Trains.com

O-Gauge Remorse??

14210 views
38 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2010
  • 33 posts
O-Gauge Remorse??
Posted by C&NW on Monday, April 18, 2011 1:30 PM

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.

  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: Lander, WY
  • 408 posts
Posted by wyomingscout on Monday, April 18, 2011 1:47 PM

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've often said there's nothing better for the inside of a man than the outside of a horse. Ronald Reagan
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 1,340 posts
Posted by Seayakbill on Monday, April 18, 2011 2:20 PM

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.

Bill T.

  • Member since
    July 2010
  • 33 posts
Posted by C&NW on Monday, April 18, 2011 2:43 PM

Why "MTH" HO?

  • Member since
    March 2010
  • From: Gettysburg, PA
  • 447 posts
Posted by Major on Monday, April 18, 2011 2:53 PM

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!  Laugh LOL

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Sandy Eggo
  • 5,608 posts
Posted by dougdagrump on Monday, April 18, 2011 2:58 PM

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. Idea

Remember the Veterans. Past, present and future.

www.sd3r.org

Proud New Member Of The NRA

  • Member since
    April 2008
  • From: Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.
  • 682 posts
Posted by balidas on Monday, April 18, 2011 3:41 PM

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.

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Crystal Lake, IL
  • 8,059 posts
Posted by cnw1995 on Monday, April 18, 2011 3:45 PM

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.

Doug Murphy 'We few, we happy few, we band of brothers...' Henry V.

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: North Texas
  • 5,707 posts
Posted by wrmcclellan on Monday, April 18, 2011 3:51 PM

dougdagrump
Using the DCS record & playback feature you could run multiple trains on the same set of tracks at the same time in opposing directions. Idea

DougnotaG - this sounds really really interesting - two trains on a shelf- one track - opposing directions - and one puts all faith into DCS Whistling. I anxiously await the YooTooob posting on this one...Beer

Regards, Roy

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: South Carolina
  • 9,713 posts
Posted by rtraincollector on Monday, April 18, 2011 6:47 PM

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.

Life's hard, even harder if your stupid  John Wayne

http://rtssite.shutterfly.com/

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: Parma Heights Ohio
  • 3,442 posts
Posted by Penny Trains on Monday, April 18, 2011 7:19 PM

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.

Trains, trains, wonderful trains.  The more you get, the more you toot!  Big Smile

  • Member since
    August 2007
  • From: North Central Connecticut
  • 320 posts
Posted by Bob.M on Monday, April 18, 2011 7:28 PM

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.

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Lexington, S.C.
  • 336 posts
Posted by baberuth73 on Monday, April 18, 2011 7:37 PM

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.  

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Monday, April 18, 2011 11:30 PM

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 ...

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • 1,786 posts
Posted by cwburfle on Tuesday, April 19, 2011 4:26 AM

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.

  • Member since
    October 2010
  • 98 posts
Posted by scrambler81 on Tuesday, April 19, 2011 4:32 AM

 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.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 1,340 posts
Posted by Seayakbill on Tuesday, April 19, 2011 5:44 AM

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.

Bill T.

  • Member since
    April 2006
  • 8,050 posts
Posted by fifedog on Tuesday, April 19, 2011 6:02 AM

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.

  • Member since
    January 2005
  • From: Lake Worth FL
  • 4,014 posts
Posted by phillyreading on Tuesday, April 19, 2011 8:37 AM

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.My 2 Cents 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.

Interested in southest Pennsylvania railroads; Reading & Northern, Reading Company, Reading Lines, Philadelphia & Reading.
  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Crystal Lake, IL
  • 8,059 posts
Posted by cnw1995 on Tuesday, April 19, 2011 8:46 AM

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: Laugh

Doug Murphy 'We few, we happy few, we band of brothers...' Henry V.

  • Member since
    January 2005
  • From: Lake Worth FL
  • 4,014 posts
Posted by phillyreading on Tuesday, April 19, 2011 9:11 AM

The only thing that I have seen in H.O that you might get away with being smaller is using flex track and a Gandy Dancer car, or a handcar. To me you need almost the same space as with H.O. so why not go with O gauge??

I have some American Flyer S gauge(normally 42 inch curves) and they take up more space than O gauge track. There was Pike Master by A.F. years ago but it didn't catch on that well, it had smaller radius curves. Also not that much would run on Pike Master do to the curve sizes.

Lee F.

Interested in southest Pennsylvania railroads; Reading & Northern, Reading Company, Reading Lines, Philadelphia & Reading.
  • Member since
    July 2010
  • 33 posts
Posted by C&NW on Tuesday, April 19, 2011 11:31 AM

Thank you all for you responses.  It has greatly helped to get some perspective through your own observations and experiences.  I know this group is probably going to have a bit of a predisposition to "O", but I needed the reinforcement.   BTW, my dad has a nice HO layout.  He was showing me the progress over the weekend by running a long train on the outer loop.  Everything was fine until he wanted to switch to an inner loop; after flipping the manual switch he derailed.  He commented on the "finicky-ness" of running HO.  When we go to a train show (monthly in Wheaton, IL) I suppose my looking over his shoulder at the HO stuff is matched by his looking over mine at the "O" gauge items....I envy the cost of HO engines, track, rolling stock, etc.  But I do feel he does miss the "hefty" feel of "O"....he was raised on "O" gauge and I think it has truly never left his blood.  In fact, when he comes over to my house I make sure I have my 0-8-0 steamer on the rails (the smoke and steam railsounds boxcar I have in the consist make his day).  Oh, to have the best of both worlds.  But I'll stick with "O"; I'm too far along..".the train has left the station" as they say. Perhaps I will post my layout for some feedback/suggestions; I hadn't thought about doing that.  Finally, perhaps there's a local train club I can visit to exorcise my HO demons...or even my dad's layout.  Thanks all.  Paul

  • Member since
    April 2006
  • 8,050 posts
Posted by fifedog on Tuesday, April 19, 2011 1:37 PM

V8Vega - ...by chance, would you be a size 17/32? IdeaCool

  • Member since
    July 2002
  • From: A State of Humidity
  • 2,441 posts
Posted by wallyworld on Tuesday, April 19, 2011 1:45 PM

No regrets as I have had HO layouts which seemed to call for more fussing with in terms of small parts, a backdrop comparatively realistic settings, which is another flavor. However, whether it is N ( which I did a layout in-forget about switching-ugh) or O, s or G whatever, I think as a rule of thumb no matter what gauge I was in ( even a garden railroad-which I still have) I felt at the time, that there is never enough room. Think of it, if space were no object what is the ideal size.?  For me , it's probably a unrealistic goal to buy Wyoming for a layout. IIs always compromise, whether it is the wife the kids work or layouts.

Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.

  • Member since
    January 2005
  • From: Lake Worth FL
  • 4,014 posts
Posted by phillyreading on Tuesday, April 19, 2011 2:40 PM

Like Dennis(V8VEGA) mentions, I too experianced H.O. freigth cars just taking a sideways dip for no reason as they run around the track. Couplers don't like to stay closed in H.O. also, Kadee couplers help a little with that. H.O. has to be weighted just right or they derail so easily.

But then in O gauge with MTH and Gargrvaes switches, there is something that MTH engines hate about certain Gargraves switches on my layout. Lionel and Williams engines don't have problems with Gargraves switches.

Lee F.

Interested in southest Pennsylvania railroads; Reading & Northern, Reading Company, Reading Lines, Philadelphia & Reading.
  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Wednesday, April 20, 2011 7:39 AM

C&NW

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.

C&NW,

I feel your pain.

As a kid, I had two American Flyer train sets, a steam engine and a diesel switcher.  When I went to college and later married and had a family, the trains went into storage for 40 years before I resurrected and rehabbed the engines in early 2010.  Meanwhile, after my kids grew up and left home, I got re-interested in the hobby and ventured into HO scale and never looked back.

I now have a 22' x 42' HO scale in my basement that is fully landscaped and filled with steam and diesel.  But, I also have a 7' x 10' table with my American Flyer layout on it.  It is pretty simple.  It consists of a double mainline running in an oval pattern, a few bridges, and some Department 56 houses in the center.  True, there are web sites that show a variety of small layouts for S scale and O scale.  But the truth of the matter is that there really isn't much you can do with a small layout space.  At least not compared to what you can do with a large layout space.

Should you have any remorse?  Should you move to HO and away from O ?   I would answer it this way.  If your O gauge stuff is vintage stuff from your childhood, stay with it and enjoy the memories.  That's what I do with my American Flyer.  But if you are new to the hobby and are buying new O gauge stuff, sell what you have and move to HO gauge.  it is less expensive, the choices on engines, rolling stock and structures are limitless, and the space advantage cannot be beat.  Remember, HO stands for Half of O Gauge.  Even on your smaller 8' x 11' layout, you can pack in a whole lot of track and interesting structures, engines, rolling stock, landscaping.

As far as CTT magazine goes, don't renew it if you don't like it.  It is supposed to be all about Classic Toy Trains which I infer to mean vintage Lionel, American Flyer, Marx, and the like.  But it isn't about that at all.  It is all about the new Lionel stuff, big, bulky, and that awful 3-rail - - - LOL.  That's not a slam against Kalmbach Publications.  Kalmback produces great stuff such as Classic Trains and Model Railroader magazine, and a host of special issues plus a number of great books.    But CTT magazine is useless unless you are into the contemporary Lionel stuff.

My advice.  Start subscribing to MRR magazine and give HO scale a try.  You will love it.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Wednesday, April 20, 2011 8:08 AM

Wow!

Lots of misinformation in this thread about HO scale, coming from the O gauge crowd, of course.

HO = H-orribly O-verrated.  How so?  Let's face it.  O gauge is all about "toy trains".  Nothing wrong with that.  As I mentioned in a previous thread, I have a small American Flyer layout sitting across from my HO scale layout.  But, HO scale is all about "model railroading".  It much is more closer to the prototype in appearance and operation.  It is clearly more popular than O gauge as evidenced by the widespread availability of the products lines and the volume of sales, and the number of participants.

The limitations of HO curvature requirements?  There are no limitations.  That is the beauty of HO.  With flex track, you can design any degree of curvature you want, unlike O gauge where curvature is fixed.

Someone said, " I used to think that with H.O. trains I could have a much larger layout, but that is not always the case".   I guess my 22' x 42' layout must be an illusion.

Another wrote, "The only thing that I have seen in H.O that you might get away with being smaller is using flex track.  To me you need almost the same space as with H.O. so why not go with O gauge??"  Which totally misses the point of the advantages of HO scale.  Within the same space as allocated to O gauge, you can produce so much more visual effect, operating space and perspective, that HO wins hands down over O.

And, finally, this lame comment. "In HO there is always some of the rolling stock derailing for no reason, too sensitive to dirty track, always a loco here or there jerking, tiny little unreliable couplers".

Derailing for no reason?  C'mon, you sound like an HO newbie who posts on the MRR forum for the first time.  HO scale rolling stock does not derail "for no reason".  It is always operator error.  Misaligned track, humps and valleys, improperly thrown switch, out of gauge wheels.  I also run trains in S scale (American Flyer) and my cars derails for a variety of reasons, always my fault.  But then I guess O gauge is impervious to derailments.

Too sensitive to dirty track?  LOL.  On my American Flyer layout, I keep a can of denatured alcohol and a clean rag nearby for the rails and a Bright Boy eraser for the wheels.

A loco here or there jerking?  Like O gauge doesn't?  Get real!

Tiny little unreliable couplers.  I focus on the word unreliable.  Kadee is the industry leader in HO scale couplers.  Trust me, folks, the couplers are reliable.

I am going back to the MRR forums where the views and opinions are much more realistic than they are here and the misinformation much less rampant.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    April 2006
  • 8,050 posts
Posted by fifedog on Wednesday, April 20, 2011 9:18 AM

...anyone catch the tag on that dumptruck...? Laugh

  • Member since
    March 2010
  • From: Gettysburg, PA
  • 447 posts
Posted by Major on Wednesday, April 20, 2011 10:01 AM

All of us have our preferences.  My primary scale is S. But I also have N, alot of HO and prewar O scale.  My son's primary scale is European HO but he also has American Flyer prewar wide gauge. I like S scale for its size and the appearance and operation of S helper and American Model trains puts it on par with most HO equipment out there. Even the original American Flyer looks good but you have to consider the stuff is 50+ years old. However I am not going to knock anyones choice of scale!  The nice thing  about model railroading is that nothing is static.  You can always change your mind and scale. So when this thread began about having remorse I would have none about chosing a particular size over another.  Its all about having fun! 

  • Member since
    October 2004
  • From: Millersburg, Pa.
  • 7,607 posts
Posted by laz 57 on Wednesday, April 20, 2011 10:25 AM

The reason for me being into O gauge is, I was brought up with Lionel trains and also now that I am back into the hobby my eyes can't see that little stuff anymore.  I'd need a big magnifying glass over that whole HO layout.

laz57

  There's a race of men that don't fit in, A race that can't stay still; Robert Service. TCA 03-55991

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTER

Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month