Verifying the Scale Accuracy of Our Model
A recent customer review raised concerns about the dimensions of our 1/64 scale model, claiming that it appeared smaller compared to other 1/64 scale models on the market. Initially, we considered this feedback seriously and decided to conduct a detailed verification process to ensure the accuracy of our scaling methodology.
Scale Verification Process
Our scaling process strictly follows real-world dimensions, proportionally reduced by a factor of 64. To validate our approach, we conducted a comparative analysis using a well-known branded 1/64 scale model: the 2010 Ford Mustang GT by Maisto.
Step 1: Verifying the Ford Mustang GT 1/64 Scale Model
Real Dimensions of the 2010 Ford Mustang GT:
- Length: 4775.2 mm, Width: 1877.06 mm, Height: 1412 mm
Expected 1/64 Scale Dimensions:
- Length: 74.61 mm, Width: 29.32 mm, Height: 22.06 mm
Measured Maisto 1/64 Scale Model Dimensions:
- Length: 75 mm, Width: 31 mm, Height: 23 mm
These measurements confirm that the Maisto model closely aligns with the expected scale dimensions.
Step 2: Verifying Our Mahindra Major 1/64 Scale Model
Real Dimensions of the Mahindra Major (as per Mahindra & Mahindra data sheet):
- Length: 3800 mm, Width: 1700 mm, Height: 1900 mm, Wheelbase: 2310 mm
Expected 1/64 Scale Dimensions:
- Length: 59.3 mm, Width: 26.5 mm, Height: 29 mm, Wheelbase: 36 mm
Measured Model Dimensions:
- Length: 60 mm, Width: 23 mm, Height: 28 mm
Analysis of Deviations
Upon comparison, our model dimensions are very close to the calculated 1/64 scale values, with minor deviations:
- Width Difference: Our model is 3.5 mm narrower than the expected 26.5 mm. This is because the real-world width (1700 mm) includes the footrest, which we intentionally reduced for design purposes.
- Length Comparison with the Mustang GT: The real difference in length between the two vehicles is 975.2 mm (4775.2 mm – 3800 mm). Converting this to 1/64 scale, the expected difference is 15.2 mm. Our models reflect a difference of 15.7 mm, further supporting the accuracy of our scaling.
Conclusion
The dimensional verification clearly establishes that our model adheres closely to the correct 1/64 scale. Any minor differences are intentional adjustments, such as footrest modifications, to maintain structural integrity and aesthetic appeal. We have provided measured values and comparative images to substantiate our claim, ensuring transparency and accuracy in our scaling process.
We appreciate constructive feedback and remain committed to delivering high-quality, scale-accurate models for our customers.
