richhotrain Rob, that Scenic Express ballast looks great on your layout. Which color is it?
Rob, that Scenic Express ballast looks great on your layout. Which color is it?
The closer track is "Blended Ballast," while the other is "Dark Gray Limestone."
EDIT - I just checked Scenic Express, since I know they've change the names of the ballast products on me before, and now the latter product is called "Dark Gray Ballast," although the stock number is the same. You may find either of these on a hobby store shelf or e-retailer with "limestone" or "ballast" in the name, but they're the same colors.
Rob Spangler
I chose WS medium for ballast and am happy with it. It was my selection because I was going to use driveway gravel in other places and it had to be smaller than ballast.
For me it was a simple process of elimination.
Bob
Don't Ever Give Up
Derek and Rob; both of your selections on size and color look great to me. I think the fine size was the correct choice for my layout. Thanks for all the comments.
-Bob
Life is what happens while you are making other plans!
Rich
Alton Junction
You could also skip the Woodland Scenics brand and use a real rock product.
This track uses Scenic Express #40 grade ballast, which looks just right to me in HO. I much prefer the working qualities of it to Woodland Scenics brand, and the cost is usually cheaper, at least on the Scenic Express site (last time I looked the WS cost $1 more per 32 oz container). See http://www.sceneryexpress.com/products.asp?dept=1107&pagenumber=2&sort_on=&sort_by= .
To the OP, Bob, as you can see there are a bunch of opinions on this. I would go with what looks good to your eye. I experimented with different sizes and materials. I settled on mixing grey and black Woodland Sceneics Fine. This is with code 100 rail. As a side note, ties and rail are painted with Floquil paint markers.
Your mileage may vary, good luck, Derek
To be prototypical or scaled down to HO scale would not fine sand be close to the actual size of ballast on an HO layout? Much like wire fence in scale would be as thin as a spider web to be in scale, although you may not be able to see it - - - BUT it would be prototypical.
I use Woodland Scenics Medium ballast as well on my HO scale double main line.
But I have also used Woodland Scenics Fine ballast in the yards and sidings, and that seems quite suitable for HO scale.
I use the Woodlands Scenics Medium ballast .... only because it looks right to me. If I look closely at the ballast, there's about three stones between each tie, which is what I'm seeing on a local line - about three to four stones.
That being said, I'm also using Atlas code 100, which has slightly smaller spaces between the ties than code 83 would. The medium ballast has a variation in stone size, much like the proto-type, but the fine ballast is mostly all the same size .... small !
I'm sure a lot has to do with what the proto-type uses as well as that varies for every part of the country.
Mark.
¡ uʍop ǝpısdn sı ǝɹnʇɐuƃıs ʎɯ 'dlǝɥ
You could mix both the fine and medium varieties and have something close to scale for most N. American railways. Personally, I use beach sand which is rather fine. I found the Walthers walnut shell stuff for HO grossly oversized.
-Crandell
Rrebell,
Good point. I guess I should have been more specific. The pieces of ballast I measured varied in size significantly, with the largest being about what WS medium looked like in size but not in shape (as has been mentioned - scale ballast is kind of round). Naturally, I noticed there were many pieces of the UP variety that were much smaller than the size I thought would be a good starting point to use as a reference. I apologize if I misrepresented the facts. And with respect to the facts, this UP line was originally built by the Southern Pacific, not long after the SP arrived here in Klamath Falls in 1909. The origin of some of this rock is anybody's guess.
Wilton.
oregon shay Like Batman, I sought out the real thing, and walked over to the local UPRR main line with my ruler. WS medium is a scale match. Trying to match the color is another matter - UP's dark red/gray would be too dark in my train room. Wilton.
Like Batman, I sought out the real thing, and walked over to the local UPRR main line with my ruler. WS medium is a scale match. Trying to match the color is another matter - UP's dark red/gray would be too dark in my train room.
This discussion reminds me of a point retired Model Railroader staffer Jim Kelly has made in his N scale column recently - that there are times when "exactly to scale" just looks wrong to our eyes (and although Jim did not mention it, what can look right to the eye can look very wrong when photographed because it is not exactly to scale).
Most mainline ballast I have seen fits neatly and flatly into the palm of my hand, although years ago the Milwaukee Road used a white gravel that was smaller than that. When I see Woodland Scenics medium ballast near the hand of an HO scale figure, it looks absurdly oversized and the HO scale hand could not possibly close a fist around it. When it is used to carefully ballast some track, it looks OK to my eye. But if stray pieces end up on top of the ties, or worse yet stuck to the side web of the rail, then suddenly it looks very oversized again. And rather too round in shape, like grapefruit.
When looking at photographed layouts in the magazines I can always tell when they used WS's medium size.
I have been using Arizona Rock & Mineral which is real rock, and is not rounded either. It is also a joy to apply and bond. But even it might be oversized unless sifted.
I have also used a line of ballast marked as for Z scale and to me it looks very close to right size for HO, but may violate Jim Kelly's dictum that scale size might just not look "right." When doing a track clinic this summer for an N scale convention I used that Z scale ballast and it looked good. If I was in N I would use that ballast marked for Z. And get new glasses.
I realize this ramble resolves nothing but I think I do conclude if you use WS's medium size ballast in HO, that in my opinion that ups the ante for laying it perfectly and to not have pieces sitting on top of ties or clinging to the sides of rails because those are giveaways that the ballast is a bit large.
The clumping type of kitty litter we get is, again, a bit too rounded in shape to look like the ballast I see when I am trackside - a bit too much like a softball or tennis ball. But perhaps LION's method of sifting resolves that.
Dave Nelson
Heartland Division CB&QYikes! I hope cats do not go in the train room.
LION uses cat litter. Wanna make somethin of it?
Sift it through a window screen him does, the cats get the big pieces back and cannot even tell the difference. (I can--- litter is easier to clean with the fines gone)
LION does not glue ballast. Gravity is prototypical enough for me.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
eagle1030 I've always been partial to kitty litter; Nice and small, and cheap!
I've always been partial to kitty litter; Nice and small, and cheap!
Yikes! I hope cats do not go in the train room.
GARRY
HEARTLAND DIVISION, CB&Q RR
EVERYWHERE LOST; WE HUSTLE OUR CABOOSE FOR YOU
I actually measured a sampling along the CPR line and found it to be about 2" to 3" on average.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
If you want scale, then small ballast is to scale (just a tad big). If you want it to look like ballast to most peoples eyes, then medium, the reason being is things lose detail to the average eyeball as an object gets smaller. You run into this constantly and you just need to know which type of landscape you want, hyperreal to fantasy or anything in between. I personally chose a step or two above middle ground. Hyperreal is the best for realistic photography.
I know this may be a basic model question and I have been modeling for over 50 years, but this just keeps coming up in my mind. I have used WS Medium ballast in the past but this time I went with the fine grade as the medium (and also large size) seem too big for HO scale. Today I measured them with my vernier calipers and the small/fine size is about .015 - .03" in diameter, which to me scales at about 1.5-3". The medium ballast measured about .04-.06" which would be close to 5" actual; too large to me? Any thoughts on this; I am just wondering what others use and what they think of the size of ballast?
PS: Just did a search for 'Ballast Size' and Wikipedia shows typical size is 28-50mm or about 1-2". Using .011" for 1" in HO, that equates to .011" - .022"; about in line with the fine ballast.