Hi,
I am looking at trying to build a C&O model set with an Allegheny 2-6-6-6 locomotive. What are the pros and cons of going with O scale vs HO scale.
Thanks
HO is the most popular gauge/scale right now. That means more and different models are in production, For instance, your 2-6-6-6 triplex is probably in production in HO. It may not be in production in O.
In round numbers, HO is half the size of O. For instance HO trains (well perhaps not a 2-6-6-6) can make it around 18 inch radius curves. O guage needs 30 inches. Which means the benchwork to support a 180 degree turn (complete loop) has to be 36 inches wide in HO, it must be 60 inches wide for O. HO locomotives and rolling stock are less expensive than O gauge.
If you have lots of space, and like the bulk and heft of the larger O models, go for it. If you have space and money constraints like most of us, HO is very appealing. HO is big enough for scratch building and kit bashing even for those of us with aging eyesight.
From your question, I would assume you are just coming into the hobby. Have you found Model Railroader magazine ? For that matter ordinary public libraries often have decent books on model railroading.
It’s definitely about what works best for you and tickles your fancy. HO is what I love. O is popular for those who like the larger trains or trains around the Christmas tree now that the season is fast approaching. O is also for those who grew up on Lionel or other 3-rail manufactures. O requires a significant amount of space and usually those who model it has a huge basement or entire garage dedicated to it. The equipment is quite expensive but in my honest opinion looks almost kind of gaudy and flashy. I think of kid toy trains when I see O layouts especially at model train shows but to each his own. To be honest some HO equipment these days are starting to approcah O prices but that’s what happens when you want extreme detail on your new engine.
Do what your heart desires and most of all have fun whatever you decide!!!
Something that needs to be taken into account is, how many different manufacturers are there selling each scale –
Off hand, the only O scale manufacturers I can think of are Atlas, Lionel, Williams, and MTH. Practically all of them are just importers of products made in China.
In HO scale, there are Atlas, Bachmann, Broadway Limited, Accurail, Exact Rail, Bowser, Athearn, and maybe as many as 20 or 30 others from which to choose. Many HO scale products are also imported from China, but a few are made in the USA.
More competition keeps prices reasonable.
For your question about the 2-6-6-6 I believe Broadway Limited Imports had one in HO scale – MTH may be the only company that had one in O scale.
Don´t underestimate the space buildings take up in O scale! The footprint of a O scale structure is roughly 4 times the HO footprint! I did not consider this when planing my On30 layout - with a sad result!
What’s the difference? About $800-$900 more for O-scale vs. HO…and that’s just for one 2-6-6-6. It’s cheaper, of course, if you get O-scale toy train stuff (then the difference is more like $200), but if you want actual scale models then O-scale is gonna cost you way more than HO in just about every detail.
OTOH, some O-scalers (2-rail guys) say that because their trains are bigger they don’t need to buy as many to fill up a layout. But while that’s true, if you are a collector and you don’t really care about filling a layout (you just want one of everything your favorite railroad had), then your wallet will take much bigger hits in O-scale.
HO is the No. 1 scale in popularity. There are more HO scalers than all other scales combined (I believe it’s 55% of the total market). Because of that, there are more things made for HO than any other scale. So if you want some rare unit, then you’re probably going to find it in HO and not in O.
Paul A. Cutler III
A C&O modeler, in HO who wanted the big Allegheny 2-6-6-6 (and presumably other and smaller C&O locomotives as well) would probably be well advised to be looking at 30" to 36" minimum radius. That means in O you’d be looking perhaps 60" to 75" minimum radius. Big curves!
Either way, there is no sense running an engine of that size on a small layout pulling short trains – you are talking major space, lots of cars, big yards. And while HO is VERY roughly “half” of O when it comes to general heft and bulk of the trains, remember that humans are the same size, and have the same general 24" limit on their reach into a layout. So you cannot simply double the size of an HO track plan and assume it’ll work fine in O because the tracks would be too far to reach in O. Note Ulrich’s comments above about size of layout footprint for comparable track plan.
And on balance I suspect O scale equipment is, car for car and locomotive for locomotive, likely to be more than twice HO in terms of cost. Many guys in O prefer to model more modest railroads, with just one or two locomotives – a Geep pulling a dozen cars looks impressive in O, not so much in HO – and assuming a normal size for a layout, the overall cost might be about the same between O with two engines and 24 cars and HO layouts with eight locomotives and 100 cars, assuming the same footprint for the layout: same cost because the size and scope of the railroading is often very different.
Hornby makes a Allegheny in HO. In O you are either going to be looking for a rare and somewhat old imported brass engine (meaning you may have to be skilled just to keep it running), or you need to be a talented scratchbuilder (and that also means knowing how to adjust scale drawings to the fact that O gauge track is not scale width and the scratchbuilder has to know how to adjust for that). Also, I do not know if a commercia
How old are you, how good are your hands and how wealthy are you?
O is FAR FAR FAR easier to handle vs HO, thats an important factor as we get older, same for eyesight, O is alot easier to work on and easier to fiddle around with your hands to repair or build things. i am working on an HO micro and dam near everything has to be applied by tweezers, it gets old quickly.
Now the biggy, how well healed are you, O is IMHO the better choice for older modelers but O is also the King Daddy of Trust Fund hobbies, it can be frighteningly expensive stuff. HO has far more cost effective options.
Personally I went into G for the same reasons I like O, easier to work and model on, but when I started costwise it was a wash with HO so I went that route, today G is more like O is that regards, costs are crazy high. I’m glad I not really looking for anything anymore.
I have both HO and O, (O is waiting to be put around the ceiling) and I would take HO 10/10 times. You can find about anything in any road name. It is MUCH cheaper than today’s new O scale equipment, and it looks alot more realistic. If you want a C&O 2-6-6-6 Allegheny then Rivarossi makes them, look on Ebay I have seen a few lately in the $200 range. All said go with HO!
It depends on what you are trying to do.
Is this to be a mantle display, Christmas tree layout, the beginning of a model railroad hobby?
Do you like to build models?
Do you want to just watch trains run around or recreate operations of the C&O?
O scale models are 6 times the size of HO (remember models are 3 dimensional). They have a really nice heft and appearance when running by. But for a layout they require broader curves and more space for the same amount of railroad as HO - layouts are restricted by width and length , but not height so an O scale layout is 3.25 times as big as the same layout in HO.
O scale models are more expensive than HO, so if money is tight or you want a lot of locomotives (and other stuff) HO may be better. If you want only a few really detailed pieces than O is probably better.
Good luck
Paul
Thanks all for the great comments and suggestions. I am going into this as an endevour to launch a hobby I have always wanted to do. I recently moved into a new home that has a decent size rec room and I planning to building a layout on roughly a 12’x 16’ section of it. Budget is an issue but O scale neccessarily won’t break the bank for me. I think the steam era of railroading is one of my favorite parts of history and have always loved the C & O railroad and its history.
Please, Please, Please, do yourself a favor and ask this same question on the O Gaue Railroading forum (www.ogrr.com)
The 2-6-6-6 Allegheny is readily available in O Gauge and O Scale, Lionel and MTH have both done this locomotive in Scale proportions and semi-scale proportions
You are getting so much MIS-INFORMATION here, that it is mind boggeling.
One poster refered to the 2-6-6-6 as a TRIPLEX, it is not, it is an Articulated (which Triplexes ARE, but the 2-6-6-6 is not a triplex)
Another poster claimed that an HO version would manage an 18" RADIUS, (which is probably true) but that an O version would require a 60" RADIUS (that would only be true in 2 Rail) Semi-scale models are double articulated(Like most HO Models) and will typically run on 031 curves (which isa 15 1/2" RADIUS, 3 rail O measures curves in DIAMETER, not Radius)
Semi-scale models often have EXCELLENT detail, and with ful command and sound are not that much more than an HO version. Scale size models typically have detail at least equal to and often Exceeding that of HO Brass locomotives, and you can actually SEE the details.
By Volume a SCALE size version is 8 times the size of an HO version not 6, 2x2x2=8, 2 x as long, 2x as wide, 2x as tall, not 2+2+2=6
Each Scale has it’s advantages and Disadvatages, I was involved in HO for 35+ years, and have been involved with O-Gauge for 9 years now, I wouldn’t go back to HO on a Dare, been there and VERY well familiar with it, MY preference is for the larger trains, if someone else prefers HO, N or Z that is Great for them, and I wont criticize thier choice.
You need to decide WHAT your goals are, if you want to model long distances between points, or Majestic Mountains, then "N"or “Z” scale may be what you need to consider, ifwant want to go find every thing under the sun all in one place then HO is propably what you will prefer. If you want to model and admire the trains themselves, then
Personally, I would go with HO scale. I find that HO scale is the perfect size, it is large enough that you can see the details, and easily rerail everything, plus, it is large enough to work on and usually isn’t super delicate. It is also small enough that the majority of people can have a reasonable size layout. HO is the most popular scale, for a reason, and being the most popular scale means that you have a lot more selection for locomotives, rolling stock, track, buildings, etc.
First, Kadee also sells “scale couplers” that are the scale size of a coupler. If you really want realistic couplers, in HO scale there are Sargent (not sure about the spelling) couplers that look like a real coupler and are the correct size for HO scale, model railroader had a article about them within the last year. You can also get magnetic brake hoses that will connect when the cars couple. And are you really trying to compare slighty large coupler
As this thread has progressed, the info has gradually been getting better. But the main thread, “it all depends”, is still true. In any scale, the Allegheny is a big engine. If this is a mantelpiece display, your choice will be determined by availability, budget, and the overall appearance you’re looking for. If you want to build an operating model railroad representing the late steam era C&O railroad, you’ll have to make a few decisions. First, you’ll need space because the Allegheny requires broad curves to operate well, and to look good when it’s operating. Truly accurate C&O cabooses are readily available from Atlas and Walthers in HO scale. The Allegheny engine is available at a fairly reasonable price in HO scale. Additional HO versions of C&O locomotives, such as the T-1 2-10-4; the H-4, H-5, and H-6 2-6-6-2’s; and the USRA 0-8-0 are, or have been, available in recent years from BLI, Bachmann, and Walthers. For the freight car freaks, the only truly accurate representations of C&O’s typical Alternate Standard twin offset hopper cars are available in HO from Intermountain, although various versions of the AAR standard cars are available from several other manufacturers and many folks accept them as being close enough. In any scale other than HO, you may find it difficult to find all these other products that would allow you to operate your Allegheny in a proper C&O context, and keep the project affordable.
However, most of us compromise. In fact, we compromise a lot. So it depends where you decide to make your compromises.
Tom
You asked about building a model. Just my opinion, if that’s your goal, O will provide much larger parts and materials to handle and perhaps slightly better tolerences for hand work. And you’ll be able to admire it. However HO will have more parts readily available.
I have been in HO to N and back to HO. If I had the space I would go O because I’m more interested in a few detailed models and scene rather than long trains. But that’s just my personal opinion and everyone here will have a different one.
Actually, O scale is not twice the size of of HO. In the U.S. O scale is 1:48 not 1:43.5 as in England.
87/48 is 1.8125, cubed for volume, this is 5.9543 (to 4 decimal places). Rounded for convience we have O scale 6 times the size of HO in the U.S.
Paul
There probably are some very good practical reasons to help determine a choice of scale. Ultimately it comes down to what tickles your fancy. What you relate to, what makes you want to model in one scale over another. Practical reasons for choosing a particular scale are undeniably important, but so is the difficult to define, feel good factor.
I model in HO & for all the reasons mentioned earlier here. But also HO was a step up in size from an early fascination with N way back in the late 1960’s. I model a South Eastern RR where there is not a lot of support from manufactures, but enough. But if I didn’t enjoy kit bashing there would be big gaps in my loco roster.
Some years back there was perhaps what could be described as a fascination with O because this scale was seen as a scale that lent itself to the very real possibilities for scratch building, super detailing and the modeling of back woods narrow gauge. But any choice of scale is dependent on what a modelers expectations are, what he wants to model - there is surely a place for all scales depending on what you have defined as your modeling needs.
Ultimately, the choice of scale is entirely yours based on what gets your enthusiasm
Oh my! I have so often wished I could go full blown into 2 rail scale ‘O’ as I enjoyed when involved with the Reading Society of Model Engineers in the early and mid 1980’s.
I’m into HO, but ‘O’ would definitely be the preference.
I still tinker…a little, in 2 rail O. But cost and space keep me from totally diving in.
Mark H
[#welcome]
The others had some good information, but forgot to say hello.
Hello. I am a LION and I build subway trains, so no steamy engines in my world.
What may not have been noticed by the others is that you asked about building an engine, while others were talking of building a layout. Were I to build an engine, and money were no object, I would surely go with the O scale. It is easier to see and looks great on the mantle piece. (You do have a mantle piece, I presume!)
If I wanted to RUN that engine on a layout, then you have other considerations to consider.
In any event, enjoy your locomotive. Now see if you can build it in a bottle, just to be different.
ROAR