HO track on N-scale roadbed

[tstage]

Greetings, All!

I'm interested in using N-scale roadbed underneath my HO track on a secondary line for height difference and need to get advice on what looks more realistic.  The two or three references that I have read on the topic are somewhat vague.

For comparison, I've included a picture of some HO track sitting on roadbed:

Click picture to enlarge

The middle track is on HO-scale roadbed.  The outer two tracks are on N-scale roadbed.

The track on the left uses three pieces of N-scale roadbed - i.e. the outer two pieces have the bevel pointing upward and the middle piece is flipped on its back.  The track on the right is only two pieces, with both pieces flipped on their back (bevel pointing downward) to maximize the surface area.  I've tried laying the HO track on N-scale roadbed (not pictured) exactly like you would if it were HO-scale roadbed but it looked too narrow.

Paul Dolkos' article in this month's MR entitled, "Modeling different types of track" (pg. 38-43) has a side-by-side picture of both on pg. 39 and they appear to be the same width.  However, the author only mentions that the "N scale roadbed for the main line and scene.

Personally, I'm liking the wider (3-piece) look of the N-scale roadbed.  (It's essentially the exact same width as the HO roadbed in the middle.)  However, I wasn't sure if it would look correct (i.e. be too wide) once the track was ballasted.

I guess the question to ask: Is the ballasted area on secondary track, sidings, and spurs generally narrower in width than mainline track, or are they the same?

I appreciate any input you all have on the topic.  Thanks for the help...

Tom

[2021]

If you close at the picture on Page 39, you will see that it consists of three pieces to give the width desired.

Ron K.

[tstage]

Ron,

That's what I sorta concluded but the line(s) weren't as clearly defined as they are with the HO roadbed on the right.

Tom

[gandydancer19]

Secondary lines are not as well kept up as a first class main line. so it would be a little narrower as well as lower. 

Why not put a stripwood spacer down the center of the N scale roadbed to make it wider, but not as wide as the main line?  Or you could cut a piece of N scale cork in strips to add to the center.

[loathar]

That article did show splicing a strip into the open middle section. I think the wider N gauge looks better. You can also get a roll of that sticky backed 1/8" cork from an office supply store and cut them what ever width you want.

[IRONROOSTER]

I would use the one on the right for little used spurs, maybe with weeds growing up through the ballast.  The left one could be a secondary line or more frequently used spur. You could split the half section for a narrower effect.

Enjoy

Paul 

[pcarrell]

This pic shows it pretty well.  There's a busy (well kept) mainline to the left, the main siding has the loco on it, and a seldom used siding is to the right.  Notice the track conditions of each one.

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j319/pcarrell/Prototype%20Train%20Photos/8-16-079.jpg

 

[tstage]

That article did show splicing a strip into the open middle section.

Loathar,

Hmmm.  Somehow that picture or reference didn't make it into my particular issue because I can't find it.

I think the wider N gauge looks better. You can also get a roll of that sticky backed 1/8" cork from an office supply store and cut them what ever width you want.

I agree and good suggestion.  I had thought about going the "sticky-back" route.  I also have some 3" x 36" N-scale cork sheeting that I will definitely be using around and under portions of my yard and servicing area.

Tom

[loathar]

I guess I'm thinking of an article MR did on this topic about 2 years ago. I remember that one showed them making the N bed as wide as the HO with a splice strip in the middle.
Those recycled articles tend to run together in my mind after a while.