I am just starting out and would like some pointers on what sort of track plans i could use. my space requirments are 8ftx4ft max. i would also rather not to have a piont to point, i like fast (reasonably) running
thanks
If you like fast running, and are confined to 4X8, I hope you are in N scale.
Please, if you have not already done so, skip over to General Discussion in the Model Railroader forum and look for the thread on “Why does everyone hate 4x8?”. It will probably be three pages back by now, but you will get a sense of the problems with HO scale and the sheet of plywood. You can always hope that Spacemouse reads your question…he is an connoisseur of fine 4X8’s, and can wax philosophical about their limitations until you cry uncle.
Essentially, they are decent enough start with…if you must…, but they inevitably get discarded or, if possible, incorporated into a larger, more sophisiticated design that is much more pleasing and interesting to run. The reason is that they are the wrong shape for the best curves and the most interest.
If you are in N scale, disregard this post. See the Atlas website for plans.
If you are in HO, try to widen your table out to to 5 ft so you can use wider curves. At 4x8 you are limited to running more slowly because of the sharp curves.
Enjoy
Paul
Here’s an article by a professional designer about the 4 x 8. Even better, he shows you alternatives that fit the same space.
http://home.earthlink.net/~mrsvc/id28.html
If you must build a 4 x 8 the best plan I found is John Armstrong’s Pennsylvania and Potomac, #26 from 101 Track Plans.
But building a 4 x 8 is a lot of wasted money on a throwaway layout.
Here’s the “Why does everyone hate the 4 x 8” thread.
http://www.trains.com/community/forum/topic.asp?page=1&TOPIC_ID=51316
I like the Red Wing Division layout in the Dec 1994 MR.
The red wing track plan, and many other HO 4x8 plans/projects can be found at www.gatewaynmra.org
4x8 layouts are often considered "beginner’ or “throwaway”, but remember that some great layouts started as a 4x8. The heart of John Allen’s Gorre & Daphetid was a 4x8.
Andrew
The G & D started out even smaller than 4x8, but John Allen’s givens and druthers were vastly different than what most people want today, no doubt. I think his curves in the original section were about 14". There’s no problem with any of that, but one’s expectations have to be adjusted accordingly.
Fast running on 14, 15 or 18" curves is only going to take place in N-scale, as Crandell pointed out, or trolleys in HO. I’m sure I will get hate mail from people saying that their SD90MAC runs on their 18" curves, but things would look and operate much better on those radii with Geeps, switchers and other B-truck locos or smaller steam. I’m not bashing 4x8 and smaller layouts, and if that is your best option just adjust your givens and druthers accordingly.
Since we are discussing the 4x8 I might as well drag mine out.
I am having fun with mine and even have a site devoted to it’s construction:
http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/4x8/
Thank you if you visit
Harold
P.S. The John Armstong track plan Spacemouse mentioned was in an article in a 1954 Model Railroader. It was the basis of an expansion to a larger layout. Eventually John’s plan covered the 4x8 portion and it was basically a “staging” section.
Very nice, Harold. I’m sure I’ve peeked at that before (I remember the cactus). But I notice you are not using SD90s or 2-10-4s, Yellowstones or Superliners!
Having modeled in all the scales I have found that the smaller the scale the larger the space is needed to make it realistic. I built a small N scale layout in 1965 and was disappointed how toylike it was in appearance.
I thought about SD50’s and all that at one time in N scale but there is no way it can ever be done realistically. Modern motive power with a 25 car train is really silly. I have always loved the 1870’s and am very happy with that era. Tried the “rathole” of the Southern in HO once but the amount of equipment needed is overwhelming.
Just a thought
Harold