what is your favorite size parts to work with?

[Garbonzo]

Personally my favorite size to work with is 2.5

[User Unrelated]

I really really like making micro-sized space probes and landers, so I'm going to say 0.625m! (and whatever size the cubic octagonal strut is)

[peachoftree]

Mk2 Spaceplanes are where it's at!

[worir4]

2.5m, in between the 3.75m which is usually overkill and 1.25m which is too small for cool parts like the IRSU and the science lab.

[Pecan]

Smaller is better but there isn't much scope below 2.5m. Bigger than that is ok for heavy launches but not needed in space.

Mk2 is just soooo boring - it's like thinking you're a cool, different, rebel because you got the same tattoo as everyone else.

Mk3 only exists to look like the shuttle, doesn't it? If it didn't exist, there'd be no need to invent it.

[regex]

I use procedurals so ... whatever fits the build.

[Mikki]

Actually i like 2.5 and the Mk3 Plane/ LF tanks... voted 2.5 tough. It has the most Crewparts i think... No crew, no fun .

[klesh]

0.625m

For the same reasons we make space things as small as possible irl.

[Torquemadus]

I've spent a lot of time in KSP playing on really tough custom difficulty settings. As a result, I've got used to making do with a limited pool of early game parts, so I've grown more attached to them over time.

[John FX]

I tend to use most of them. For my payload 0.625 and then increasing sizes through the stages depending on the Dv desired for the payload.

[Hagen von Tronje]

I have the most fun with Mk2 personally.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

I would vote for "Stock other," I love building in-between size rockets.

[Gaarst]

2.5m for me.

0.625m is good for probes, and that's it; 1.25m is too small for launchers; 3.75m lacks parts (SAS, engines...); modded 5m lacks low power engines for upper stages; and I don't use planes or spaceplanes so I don't really care about Mk2 and Mk3.

[yorshee]

2.5m, the Rockomax brand of parts are my favourite.

[Jolbucley]

I love 0.625m because it’s more difficult to assemble craft in orbit if their constituent parts are small, fragile, and hard to see.

[longcat]

I almost exclusively use 1.25 meter parts. That was the only size when I started playing, and I'm still wary about that newfangled mainsail engine. I don't care what you have to say about part counts, efficiency, or realism: an asparagused 1.25 meter rocket just feels more Kerbal.

[Tank Buddy]

1.25 in stock, but 2.5 in RSS. I think I like the 2.5 meter parts more.

[Redhotita1]

10 meters in RSS

[Pax Kerbana]

Mk2 is just soooo boring - it's like thinking you're a cool, different, rebel because you got the same tattoo as everyone else.

Why do blank skins always think inkies get tattoos to be cool?

[Mysterion]

10 meters in RSS

What'd you use to make your signature? Also, I believe your sig has 2.5, 3.75, 7.5, and 10m parts in it?

[passinglurker]

1.875m not too big not too small

[Frozen_Heart]

1.25m just due to the part range being most complete and detailed.

[Dawnstar]

20m. Fits in the shed, holds the juice, gets the payload lofted. Except when it doesn't, and then it's time for moar boosters. Which might or might not fit in the shed.

[Xyphos]

Smaller is better, but KSP lacks small parts. as a result, I find myself shoving everything I need into Mk3 cargo bays and building from there.

[Edax]

1.25m is my favorite for spaceplanes. I just can't stand the MK2's tendency to tumble uncontrollably and fly apart when pitching up, and I haven't been able to work out how to build a stable MK3 SSTO yet.

2.5m is my favorite for rockets cause it's the size of the IRSU, Lab, Cupola, and Hitchhikers, so it looks cool when the base of the "rocket" is all the same size. Plus the boars exhaust thrust has a cool color. My only gripe is that none of the 2.5m fuel tanks match the Boars engine paint scheme.