, you will never win a corrct scale argument, we have given up putting the 1/76 scale on our price list as everyone now calls it 20mm, which is still wrong imho, but as long as gamers buy them, i don't care anymore what they call it.
you make something nice and someone will buy it what ever size it is.

I suspect that etotheipi's post refers to a certain WW2 range from a certain Italian company (we were asked to not mention actual names…). I spoke to the figure designer and another representative (owner perhaps?) of the company at Salute. I was admiring their new buildings and asked about the choice of scale. I was told that it's not 28mm, and not supposed to be. It was chosen to fit in with the scale many plastic kit manufactures use, so that gamers could use the wide range of available vehicles in what, they said, was intended to be a skirmish game using only a few models. So no confusion in their minds. Just the confusing lack of a definite scale for most wargame figures?

"I'v chosen to use this system (measuring to the eyes) because I want to avoid any form of guessing."

That's where you lost me.

The height of a 28mm 'to the eyes' figure depends of course on how big the head is and where the eyes are placed (even if he is standing up straight and you get him to hold his head 'level' whatever that means). With something approaching natural proportions this would be 30mm but the typical gaming figure has a grossly over-sized head and face. So more like 31mm. If you peg average height at 5'8" for pre-modern Europeans that makes '28mm' 1/56. However, as I mentioned the head of most figures is 5-6mm rather than 4mm, since the head averages 1/7.5 of height for pre-modern Europeans that makes the head more appropriate for a figure 37.5-45mm overall height. On top of that the face is generally enlarged on the head so it's features would fit a 54mm figure.

A millimeter or two may seem very little but as a percentage it is enormous, the whole range of adult hat sizes describes the difference between a 3.75 and a 4.25mm head in this scale. If you actually met an adult of average height with a 1/5 head it would look like a basketball.

I have just built a 1/48 scale WWII Puma. In photo tests, it appears to be big with 28mm figs; especially if you use OTHER than the bases that come with 28mm.

Frankly, the use of BLACK round bases for these figs is stupid. They should all be CLEAR like the discs from Litko. I tested this and clear is definately WAY smarter.

However, you can get clear bases in various thicknesses, and the figs themselves mean, well, it TOTALLY depends on what brand of 28mm figs you are using.

In my photo tests, the 1/48 Puma and the 28mm figs are ok because the cost of 1/56 vehicles makes this a neccesity.

The real test will come in building a 1/48 scale British Bren carrier from Tamiya.

My guess is as I continue the tests that the difference will only be obvious in fairly rare cases; for instance, putting a 1/48 Jeep next to a 1/56 Sherman.

It's all whats in your budget and the size of your game table, and the size of the buildings and trees and bridges you want to use.

For instance, what about bridges anyway? Even a 1/56 bridge of minor caliber is going to be enormous on the game able right?

Look at the footprint of a building in scale. It's gi normous. So the thing is, you really CANT use buildings that are in scale with the figs if your game table is only 5x5 feet; in fact, you can't even show a hill in scale because the entire game table would have to represent the top of even a small hill.

Seriously, it's all making me think that 1/72 plastics are the only best solution to gaming in scale/proportion to game table. 1/72 especially these days is become far smarter.

PS I'm in agreement with Caesar and wrgmr

28mm is closer to 1/56 in most cases.
In the Nineties many sculptors ignored correct human feature and made big heads, thick torsos etc.
Today many companies still stuck to the past still use this kind of sculpture, costumers call them "cartoonish" looking figures.
Generally today's public favors well balanced sculptures anatomic correct and correct equipment.
As to vehicles:
Bigger scales like 1/48 might look ok but on important factor is the height:figures based on thin 1mm washers will look better next to a vehicle than those on huge pedestal bases that will place them on a tall level, taller than they should be, so here why bigger scale vehicles look better.