Which track and scale to use?

[Anonymous]

Funny this thread was started in August 2003, What scale did he chose? It might have all the track laid by now and he might be working on senery.

[Anonymous]

Funny this thread was started in August 2003, What scale did he chose? It might have all the track laid by now and he might be working on senery.

[IRONROOSTER]

Your room size is large enough to use any of the scales. The trade off is that smaller scales (N and Z) allow longer trains and more away from the track scenery. Larger scales (O and G) focus more on the trains which tend to be shorter and trackside buidlings. The middle scales (HO and S) are in between. Most people find it easier to build models the larger the scale and operation tends to be more reliable. While all of these scales have adequate commercial support, HO being the most popular has the widest variety and most availability at local hobby shops. I would suggest you go to some train shows featuring layouts in different scales.
Enjoy
Paul

[IRONROOSTER]

Your room size is large enough to use any of the scales. The trade off is that smaller scales (N and Z) allow longer trains and more away from the track scenery. Larger scales (O and G) focus more on the trains which tend to be shorter and trackside buidlings. The middle scales (HO and S) are in between. Most people find it easier to build models the larger the scale and operation tends to be more reliable. While all of these scales have adequate commercial support, HO being the most popular has the widest variety and most availability at local hobby shops. I would suggest you go to some train shows featuring layouts in different scales.
Enjoy
Paul

[Jetrock]

Indeed, a lot depends on the type of railroad you want to run. N scale's strong suit is being able to simulate BIG trains in a small space, as well as vast scenic vistas.

HO has the advantages of economy and availability as well as great diversity of available models, and size-wise, you can fit quite a bit of HO-scale railroad in a 15x15 room. HO is nice if you want to do more superdetailing, too--and you can actually see the detail. jschuknecht puts all this quite well...

Since you mentioned that the prototype was 10 miles long, fairly dinky by railroad standards, I assume that your prototype didn't feature gigantic articulated engines with mile-long coal drags. What kind of engines did your prototype use? If they tended towards the smaller stuff (4 or 6 wheel steam, 44 or 70 ton diesels, smaller roadswitchers) then HO might be better--while there are some small N scale engines out there, they're not as common as those in HO.

Also, how "historic" is this layout? Do you have a specific era in mind? "Historic" in this context could mean anything from the 1830's to the 1980's...care to be a bit more specific?

[Jetrock]

Indeed, a lot depends on the type of railroad you want to run. N scale's strong suit is being able to simulate BIG trains in a small space, as well as vast scenic vistas.

HO has the advantages of economy and availability as well as great diversity of available models, and size-wise, you can fit quite a bit of HO-scale railroad in a 15x15 room. HO is nice if you want to do more superdetailing, too--and you can actually see the detail. jschuknecht puts all this quite well...

Since you mentioned that the prototype was 10 miles long, fairly dinky by railroad standards, I assume that your prototype didn't feature gigantic articulated engines with mile-long coal drags. What kind of engines did your prototype use? If they tended towards the smaller stuff (4 or 6 wheel steam, 44 or 70 ton diesels, smaller roadswitchers) then HO might be better--while there are some small N scale engines out there, they're not as common as those in HO.

Also, how "historic" is this layout? Do you have a specific era in mind? "Historic" in this context could mean anything from the 1830's to the 1980's...care to be a bit more specific?

[Anonymous]

My knee-jerk reaction would be to go HO. But that would depend on the railroad, and what parts of the line that I would be more interested in replicating.

I would lean towards HO if this is a short line with short trains and mostly switching, if I want to replicate alot of the structures and the like around the line, if I were going to model steam, or if I wanted very accurate rolling stock and engines.

I would lean towards N if I wanted to replicate the expansive feeling of a modern industrial park or the like, if the short line had many long trains, if I wanted to replicate alot of the scenery to run trains through, or if I wanted to run long modern rolling stock like 89' trailer train cars that require broad curves to look good.

Mind you, all of this could be done in either scale, but it would determine on what facet of the railroad that I wanted to focus on.

---jps

[Anonymous]

My knee-jerk reaction would be to go HO. But that would depend on the railroad, and what parts of the line that I would be more interested in replicating.

I would lean towards HO if this is a short line with short trains and mostly switching, if I want to replicate alot of the structures and the like around the line, if I were going to model steam, or if I wanted very accurate rolling stock and engines.

I would lean towards N if I wanted to replicate the expansive feeling of a modern industrial park or the like, if the short line had many long trains, if I wanted to replicate alot of the scenery to run trains through, or if I wanted to run long modern rolling stock like 89' trailer train cars that require broad curves to look good.

Mind you, all of this could be done in either scale, but it would determine on what facet of the railroad that I wanted to focus on.

---jps

[DSchmitt]

In general, if you perfer switching operations, they are easier and more reliable in HO and larger scales. If you like to run long trains through the country side and have the rear of your train leave one town before the head end enters the next town then N or Z will work better. (although I do know of some fine switching layouts in N scale and also fine "running" layouts in HO)

Several people have suggested track systems with built in roadbed. They are good for the beginner and I have also seen beautiful layouts by experienced model railriaders using them. If you do decide to go that way, you may eventually find the geometrics of the system you choose is limiting. But all is not lost. Mixing track brands, while a little more difficult, is not really hard to do. I am working on a N scale switching layout which has Kato Unitrack, Peco code 80 (flex), Peco code 55 (flex), and Atlas code 80 (flex and sectional).

I was looking at some track with roadbed (HO) in the hobby Saturday, The only one I saw that might be hard to mix with other brands is the one with black rails and roadbed, but I think it can be done with it too. The others all have standard rail joiners on the rail (even Kato where they are molded into the plastic, easily removed, clip joiner)

[DSchmitt]

In general, if you perfer switching operations, they are easier and more reliable in HO and larger scales. If you like to run long trains through the country side and have the rear of your train leave one town before the head end enters the next town then N or Z will work better. (although I do know of some fine switching layouts in N scale and also fine "running" layouts in HO)

Several people have suggested track systems with built in roadbed. They are good for the beginner and I have also seen beautiful layouts by experienced model railriaders using them. If you do decide to go that way, you may eventually find the geometrics of the system you choose is limiting. But all is not lost. Mixing track brands, while a little more difficult, is not really hard to do. I am working on a N scale switching layout which has Kato Unitrack, Peco code 80 (flex), Peco code 55 (flex), and Atlas code 80 (flex and sectional).

I was looking at some track with roadbed (HO) in the hobby Saturday, The only one I saw that might be hard to mix with other brands is the one with black rails and roadbed, but I think it can be done with it too. The others all have standard rail joiners on the rail (even Kato where they are molded into the plastic, easily removed, clip joiner)

[cwclark]

I would go for N scale but the parts are so small a person could go blind looking at stuff that small so close to their face...HO can be fit in a room 15 X 15..i had a really nice layout in the 80's that was in a 10 X 15 room...a lot will depend on how you track plan turns out utilizing all the room you have to work with...

[cwclark]

I would go for N scale but the parts are so small a person could go blind looking at stuff that small so close to their face...HO can be fit in a room 15 X 15..i had a really nice layout in the 80's that was in a 10 X 15 room...a lot will depend on how you track plan turns out utilizing all the room you have to work with...

[Anonymous]

Need to buy Life Like Power Lok track

[Anonymous]

Need to buy Life Like Power Lok track

[Anonymous]

One more thing I forgot to add. No matter witch scale you choose I strongly recommend the new track on the market without the pesky rail joiners. Life-Like calls it Power-Lok. Bachmann has a different name. It is molded on top of a plastic roadbed and you will not need cork roadbed. Much stronger and better connections using the Power-Lok system. Available in both H.O. and N scale.

[Anonymous]

One more thing I forgot to add. No matter witch scale you choose I strongly recommend the new track on the market without the pesky rail joiners. Life-Like calls it Power-Lok. Bachmann has a different name. It is molded on top of a plastic roadbed and you will not need cork roadbed. Much stronger and better connections using the Power-Lok system. Available in both H.O. and N scale.

[Anonymous]

Everyone's posts are very good here and make some positive points. But because of it's size I would recommend N scale. But buy a N scale ruler at your local hobby shop so you can keep things in scale. Measure everything. It's fun! It is true modeling in a smaller scale is a little harder and more challenging but remember only the close up areas of the layout need super detailing. An arms length is a good rule. I also recommend you buy the book 303 Tips for Detailing Model Railroad Scenery & Structures. Published by Kalmbach Books. http://books.kalmbach.com No matter what scale you model it will be most helpful. You'll see. Now why N scale? First of all N has come a long way since it's early days. The details and items available are gaining fast on H.O. Second and most important is N scales small size. Your 15' x 15' would render a GIANT SIZED layout in N scale but if you step up a notch to H.O. it would be much smaller space. About twice as much track could be squeezed in your 15' x 15' space using N gauge. I just started my first ever layout on a board 4' x 8' and I modeled it in N scale. Actually it is two 4' x 4' sections mounted together to form a 4' x 8' area. This helps to move it if necessary witch is something else you should consider. Check my profile below to see a PIC of my little empire. It has 20 remote turnouts and two reverse loops. And over pass and last night I cut a stream that empties into a pond and back out again in the center of it with a jig saw. I lowered the cutout and fastened it with L shape supports. This will make the bottom of the pond. The PIC in my profile does not show the pond. It was taking last week before I cut it out. Actually it is a small lake because it is about one football field in N scale size at it's widest point. I love to measure my stuff! If you want to see a current photo e-mail me at [e-mail] and I would be glad to let you take a peek. The name of my layout is Empire Falls. It will be lettered on the towns water tower. A water fall will empity into the stream and then into the pond and out again. My layout length is over four football fields in N scale size. Your board is much bigger than mine. So as you look my PIC over just imagine all the things you could do with your space in N scale. Good luck in whatever scale you choose.

[Anonymous]

Everyone's posts are very good here and make some positive points. But because of it's size I would recommend N scale. But buy a N scale ruler at your local hobby shop so you can keep things in scale. Measure everything. It's fun! It is true modeling in a smaller scale is a little harder and more challenging but remember only the close up areas of the layout need super detailing. An arms length is a good rule. I also recommend you buy the book 303 Tips for Detailing Model Railroad Scenery & Structures. Published by Kalmbach Books. http://books.kalmbach.com No matter what scale you model it will be most helpful. You'll see. Now why N scale? First of all N has come a long way since it's early days. The details and items available are gaining fast on H.O. Second and most important is N scales small size. Your 15' x 15' would render a GIANT SIZED layout in N scale but if you step up a notch to H.O. it would be much smaller space. About twice as much track could be squeezed in your 15' x 15' space using N gauge. I just started my first ever layout on a board 4' x 8' and I modeled it in N scale. Actually it is two 4' x 4' sections mounted together to form a 4' x 8' area. This helps to move it if necessary witch is something else you should consider. Check my profile below to see a PIC of my little empire. It has 20 remote turnouts and two reverse loops. And over pass and last night I cut a stream that empties into a pond and back out again in the center of it with a jig saw. I lowered the cutout and fastened it with L shape supports. This will make the bottom of the pond. The PIC in my profile does not show the pond. It was taking last week before I cut it out. Actually it is a small lake because it is about one football field in N scale size at it's widest point. I love to measure my stuff! If you want to see a current photo e-mail me at [e-mail] and I would be glad to let you take a peek. The name of my layout is Empire Falls. It will be lettered on the towns water tower. A water fall will empity into the stream and then into the pond and out again. My layout length is over four football fields in N scale size. Your board is much bigger than mine. So as you look my PIC over just imagine all the things you could do with your space in N scale. Good luck in whatever scale you choose.

[Anonymous]

Hmmmmmmmmmm... how to respond.

Well, I prefer HO and if I had a 15 by 15 room, when I started out in my hobby carreer I probably would have put an HO layout in there. But I am modelling N, because my room is smaller than yours.

But over the years I have learned lots about N and how to appreciate it. I have been scratchbuilding in N - no big deal really. I've never scratch built in HO.

There are some challenges in N that are a bit more frustrating at first. Your first attempts at soldering will probably result in some melted ties. But I only melted four of them before I got the hang of it. Use that track in the back of the layout. Some one said that N scalers are probably better track layers and solderer's; I believe that now. It must be terribly easy to solder feeders to tracks in HO- where's the challenge I say. Seriously, it takes about 10 to 15 solders to get the hang of it, and then you discover how "easy" it is.

In that same room, you can have a wonderful one deck empire, but if it were my room; I would have a multiple deck. You have lots of room for guests.

A nolix works well in N scale but not so hot in HO. A nolix is a dedicated area that allows trains to gain elevation, but is more open than a helix. If you decide on N scale, I can help you with a room design.

BUT, if you chose this option, get a fax line I can fax it to. And tell me where doors and windows , etc are. I only do a rough mainline and bench work shape. Not the whole nine yards.

[Anonymous]

Hmmmmmmmmmm... how to respond.

Well, I prefer HO and if I had a 15 by 15 room, when I started out in my hobby carreer I probably would have put an HO layout in there. But I am modelling N, because my room is smaller than yours.

But over the years I have learned lots about N and how to appreciate it. I have been scratchbuilding in N - no big deal really. I've never scratch built in HO.

There are some challenges in N that are a bit more frustrating at first. Your first attempts at soldering will probably result in some melted ties. But I only melted four of them before I got the hang of it. Use that track in the back of the layout. Some one said that N scalers are probably better track layers and solderer's; I believe that now. It must be terribly easy to solder feeders to tracks in HO- where's the challenge I say. Seriously, it takes about 10 to 15 solders to get the hang of it, and then you discover how "easy" it is.

In that same room, you can have a wonderful one deck empire, but if it were my room; I would have a multiple deck. You have lots of room for guests.

A nolix works well in N scale but not so hot in HO. A nolix is a dedicated area that allows trains to gain elevation, but is more open than a helix. If you decide on N scale, I can help you with a room design.

BUT, if you chose this option, get a fax line I can fax it to. And tell me where doors and windows , etc are. I only do a rough mainline and bench work shape. Not the whole nine yards.

[Anonymous]

I like N primarily because I don't have a lot of room and it's ideal for me. Regarding track, you might want to consider Kato Unitrack for N if you're unsure about your track laying skills. It has built-in roadbed, snaps together, and is basically dummy proof. A lot of the prototypical people don't like it but for me, you can't beat it. It's also good if you're unsure about your layout or track plans and want to run trains until you decide. Atlas makes a similar track for HO called True Track.

Good luck!
Doug

[Anonymous]

I like N primarily because I don't have a lot of room and it's ideal for me. Regarding track, you might want to consider Kato Unitrack for N if you're unsure about your track laying skills. It has built-in roadbed, snaps together, and is basically dummy proof. A lot of the prototypical people don't like it but for me, you can't beat it. It's also good if you're unsure about your layout or track plans and want to run trains until you decide. Atlas makes a similar track for HO called True Track.

Good luck!
Doug

[Anonymous]

One other consideration among the many good points raised in this thread is how long do you want it to take a train to make a full trip across your layout at scale speed?

At 34mph (50 feet or 1 boxcar per second) an HO train is moving at 6.9 inch/sec; N is moving at 3.75 inch/sec; and Z is moving at 2.73 inch/sec. For 15 feet thats 26 seconds in HO, 48 seconds in N, and 66 seconds in Z.

Scratchbuilding in smaller scales is not necessarily 'harder', but could be considered 'more challenging'. This is what it takes to develop some of the creative skills this hobby demands and teaches, and that's one reason why so many of us enjoy it no matter what the scale. For instance, a 2x4 (unplaned) in Z scale is approximated very nicely with .01" x .02" strip styrene, most human eyes cannot resolve the slight error at this small size, especially from 2 feet away. If someone does claim to have Superman's visual accuity (after discreetly hiding their calipers), just say the sawmill operator had a hangover that day.

There is no one 'best' scale. If your 15'x15' has the room for what you want in HO or larger, go for it. If you want even more track and features, go N. If you like wide panoramas and even more trackage (future expansion), go Z. But mainly - have fun!

[Anonymous]

One other consideration among the many good points raised in this thread is how long do you want it to take a train to make a full trip across your layout at scale speed?

At 34mph (50 feet or 1 boxcar per second) an HO train is moving at 6.9 inch/sec; N is moving at 3.75 inch/sec; and Z is moving at 2.73 inch/sec. For 15 feet thats 26 seconds in HO, 48 seconds in N, and 66 seconds in Z.

Scratchbuilding in smaller scales is not necessarily 'harder', but could be considered 'more challenging'. This is what it takes to develop some of the creative skills this hobby demands and teaches, and that's one reason why so many of us enjoy it no matter what the scale. For instance, a 2x4 (unplaned) in Z scale is approximated very nicely with .01" x .02" strip styrene, most human eyes cannot resolve the slight error at this small size, especially from 2 feet away. If someone does claim to have Superman's visual accuity (after discreetly hiding their calipers), just say the sawmill operator had a hangover that day.

There is no one 'best' scale. If your 15'x15' has the room for what you want in HO or larger, go for it. If you want even more track and features, go N. If you like wide panoramas and even more trackage (future expansion), go Z. But mainly - have fun!

[Anonymous]

Which scale you use depends on your skill and how much time and $ you want to spend. HO is generally less expensive, and has much more off the shelf items. It's also easier to scratch build. N and Z give more train running area, but detail and scenery become harder to do and much more expensive. Scratch building anything in Z is extremely difficult, a 2X4scale board is smaller than a hair. As to track, handlayed looks nice but is labor intensive. I like code 83 flex track in HO. Some use other and I respect their choice, but I like code 83 for price v looks v reliability v avalibilty. In N the choices are less, and Z i don't think there is much of a choice to track size. Does anyone handlay Z track? If I was doing a Historical layout I would do HO due to the large amount of scratch building and kitbashing you will have to do to be accurate. I think it would be much harder in N and almost, nay, impossibe in Z.

[Anonymous]

Which scale you use depends on your skill and how much time and $ you want to spend. HO is generally less expensive, and has much more off the shelf items. It's also easier to scratch build. N and Z give more train running area, but detail and scenery become harder to do and much more expensive. Scratch building anything in Z is extremely difficult, a 2X4scale board is smaller than a hair. As to track, handlayed looks nice but is labor intensive. I like code 83 flex track in HO. Some use other and I respect their choice, but I like code 83 for price v looks v reliability v avalibilty. In N the choices are less, and Z i don't think there is much of a choice to track size. Does anyone handlay Z track? If I was doing a Historical layout I would do HO due to the large amount of scratch building and kitbashing you will have to do to be accurate. I think it would be much harder in N and almost, nay, impossibe in Z.

[Anonymous]

Make a scale drawing of your space and mess around with trying to fit various track layouts into it. Eventually you'll come to a decision as to what scale. Maybe you can try looking at at published track plans, both in magazines and on the web, to get a feel on what will "fit" in you space.

[Anonymous]

Make a scale drawing of your space and mess around with trying to fit various track layouts into it. Eventually you'll come to a decision as to what scale. Maybe you can try looking at at published track plans, both in magazines and on the web, to get a feel on what will "fit" in you space.

[Anonymous]

If you are not totally set on HO or N, think about Z - it will give you the closest rendition of your 10 miles. Your 15 feet is more than a half mile in Z (0.625 mi to be exact), and that much more room for your spurs, processing, and distribution areas. And more rolling stock as well.