The following is the data a board member named Dave came up with when he measured his T206 collection back in 2004:
T206 sizes
July 24 2004 at 9:12 PM Dave (Login t206guy)
Response to Help/Advice
I've measured all my original T206 collection as part of the data I keep on each card. Here is a summary of the sizes. The cards are virtually all Piedmont (4 Old Mills) and I am virtually certain the none were ever trimmed or are reprints.
Total: 524 cards
Nominal width is 1.438
Measured widths
< 1.420 3
1.420 - 1.429 9
1.430 - 1.439 38
1.440 - 1.449 126
1.450 - 1.459 172
1.460 - 1.469 111
1.470 - 1.479 40
1.480 - 1.489 13
1.490 - 1.499 9
> 1.500 3
The smallest is 1.393, Doc White - Chicago - Portrait
The largest is 1.642, Ira Thomas
Nominal heigth is 2.625
Measured heigths
< 2.580 6
2.580 - 2.589 5
2.590 - 2.599 19
2.600 - 2.609 30
2.610 - 2.619 57
2.620 - 2.629 140
2.630 - 2.639 111
2.640 - 2.649 81
2.650 - 2.659 40
2.660 - 2.669 16
2.670 - 2.679 7
2.680 - 2.689 3
2.690 - 2.699 1
2.700 - 2.709 3
2.710 - 2.719 5
The shortest is 2.453, Germany Schaefer - Detroit
The tallest is 2.716, a tie between Nick Maddox and Moose McCormick
What does all this mean? I don't know, other than there is a wide variation, especially on heigth. Cards are much more likely to be large rather than small.
I tried adding width and height, nominal is 4.063. Of 524 cards, only 72 were lower than nominal in this.
By the way, these measurements were made with pecision digital calipers, with resolution to 0.0005, and accuracy to about 0.001. I've tried repeated measurments on the same cards several times; the numbers repeat within 0.001.
|