What was once the dominate scale in the USA is but a niche these days. Who here models in 2 rail O scale. The scale side of O, be it Ow5 or Proto48. I have a small Ow5 layout started to tinker with till I move to a house with a larger train space. I love the Proto48 stuff, but converting some of my favorite engines to that gauge is way beyond my means. I really wish we had an active O scale 2 rail club in central Indiana still. Any ways, lets see your trains. Here are 2 of my old AHM/Rivarossi locos running on my tiny loop. Excuse the mess as I sort thru a collection of old AHM loco kits.
Great video! O scale is 100% fun… My stuff gets mileage at this time of year under the tree. Our tree is not up yet, but here’s a picture from 2 years ago.
20191221_170545 on Flickr
I have a portable layout that’s in storage in the garage. Most of my stuff is Rivarossi. I do have an All National model that I rebuilt. The mechanicals run well, I need to change the decal and add a few more details…
20200428_221849 on Flickr
Simon
Most of the follks here are HO or N modelers. If you go over to the Classic Toy Trains forums you may find more folks with 2-rail O.
Good luck,
Richard
The key word you say Richard is “Toy” There is no Toy in scale O modeling. Just a much smaller group of folks doing it these days. Its a very correct topic here on this forum. Pretty much everyone on the toy side are in 3 rail, or 3 rail scale. Totally different world. Two rail O scale is like HO on steroids. Get your hands on one of these chunky Harbor Belt switchers and see what I mean. They capture the chunky look of these monsters that the HO scale versions just didnt due to the smaller size. Anyways. Here is my current project, a AHM/Rivarossi Casey Jones kit build. Took a few hours of building to get to this point. A smooth running chassis is the result. But it was enjoyable work while watching football. Cab/boiler and tender are next.
I have some 2 rail O scale. I considered going with O scale back in the 70’s and 80’s, but eventually went with S for space reasons.
Occaisionally, I set up a loop of track and run my 2 rail O sale trains.
Paul
MRR carries articles on 2 rail O scale. Every time some posts on this Forum on O scale, someone makes the above remark. Why don’t you give it a rest.
Looking good, Mike! Love the Reno, and the Harbor Belt. Casey Jones coming along nicely.
Paul
Part of the perception problem with O is that you don’t see much outside of HO and N in the ‘mainstream’ model mags like MR or RMC. O, S and Z have their own magazines, and many manufacturers of products in those scales only advertise in those magazines.
O Scale Trains is strictly two-rail:
O Gauge Railroading covers both two- and three-rail modelling, and has their own online forums:
I agree and I blame that solely on the Editor at Model Railroader. That magazine Should cover all scales like it did in the past. And that includes O scale. The only thing I feel should be left out is the tinplate/3 rail stuff. That needs its own magazine. But with dwindling magazine thickness and content. I would think it would be in the magazine’s best interest to include the other scales of “Scale” model railroading such as O, S and stuff on 45mm “g” scale track as that covers many scale facets. They eliminated the garden railways magazine. Yet the thickness of MRR keeps getting thinner and content less and less. Its more of a catalog of the newest wizz bangs on the market and less about the actual act of modeling. Hence why I dropped my subscription years ago. Bad managment has sank many a business/magazine. I have older issues of MRR that had a great mix of all scales and even older ones where the bulk of the issue was O as HO was in its infancy. Maybe if the mainstream media would pay more attention to the scales outside of HO and N, more modelers might look at modeling in that scale. Many percieve you need a huge basement for 2 rail O modeling. Buet there are many options for small layouts in small spaces, where scenes are super detailed to the max. Same can be done in S scale. Lots of proper scale items there these days if you know where to look. Sorry for the rant, but the direction of MRR in the past decade has really irked me to the max. And its a shame and diservice to the modelers they are trying to serve.
While I am a committed HO modeler, I dabble in scale 2-rail O. In fact, at the train show this weekend, I picked up an Atlas stock car ($25) and two wood & metal reefer kits ($10 ea.) from “Old Pullman” (which appear to be former Athearn O scale kits). I also have a couple RS-3s from Weaver, a Weaver GP9 undec. kit, and the IHB 0-8-0 (dummy), plus an Atlas NE-6 caboose an a brass NH NE-5 caboose. Last year, I built a Red Caboose flat and tank car kit. But I don’t have a layout or even a place to run any of them. To me, it’s sort of like building a P-47 Thunderbolt model or USS Hornet. I like to build models, so these O scale models are just more of the same; they just happen to be trains.
Vintage Steamer,
Um, MR covers most scales, including 2-rail O. Remember Tony Koester’s small NKP 2-rail O scale switching layout that was featured in multiple issues not too long ago? He asked folks ought to give scale O a try. I also know MR has done scale S layouts in the past decade or so.
The problem is that these larger scales are a super minority in the hobby. If HO is 55% of the hobby, and N scale is about 25%, that leaves just 20% of the hobby for everything else. And since toy trains are the majority of the O and S scale markets, that means that less than 10% of the hobby is into scale O and S…if that!
If you’re really worried about MR’s page count, then they should be chasing what the vast majority of the hobby wants, not the small fry like scale O or S. The fact that MR publishes any scale O or S content at all is rather amazing.
It’s all model railroading, doesn’t matter the scale. Many fine old time layouts were in 0. Many clubs, and John Armstrong’s " Canandaigua Southern", which was 2 rail with an outside third rail, which was very common at one time.
The differentiation is “0 scale”, and “0 gauge”. 0 gauge also can include toy trains. O scale is just that.They are models. This probably causes some confusion, understandably…
Paul
Another problem is the perception that “O scale” and “three rail” are two different things. Over the last decades, one of the fastest growing segments of O gauge modellers has been in “3-Rail Scale”. These modellers only use 1:48 scale equipment, structures, etc. often using Kadee couplers, but use three rail track. Atlas, Lionel, and other companies make full 1:48 scale engines and cars. Sunset even has a subsidiary that makes 3-Rail Scale brass locomotives.
Most use Lionel’s command control system, but in recent years some folks have chosen to convert their 3-Rail engines to DCC.
One of the best 3RS layouts is the one of Norm Charbonneau.
Thanks for sharing Stix. Now THAT is a layout I would like to see in person. I’m not a fan of 3 rail, but that layout definitely stands out and makes us forget about the third rail…
Simon
Your percentages may be a bit low.
According to an article in the latest (1/24) MR, “modelers who claim N scale as their primary scale amount to about 20% of the market, with HO scale at nearly 80%”.
Yet MR also frequently publishes articles by Lou Sassi, who models in O scale. And there’s the video series about David Popp’s On30 layout. MR will publish O (and S, and Z…) if someone submits an article.
I would question that. My sense is that only a small minority of ‘toy train’ collectors / operators are in S, I think most people doing S nowadays are scale modelers - especially if you include Sn3 modelers. I’m not sure, but I suspect if you bunch “hi-railers” (folks running 1:48 equipment on three rail track, but generally maintaining things like truck-mounted Lionel-style couplers, moving pilots for sharp curves etc.), 3-rail scale folks, and O narrow gaugers all together, there might be more of them than of 3-rail toy train collectors / operators.
Plus determining a true percentage of each scale and gauge for the general population can be difficult. People don’t join clubs and organizations the way they used to. I’m sure many model railroaders aren’t in the NMRA for example, so wouldn’t be part of any survey etc. NMRA would do. People not in HO or N (people in O, S, “large scale” etc.) are less likely to read MR or RMC, they have their own publications and (if you are a ‘joiner’) their own organizations.
Does On30 or On3 count? There is a fair number of us around.
Mark
It’s O scale and 2 rail, so it fits the OP’s criteria.
I have been in O gauge, HOn3, HO, back to O scale, and now On30. My choices were somewhat moved by availability. On30 seems to have passed its peak.
wjstix,
I consider all hi-rail track models to be toy trains. Yes, I know, some of them are very nice and are beautiful models, but they still have grossly large wheel flanges, fat wheels, big couplers, and run on enormous rails. There’s never been a hi-rail layout featured in MR that I know of because MR is the home of scale model railroading.
The National Association of S-Gaugers points out the difference: “Currently, about 60-70% of the S-scale community fits within the A.F./hi-rail group, and about 30-40% are scale modelers.” An S-gauge American Models box has two options: Hi-Rail and Scale.
Therefore, I consider my statement to be factual, in that toy train modelers significantly outnumber scale modelers in both O and S scales. Meaning that scale modelers in O and S gauges are far less likely to end up in MR, the magazine for scale modeling.
I agree that nailing down the true percentages of who models what scale is impossible as there’s no one thing that all of us do as model railroaders. We don’t all get MR, we all don’t belong to the NMRA, etc. There’s no national database to join or examine.
However, one thing we can look at is the amount of different products sold. We all buy things, after all. Just look at how many different manufacturers and the different number of products sold in a calendar year. There’s a reason why HO had their own Walthers catalog while N and Z were in their own shared catalog and everying bigger than HO was in the Large Scale catalog.
Sadly On30, which was really being spearheaded by Bachmann, lots its head of steam when the gentleman that worked at Bachmann and pushed this scale, along with the G scale side, passed away. After that, we have seen very little movement in either scale from Bachmann. I have one On3 brass engine, one of Argent Lumber’s 2-6-0 locomotives imported by Flying Zoo and made by Sugiyama in Japan. O scale definatly takes some patience in finding older long out of production models or you have to scratchbuild. I love my AHM/Rivarossi Casey Jones locomotive, but try to easilly build up the proper consist for it to try to pull, or even a shorter consist to keep the weight down. Same for that era of the ICRR. I think the same applies to the Reno/Genoa from the same importer, not much easilly found rolling stock wise. I need to look thru the 3 rail world to see if anything is close that I could retruck for either locomotive. Plenty out there to model the IHB in steam era. While I loved HO, its easier to enjoy the details and kit building in O scale or larger for me now. Yes I do remember Tony K’s small O scale layout. I have those issues as I do check the magazine at the local book store each month to see if I want a copy or not. As long as we are all having fun thats all that matters. I just hope to get a few converts over to 2 rail O scale modeling.