I now very little to almost nothing of ON30 other then they really look cool and seem like they would be a fun scale to model. When I see rolling stock and locomotives in catalogs etc. most of which have road names such as D&RGW and some others that I have never heard of. Is this because ON30 is generally geared toward mountain railroading? What other railroads would be modeled in ON30 any eastern railroads perhaps?
Thanks
On30 is mostly a “pretender’s scale” because most/many of the models are based on and/or lettered for three-foot and two-foot-gauge prototypes. It is a great scale if cute and fanciful is a major reason for modeling.
Mark
Very, very broadly the narrow gauge lines were more likley to be 3’ gauge in the USA. I’m pretty sure the D&RGW was although it’s a long time since I looked at it. That is the best known because it lasted longest and got preserved.
Another line to look at would be the East Broad Top.
The 30" lines were mostly in the NE IIRC. I can only recall one that had the full works including passenger… Something and Rangely Lakes I think. … Hmm… I think that was 24"…
That said there was a lot of industrial narrow gauge - particularly in the logging and mineral industries… they were made less effective/redundent by crawler tractors and conveyor belts.
In early days though quite a few lines were originally built to 3’ gauge with the aim of making them standard later. There were a number of reasons for this.
the capital cost on a speculative line was less. (I’m pretty sure that 3’ gauge equipment that got replaced by standard gauge often moved on to the next project… again this would keep start-up costs down.
There isn’t any reason that 3’ gauge would be better in mountains than std gauge… except… (A) the whole thing is lighter so that new fills in particular don’t have to be consolidated so much before traffic can run… the early railroaders didn#t have the compacting machines we now use. (B) bridges and trestles could be smaller and lighter… even if land was taken and a lot of the formation originally built ready for the switch to standard gauge they could and did do the awkward bits to small size first - again cost but also it was quicker.
Where trestles carried 3’ numbers of them were later turned into fills… these could be built out to take standard gauge.
Tunnels were a diff
0n30, is O-Scale equipment(1:48 scale) running on HO track, which would scale out to a 30" track gauge, there were some 30" gauge railroads, but they were not as well known as the 36" and 24" narrow gauge railroads. To be properly scaled for 36" narrow gauge the track would need to be 1/8" wider, and to be properly scaled for 24" narrow gauge, it would need to be 1/8" narrower. Some people notice the 1/8" discrepancy more than others. If you like this scale, and don’t mind the 1/8" “Error” in the track gauge, then try looking at Micro Engineering’s(it might have been Peco’s?) 0n30 track, it is still the same gauge as HO track, but the rails and ties are sized more appropriately, as well as the tie spacing, than HO track. With the track components more properly scaled you might find it more acceptable.
Bachmann, is the leading manufacterer in 0n30 trains www.bachmanntrains.com I believe that they offered or have offered in the past D&RGW, RGS, C&S, WP&Y and East Broad Top for the Eastern fans, as well as several Logging and Mining road names, plus they offer many versions painted/unlettered so you can free-lance your own road name or somethingelse that they have not yet offered.
I do respect Mark, but as far as the “Pretender Scale” issue, just about EVERY scale has issues where a bit of Modeler’s License" is applied (a WHOLE BUNCH, in the case of my prefered 3-Rail O-Gauge portion of the hobby) In HO, the curves are generally much sharper than would be seen on the prototype, the couplers(Standard Kadee’s) are typically over-sized, and distances of many miles compressed into an area of a couple of scale acres. Model Railroading is a Hobby as much of Balances and Compromises, as it is about trains, we each decide what compromises we will accept to accomplish our own goals in the hobby. If that 1/8" gauge issue doesn’t bother you, it wouldn’t ME, then th
On30 goes back many decades, to the time when narrow-gauge modelling was pretty rare. O scale was king back then, and O modellers realized that a short-cut to building a narrow-gauge line would be to use HO scale wheelsets and track, which worked to about 30" scale in 1:48 scale.
The recent surge in On30 was caused by Bachmann creating a line of trains to go with a popular line of collector’s / “Christmas Village” type buildings that some (non-model railroad) folks collected. The earliest models in their line were based on 3’ western lines like the D&RGW and Colorado & Southern. In recent years, the newer models have either been based on Maine 2’ gauge lines like the Sandy River and Rangeley Lakes, or on actual 30" gauge models generally designed by US builders for export to other parts of the world where 30" gauge trains were more common.
So then if my coffee deprived brain is processing this right if I were to have an O gage layout and wanted to add let say a mountain or logging narrow gage railroad I could choose ON30 and things would be pretty close but not 100%. So what would I use for the same type narrow gage or mountain railroad if I model HO?
Yes if you model in O scale standard gauge, you could add a 30" logging line or something similar. (O scale is O scale, (1:48 in the US) regardless of the gauge.) There were some real 30" logging lines in the west, so it would be pretty accurate. Narrow Gauge and Short Line Gazette had a series a year or two back cataloguing all the real 30" railroads in the US. I’d guess 3/4ths of them were private logging companies.
Some modellers use N scale track in HO for HOn30, though most of them I suspect are using it to model the Maine 2’ lines.
Hows your math? [:-,]
Working downwards…
Gauge 1 followed Gauge 2 which was massive. Gauge 1 started out as 3/8" =1’ [1/32] and got changed to 10mm = 1’ which is a bit wonky… IIRC gauge is 45mm.
0 Gauge (That’s “Nought Gauge”) started as 1/4" = 1’ but got changed to 7mm = 1’ when British toy shops went to German toy makers for supplies c1900. That’s 1/43 running on 32mm gauge track which is a little out.
S7 is 7mm=1’ [1:43] running on 33.2mm (or 33.x x= a very small fraction 'cos I don’t recall off the top of my head) which is correct gauge for 1/43… they specialists also use correct wheel profiles etc etc.
0 Scale (Which also started off as “nought”) started as 1/4"=1’ which is 1/48… but it adopted the UK originated 32mm Gauge track which is technically a bit too wide… I would guess that this resulted from what were actually German models being shipped across the pond… possibly from England.
S Scale/S Gauge is the only one that started and has always been “Imperial” with no metric creeping in. It is 3/16"=1’ or 1/64. I never can recall the track gauge but it is basically correct.
Then we get the Europeans halving 0 Gauge to produce “Half Naught” which is H0… 3.5mm=1’ … 1/86. Now, if you’re expecting that to run on 16mm gauge track you’re out of luck because they corrected the error so that it runs on 16.5mm gauge track which is pretty close to correct. Most USA and European models use this scale/gauge plus a lot of others.
The English then came up with “Table Top” which is called “TT” and is 3mm=1’ on 12mm gauge track… clearly way out but it was for post WW2 kids to play with on dining room tables in English houses.
There were quite a few 30-inch-gauge railroads in California. They were primarily in the areas of northwestern California and east-central California. Almost invariably they were small private, industrial railroads serving their owners’ mining (often copper), logging, and construction (dam) projects. These railroads were short-lived, and it wasn’t unusual to see the same equipment on different projects.
The only exception that comes to mind was the Yosemite Short Line, a common-carrier intended to serve the then-newly-formed Yosemite National Park. The YSL was very short-lived project which never got near the park. It started from two miles west of Jamestown on the Sierra Railroad. Right-of-way was purchased to Groveland, but the 1906 San Francisco earthquake doomed the project for lack of financial support. (A completed-as-planned YSL would make a great semi-imaginary prototype to model.) Two YSL Porter 0-4-0T locos were transferred to the Empire City logging operation, and I believe one was later moved for the Relief Dam project near Sonora Pass.
The quintessential 30-inch-gauge locomotive was the 0-4-0 tank-type.
Mark
I don’t know about math, but your history is attrocious!! [:)]
Germany’s Marklin is generally credited with being the first company to offer different gauges of toy trains. Their trains came in sizes 1,2,3, 4 and 5, with No. 1 being the smallest. 1:32 scale No.1 Gauge is still around and fairly popular in Europe, and is the 1-3/4" track gauge used by LGB and all the other “Large Scale” trains. (Yes that was the smallest size trains!)
Around 1900, when they developed smaller trains with a track gauge of 1-1/4", the only number left was “zero” or 0 Gauge, which in English was generally pronounced “oh” like the letter O. It scaled out to 1:43.55 or 7mm = 1 foot. In areas where metric measurements weren’t common, like the US, it was adjusted to 1:48 scale, or 1/4" = 1 foot…which means in US O scale, the track gauge is actually 5 ft. wide instead of 4’-8-1/2" as it should be. (In the real world, Russian trains run on 5’ track gauge, supposedly to make it more difficult for invaders to use their tracks to help their progress.)
After WW1 “Half O” scale came along, I believe again in Germany with Marklin. Half of 1:43.55 is 1:87.1, the scale of HO trains, with a track gauge of 16.5 mm. In Britain, the resultant models would have been to small for the smallest available motor (since UK engines are fairly small) so they went with “OO” scale, 4 mm = 1 foot only still running on HO track.
In the 1930’s, in response to the rise of scale model railroading, American Flyer and Lionel began producing some very realistic O gauge trains, but built to a linear scale of 3/16" = 1 foot (largely to allow them to fit around tight toy train track curves). In time AF chose to change their track gauge to match the linear scale, and started making S scale trains…although IIRC a company m
[%-)]
My history is from the east side of the big pond. [:)] The previous is the way I’ve always heard it. Certainly a lot of early stuff came from Germany. I don’t think that there was necessarily any original single scale and way of doing things. It’s not as if someone, anywhere, set up an NMRA to establish standards and then everyone got started.
It may well be that when the UK toy trade went to the German manufacturers they already had something started… but we always hear “history” from the perspective of the person telling it.
In that respect there are people/“fanatics” here that will explode to tell you that it isn’t O but, being less than 1 is 0 [banghead]. Naturally as we discovered and built everything first all the history is written that way round. [(-D]
As I said, I stopped messing about and opted for US H0… or HO… I don’t really care so long as it runs.
Shouldn’t “G Scale” be “G Scales”?
[%-)] Doesn’t that beg a definition of “very realistic”? With a very scruffy bit of arithmatic 3/16 on 32mm/1.25" gauge track comes out at somewhere around 5’8" gauge. That must have looked interesting! [:O]
Even some of the Athearn HO/H0 locos I have have been distorted to fit in the smallest mech they found commercially viable.
[quote user=“wjstix”]
In Britain, the resultant models would have been to small for the smallest available motor (since UK engines are
For the history of S http://www.trainweb.org/crocon/sinfo.html
On30 track is halfway but I think the rolling stock is closer to 3ft practice than 2ft. In any event it’s a nice size for modeling narrow gauge, about the same size as S standard gauge.
Enjoy
Paul
Close to S but not quite there, many S scalers use as is, personally I find On30 indespenisble as a inexpensive source for S scale steam. With the introduction of a On30 2-6-6-2, it occurs to me it might be a good starting point for a M2 4-6-6-2 cab forward.
Dave
I bought the Bachmann On30 2-6-6-2 last month, and I love it. I’ve modeled logging lines in HO standard, which is incorrect for the rivet counters, and worked just fine for me. The Mantua artics were fun to run, and that was the point and still is, to have fun with the hobby. One of the benefits of On30 is the level of detail that can be built into the locos, rolling stock and scenery. I have an HO layout, and a very small N layout and enjoy both of them, however, On30 lets me detail to a level that I could never achieve in the smaller scales, and keep in a relatively small area.
Having said that, does anyone know what the tender capacities are for the On30 2-6-6-2 that Bachmann put out? I’m running it as an oil burner, so need the gallons of oil and water. I was thinking that 1800 gallons of water was close, but I’m not positive. Any thoughts? Thanks, Rob
Well perhaps “better detailed” would be more accurate. For example, a late 1930’s American Flyer O gauge steam engine looked like this:
http://www.classictrains.com/storeimages/OAF429-1.jpg
While a typical O gauge “toy train” engine (in this case, Lionel) looked something like this:
http://pictures.trainz.com/2010/January/Pictures%2001-11-10/m43_001.jpg
At that time true O scale trains were either scratchbuilt or fairly difficult kits except for a couple of 1/4" scale Lionel engines like the Hudson, so many folks bought the American Flyer stuff and better Lionel stuff and just tried to ignore the inconsistencies I guess.
[quote user=“Dave-the-Train”]
[quote user=“wjstix”]
In Britain, the resultant models would have been to small for the smallest available motor (since UK engines are fairly small) so they went with “OO” sca
You are thinking just fine. Just a couple of additions.
Not all logging railroads were narrow gauge by a long shot. Those logging railroads build before 1900 were more likely to be narrow gauge than those built later in the early 20th Century. Narrow gauge railroad building, except for special reasons or single purpose railways, had pretty much ended by 1900. The economics didn’t work except for single purpose or temporary lines like industrial or dam building or the like. The cost of transloading freight more than made up for the savings on the initial track.
Were standard gauge logging railroads more like narrow gauge lines than Class 1 railroads? Yes. If they didn’t interchange, they didn’t have to meet most of the rules for Class 1 lines.
In O, you can choose On3, On30, and On2 to model narrow gauge. All have some commercial support, with On30 having by far the most. On30 uses HO standard gauge track. There are a few who model industrial railroads in O using N gauge track, which scales out to On18 or On15, depending on which O “scale” you use.
In S, you can choose Sn3 or Sn2. Sn2 usually uses N or HOn3 track (the 2 are not interchangeable). There are not many folks doing Sn2. There is also Sn42, which pretty accurately models 42" gauge using HO track. 42" gauge was most commonly used in New Zealand and in Newfoundland.
In HO, HOn3 accurately models 3ft narrow gauge. T
Sn2 is using HOn3 in the U.S. There may be some some using N, but what commercial support there is, uses HOn3 - Train and Troopers imported brass locomotives and cars, Portland Locomotive Works archbar trucks, FasTracks jigs.
Enjoy
Paul.
In HO, if you were modeling a 3 foot gauge prototype (West Side Lumber, Sumpter Valley, Uintah, D&RG, East Broad Top…) you would probably use ‘correct scale gauge’ HOn3, on 10.5mm track gauge. HOn3 has a fair selection of rail products, motive power and rolling stock. If you want to combine HOn3 with HO standard gauge, Shinohara manufactures dual-gauge flex and 3-rail switches. You would have to hand-lay the fancier specialwork, but that’s a big part of the fun. [One John Armstrong layout, the Hardscrabble and Golconda (written up under the title To Hardscrabble, the Hard Way) rings the changes on HO/HOn3 dual-gauge specialwork.]
HO scale on N-gauge track is (choose one) HOn30, HOn762, HOe or something about half a tuna. There are a lot of prototypes, just not many that ran in the USA. Japan, for one, used to have a sizeable number of secondary rail lines (ranging from loggers to commuter rail) laid to 762mm/2.5 foot gauge. I believe that there were a number of similar-gauge tram lines in Europe.
S scale on N-gauge track would closely approximate 2 foot gauge, with a prototype choice range from the ‘Down Easters’ (Billerica and Bedford, Sandy River, WW&F…) to today’s Australian sugar cane network (diesel-hydraulics now, all kinds of quaint steam earlier) to the trench railways used by both sides in WWI. At least one logger in, I believe, Virginia operated on 2 foot gauge tracks, and used ex-US Army 2-6-2 trench engines for motive power.
Fun, isn’t it?
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
<
Here in Minnesota there used to be quite a few logging railroads, IIRC only one isolated one was built to narrow gauge, a 3’ line with no direct rail connections. (Logs were brought by rail to a lake, then floated across the lake to the NP’s tracks).
Common carrier narrow-gauge lines were outlawed in Minnesota in 1911, but the last narrow-gauge common carrier lines (owned by the Milwaukee Road) had been standard gauged by 1903 anyway.
Because the distance from the logging site to the interchange or sawmills tended to be pretty far, and there were few steep grades, in Minnesota siderod engines were more common than geared engines, since they could go faster. Probably the most common was the 2-6-0, usually bought second-hand from larger railroads, but 2-8-0s and 4-4-0s were used too.
You guys are missing the true roots of American 2 footers, which a lot of the Bachmann stuff represents. Do a quick search for the Sandy River and Rangeley Lakes Railroad, and you’ll find more than you’ll ever have wanted to know about the most famous of the 2 footers.
P.S. it is Maine.