O-Gauge v HO and others

[Anonymous]

... being a novice, i was given about forty pieces of 3-rail O-gauge track. Obviously, that pique my interest into setting up a layout. So far, i've been looking at O-gauge accessories, etc., yet i'm actually seeing more HO or N[?] layouts and accessories. Before i start sinking cash into an O-Gauge set up, would a novice like myself benefit more from another scale? The track that was given to me can still be used, but the smaller seems lets troublesome.... your thoughts

Mac

[Jetrock]

O scale is a fairly large scale and requires quite a bit of space. It is also generally much rarer and more expensive than HO.

The 3-rail track is the kind used for "toy-train" O gauge sets--tinplate, toy-train type stuff rather than the more realistic "model railroad" equipment. If what you want is to create a toy layout that looks toylike (which is a fine endeavor, and lots of peple do it) then 3-rail O is just fine.

HO can also be toylike--but is more commonly used for a more representational "model railroad" style setup. It can be a lot cheaper, but requires a little more labor--but nothing a beginner would have too much trouble with.

[IRONROOSTER]

Since you are unsure about scale etc try to go to a trainshow where they have several layouts setup. This will help you pick a scale. Another thing to consider is what you want to do. Some people like building models best, for them larger scales S or O are a good choice. Some like running long trains so N is a good choice. Some people like having lots of products to chose from which leads them to HO.
You may even want to try 2 or 3 scales to see which one you like. I started in HO, changed to O and then to S.
Enjoy
Paul

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the info Paul and Jetrock. I'm definitely putting the O-gauge on the backburner for [perhaps] a later project. Like you mentioned, I do believe an HO will be tedious, yet, it can be fun. How 'bout the surface cover? Is an inch or a two-inch foam cover an surface? I know a thicker foam surface will allow for creeks beds and shallow canyons. Before i get too far ahead, i will need to know what type of glue, adhesive, etc., for keeping a foam cover stable.

[Jetrock]

Tedious? I wouldn't say that--for a lot of model railroaders, myself included, the planning and construction of a layout is where most of the fun is.

"Surface cover"? There are several ways to provide scenery for your layout--foam is comparatively recent.

One traditional approach is called the "cookie-cutter" approach, where the plywood base of the layout is cut to approximately match where the track will run. This is mounted on top of a grid of lumber that supports the "cookie-cutter" of plywood, and scenic material (which can be plaster hardshell, foam, glueshell or other type of scenery) is placed between these gaps. Using this method, you can have scenery that dips far below or high above the level of the track, and changing the elevation of the track itself (changes in grade) is fairly easy to accomplish.

A more recent method is to use foam boards--several inches of foam board below the level of the track, cut away to represent that which dips below track/ballast/roadbed level, and piled up above track level to represent hills, mountains, etcetera.

There is a type of glue called "Liquid Nails for Projects", available at hardware stores, that is good for gluing foam together.

[Anonymous]

... valuable info i will consider, thanks Jetrock.

[ndbprr]

I have a couple of general comments to consider:
1. Ask yourself how old you are and how good is your vision? I am now 59 and need magnification to do anything in HO. It would also be impossible for me to replicate what I have purchased over the years in another scale so while it doesn't bother me much at this point I really am locked into HO.
2. What is your goal? Do you want to fling a multitrack high density operation accross a landscape or one one train from start to finish? The smaller the scale the easier it is to do the first.
3. How much are you willing to invest? Many railroaders are very happy buying G gauge engines (roughly 1 1/2 tiomes the size of O gauge) and making new superstructures and modifying them to their hearts content. Basically the bigger the scale the higher the cost. So if space isn't a consideration price will be. the bigger the scale the more it lends itself to a branchline set up where you have fewer cars, engines, trains, etc.
4. If all you want to do is watch them go round and round do whichever scale you like the best. When I was a kid I had six levels of Lionel loops with trains and noise everywhere. now that I am into scle modeling there is still a portion of me that misses that side of the hobby.

[iandrewmartin]

Mac and all;

Just my two cents worth;

The scale you choose whould be based on what you want to do with the space you have. You can have some really great layouts in any scale, but I think that for switching layouts, nothing beats O scale.

You tend to get into the layout space, and really become a part of the operation. Now I also run HO for the children, and we love to switch there also, but most of this stuff is out of the box, weathered and not super detailed. So it is horses for courses.

As for the comment that cost goes up as scale goes up - this is a fallacy. You can get a good G scale GP-9 for not much more than an HO scale P2k loco now. So don't be bamboozled into beliveing that you have to spend lost of money on the larger scales. Matter of fact - larger scales end up costing you less money becasue a train of 8 O scale cars looks like way more train than on of the same size in HO. And you can do it on the cheap. E-Bay is my preferred method of shopping for O scale. Same is true of HO too I suppose.

Just keep in mind what you'd l;ike to achieve, and remember that big country, grand vistas and long runs in N scale, short trains, switching etc in larger scales. FInd your place on the sliding scale and there you are.

Hope this helps.
Andrew Martin
CEO - Hunter Valley Lines

List Owner/Moderator:
---------------------
Australian Railway Operations Sig - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aus_rail_ops/
Austin Armor Builders Society - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/austinarmorbuilders/

Co Moderator
------------
Small Exhibition Model Railroad Layouts - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Smallex/

And all around nice guy...

[ndbprr]

Wait a minute. Cost does go up with scale for ready to run. You can't take one example and apply it accross the spectrum. Are you saying Atlas rolling stock in O gauge (which is beautiful) costs the same as ready to run in HO and O gauge turnouts and crossings cost the same? if you bought identical equipment in HO and O the cost of scale O is going to be higher in my opinion.

[iandrewmartin]

You wrote: "Are you saying Atlas rolling stock in O gauge (which is beautiful) costs the same as ready to run in HO and O gauge turnouts and crossings cost the same..."

What I am saying is that if you look at quality levels, IE Kadee cars in HO (say a 2 bay covered hopper) which costs $40 and you look at the same Atlas car you'll only be paying around $54 on the street for the same car.

Dollar for dollar the O gauge car is better value. As for track a Peco code 83 now costs $26 per turnout. I make my own so I don't have a reasonable estimate. My point overall is that you can get away with 10 O gauge cars at first to fill up your space versus 20 on HO. Doing the math and taking into consideration that in the same space you only fit in 1/2 as much O scale - you'll be more cost effective in larger scales - if - you want to have a small foot print layout for example.

Depends on what you want. But O is not that much more expensive than high quality HO..

[8D]