I think you can have fun with either scale. Some day (don't you just love that concept!) I would love to have a garden scale layout because the opportunity for detailing is just incredible. My first layout (30 years ago) was a HO circle on a plywood sheet because HO was all I could find locally. Right now I have a tiny N scale but it is teaching me a great deal about economy of detail and the value of carefull planning. At this time, it is all I have room for.
HO is really the best blend of both size and detail and has the most to offer in terms of equipment and knowledge. It just takes more room to work with.
However, I know of no law that says you can not have both!
P.S. If anyone knows where to find or how to make an N scale American flag on a flagpole, please let me know. Thanks.
BRAKIE wrote: dale8chevyss wrote:For me, HO is small enough. I look at N and don't believe myself or my viewers should have to have magnifying lenses to see the details. I just prefer HO over N and thats my opinion. What I find odd is I can work on N Scale better then I can HO since I have limited use of my right hand..And thank heavens I can still work on N Scale with my glasses off and I am 60!As far as magnifying lenses..Hey,HO guys been using 'em for years!!!
dale8chevyss wrote:For me, HO is small enough. I look at N and don't believe myself or my viewers should have to have magnifying lenses to see the details. I just prefer HO over N and thats my opinion.
What I find odd is I can work on N Scale better then I can HO since I have limited use of my right hand..And thank heavens I can still work on N Scale with my glasses off and I am 60!
As far as magnifying lenses..Hey,HO guys been using 'em for years!!!
As far as magnifying lenses and Opti-Visors are concerned, I make use of them when I work on O scale and sometimes even G scale.
Ah heck, they are both fine. I went from HO to N due to room requirements, now I model in N but still like HO also, room enough for everybody.
Well I say pro,it is true that most HO layouts are not able to operate 100 car trains,our modular layout CAN.Check out this video; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYnPU52rI this is not our longest train by a long shot! Back in the late 90's (before we started more video.) we ran a 104 car train with very long cars,train reached 75 feet long that didn't straighten out.Layout lenght was sixty feet long.
Ken
Paul3 wrote: pcarrell,I thought I was keeping it friendly.
pcarrell,I thought I was keeping it friendly.
My bad.....sorry! Sometimes this electronic communication has it's shortcommings.
You make some excellent points.
Being tht I was in HO scale for about 15 years before I switched to N in the late 1980's I do understand a little of both sides of the fence (though, admittedly, it's been a while since I've ventured into the land of the giants (HO)).
I wear glasses to see what's in the distance. For close up work, I usually take them off. And I am going to turn 60 in early October.
I've been wearing glasses since the late 1950s. I never had to take them off to read or do closeup work until the mid 1980s.
Irv
Red Horse wrote:HO con: it upsets the N scale folks.N scale con: it upsets the HO scale folks!
HO con: it upsets the N scale folks.
N scale con: it upsets the HO scale folks!
TT scale con: it upsets American model railroaders... Oh, and its is hard to get in this country.
markpierce wrote:If you're undecided, dabble in different scales and decide from hands-on experience before making a "full body" plunge.
If you're undecided, dabble in different scales and decide from hands-on experience before making a "full body" plunge.
To me this is the best advice so far.
Hey, Brakie! Do you feel like me that some readers don't pay attention to what one is saying?
Mark
Mark,Ole buddy-I said One of my past N Scale ISLs was at eye level while seated-not standing.
Many layouts in HO and N are built to eye level instead of the normal "birds eye view" layouts.
I just know you understand eye level while seated.. You have a ground view and not the "bird's eye" view..
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
loathar wrote: bellzbello wrote:I don't get it...Are you starting to "get it" yet?
bellzbello wrote:I don't get it...
Are you starting to "get it" yet?
I got it.
BRAKIE wrote: Mark said:Also, the less I have a "godlike" view of a layout as compared to a sense of being human within the scene, the more I like it.--------------------------------------Ah yes yet another urban legion comes to light.
Mark said:Also, the less I have a "godlike" view of a layout as compared to a sense of being human within the scene, the more I like it.
--------------------------------------
Ah yes yet another urban legion comes to light.
What is your secret for defying natural law? When I look at an N-scale layout, assuming there is a three-dimensional view, I see four times the layout compared to HO scale. In two dimensions, I see twice as much in N as in HO. If my eyes are 1 foot away from a layout, I'm nearly a scale 170 feet from an N-scale model, while in HO I'm 87 feet away. That, my boy, is not an urban legend.
In a perfect world, we could all "model" in 1:1 scale. I have to settle for 1:87. Some people settle for even smaller. While the above paragraph is fact, this last sentence is opinion because some people perceive less as more.
The reason that I took HO scale over N is because of the size of my hands and my failing eyesight, I could barely see the details on an N scale locomotive that I held for the first time and never mind having to work on one with these big paws of mine.
I like all scales of model trains so I'm going to say a lot of time it might be a space issue that brings some of us to enjoy N scale, if we have the luxurey of a lot of room than it is easier to go up in scale.
I give a thumbs up to both, beauty is in the eye of the engineer!!!
For me, it's a matter of what's available out there for the railroad that I prefer to model, which is Rio Grande and Southern Pacific big steam in the 'forties. In HO there are a number of brass Rio Grande models, but in N there is nothing I've seen that I could even 'kit-bash' into a representative model of a Rio Grande steamer (and I'm not talking about the UP-clone Challenger from Horizon, Rio Grande didn't like them and got rid of them as fast as they could). Ergo I'm in HO.
With that said, I remember when my dad retired and decided to go into model railroading. He chose N scale. And I was absolutely AMAZED at the amount of running space he was able to fit into two walls of his shop building. Being the dutiful son, I helped him plan the layout and I remember how much fun we both had with that scale, and how amazed I was that even with my big, long pianist's fingers, how easy it was to work in it. And of course, dad always grinned and said, "In HO you can model about two miles of the Sierra, in N you can model the whole darned mountain range." He wasn't far from the truth, either. So for me, there's no 'versus', really. Except for the fact that if I were modeling Rio Grande in N scale, I'd have to go into the diesel era. Which for me is not an option.
As for 'selection'--I was at my LHS the other day, staring longingly at the new Kato N-scale "Morning Daylight" and wondering, "When in heck is this ever coming out in HO?"
So from my point of view, at least, each scale has its advantages and drawbacks. But dad's still right--with 24x24' in HO, I have a comfortable layout. In N, I could have an EMPIRE!
But that's another story.
Tom
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
BRAKIE wrote: Geared Steam wrote: I'm gona use ho if its still around. And where would HO be going to? Maybe replace with 3/16ths?
Geared Steam wrote: I'm gona use ho if its still around. And where would HO be going to?
I'm gona use ho if its still around.
And where would HO be going to?
Maybe replace with 3/16ths?
Cool! Then I can buy my HO stuff at bargain prices
"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."-Albert Einstein
http://gearedsteam.blogspot.com/
Absolutely. S is everything you want HO to be!!!!
Enjoy
Paul
I am just the opposite..Since I will never have room for a HO layout-except a very small 1x6 foot ISL I realized I had 2 choices go with that tiny 1x6 HO ISL or build a small N Scale layout.For me that was a no brainer..N Scale won that round.Sure I still have both HO clubs and the N Scale club but,I wanted a home layout as well.Nothing like your own layout to build and operate as you please.
As far as N Scale locos as a rule they run as well as their HO counter parts.
One of my past N Scale ISLs was at eye level while seated.
Again if one takes the time to sperate fact from fiction,urban legions and myths from the truth one would see N Scale whole different set of eyes.
That's why N Scale is the number 2 scale..
It is a matter of physics. N scale models are smaller than my individual fingers so I'm not able to work with that scale. Even HO scale, where I'm at, barely qualifies. My extent of compromise stops at HO. I don't want intolerable frustration by changing to a smaller scale. And then there are my eyes.....is that a cricket or an ATSF S-1? And putting both scales under a bit of magnification shows that N scale is less realistic looking. Yes, I could get a lot more into a given space with N, but that's not an option for me. Also, the less I have a "godlike" view of a layout as compared to a sense of being human within the scene, the more I like it.
IRONROOSTER wrote: Randall_Roberts wrote:The argument that there's more selection in HO than in N scale reminds me of the argument that there's more software for the IBM PC than for the Mac. In 1984 that was an issue, as there was no software for the Mac. But a few years later I'd hear that argument and reply... there's 12 word processors for the IBM PC and only 4 four the Mac. How many of them are you going to use?Yes, there is more selection in HO than in N scale. But there is more than adequate selection in N scale today. In recent months I've decided to split the difference and go with TT scale. But that means I have to get all my trains, track, and accessories from Europe. Which is ironic, as the scale was introduced here in the United States.And that opens a whole other can of worms.Best! There is some American TT here http://www.ttscale.com/ and here http://www.goldcoastrailway.com/ and here http://www.btsrr.com/btstt.htmEnjoyPaul
Randall_Roberts wrote:The argument that there's more selection in HO than in N scale reminds me of the argument that there's more software for the IBM PC than for the Mac. In 1984 that was an issue, as there was no software for the Mac. But a few years later I'd hear that argument and reply... there's 12 word processors for the IBM PC and only 4 four the Mac. How many of them are you going to use?Yes, there is more selection in HO than in N scale. But there is more than adequate selection in N scale today. In recent months I've decided to split the difference and go with TT scale. But that means I have to get all my trains, track, and accessories from Europe. Which is ironic, as the scale was introduced here in the United States.And that opens a whole other can of worms.Best!
The argument that there's more selection in HO than in N scale reminds me of the argument that there's more software for the IBM PC than for the Mac. In 1984 that was an issue, as there was no software for the Mac. But a few years later I'd hear that argument and reply... there's 12 word processors for the IBM PC and only 4 four the Mac. How many of them are you going to use?
Yes, there is more selection in HO than in N scale. But there is more than adequate selection in N scale today.
In recent months I've decided to split the difference and go with TT scale. But that means I have to get all my trains, track, and accessories from Europe. Which is ironic, as the scale was introduced here in the United States.
And that opens a whole other can of worms.
Best!
There is some American TT here http://www.ttscale.com/ and here http://www.goldcoastrailway.com/ and here http://www.btsrr.com/btstt.htm
Thanks Paul. I'm familiar with those sites, and know the American sources pretty well. The best is the TTScale.com site, which is Elmer MacKay's. Elmer is only just now getting his business back online after having relocated. As he's a one-man operation it was a lengthy haitus. TT Scale in America today is a cottage industry much like S scale was in the early 1980s. However, in Europe it is about as popular as S scale is in America today. The best selection of TT Scale products I can find online in North America is at Euro Train Hobby.
Unfortunately, with the price of the euro vs. the American dollar he doesn't seem to keep too much in stock these days. He also doesn't carry Mehano. Mehano has a bad name in the U.S. because we only get their low-end stuff. For the European market they make much higher grade products, including locomotives with sound decoders.
bellzbello wrote:Can anybody share the pros and cons of either gauge? How do the smaller trains perform? Thanx.
I recently tinkered with N scale, its enough that I want to make some display layout sometime, but my main scale is HO. I bought some 2nd hand equipment and gavem a workover, and I was impressed this rather toylike Santa Fe F unit crawled like a snail. Quite frankly you can make both scales run like champs, so the decision can't be based on operationality. Its more space and size and can you deal with the smaller size of N scale. Commercial equipment is certainly broader in HO than N scale. N scale can get 4 times the layout in the same space than HO. If I were to start fresh I would have to look at what I want to do model wise. At what I want to do today, HO still wins. But your decision what scale is your decision and how you would like to model.
Paul3 wrote: Dave V.,How big are the pictures on these car cards? How big are the cards? If you're modeling the PRR (like I model the NH), you must have a large collection of boxcar red boxcars or just PRR boxcars. For example, I have been known to buy a set of NH boxcars where the only difference is the number. How does one get around the problem of reading miniscule car numbers when one has a group of cars that look identical that could be headed almost anywhere on the layout? This may be a "non-factor" when it comes to unit trains of coal, but with individual cars, how would that work?
Dave V.,How big are the pictures on these car cards? How big are the cards? If you're modeling the PRR (like I model the NH), you must have a large collection of boxcar red boxcars or just PRR boxcars. For example, I have been known to buy a set of NH boxcars where the only difference is the number. How does one get around the problem of reading miniscule car numbers when one has a group of cars that look identical that could be headed almost anywhere on the layout? This may be a "non-factor" when it comes to unit trains of coal, but with individual cars, how would that work?
I've heard of this being done, but I don't do it myself. I don't have any problem reading my car numbers (and I do have several of the same type, such as the X29, X26c, GLa, H21a, etc.). Not to be sarcastic, but I keep my glasses perscription up to date. It's honestly not a problem. Eevn the weathered ones. On a few of my older X29s, I have wiped the car number clean as was PRR practice when dirty cars were humped.
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
Paul,Actually it isn't as bad as you think.I have no problems reading the numbers with my glasses off..Just like I do HO numbers.
Let's not forget the HO cars-especially the steam era browns and oxide reds look the same.
Not to go "off topic" suffice it to say many modelers still don't fully understand prototype operation that also includes safety and work rules.But,that's another deep study topic.
Paul3 wrote: As for operations, I wasn't talking about performance of the locos (which I know is darn good these days) so much as the performance of the couplers, cars, etc. It's bad enough in HO scale trying to pick the couplers with a bamboo stick or get the magnetics to work right. ... snip ... Trying to uncouple them is a bit of a chore (in my limited experience), and getting them back on the track is even worse.
As for operations, I wasn't talking about performance of the locos (which I know is darn good these days) so much as the performance of the couplers, cars, etc. It's bad enough in HO scale trying to pick the couplers with a bamboo stick or get the magnetics to work right.
... snip ...
Trying to uncouple them is a bit of a chore (in my limited experience), and getting them back on the track is even worse.
You need to get out more. Picks work better on N scale M-T couplers than HO Kadees, in my significant experience with both. A number of N scale layouts where I have operated use car cards and waybills. Works fine, but you do need enough light. Once one is used to the smaller cars, it's about the same effort or a little less to re-rail N scale -- and they don't come off the track any more than does HO, assuming careful trackwork. One can buy 6-packs or 12-packs of cars with different numbers from Intermountain. Even MicroTrains is producing multi-number "runner packs" these days.
For someone who insists he's not trying to pick on N scale, you sure keep at it. We get it -- N scale is not for you. It works for lots of us.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group