V8Vega:
Sorry, but I don't understand your last comment. You don't HAVE to be so serious, no matter what scale you choose. But you can be serious if you wish. It's a HOBBY, for cryin' out loud!
Tom
I model in S scale and am itrigued with possibilities one could acheive with Proto 48 if I retained my current branchline theme with a minimal number of turnouts, rolling stock and motive power it would be achieveable during my lifetime, or I could really go radical and convert to Proto 64!
Dave
This has been mentioned by one poster already. What do you want to achieve in the end? Do you want high scale, accurate look, operations and feel for real railroading or a toy layout in that space to just watch trains go around and round.
Only you can answer that question, not us. If you are after realism to any real degree with high scale locos and rolling stock and real operations, all within the small space you quoted. You must go with a smaller scale than O. You will save money and have more enjoyment in you MR experience. If, however, you are just comming in and are more interested in just running trains for a few occasional visitors who are not MRs and you are not planning on devoting a lot of effort to high end detailing, then three rail O is fine. 12X16 is a very small O scale layout. However, with hairpin turns, a load of switches and crossovers you can load an O layout up with rail that no HO railroader would ever consider.
You really need to visit a good O scale layout and a good HO layout and maybe even an N scale layout to see what you might be in for.
If you are lucky enough to find a good high scale O layout, you will be rather stunned by its size.
Richard
If I can't fix it, I can fix it so it can't be fixed
In the past several years, MR has featured several C&O-themed layouts in the magazine or in some of the specialty publications (Planning; Great Model RR's). In particular, the O Gauge EuDaly layout comes to mind, as well as the HO layout built by a fellow named Zugelter. I believe there have been others as well. Can some member help out here by citing the publications, dates, etc. to help our guy find these articles? I'm sure the info would be helpful.
I really appeciate all the advice and thoghts on my post. After a lot of thought, and taking in all the advice as well as researching layouts and the space available, I have decided I will go HO. I think the final push was a visit to the B&O museum in Baltimore this week. They have converted an old passenger car into a model train layout. It is an HO scale layout and provides a flavor of the B&O, with the various landscapes from Camden station in Baltimore to the Ohio in Wheeling. I am not sure which way I will go with my layout in either something freelance like the B&O model at the museum with a flavor of the C&O from Newport News to Huntington or more of a prototype of the Hinton to Clifton Forge portion of the railroad. Either route, I plan on late era steam and I think I can fit something that will be about 30-35' end to end. I love the level of detail in that model and think I can only acheive that in HO scale.
Thanks for all the input.
Walt
richhotrain My guess is that he may be considering the MTH version which is available in the Premier Line O Scale series. That is a 1:48 scale locomotive that operates on O-72 curves. MTH produces O-72 track in 3-rail O-gauge, and that O-72 track is going to require a 6' diameter to complete a half circle. Rich
My guess is that he may be considering the MTH version which is available in the Premier Line O Scale series. That is a 1:48 scale locomotive that operates on O-72 curves. MTH produces O-72 track in 3-rail O-gauge, and that O-72 track is going to require a 6' diameter to complete a half circle.
Rich
Some quick google-fu, and I found a Rivarossi Allegheny in HO, looks like the minimum operating radius is 22" -- or, just shy of a 4' diameter return loop (although, it'll probably work better if your minimums are 24" / 4' diameter return loop).
-Dan
Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site
rtraincollector dstarr HO is the most popular gauge/scale right now. That means more and different models are in production, For instance, your 2-6-6-6 triplex is probably in production in HO. It may not be in production in O. In round numbers, HO is half the size of O. For instance HO trains (well perhaps not a 2-6-6-6) can make it around 18 inch radius curves. O guage needs 30 inches. Which means the benchwork to support a 180 degree turn (complete loop) has to be 36 inches wide in HO, it must be 60 inches wide for O. HO locomotives and rolling stock are less expensive than O gauge. If you have lots of space, and like the bulk and heft of the larger O models, go for it. If you have space and money constraints like most of us, HO is very appealing. HO is big enough for scratch building and kit bashing even for those of us with aging eyesight. From your question, I would assume you are just coming into the hobby. Have you found Model Railroader magazine ? For that matter ordinary public libraries often have decent books on model railroading. You need to understand what your talking about befor shooting off.
dstarr HO is the most popular gauge/scale right now. That means more and different models are in production, For instance, your 2-6-6-6 triplex is probably in production in HO. It may not be in production in O. In round numbers, HO is half the size of O. For instance HO trains (well perhaps not a 2-6-6-6) can make it around 18 inch radius curves. O guage needs 30 inches. Which means the benchwork to support a 180 degree turn (complete loop) has to be 36 inches wide in HO, it must be 60 inches wide for O. HO locomotives and rolling stock are less expensive than O gauge. If you have lots of space, and like the bulk and heft of the larger O models, go for it. If you have space and money constraints like most of us, HO is very appealing. HO is big enough for scratch building and kit bashing even for those of us with aging eyesight. From your question, I would assume you are just coming into the hobby. Have you found Model Railroader magazine ? For that matter ordinary public libraries often have decent books on model railroading.
HO is the most popular gauge/scale right now. That means more and different models are in production, For instance, your 2-6-6-6 triplex is probably in production in HO. It may not be in production in O.
In round numbers, HO is half the size of O. For instance HO trains (well perhaps not a 2-6-6-6) can make it around 18 inch radius curves. O guage needs 30 inches. Which means the benchwork to support a 180 degree turn (complete loop) has to be 36 inches wide in HO, it must be 60 inches wide for O. HO locomotives and rolling stock are less expensive than O gauge.
If you have lots of space, and like the bulk and heft of the larger O models, go for it. If you have space and money constraints like most of us, HO is very appealing. HO is big enough for scratch building and kit bashing even for those of us with aging eyesight.
From your question, I would assume you are just coming into the hobby. Have you found Model Railroader magazine ? For that matter ordinary public libraries often have decent books on model railroading.
You need to understand what your talking about befor shooting off.
Dave's reply to the OP seems pretty civil to me, hardly a case of "shooting off" at the mouth.
Anyhow, this thread seems a bit confused, but that is understandable when the issue of scale versus gauge comes up for discussion.
The OP says that he is looking to build a C&O model set with an Allegheny 2-6-6-6 steam locomotive in either O scale or HO scale. My guess is that he may be considering the MTH version which is available in the Premier Line O Scale series. That is a 1:48 scale locomotive that operates on O-72 curves. MTH produces O-72 track in 3-rail O-gauge, and that O-72 track is going to require a 6' diameter to complete a half circle.
Alton Junction
rtraincollector You need to understand what your talking about befor shooting off. I can get more loops on a 4x8 with O than you can with HO I could even thou would be tight and would have to be smaller engines run O-27, O-31, & O-42 on one board .
O-27, O-31., O-42 and O-72 are O gauge 3-rail curve designations, not "O Scale" curves. (True "O Scale" is 1:48, that is 1/4" = 1'-0'' in the USA but usually made to run on 5' gauge 2-rail track, British O scale is a little larger (1:43) so the same track represents 4' 8-1/2} The cars and locomotives made to run on those curves are usually undersize and often not not to scale poprortions, and with visible detail compromises, although it is possible for some small prototypes to be in scale and run on curves that sharp. The equipment run on those curves is usually railroad toys, not railroad models. True "O scale". whether 2-rail or 3-rail, takes a lot of space. More than twice the space of HO to do it right.
This is not meant to put toy trains down. They can be operated just as realisticly as scale trains. Some of the layouts have some very realistic scenery despite the sharp curves and 3-rail track. Most O toy layouts are not realistic in appearence or operation, but they are a lot of fun.
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.
How do nyou fiqure that, I can get a critter to go round 9" curves.
You need to understand what your talking about befor shooting off. I can get more loops on a 4x8 with O than you can with HO I could even thou would be tight and would have to be smaller engines run O-27, O-31, & O-42 on one board .
Also if you like strainimg your eyes repairing HO go for it I don't
Life's hard, even harder if your stupid John Wayne
http://rtssite.shutterfly.com/
BRAKIE NeO6874 BRAKIE I agree that 2-6-6-6 will require large curves probably 72" to look good. ... and if you can get "good looking" 72" curves in O scale... just think of the awesome that'd bring you in HO... I would love to see a 72" HO curve since the largest HO curve I ever seen was 40" curves on a home layout.
NeO6874 BRAKIE I agree that 2-6-6-6 will require large curves probably 72" to look good. ... and if you can get "good looking" 72" curves in O scale... just think of the awesome that'd bring you in HO...
BRAKIE I agree that 2-6-6-6 will require large curves probably 72" to look good.
I agree that 2-6-6-6 will require large curves probably 72" to look good.
... and if you can get "good looking" 72" curves in O scale... just think of the awesome that'd bring you in HO...
I would love to see a 72" HO curve since the largest HO curve I ever seen was 40" curves on a home layout.
One of my plans, I had 48" curves, but that kinda turned the whole layout into curved track. Although, assuming xtrkcad is right, one of the curves following the jog in the room's wall is something like 60 or 66"
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
V8Vega This same question has come up on O gauge forums and there many people say they were in HO and switched to O, they complain of in HO little tiny wheel flanges and constant derailments. There is nothing scale about a derailment every few scale miles. Engines don't weigh enough to pick up electricity as good and stops for no apparent reason or jerkey operation. Droopy couplers requiring constant height adjustment. Huge radus required again because of little tiny wheel flanges in a attempt to keep it on the track. This big radus really limits what you can do in your given space unles you have a really large space. In HO constantly having to clean the track again because of not enough weight to pick up electricity reliably. And having to clean rolling stock wheels.
This same question has come up on O gauge forums and there many people say they were in HO and switched to O, they complain of in HO little tiny wheel flanges and constant derailments. There is nothing scale about a derailment every few scale miles. Engines don't weigh enough to pick up electricity as good and stops for no apparent reason or jerkey operation.
Droopy couplers requiring constant height adjustment.
Huge radus required again because of little tiny wheel flanges in a attempt to keep it on the track. This big radus really limits what you can do in your given space unles you have a really large space.
In HO constantly having to clean the track again because of not enough weight to pick up electricity reliably. And having to clean rolling stock wheels.
HO wheels do not cause derailments. What does cause derailments is out of gauge wheelsets, rolling stock that is under weight, bad track work, and other problems that can be fixed by initial inspections, and regular maintance. Wheelsets can be checked and adjusted, weight can be added, bad track work can be avoided in the first place. I doubt that O gauge doesn't have those same problems.
HO scale engines usually have enough weight, and you can always add more weight if needed. Cleaning your track properly is important if you want good electrical reliability for a while. The engines like everything else does need maintance now and then, like cleaning the wheels. However, you do not need to constantly clean everything.
Droopy couplers can be fixed by adding washers, or styrene shims. Again, some maintance is required. I remember there is an article on how you should get on an annual schedule of servicing and cleaning cars for good performance.
There is a saying, "take care of your equipment, and your equipment will take car of you". Everything mechanical needs some maintance, from your car to your tools. I am positive O gauge requires some maintance to run smoothly.
Are you suggesting that 18" radius curves in HO scale are huge? Have you seen a six axle locomotive go around 18" curves? 18" looks somewhat weird with large locomotives, especailly if the OP wants to run large steam engines. I am curious, what is the minimum radius of a large O gauge engine? If you could even match the 18", it would look even worse than HO scale. Also, O gauge tracks are twice the width of HO scale tracks, and O gauge rolling stock is twice as long. Not to mention buildings and details take up more space too on an O gauge layout. HO fits in smaller spaces.
Consider the Hinton area in HO. And if you're not a member of the C&O Historical Society, you really need to join.
I grew up in Virgina with parents from West Virginia. My interest would definately lay in that part of the C&O.
When you said you wanted a "set", that suggested "layout" to me. For your 12'x16' space, the design that seems most appropriate is an around-the-walls arrangement with operation from an open central space. It would be possible to do this in O scale, but HO would provide proportionally gentler curves, longer trains befitting this particular loco, and a mainline run that would appear longer due to the smaller scale. That space would allow you to feature the C&O's double track mainline where the Alleghenies operated. A branch or switching area could intrude into the center of the room, but your 2-6-6-6 probably wouldn't go there.
Have you thought about a real or imagined location to model? The C&O Alleghenies operated in their namesake mountains of Virginia and West Virginia; but they also operated across the flatlands of Ohio to the Lake Erie port of Toledo, so you have some options in terms of scenery.
So many problems, so little time. If I experienced all the difficulties mentioned for HO scale, I might switch too. However my gleamed track requires almost no cleaning. My consists will run of hours, unless I screw up a turnout move, and my locos don't stall. I must be doing something wrong.
I would rather have 2 rail O Scale but,even a small switching layout would require about 18'..That's 8 feet more then my current HO switching layout.
So,depending on what you want out of O Scale.
The others had some good information, but forgot to say hello.
Hello. I am a LION and I build subway trains, so no steamy engines in my world.
What may not have been noticed by the others is that you asked about building an engine, while others were talking of building a layout. Were I to build an engine, and money were no object, I would surely go with the O scale. It is easier to see and looks great on the mantle piece. (You do have a mantle piece, I presume!)
If I wanted to RUN that engine on a layout, then you have other considerations to consider.
In any event, enjoy your locomotive. Now see if you can build it in a bottle, just to be different.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
Oh my! I have so often wished I could go full blown into 2 rail scale 'O' as I enjoyed when involved with the Reading Society of Model Engineers in the early and mid 1980's.
I'm into HO, but 'O' would definitely be the preference.
I still tinker...a little, in 2 rail O. But cost and space keep me from totally diving in.
Mark H
Modeling in HO...Reading and Conrail together in an alternate history.
There probably are some very good practical reasons to help determine a choice of scale. Ultimately it comes down to what tickles your fancy. What you relate to, what makes you want to model in one scale over another. Practical reasons for choosing a particular scale are undeniably important, but so is the difficult to define, feel good factor.
I model in HO & for all the reasons mentioned earlier here. But also HO was a step up in size from an early fascination with N way back in the late 1960's. I model a South Eastern RR where there is not a lot of support from manufactures, but enough. But if I didn’t enjoy kit bashing there would be big gaps in my loco roster.
Some years back there was perhaps what could be described as a fascination with O because this scale was seen as a scale that lent itself to the very real possibilities for scratch building, super detailing and the modeling of back woods narrow gauge. But any choice of scale is dependent on what a modelers expectations are, what he wants to model - there is surely a place for all scales depending on what you have defined as your modeling needs.
Ultimately, the choice of scale is entirely yours based on what gets your enthusiasm up & running. After a while of listening to good, but often subjective advice, you will just feel what will be best for you.
Dusty.
challenger3980 ... By Volume a SCALE size version is 8 times the size of an HO version not 6, 2x2x2=8, 2 x as long, 2x as wide, 2x as tall, not 2+2+2=6 ... Doug
...
By Volume a SCALE size version is 8 times the size of an HO version not 6, 2x2x2=8, 2 x as long, 2x as wide, 2x as tall, not 2+2+2=6
Doug
Actually, O scale is not twice the size of of HO. In the U.S. O scale is 1:48 not 1:43.5 as in England.
87/48 is 1.8125, cubed for volume, this is 5.9543 (to 4 decimal places). Rounded for convience we have O scale 6 times the size of HO in the U.S.
Paul
You asked about building a model. Just my opinion, if that's your goal, O will provide much larger parts and materials to handle and perhaps slightly better tolerences for hand work. And you'll be able to admire it. However HO will have more parts readily available.
I have been in HO to N and back to HO. If I had the space I would go O because I'm more interested in a few detailed models and scene rather than long trains. But that's just my personal opinion and everyone here will have a different one.
As this thread has progressed, the info has gradually been getting better. But the main thread, "it all depends", is still true. In any scale, the Allegheny is a big engine. If this is a mantelpiece display, your choice will be determined by availability, budget, and the overall appearance you're looking for. If you want to build an operating model railroad representing the late steam era C&O railroad, you'll have to make a few decisions. First, you'll need space because the Allegheny requires broad curves to operate well, and to look good when it's operating. Truly accurate C&O cabooses are readily available from Atlas and Walthers in HO scale. The Allegheny engine is available at a fairly reasonable price in HO scale. Additional HO versions of C&O locomotives, such as the T-1 2-10-4; the H-4, H-5, and H-6 2-6-6-2's; and the USRA 0-8-0 are, or have been, available in recent years from BLI, Bachmann, and Walthers. For the freight car freaks, the only truly accurate representations of C&O's typical Alternate Standard twin offset hopper cars are available in HO from Intermountain, although various versions of the AAR standard cars are available from several other manufacturers and many folks accept them as being close enough. In any scale other than HO, you may find it difficult to find all these other products that would allow you to operate your Allegheny in a proper C&O context, and keep the project affordable.
However, most of us compromise. In fact, we compromise a lot. So it depends where you decide to make your compromises.
Personally, I would go with HO scale. I find that HO scale is the perfect size, it is large enough that you can see the details, and easily rerail everything, plus, it is large enough to work on and usually isn't super delicate. It is also small enough that the majority of people can have a reasonable size layout. HO is the most popular scale, for a reason, and being the most popular scale means that you have a lot more selection for locomotives, rolling stock, track, buildings, etc.
challenger3980 The model railroading Hobby is as much one of BALANCES and COMPROMISES, as it is about trains. I have had people tell me that they could NEVER accept that third rail and oversize couplers and flanges(Guess what, Kadee HO couplers are closer to "S" scale than they are HO). Please, Please, Please, do yourself a favor and ask this same question on the O Gaue Railroading forum (www.ogrr.com) This is a PREDOMINATELY HO and N scales forum, so not surprisingly you got mostly "HO" is the only real choice replies. That would be like going to a Harley Davidson forum and asking which is better, Harley or Honda, what do you think THAT answer would be?? Doug
The model railroading Hobby is as much one of BALANCES and COMPROMISES, as it is about trains. I have had people tell me that they could NEVER accept that third rail and oversize couplers and flanges(Guess what, Kadee HO couplers are closer to "S" scale than they are HO).
Please, Please, Please, do yourself a favor and ask this same question on the O Gaue Railroading forum (www.ogrr.com)
This is a PREDOMINATELY HO and N scales forum, so not surprisingly you got mostly "HO" is the only real choice replies. That would be like going to a Harley Davidson forum and asking which is better, Harley or Honda, what do you think THAT answer would be??
First, Kadee also sells "scale couplers" that are the scale size of a coupler. If you really want realistic couplers, in HO scale there are Sargent (not sure about the spelling) couplers that look like a real coupler and are the correct size for HO scale, model railroader had a article about them within the last year. You can also get magnetic brake hoses that will connect when the cars couple. And are you really trying to compare slighty large couplers to a third rail? Which one would you notice more? The third rail of course, most people really don't notice or care if te couplers are a bit larger. The third rail is almost everywhere you look on an O gauge layout, and is shiny and stands out against brown ties.
Second, I find it ironic how first you tell the OP to go to an O gauge forum, and then all the way at the bottom, you mention how if you go to a forum on HO scale, you will mostly get the answer of HO. However, this forum is for every scale, more O gauge modelers visit here than HO modelers visit a forum specifically about O gauge. I would suggest posting this question on the Classic Toy trains forum, and Garden Railways forum, and then considering all of the answers on each forum.
The 2-6-6-6 Allegheny is readily available in O Gauge and O Scale, Lionel and MTH have both done this locomotive in Scale proportions and semi-scale proportions
You are getting so much MIS-INFORMATION here, that it is mind boggeling.
One poster refered to the 2-6-6-6 as a TRIPLEX, it is not, it is an Articulated (which Triplexes ARE, but the 2-6-6-6 is not a triplex)
Another poster claimed that an HO version would manage an 18" RADIUS, (which is probably true) but that an O version would require a 60" RADIUS (that would only be true in 2 Rail) Semi-scale models are double articulated(Like most HO Models) and will typically run on 031 curves (which isa 15 1/2" RADIUS, 3 rail O measures curves in DIAMETER, not Radius)
Semi-scale models often have EXCELLENT detail, and with ful command and sound are not that much more than an HO version. Scale size models typically have detail at least equal to and often Exceeding that of HO Brass locomotives, and you can actually SEE the details.
Each Scale has it's advantages and Disadvatages, I was involved in HO for 35+ years, and have been involved with O-Gauge for 9 years now, I wouldn't go back to HO on a Dare, been there and VERY well familiar with it, MY preference is for the larger trains, if someone else prefers HO, N or Z that is Great for them, and I wont criticize thier choice.
You need to decide WHAT your goals are, if you want to model long distances between points, or Majestic Mountains, then "N"or "Z" scale may be what you need to consider, ifwant want to go find every thing under the sun all in one place then HO is propably what you will prefer. If you want to model and admire the trains themselves, then O or even Large scale(thats going to be an Outdoor layout with sights set on a 2-6-6-6) might be what you are looking for.
There are a LOT more choices in "O" than you are being led to believe here.
The model railroading Hobby is as much one of BALANCES and COMPROMISES, as it is about trains. I have had people tell me that they could NEVER accept that third rail and oversize couplers and flanges(Guess what, Kadee HO couplers are closer to "S" scale than they are HO), then go on to tell me about how they are modeling a 100 mile sub-division in HO on a 6x12 layout.
Which Balances and Compromises you choose to make/accept are up to you, just please see what "O" has to offer, then make an EDUCATED decision about what YOU would ENJOY the most.
This is a PREDOMINATELY HO and N scales forum, so not surprisingly you got mostly "HO" is the only real choice replies. That would be like going to a Harley Davidson forum and asking which is better, Harley or Honda, what do you think THAT answer would be???
There are choices from mere "TOYS" in "O" to Dead On accurate scale models, there is also the same options in HO, there are still "Entry Level" starter sets in HO, that are poor quality "TOYS" as well.
Which ever decision you make, you will need to know abit about what you are buying before you buy.
I have been Enjoying model and real trains for almost 50 years now, I have had a small sampling of "N" a large collection of HO(still have a lot of it) I had some American Flyer "S" scale (which many consider the "Ideal scale) when I was younger, I now collect "O" and still have a bit of "Large Scale", I have Enjoyed ALL of them.
May your flanges always stay BETWEEN the rails
Thanks all for the great comments and suggestions. I am going into this as an endevour to launch a hobby I have always wanted to do. I recently moved into a new home that has a decent size rec room and I planning to building a layout on roughly a 12'x 16' section of it. Budget is an issue but O scale neccessarily won't break the bank for me. I think the steam era of railroading is one of my favorite parts of history and have always loved the C & O railroad and its history.