So I’m about 90% done with my roughly 8 x 11 O-gauge layout. I can run (conventionally) 4 trains at a time; 3 on the main level (3 separate loops: outer, middle and inner) and 1 on a second level " L" configuration. I very much like the feel of the O-gauge units (engines and rolling stock). However, after a year of subscribing to CTT magazine, I guess I’ve grown a bit jealous of the 20 x 30 layouts that can run ultra long consists. Given my 8 x 11 space I have wondered if I’ve made a mistake by not going the HO route. Anybody ever been at this point? I’d appreciate your thoughts.
Mine’s a little bigger than your & I’m thinking of redoing some of it, but I love 0 gauge. Wouldn’t consider HO at all; I like the toy train aspect and can’t model well enough for spectacular HO, or even O, gauge high rail or scale.
wyomingscout
I have a fairly large layout that has continued to grow over the years. I have the entire basement dedicated to the layout, display and storage. It is a continuous work in progress.
But, if I was getting into the hobby today I would be jumping in on the ground floor with MTH HO.
Why “MTH” HO?
I would have no remorse, I am helping my son on an European HO Layout, As nice as that is it cannot compare to S Scale or Pre War O Scale I have. The size of the trains does matter to me and the smaller scales while visually nice and having the ability to fit more into a given area lack dramatic impact. Even without sound trains like an American Flyer City of Denver or Lionel M10000 from the 1930s have a visual and auditory impact! Also if you have ever ran them on hard wood floors without any rubber roadbed you can feel them go by! [(-D] LOL
Bill,
The closest thing I have to a layout is the 5x8 Thomas/Christmas table in the living room. I don’t really consider the ceiling track in the “train room” as much more than a test track and staging track for what I take to the museum to run. If you would like to run some really long consists have you considered putting up a relatively narrow shelf layout around the perimeter of the basement. Put up maybe two mains or a single main with a couple of long sidings on oppsite sides of the basement. Using the DCS record & playback feature you could run multiple trains on the same set of tracks at the same time in opposing directions. [I]
If you like long consists, how about going to N gauge. I was at a model train show several years ago and there was an N gauge layout with a frieght consist that had to be at least 4 feet long winding around the layout. It looked so cool! I couldn’t get a count of the cars & locos tho.
I also have O gauge and love long consists, but don’t have the room. But then that’s where the secret ingredient of our hobby kicks in. It’s called imagination! We had an unlimited supply as kids and we need to tap into that again as adults.
I imagine MTH HO because their use of DCS offers some interesting special effects in comparison to DCC.
I came up the other way - from N to HO now to O. Each scale has its pros and cons - and these are subjective and individualized too. I put a higher value on the size, ‘heft’, effects and sheer playability (IMO) of O gauge. I am fortunate to have a fairly large space - but the space is ‘uneven’ so it is valuable to me that O gauge tubular track is pretty good on inadvertent elevations. I find O gauge also easier to deal with electrically, with older, more basic units practically bulletproof - but those were higher values to me. As you note, if long runs are valued more that your current O space affords, you could work out the cost benefit of what it might look like in HO.
DougnotaG - this sounds really really interesting - two trains on a shelf- one track - opposing directions - and one puts all faith into DCS [:-^]. I anxiously await the YooTooob posting on this one…[B]
I was first introduced to HO when I was about 5 or 6 and then when I turned 9 my father ( well 2 months befor) brought home an O gauge Lionel set with super O track and a B&M 2359 GP-9 engine and the rest is history and to be honest yes you can have longer trains in a given area than you can with O seeing there about 1/2 the size But I wouldn’t trade for Ho and definitely not go to n scale just too small for me to work on and I like working on my own trains when I can.
My primary layout is 9 by 14 but the one I operate on most commonly is only 4 by 6. So, I collect scout engines and similarly short cars.
I have often thought about HO, but at my age (72) the larger O gauge trains give me more pleasure because I can see them… My table is presently 4X16 with a 4X4 addition, so I can put together reasonably long trains.
I switched to O when ebay came along and opened the door to post war for me. Where I live swap meets and train shows are unheard of. I had no idea all this O stuff was available, so I quickly acquired what I could afford. Switch back to HO? Never, never never.
HO = H-orribly O-verrated
Doubt I will never go back to HO or N, just dont get anything from it anymore, but I might try a micro in T gauge just for fun …
Remorse?
Keep your layout and trains, drop the magazine.
Your layout is a nice size, as big, or bigger than most people would be able to build.
All the “O” gauge centric magaizines put too much emphasis on expensive trains, and tremendous layouts. I think they drive people away from the hobby.
I was running HO before my boys were born. Following family tradition, each received a Lionel set for his first Christmas, just like all of my nephews. However, the 7 trains given to my 7 nephews all disappeared into the abyss after a Christmas or two, and I couldn’t bear to see that happen to my boys’ trains. Not wanting to dedicate my entire basement to train layouts, I broke down my HO and replaced it with the Lionel. So far I can’t bring myself to sell my HO equipment - I have a lot of it - so it is mostly on display right now.
I don’t really regret switching to O, but sometimes I do feel a little bad knowing how much HO scenery and equipment I have that I’m not using, compared to how much stuff I still need to buy for the larger trains.
I imagine MTH HO because their use of DCS offers some interesting special effects in comparison to DCC.
Yep, I have been using DCS since the initial release, really like all the options available. Since MTH HO has PS-3 capabilities the system will only get more robust.
I have a “pedigree” in HO, with a BS in N-scale. In my teens-20’s-30’s emphasis was on creating a scale model rr. When my son was born, got "re"introduced to O, which was also the time when synchronized steam and sound hit the market. Hooked like a big ol’ catfish. Current layout is 9x13, and I’ve worked a considerable run into it, as I now like to sit back and just watch my trains snake through my scenery.
I personally feel, given the limitations of HO curvature requirements, you are still ahead of the game sticking with O. My suggestion to you now is to simplify your trackplan; remove 2 lines, and replace as much straight check with O-72 and other curves as possible.
Perhaps a few pics of your current layout would help us, help you.
I used to think that with H.O. trains I could have a much larger layout, but that is not always the case. H.O. train track has a factory minimum size of 15 inch radius or a 30 inch circle, and 027 has a circle of 27 inches. O gauge has a 31 inch circle minimum, so there isn’t much space saved by going to H.O. Some of the cost for engines and rolling stock and track might be a lot less, but you still need the same size area for H.O.
N gauge is just tooo small.[2c] Working on an N gauge engine, I would need a magnifying glass or microscope to see the parts.
So I still like to run mainly O gauge trains. Had 027 & O gauge since I was about 5 years old, could not run them without my dad until I was 8 years old. Around 10 or 11 I got my first multi train transformer, the 275 watt ZW, still works great, just need newer circuit protection for the newer trains.
Many companies are trying to price themselves out of the ballpark, so to speak, with engines at $500.00 or better. Who can afford the major brands? That is one of the reasons I am buying mainly Williams engines and RMT rolling stock.
Lee F.
The curvature limits mentioned by Lee and Fife are excellent points I forgot about. . . Running shorter engines and rolling stock in your existing layout might also make a difference.
Roy: [(-D]