N Scale?

[Razorclaw]

What are the pros and cons? Thanks, Stephen

[Anonymous]

Since I model HO and my wife models N, I can only say for myself what the "pros & cons" may be.

The pros to HO is tremendous variety in all phases of the hobby, (though N is catching up fast)

The pros to N is that you can fit a lot of realistic railroading in a lot less space.

There are not cons to any type of model railroading that I can think of, except maybe a lighter wallet.

[Anonymous]

Because I live in an apartment I'm currently modeling "N". At first for me it was a compromise becasue of my space restrictions. I was worried because my old layout, 30 years ago, was HO and not reliable at all. I thought how will this ever stay on the tracks. Well I'm using Kato Unitrack and it is rock steady. De Railments are not an issue at all. I've learned to really like the size. I'm able to build a more realistic layout. The con's are most hobby shops don't stock alot of "N" and there is more variety at better prices in HO. But once you find out where to shop, You can find just about anything in "N" If your main interest is Steam though, I couldn't reccomend "N" Good runnig steamers are harder to find. Dave

[retsignalmtr]

when i was modeling in ho i couldn't get a satisfying layout due to space limitations. since switching to n i am building a one track modular layout around the walls of my family room. it is going to have about 75 ft of mainline track. it is a very reliable scale now and there is a lot of equipment and accessories available. i kept my ho equipment to run at my clubs ho layout.

[ATSFCLIFF]

Space limitations is one of the reasons.
Ability to run long trains without tail chasing.
Do very good dramatic scenery in a compact space.
Quality engines and rolling stock from Kato & Atlas, tracks from Peco or Micro-engineering makes it as good as any scale. Every scale has it's pros & cons, I choose N scale to suit my space.

[Bikerdad]

One of the cons not mentioned is the relative lack of detail compared to the larger scales, and the difficulty some folks encounter working with the smaller parts. The other con, and for some this is a huge one, other folks it doesn't matter, is that there's very little available in N scale for the 19th century modeller. One other challenge lies in the DCC arena. Decoder installation is more of a challenge, again, physical space limitations.

Mind you, I'm an N scaler, and I think the pros outweigh the cons, but you should know all of them.

[IRONROOSTER]

Pros: Longer trains.
Higher scenery to train ratio for better setting.
Smaller size means more railroad for a given space.
Cons: More electrical pickup problems - quality components a must.
Requires more careful trackwork - not that you want to be sloppy in any scale,
but the smaller you get the less tolerance there is.
Smaller size is harder to see and work with.
As always comes down to what do want to do and which scale does it best for you given your limitations of space, time, etc.
Enjoy
Paul

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Bikerdad

One of the cons not mentioned is the relative lack of detail compared to the larger scales, and the difficulty some folks encounter working with the smaller parts...

But at the same time, the smaller scale means that you don't have to worry about all of the smaller details, especially when viewing distances are 3 ft. or more (such as from behind a rope viewing an N-track layout). So it becomes a trade-off. If you are interested in replicating the small details of an engine, car, or scene, then HO is a better choice. But if you are rather interested in the overall feel of a scene or operation, then N is better, as you don't have to bother with as many smaller details to replicate the "feel" of the engine.

Of course, that doesn't mean that there aren't people like myself who enjoy the challenge of replicating as many small details as possible on an N-scale engine.

---jps

[Anonymous]

jschuknecht, good point about the details. I received the E8/9 I bought from eBay, and when I opened it I thought, "Wow, what a handsome little machine!" So I set it up for a few loops around my poor little EZtrack loop (hopefully in a couple of weeks I'll have a real bench constructed). Looked good (or as good as it could look going around 9" curves). Then I took the picture:

I set the picture as my desktop wallpaper at work, and put the locos (A and B units) away in their boxes until I get a proper layout to run them on. Staring at this picture all day, I thought "That loco really could use some detailing. Real handgrabs instead of the plastic ridges, those class light 'bumps' look awful, and there are missing handgrabs that could be added." I thought this, looked up photos, and started taking inventory of various things to improve or add. Then I got home, took the engine out of the box, and it hit me again just how tiny a lot of those things would be to deal with. Ridiculously small, and I would barely even see the difference when just looking at the thing. So I decided I wouldn't bother with it, at least for now. The only downside would be that the lack of detail may be apparent in any photographs I take.

So, if photography is your thing, the small size and difficulty of superdetailing would be a major con. If you just like operations, or trainwatching, you might find it refreshing that you don't have to worry about every detail in order to have something that looks good when you're using it.

[Anonymous]

My Dad modeled in every scale but Z. N scale was his last layout and was his best. He was able to do wonders with it even at 70 years old. His last layout was the same size (dimension wise) as his previous HO layout. However, because it was in N, it was twice the size of the HO layout. N is an excellent way to go.

[Anonymous]

As previously mentioned, the ability to model in a small space is the biggest plus for N scale as well as longer trains. The quality of N scale today is superb compared to what it was even ten years ago. Atlas and Kato have the best quality. Some of the newer LifeLike is also good. Beware of Bachmann and Model Power.

[csxengineer98]

pro....can put alot of layout in a smaller space...
con...hard on the eyes when you are trying to rerail your trains...
csx engineer

[Wdlgln005]

2004-2005 is the year for some good Nscale steam. I'm talking about the Mogul & Shay from Atlas. Bachman's Connie is great. Athearn seems to be upgrading the MDC connie & 2-6-0. a lot of new steam is coming out by Model Power. I'd like to see the MR review of the LifeLike Berk. If we can get some heavyweight passenger cars, the Nscale Polar Express is here!

There are some gaps in the Nscale roster that HO dosen't have. The limited run business plan may make it more difficult to assemble realsistic freight car fleets. The best way to go DCC is to let Atlas do it, at a price.

[Bikerdad]

Just a point about the MDC/Athearn Mogul and Connie: the only upgrading that Athearn is doing is to reissue the Connie (and likely the Mogul) with operating knuckle couplers. Functionally and visually, they're excellent locomotives in their MDC iterations. The drive shaft coming from the tender to the locomotive is virtually invisible during operation. I'm sure that it would be much more noticeable in a larger scale, not a problem in N.