Lately I have had this craving to get more of a trackside perspective, not just speaking of the height of the table, but to actually feel you are small compared to the train. When I run HO, it feels the other way around, like I am sitting up on some mountain, looking down at the railroads. This is a fine idea, and it can lead to creating some beautiful scenery, but I like to hear the roar of the trains go by when I watch them. I have noticed that even if I lay down on the carpet next to an O gauge set, I actually feel like I’m more at that train yard than if I created a realistic looking yard for HO on a 5 ft high table. Even when you run lionel trains without sound, you can hear them roar down the tracks, and you hear that natural clickety clack as about 20 or so box cars go by.
I guess I feel like ‘god’ sometimes looking at my minature railroad, and well, thats just not right…[8D]
Seems we had part of this conversation once before.
I have always maintained that sound, smoke, and such are very effective in the larger scales where you are in that more intimate relationship with the train, than they are in HO or N where the train is effectively much farther away. Even when you are as close as one actual foot, which is 87’ in HO, you are still a ways away.
This is why, for me personally (before the flaming starts), I have no interest in sound or smoke with HO.
If I were to go to a larger scale, sound would be a must.
But for me, no, I would not want to be in a larger scale. I once considered two rail O scale but rejected the idea after carefull consideration of my likes and interests.
I do what to be the “President” of railroad system, not just the Engineer of one locomotive, so for me HO is perfect.
I do like that “system overview” effect of smaller scales.
While I do appreciate larger scale models for their detail and massive presence, the reduction in scope that would be required would not fully satisfy my goals/desires for modeling.
So I am right where I need to be and never question it anymore.
I have G scale in my back yard, and put up an outdoor G-scale layout during our HO scale club’s open houses. G-scale is certainly easier to work on, but does get very, very expensive compared to HO or N scale. Sound? An HO scale Tsunami decoder can be had for around $100, depending on where you purchase it, and includes a DCC decoder. A G-scale Phoenix sound system is in the neighborhood of $250 and is sound only; no DCC decoder.
I don’t feel the need to go for a larger scale - N is perfect for my objectives. I see model railroading as a sort of logic puzzle, where we have the rails laid out, the cars and locos as ‘pieces’ in the puzzle, and the car cards/train orders dictating the moves that need to be made. Having the birds-eye perspective allows me to plan the moves and make them efficiently. But to each their own.
I prefer a panoramic approach; as a matter of fact, I am considering a change over to N-scale (from HO) to accomplish what I want in the space that I have.
If anything, I wish I had went smaller. Seems no matter how much track is laid, most of us want more. I run HO and main is 93 feet, that is apx 1.55 scale miles. If I was N scale 2.86 miles, sure be able to do more.
When I am eye level with the layout, they seem pretty big from that point of view.
Far as sound, hard for me to believe after buying 10 sound engines, I don’t care much for sound? It gets on my nerve’s and it not the sound quality. 95% of the time I run my none sound engines.
I’m beginning to feel the same way, I love my sound equipped MTH engines, but the Broadways I now run with the sound off mostly. Somebody described the QSI equipped M1b as sounding like it was muffled in a coffee can? Maybe I butchered that quote, but I think I know what they were talking about.
When I run several sound HO locos at once, its just nerve racking. I like the whistle sounds, but the chuffing gets a little overwhelming, maybe I will turn the volume down and I will feel better, I have never tried doing that yet.
I’ve considered trying out S, it does seem to be the perfect size, and I like that two rails are still used instead of 3, but there are no duplex engines, which I love.
I did find however a Pennsy J1a for S scale, but its brass and costs $2500 [:(]
I’ve been in HO since I was a teenager (don’t ask how long ago, okay?) and it’s always worked well for me. At one time I went into outdoor G scale, but it was mainly a kind of ‘fun’ thing for outdoor parties around my pool (hauling beer and snacks on flat cars and gondolas), and I gave it up as I got older and a little less able to lean down. Oddly enough, the tracks are still out there in the back yard in case I decide I want to ‘resusicate’ it.
But actually thinking about it, if I ever wanted to be in a larger scale than HO, I’d probably go with S-scale. It LOOKS comfortable. Right between HO and O, of course, and there’s a lot more out there than I thought there might be. Frankly, when I was a kid, and I’d go look at the big train displays at Christmas in the department stores, I always headed toward American Flyer before I did Lionel. I just liked the more ‘scale’ look of the two-rail track and the equipment. And of course, the scale version of S is far more than American Flyer–it’s a really viable alternative.
If I weren’t so invested in HO (which I like a lot, BTW), I’d probably head toward S. And currently with an HO ‘garage’ empire, I don’t think it would be such a loss of running space, either.
But with my HO being a ‘mountain’ railroad, I can have both: A ‘panoramic’ view, and also an ‘in your face’ view, since the elevation changes in my MR often put my trains right at close-up standing height.
But, if pressed to the wall, and HO were not available to me at all, I’d go with S.
I’ve felt for a long time that S is the ideal scale. The Goldilocks scale. Just right. It’s the perfect compromise between HO and O. Large enough for the trains to be impressive but small enough to build a decent sized layout. While two rail O scale trains look might impressive, they tend to dwarf the scenery. Going to a larger scale doesn’t make your arms any longer so there is a limit to how wide you can make your benchwork which has nothing to do with scale. O just doesn’t allow you to develop much in the way of background scenery. S creates a much better balance between the trains and their setting. Unfortunately, there is not nearly as much available in that scale as there is in HO so I have stayed in HO, which is absolutely the smallest scale I would ever consider. N is just way to small for me to appreciate. I would find another hobby before I would ever go into N scale.
I would love to go to a larger scale, S or O. I started in HO way back. Switched to N while in the service and then drifted back to HO. While the panoramic perspective is beautiful, I found I wanted more of the “crew on the ground” feel. My whole layout concept is based around branchline switching for that reason. Probably because I grew up on the end of a branch and used to love standing trackside to watch them work. If I had the space I’d definitely switch up in size.
As for the sound discussion, I would like sound, but at least to my tin ear, HO sound doesn’t come out right. The engines have more of a “whine” to them than the rumble you feel trackside. Probably one of these days I’ll have to go to a subwoofer. Heck, besides sound, I’d love to smell the smoke and cinders, hot oil and creosote. Wonder if Fabreeze makes a scented candle in bituminous?
Sound is managed by keeping them at a volume within 6 feet of listener. Otherwise they literally go away and be quiet when they travel far enough.
These days the sound of traffic drowns them engines out.
I started in O then a bit of S followed by HO. N is just too small. I went to larger scales because it’s more manageable with my situation.
Dare I say, cheaper too. I sold off just about all the HO on Ebay and used the proceeds to finance and purchase some larger scale stuff to get started. Holidays are a good time to sell off.
When I was a lot younger, and more given to impossible dreams, I longed for live steam in ‘ride-on’ scale (1:8 or 1:4) and a forty-acre plot to run it on.
I also longed for a private jet, a bevy of beautiful young ladies, a huge house filled with all sorts of wonderful things - and the billion-dollar annuity needed to fund it all!
Reality rather overwhelmed my dream world. I had to settle for second-hand cars, whatever quarters my budget could afford, only the most essential gadgetry (like a dependable alarm clock…) I got lucky with the lovely young lady - only one, but she’s fantastic. We’ve been married for 49 years.
As for trains, I went with HOj (1:80 scale) and built up my rolling stock collection while running with several clubs and assembling the occasional mini-layout. My longing for large-scale live steam died off, slaughtered by a gang of cold, hard facts. By the time I finally got enough space to build a suitable layout I was secure with my scale of choice - and had 'way too much invested in it to contemplate a change.
Now I (and the mortgage company) own a house big enough for two people, the RAV4 and truck were bought new and the layout space is neither too small nor too large. My wife is healthy and active and I’m ready to outlive my parents (who were in their nineties when they passed on.) Life is good…
May I play devil’s advocate, Tom. I have only ever modelled HO. And I am afraid I am out in the sticks a bit, so I have not ever been to a train show, club, or seen anything but a few HO and even fewer N scale layouts in my life. (You all can use this info to blast me later.)
However, from what I have seen, the reason HO is preferable is exactly because the scale is right to “fool the eye”. O gauge is very pleasantly large, but because models of any gauge are never as detailed as prototypes, an O gauge loco seems less believeable and actually more toy like. Why? Because with the large format, large areas on the loco seem blank. Areas on smaller scale that are obscured by shadow and the angle of view, are more evident and unfinished on large scale locos. And the finer details are large enough that the eye demands some further satisfaction like surface texture etc.
(I said I was playing devil’s advocate). From what I can see of O gauge locomotives online they are harder to pass off as a realistic representation of the true thing. The truck side frames, for example, are toy like and not detailed very well.
Now, HO is no more detailed (except it is in some cases) but the scale allows the eye to be much more accepting of the representation of a real loco. And I think that is one reason HO is predominant…it is more visually appealing. It is almost a visual trick that makes HO the brain’s favorite size.
On the other end, N scale has difficulty getting the detail to show, even if it matches the level of HO. Seeing an N scale layout at eye level leaves much detail to be desired, compared to HO. There, the brain is also less satisfied because it strains for detail that is not even hinted at as in HO.
Now, I know that because of the predominance of HO scale, there are many more detailing products around com
There have been modelers who superdetailed all of their 1:48 scale models to the N-th degree (Bill Hoffmann’s Sacramento Northern and PE cars come to mind, as does Mel Thornburgh’s B&O steam.) Contest level O scale cabooses have gone so far as to have train orders, waybills and coffee stains on the conductor’s desk.
Granted that really detailed O scale models require either advanced scratchbuilding skills or lotsa wampum. Those that want them badly enough will arrange to get them.
On30 is, admittedly, a special subset of 1:48 modeling - but Bachmann’s commercial products look good, would be easy to superdetail and aren’t budget-busters.
Space would seem to be the big bugaboo in modeling O scale - and yet, John Armstrong designed a rather nice O scale layout that could handle 4-8-4s, 2-10-2s and the occasional 2-6-6-2 - in 4 x 8! It was a cramped engine terminal, with roundhouse, turntable, transfer table and back shops - but still a layout.
Steam is about the only real limitation in S. On the scale side currently, non brass standard gauge is limited to 4-6-2, 4-8-4, 4-6-4(NYC streamlined), 2-8-0 (RTR and kit), and 0-6-0 (kit). I am fortunate that 3 of the Ma&Pa’s 2-8-0’s are available in kit (41, 42, & 43).
my family was living in Scotland when I started with trains so my first trains were British ‘oo’ scale. moving back to the States I added ‘o’ three rail trains then finally ‘g’ to the mix. now the basement layout is oo/ho on lower level o 3rail at eye level and g above that. all height dimensions are sitting on the couch with a brandy on one side and a basset on the other. my true scale buddies always scold me about the mixture, but it works for me. with 3 scales to chose from interest never dulls and I buy whatever is on sale for that particular scale. go for it. if you do not like it you can unload the excess on e-bay or a train show. the whole point in having trains is r&r. by the way my real life occupation is on time freight. that is why no operating schedules or tower talk at home. just relax and watch em go.
The only bigger scale I’d go up to would be On30 (or an equivalent) as I could utilise the HO track I already have. S and G gauges simply aren’t tailored for in the UK much at all - unless you don’t mind scratch building everything.
On the other hand HO is as small as I’d go - I have trouble seeing some of the reporting marks on the cars as it is without making them any smaller!
I’ve been on both sides. After having an American Flyer “S” train set as a kid (with scale-type track, not tinplate) and a brief fling with early N I went into HO in 1971 at 13, but after a couple of years of dealing with brass track and such gave up and switched to Lionel O after buying a friend’s old train set for $3. I spent 15 years in O, then switched and for 20 years now have been in HO.
One reason that “hi-rail” O layouts are so popular is that you can run scale-size equipment on much tighter curves than O two-rail trains will take. I’m sure many HO and N people don’t realize that probably half of the guys running three-rail layouts in O are running primarily scale equipment, not “toy train” undersized stuff.
So if you have room for O-54 to O-72 (27" to 36" radius) curves, you can do a lot in O scale nowadays. However, the downside is the cost. Fewer engines are going to be available in O, and don’t be surprised if you pay 3-4 times as much for them than an equivalent HO or N engine would be. Of course, since O is so big you’re going to need fewer engines and cars for the same space, so it kind of balances out I guess??
I’d suggest checking out a local O scale club if you can find one. This would be a good time, as many clubs are having open houses for the holidays.