So I posted my layout on the boards, but there was some resounding talk that I shouldn’t use a 4x8. What other sizes do you reccomend I use. The area I have is realativly small. It’s the back quarter of a basement. The wall that I have is about ten feet across, but I only can use about seven feet of it. The depth that it can go about is four feet, maybe less. I might be able to go around the corner on the right a bit, but only about two feet. Here is a picture of the area.
Just imagine the area without anything there. I can’t go out too far because there is a fishtank on the right and another desk on the left.
The problem you are facing is the width. and what scale is it? If you’re doing an HO scale layout, you’re going to need the entire 4 feet for the curve if you want an 18" radius track. You can go to a 15" radius with the space you have (bare minimum) but you will only be able to run short 4 axle locomotives and 40’ rolling stock. Anything bigger will de-rail in the curve. Have you considered modeling a small point to point layout that you can switch an HO scale industrial area theme with?..It won’t be continous running, but it beats no layout at all…The other alternative is to go with the smaller N or Z scale…chuck
What size do you think is most popular? I’d wager heavily that it is the old 4x8. Of course it is because that is the size plywood is sold in (and foam board too). But if you couldn’t put together a satisfying layout in that space, don’t you think it would have been abandoned years ago. Certainly, it has its drawbacks but that is true of any configuration you choose. If you chose to go around the walls you have the problem of access to inside of the layout. That means a duck under or a liftout. And in your case, you have some nice panelled walls. Do you want to attach a backdrop to them. I certainly woudn’t. There are hundreds of ready made plans to choose from or you could come up with your own. Most likely you will end up with a continuous run oval(s) with some sidings and spurs. With a little creativity, you can disquise the fact that your trains are going around and around. If space permits, you could add some width and allow broader curves but schematically you will have the same layout. If you choose to go with the standard 4x8, you probably want to limit yourself to small locos and rolling stock. Even if the larger equipment can negotiate the tight curves, it won’t look good doing so. Whatever you choose to go with, good luck with it.
Well if you want continous running, sadly your options are limited. Luckily a 4x8 is a great starter point for people who are of limited skill. Take a look at woodland scenics layout kits. They are quite nice. There’s also an excellent city layout that was in dream plan build ?vol 1? dvd from Kalmbach. It fit on a 4x8, or an 5x8 with the optional pier.
Oddly enough newbs find point to point boring. They just want to see their train run. On the other hand more experienced modelers want a more active control in their trains, and only sometimes want a continous run.
The trick to a good 4x8 is being able to hide that fact that your train is going in circles. This means lots of buildings/tunnels, and/or scenic dividers.
If you review most of MRR’s how to articles, they just about always create a 4x8 layout for beginners. While I feel they are a good start, they are a bit simplistic, and therefore get would get boring easily IMHO. (This is the hazard tradeoff of trying to design a layout for beginers) Luckily they put on a number of off-track lines in which branchs can be added to the table later. (Allowing for expansion).
HO scale is the most popular, with N scale in a strong second. With your space constraints you’re going to be quite limited if you want continuous running in HO scale. You’re fine for a switching layout in HO. By going with N scale your possibilities open up quite a bit. continuous running isn’t a problem. You could even run some pretty substantial equipment.
This site may help to get your creative juices flowing;
One suggestion would be to use the 4x8, but make the track on it non-continuous so that it forms a “U”. One leg of the u would be a small carfloat operation, the other leg would be the industries served by the carfloat. New York had several of these operations whose only connections are via carfloat. Making it an urban environment would mean you could use buildings as a senic divider between the two halves of the layout. There is a picture of such an operation in John Armstrong’s Track Planning for Realistic Operation.
I also have another part of my house that might be usable. It’s near a furnace, so I don’t know if that’s a problem. I could figure out something with that area. I was wondering if you guys have pictures of your layout as a whole, not just sections of it. I might be able to get a sense of what I might be able to do and if I could make room to fit in a layout.
My question is, why does everyone dislike 4x8’s so much? I know that it’s not the ‘ideal’ size for a layout, but many people (including me) dont’ have all that much room to spare for a layout. Creativity allows for some interesting track arrangements that allows for a loop of track with at least 18" radius (22" if you stretch it), one or two sidings, and several spurs for switching. For a limited space, I am a big fan of the 4x8 instead of a point to point switching layout. Take what you got and use it to your advantage.
If you are really insistent on having continuous running, I’d suggest a “dog bone” style of layout, which is a layout that looks kind of like a barbell: narrow in the middle, with a loop at each end. If you are dead-set on using HO this will be a bit of a reach, since you’ll have the return loops in the corners, but if you go N scale you could have a 24"-30" deep layout running along the back wall above the desk that might shape up nicely. If you don’t object to not having a loop, you can do quite a bit of switching layout along that wall in HO or N. 24" deep is about all you’d need–one thing about small switching layouts is that generally it isn’t practical to make them very deep.
I don’t dislike a 4 x 8. There are a ton of track plans for them. They are easy to build, and fit in a tight space. The fact is though, that if your 4 x 8 has to be against a wall on one of the long sides, reaching over it will be a challenge, that’s all.
Unless your “limited space” is not enough room for a 4x8. My problem with a 4x8 is that they take up too much space!
Quite frankly, the fact that people seem to think that a 4x8 is a microscopically small layout, when it actually eats 80 square feet of a room, is the most obvious problem and THING TO LOATHE about the 4x8. It’s a really inefficient use of room and wood, and while it is supposedly “great for a beginner” it’s also a great way to teach bad habits and poor design practices. A shelf switcher is great for a beginner too, takes up less space, costs less, and lets the modeler, as you say, “take what you got and use it to your advantage” while getting a lot more bang for your buck in terms of effective use of space.
Jetrock - pcarrell, I disagree with you. I have a 4’x8’ N scale layout and the way the room is set up, it fits in here just right. I can walk around all four sides and it is not “wasted” space. [:)]
I agree with BMRR. My 4x8 section of my layout (the entire thing for right now) is set up with one of the short ends against a wall. One 8’ side serves as part of a path and the other two face the rest of the room. I also know that many other designs can be achieved in the same amount of space as a 4x8 plus walkways around it, but I still feel like the standard 4x8 is a good starting point, gives you something to build on later (as mine does), and is quick and easy to complete. This topic can go on for pages, as past threads have done, and we can argue the point back and forth. I have my opinion and others have thiers, and I respect that, but for me, the 4x8 is ideal for my situation.
Your pictures won’t show on mine at the moment but I have seen several good 4x8 layouts especially if you can separate scenes with structures or hills to act as view blocks.
The recent project layout in MR worked well and there are several plans in one of the MR special books with 4x8’s and other small layouts.
Have you thought about raising the layout up high say 48-50" and splitting the 4x8 up?, you could make it a 18"-24" wide shelf layout above the furniture with the operating space in the centre. You could duck under or have a lift out section for access. This option would mean a little more work and lumber but you’d get easier radius curves in and you could have it portable as well, this type of idea is common over here in the UK.
Paul
There are lots of attractive and well sceniced 4x8’s out there. There are lots of good plans out there to fit that space that have a lot to offer. That’s not the issue.
And if a 4x8 is on wheels and can be moved around to share it’s space for other purposes, like a den or something, then it’s just fine if that’s what you want.
What I am saying is that for a perminate, immovable (i.e. not portable), layout, it’s not the most efficiant use of space given the square footage that it and the isles around it occupy. We don’t have to be locked into this 4x8 only kind of thinking. Lets take a look outside of the box for a moment. Other options may offer more desirable space useage. There’s a lot of things that can be done in that amount of space.
That’s not to say the 4x8 is not a uesful option still. The 4x8 can do a lot of things and is a useful size of layout. But given the options available to a perminate layout of that size, I personally feel that some of those other options are more desirable.
And that’s what it really boils down to, isn’t it? It comes down to what you personally feel is the best route for you to take. I feel that something other then a 4x8 in the given space would be desirable. Another person may not feel that way, and that’s OK.
I agree. Putting a short side only against the wall is the way to go. Not everyone can get away with having an 8’ X 4’ extension coming straight out in the room, though. I kinda got the impression from the way the photograhp was taken, that he needed something that did not encroach the room too badly. Maybe I misunderstood.
Could you post a diagram of the whole room, showing doors and non-movable furniture? There may be other options people can see.
I model in HO, and my layout is a 5x12 table. It has to share space in the family room, so I didn’t have the option of fastening the layout to the wall. Instead, I built a light framework and used foam for my base, and then put casters on the legs. Right now, I’m working on the nominal “front” of the layout, while the back is against the wall, but as I move around to the back in the scenery phase, I can turn the whole layout around. All wiring to the control panels is routed through a point at the center, so I can even move the panels from the front to the back of the layout.
If I had a small room where around-the-walls was an option, I would look very seriously at a lift-off bridge connecting the ends of a U-shaped layout. This allows for continuous running without requiring a big loop at each end, and makes it easier to build a layout without very tight curves.
And even though I’m in HO and very happy with it, there is a lot to be said for N-gauge when space is an issue.
Whether a 4x8 is the most efficient use of space depends on a number of issues. Where is the door(s) located? Does the room need to be used for other purposes? Can backdrops be mounted on the walls?
Many first layouts are built in a spare bedroom. A 4x8 is similar in size and shape to a bed so it works well in a typical 10x11 bedroom without blocking access to the closet which is a handy thing to have in a railroad room, especially if you add shelves. A spare bedroom also usually has one doorway so you don’t have to be concerned with the traffic flow through the room. Such a room likely will have one or more windows which makes an around the walls design problematic.Either you block off the window or do without a backdrop in that area. Some modelers are apartment dwellers and there may well be lease restrictions which limit what can be put on the walls.
A switching layout on a shelf is another option but it’s not going to be for everyone. Simply switching cars back and forth could get old just as quickly as a roundy-round. You don’t get to run trains over the road and can forget about passenger operations unless your idea of fun is moving cars from the station to the coach yard and back. A 4x8 provides the opportunity to do both switching and running of trains. If you want to run trains and don’t have a lot of room, a continuous run layout is almost a must and a 4x8 is the simplest way to get there. If you have the room to make it 5x8, that’s even better because you can use broader curves.
A 4x8 is not the best small layout solution for everyone but it is a viable option and should not be dismissed without considering a wide range of factors. My first layout was a 4x8 and we had a lot of fun with it and it is probably the reason I am still in this hobby over 40 years later. For a first layout, it can be an excellent choice.
