In a simple phrase - "space required."
For a given amount of railroad, the space required for a scale O layout (not tinplate) is about four times that required for HO, and about 16 times that required for N.
I had the pleasure of seeing a large O scale layout in California many years ago. An O scale Big Boy came chugging around a large radius curve, and it looked absolutely incredible! But most of us don't have the kind of space needed for something like that in O.
Then we also get into the cost (that Big Boy, way back in the 1980's, cost several thousand dollars), availability of models and all that as well.
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton
Hi there. I have a portable 2 rail O scale in construction, but my main layout is HO. Why not O scale for my main? Here is a list of my reasons:
-I can't stand the appearance of 3 rails
-O scale is expensive. 2 rail equipment is more expensive!
- HO takes less space
-HO has wider road offerings
-HO equipment is better adapted for operations
Simon
snjroy-I can't stand the appearance of 3 rails
I think we are talking about O scale, not O gauge model railroading.
Space is certainly the number 1 reason for the rather low interest in this scale, but most likely followed by the lack of scale locos and cars.
In Europe, things are quite different! 7mm scale has been always strong in the UK, both SG and NG model railroading. In Germany, O scale is experiencing a renaissance since a few years, mainly driven by Lenz (the DCC people). Having said that, HO scale is still the dominant scale.
Happy times!
Ulrich (aka The Tin Man)
"You´re never too old for a happy childhood!"
Unfortunatey new O scale (2-rail) is now very scarse in Americia. This is especially true of locomotives. O is harder to find than even a few years ago, and there is very little selection of types of locomotives and cars. Most O made today is 3-rail O gauge.
http://www.oscalekings.org/
Proto48 which uses the correct track gauge is even harder to find, it is basically a scratchbuilders scale.
https://www.proto48.org/
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.
traindaddy1 I'd really like to know why, in your opinion, there isn't more interest is the larger "O".
How do you know that there isn't? On what, are you basing your statement? Maybe spend some time in the classic trains forum, and ask the members there why they don't show more interest in HO.
My grandson's O scale is in my basement, along side of my HO. Lately, I've been running it more than he has. He's a teen now and has many other interest, and we only have him for a short time each summer.
This is a forum centered around HO. I just don't get your off-the-wall question???
Are you asking why O isn't a main topic on this forum? Or are you asking why members in here model in HO and not O ?
I don't get it.
Mike.
My You Tube
I certainly agree that space is the big impediment.
Coming in second and third:
There's less available in O scale. That's a problem if you are an off-the-shelf type of person, and you want to follow a particular prototype. I don't know about the availability of parts, O compared to HO, because I don't work in O. I do suspect there are more parts available in HO, though.
There are more people working in HO. Which means if you want to have a play-date, there are more people who share your scale. In particular, I am in Free-mo. It is HO scale. There are about 8 people in Northern California active in Free-mo. What do you think it would be in O scale?
Someone could suggest a fourth: cost. But O scale people seem to have fewer pieces of rolling stock. Thus "saving" money.
Because of all of the above, I am happy staying in HO.
All that said, I LOVE O scale. It is grand. It is glorious. Years ago, I bought my one O scale locomotive (and caboose). Brass. 4-8-4. It sits on the mantle. It's never run. But it IS a sight to behold. Which explains its placement.
Ed
mbinsewi This is a forum centered around HO. I just don't get your off-the-wall question??? Are you asking why O isn't a main topic on this forum? Or are you asking why members in here model in HO and not O ? I don't get it. Mike.
It is CENTERED on HO because there are so many more people working in HO. There is nothing keeping other scales out. But it is wise, when someone comes in from a different scale, for that person to self-identify. That's to keep people from assuming they're HO.
Over on the Atlas Rescue Forum, there ARE sub-forums for the three major scales. Not here.
By the way, here's the number of topics on that forum since it started:
HO 4661
O 50
N 183
7j43kIt is CENTERED on HO because there are so many more people working in HO.
Ed,The reason the N Scale count is low is because there is three great N Scale forums. Why hang out on a HO forum?
One of the most beautiful ISLs I ever seen was a O Scale two rail that was 16' x 2'.
That Atlas 2 Rail RS-1 was a master piece with its added details.
Have you compared O Scale 2 rail prices with HO?
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
When I switched away from N scale in the 1990s I looked very hard at 2 rail O scale, and even Proto-48 as options.
.
My experience with the "dream house" layout left me knowing I had made bad choices in this hobby. I was never going to want a large layout that required multiple operators and massive amounts of equipment.
My interest at the time was a layout that would fit in my small duplex with my growing family. I was going to build a switching layout, what is now commonly called an "ISL" on one wall of the bedroom. I needed one locomotive and about 10 freight cars.
Even back then, with Atlas and Intermountain making O scale rolling stock, and Lorrell Joiner promoting the scale, the final decision was made on availablility of equipment and supplies. With HO scale I could have everything with no compromises. There was even so much more available in N scale than in O.
Now that I am going to have a 11 by 22 foot dedicated layout space in my house, I am glad I chose HO. I can do what I want in HO. With O scale there would be a lot of compromises.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
Three reasons............
Space (lack there-of), Cost (consider twice HO), and Availability/selection of components. The latter of course is just the result of the supply demand circle. Less demand, less supply......demand picks up, the suppliers will produce more in quantity and selection.
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
People say they shy away from N scale because they can't handle the details. Fair enough. But the fact is that you don't really need all the fiddling details in N because they can't be seen, especially at 24 inches. It's nice if they're there, but not a disaster if they're missing.
In O scale, if the details are missing, they're noticed. You have to show rivets and door knobs and hatch handles; even eyeballs, belt buckles, and wrist watches on the figures.
That's why I don't do O. I'm sure there are other reasons.
Robert
LINK to SNSR Blog
traindaddy1Before you "send me to the other forums like the Classic Toys etc., I'd really like to know why, in your opinion, there isn't more interest is the larger "O".
Well, you might also ask "Why not more 'S'?". It's smaller than O and larger than HO. Unfortunately, it suffers the same fate as O when it comes to availability.
I grew up on American Flyer and enjoy the size but there just isn't much out there presently that offers what HO does for my particular prototype. And while N would allow for more layout in the same-sized footprint as my HO layout, the choices for modeling steam/early diesel are - again - very limited.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
Even On30, which uses HO gauge track, suffers from the same space, availability, and cost concerns as O standard gauge. It can run tighter radius curves than O standard, but everything else (buildings, vehicles, scenery, etc.) takes the same space
George In Midcoast Maine, 'bout halfway up the Rockland branch
Many thanks for all of your well thought out replies. Appreciate it.
G Paine Even On30, which uses HO gauge track, suffers from the same space, availability, and cost concerns as O standard gauge. It can run tighter radius curves than O standard, but everything else (buildings, vehicles, scenery, etc.) takes the same space
I used to know a man who, because of his old age, switched from HO to O scale because he wanted more details and he wanted to be able to see them. His layout was small. He only had a couple of locomotives and a few freight cars but he had one of the nicest layouts I’ve ever seen.
Lone Wolf and Santa Fe I used to know a man who, because of his old age, switched from HO to O scale because he wanted more details and he wanted to be able to see them. His layout was small. He only had a couple of locomotives and a few freight cars but he had one of the nicest layouts I’ve ever seen.
I agree with this. Wholeheartedly. I love the idea that I may one day build a 1:48 diorama of sorts. About 5 feet by 3 feet. With a fully-detailed Challenger sitting majestically on a turntable. Maybe under a sanding tower. Something. But in the meanwhile, I like the panoramic vistas and wide open spaces of my N scale thing. And not sweating the details.
rrebellOn30 is the only reason there is alot of what there is in O.
Interesting point of view!
However, I don´t think that statement will earn you lots of friends "over there" - in the CTT forum.
SeeYou190I was going to build a switching layout, what is now commonly called an "ISL" on one wall of the bedroom.
By the way, small switching layouts are only referred to with that acronym on this and maybe one other forum. The term is inaccurate in fact, since a good part of the trackage in most small switching layouts (except the industry spurs themselves) would be owned by the railroad, not the industry. And the railroad would do the switching.
The exception is modern industrial parks with their own switcher, but most of the small switching layouts folks are building are intended to operate as a branch or terminal area of a railroad (Class 1, Regional, Short Line, Terminal Railroad, etc).
The ISL acronym is also ambiguous, since it could stand for Industrial Short line, Independent Short/Switching Line, Isolated Short Line, etc., etc.
This is not directed at you at all, Kevin, but once every couple of years I am moved to refute the notion that this acronynm is “common” or widely accepted – or accurate in any way.
Clarity is good, IMHO. And is doesn’t take very long to type "small switching layout" in the interest of accuracy.
Byron
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
cuyamaThe exception is modern industrial parks with their own switcher
The other exception I should have mentioned is the true industrial railroad such as a large cement plant or something like the Coors brewery in Colorado that rosters its own motive power. Although these can also be great subjects for a layout, they are not what most people are building as small switching layouts.
That's a very HO-centric view and demonstrably false.
I know a bunch of O scalers - A couple of shining examples are Gary Schrader and Dave Adams.
Check out O scale west for some more info on the scale and what is being done these days.
For us heavy metal, SP fans, the detail on the latest Key Cab forwards in O scale is almost enough to make you want to switch scales just to run that loco!!!
I think the reasons for less O scale have been pretty well covered in this thread, but it is awesome when you see a well executed O scale layout.
Guy
see stuff at: the Willoughby Line Site
I'm not a fan of tinplate. It's too toy-like for me, no matter the scale. But I do like scale O-scale (two-rail). It's impressive, and I admit I have four 2-rail undec. O-scale locos and a half dozen cars. However, every time I think about finishing them up, I add up the cost of all the O-scale detail parts and think of what I could get in HO instead.
For example, in HO scale if I need a Hancock Air Whistle detail part, it's $1.00 for a pair. In O-scale, it's $5.00...each! A dynamic brake blister for an O-scale GP9 is $50, and so on. Yikes.
Also, the cost of the rolling stock isn't cheap, either. An Atlas NE-6 caboose in 2-rail O was $75. At the same time in HO, it was $27.
How about track? Atlas O Code 148 flex track is $18.25 for 40", a #5 switch is $92, and a #7.5 is $97. In HO, the Code 83 flex is $6.95 for 36", #6 switches are $22 to $24, and #8's are $23.
It seems just about everything in O-scale is roughly triple the price of the same thing in HO-scale. And that's if you can actually find the stuff, and have room to set it up.
So, to answer the question, the reason why O-scale isn't more popular is due to various factors: 1). Price, 2). Availability, 3). Space. Other than that, it's a great scale.
Tinplate Toddler rrebell On30 is the only reason there is alot of what there is in O. Interesting point of view! However, I don´t think that statement will earn you lots of friends "over there" - in the CTT forum.
rrebell On30 is the only reason there is alot of what there is in O.
Byron's comment about the rrebell statement notwithstanding. CTT (from what I have seen) is largely focused on 3-rail O guage, hence the "classic toy trains". Two rail scale doesnt really fit into the "Classic Toy Trains" genre.
When you talk about O, you could be talking about 5 different things
1) O-27 Toy trains with less than scale dimensions (tin plate stuff too)
2) O guage - Somewhat less toy and more of scale (car body is usually scale), still has oversize wheels and truck mounted couplers, etc.
3) O scale - 1:48 scale dimensions, but runs on slightly wide gauge track
4) Proto 48 -1:48 and runs on scale 4' 8.5" track.
5) Various Narrow guages of O
I fit into 2 above with the equipment I own. I dont run said equipment. Why? A 7 car passenger train is over 14' long. I have room for exactly two passenger stations, and suspending my disbelief to do laps isnt my thing. It gets too boring, then you end up spending money buying new interseting things to run through the unchanging scenery.
I am quite aware of the different O gauge and O scale standards, but they all boil down to something which is 1/48 scale, but running on different tracks. However, accessories, buildings and structures find their home on any 1/48 scale layout. I dare to say that the most recent creations in that scale from Menard´s find more homes on a "toy" layout, than a "scale" layout.
Oh, btw - don´t let my low post count or handle fool you, I am a dyed-in-the-wool scale modeler with a record of 55 years in the hobby, who has built layouts from Z scale all the way up to a live steam garden layout.
Tinplate Toddlerbut they all boil down to something which is 1/48 scale
Not all, the O-27 stuff is not even close to scale. The trucks are actually wider than the car body.
Tinplate Toddleraccessories, buildings and structures find their home on any 1/48 scale layout
See your next comment...
Tinplate Toddler I dare to say that the most recent creations in that scale from Menard´s find more homes on a "toy" layout, than a "scale" layout.
There is a reason for that. They arent really scale. They are actually marketed as "O Guage".
I disagree with some of the negatives.
There's actually quite a lot available for 2 rail O scale. Atlas makes much of (maybe all) their Trainman and Master line in 2 rail as well as 3 rail. Much of MTH's Premier line of steam locomotives is available in 2 rail with scale wheels. Their Premier line of diesels usually have a conversion kit available. Premier is their detailed scale size line. Both Atlas and MTH make conversion kits for their rolling stock. So while you may not have as many locomotives for a specific railroad as HO does, there's plenty to choose from and the major railroads are pretty well represented.
Thanks to 3 rail O scale, there are plenty of structures available, both RTR and kits. Many laser kits are made in multiple scales including O. When looking at sizes, all scales including HO favor smaller prototypes.
It does cost more per piece and there are fewer places offering discounts. Unlike HO, there really is no budget line available (although you can find some older, cheaper items at train shows). So for a given budget you'll have fewer items. It's just one of the many trade offs we make in the hobby. But if you can afford multiple locomotives in HO, you can find something in O to get you started.
Space is another issue. It does take a lot of room for O scale. This is the issue that put me in S scale. I just don't have enough room for the layout I want in O. For me, this is a trade off issue. I could have a layout in O, just not as many towns along the mainline. But many folks are very space constrained, so HO or N is the best way for them. I think this is the major reason for few O scale layouts. I also think this a major reason there are so many 3 rail layouts - with it's much tighter curves you can fit a layout into some pretty tight spaces.
Paul
mbinsewi MIKE:
In all due respects, the question was based entirely on my personal observations of the postings I've read on this forum.
It was, in no way, implying that the name "Model Railroader" should be changed to "O" nor would I even suggest that the name be changed because, as you stated, "This is a forum centered around HO".
I'm truly sorry that you "don't get 'my' off-the-wall question???
Seems like, upon reading many of the replies, other viewers took the question in stride and just offered their constructive opinions. And I really appreciate their contributions.
This is a great hobby no matter what gauge/scale one favors.
It still comes down to space, money and time.
Life, and model railroading are full of compromises, given unlimited resources, I might want to be in two rail O scale.
But I reject the idea of limiting my other modeling goals to be able to model in that larger scale.
I like long trains, mainline action, reasonable detail, that make HO the right size for me.
My current layout space is about 1000 sq ft. We are possibly moving soon, and the new house we are expecting to get has a 1500 sq ft basement - just for me.
That will build a suitable empire in HO, and a short line in O.
Not interested in a short line.....
Sheldon
Too big takes up a lot of space.
Too expensive.
I've been to a number of train shows over the years and O scale is represented very well with many modular layouts. They look great and so does the equipment. I'm sure if you went over to some of those guys they would tell you it's alive and well. A good friend of mine recently got rid of his HO layout and trains to switch to O scale. Why? He's getting up there in age, and it's easier to handle.
People that enjoy model railroading will find a way to enjoy the hobby, whether switching scales, smaller layouts or arm chair modeling.
Oh, I model HO and I have an O scale track that goes around the top of the room for my O Scale LIRR Worlds Fair train! I'm happy!
Neal
Basically Model Railroader is an inaccurate title for the Magazine and Forum, it Should be Titled HO & N Scale Monthly.
Years ago Tony Koester's April column was an April Fool's joke about switching to "O", to someone in "O" Gauge it was a pretty demeaning column, and I haven't renewed my MR Subscription since. MR was already pretty much ignoring anything but HO and N by then any way, so that was the final straw for me, didn't renew, and if I didn't see this thread as the most recent on the index page, wouldn't have seen it at all.
Doug
May your flanges always stay BETWEEN the rails
I think that HO and O are two pretty different animals ..... and they're both wonderful.
Its been said that with O, a bit more focus is on the actual trains. With HO, there is more focus on the railroad, the layout.
I think with the 3-rail folks, there are many collectors. And, have trains displayed on the walls of their layout rooms. Many started it with Lionel trains from thier youth. However, there are many very beautifully detailed scale engines in 3-rail, too. They like to call it "3-rail scale."
The lack of 2-rail O engines can be frustrating. Thankfully, Atlas O seems to have thier production problems straightened out, and are starting to ship engines again. 3rdRail/Sunset make very highly detailed, and correct to the railroad, steam engines and some diesels .....which can be quite expensive.
If you really enjoy sound like me, obviously there are larger speakers in O scale. And, Atlas is now using ESU decoders in their 2-rail O scale engines.
I've done both scales a lot, and you just can't do in O what you can do with HO. I know nothing about N scale, but I know with HO ..... the world is your oyster. lol
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
Most HO railroaders are probably in that scale because of circumstances. As a kid in the 70s, HO was the dominating scale used for toy trains, and the local hobby shops were mainly offering HO stuff. That is the explanation why I mainly model HO. Today, online shopping and information opens things up dramatically. Anyone starting from zero can pretty much go in any scale and thrive. Space is really the only major constraint.
On30 is kind of a growing sub-market that has its followers; your more likely to find On30 modelers than you are to find 2-rail O-Scale or Proto:48 modelers (at least from what I have heard from and read in sources online). The narrowgauge size of On30 allows for layouts that take up space more similar to an HO layout, yet with the O scale size for detail. At least it seems to be popular here out west with the omnipresent wave of DRGW narrow gauge nostalgia freaking everywhere...As for 3-rail O-gauge toy trains stuff? Lionel still seems to be holding on fine, but I don't have much appeal for it other than the thought of getting a O-gauge set to run around a Christmas Tree sometime in the future. I can't understand how Lionel can be considered a "toy" when its priced out of the range of most children and families due to their collector oriented nature. I wonder how well they will be able to keep selling those collector oriented trains of theirs in another generation as more and more of the kids from the 1940's & 1950's fall out of the hobby. I can tell you, that I have met very very few people of my age who have ever had any interest in 3-rail O-gauge toys. Also, mind you Model Railroader is a reader submitted article type of magazine. If you feel there is a lack of O-scale content that is because there are O-scalers who are NOT writing and submitting articles on their layouts. Its the same reason we seem to have a glut of Appalacian and Colorado set layouts in the magazine, because those happen to be the people who take the time to sit down and describe their work.
Following up on my previous posts . . .
I started looking around for O scale stuff. Found some at the usual retailers. I do not do eBay (no comment, I just don't). I'm specifically looking for well-detailed, accurate models. Proto:48 I think. I do not want 3 rail. In approximate order of preference (but I am flexible if something interesting turns up): Berkshires, Northerns, Challengers; CB&Q, C&O, UP.
I'm not afraid of the price point, but I don't want to be ridiculous about it.
Any ideas?
Thanks.
There might be a material change in the look and feel of the forum if there were separate sub forums for O, S, HO and N. On the other hand, maybe a forum, in a hobby as small as ours, maybe it can't be all things to all people.
I was younger than Mel when I talked my parents into ditching American Flyer and buying HO scale. I'm not quite sure how I won the argument, but I could squeeze more stuff into the 4x8 sheet of plywood with HO.
One could make the same argument about moving from HO to N, except it does not compute in my imagination. Size matters.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
I gave my son the choice of whether to go with HO or O for our layout. He chose HO.
If I was starting I'd still probably choose HO, For me the choice comes down to a few things.
-Price. We're doing railroading on a budget and while most scales have some budget options, there's just no comparison to the amount of incredible used deals on HO stuff. We happen to live close to the monthly Great Midwest Train Show and if you're patient and don't need the latest-and-greatest, almost everything will show up cheap.
-Space requirements. With a 9x5 to work with HO was a slightly better choice. I still would have been happy working with 0'27'ish stuff in a compressed space but that HO is better for that.
That said, my situation is slightly unique in that if he'd choosen O, I have enough 1/56-1/48 wargaming terrain (dirty and worn but not ruins) to have put together a convincing 9x5 city table almost immediately.
Visit the Chicago Valley Railroad for Chicago Trainspotting and Budget Model Railroading.
traindaddy1I'm truly sorry that you "don't get 'my' off-the-wall question???
OK, looking at all of the other contributers, your looking for pros and cons of going to O scale, and why someone would pick HO over O.
For me, I like HO, it's more "real" to me, say compared to the MTH Rail King O scale layout my grandson has, but I do see possibilities with it.
I thought about S scale at one time, and I do have some On3 equipment, but I just like HO.
Space is also a consideration of mine, and N is too small for me to work on.
I've seen some 2 rail O scale at train shows, and it looks good.
ROBERT PETRICK Following up on my previous posts . . . I started looking around for O scale stuff. Found some at the usual retailers. I do not do eBay (no comment, I just don't). I'm specifically looking for well-detailed, accurate models. Proto:48 I think. I do not want 3 rail. In approximate order of preference (but I am flexible if something interesting turns up): Berkshires, Northerns, Challengers; CB&Q, C&O, UP. I'm not afraid of the price point, but I don't want to be ridiculous about it. Any ideas? Thanks. Robert
Start here:
http://www.oscalewest.com/
Check out this layout:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBcSz9iI7nY
And this layout:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3c7BQBrSC8
See this site:
http://www.keymodels.net/
Hopefully these sites will give some ideas..
These locos were made in brass, and there are brass retailers, such as brasstrains.com, that offer that sort of stuff. If you don't like buying online, you might want to view the brasstrains.com selection on their website and pick it up in person in Florida... Looking at the prices of these items, I would consider doing that if I was not that far away (Canada). But it's a great excuse to travel to Florida!
Check out 3rd Rail by Sunset Models, Most if not all of their models are available in both 2 and 3 rail versions, don't let the name Fool you.
3rd Rail has a Reputation for Very ACCURATE, Well Detailed and Excellent running models, at for the market, very competetive prices.
Definitely check out their "Boneyard" which often has Warehouse finds and other remaining or repaired stock, all of which comes with a Full Warranty. You can often find what is an otherwise Hard to Find item from previous production runs.
3rd Rail would be well worth a look for you.
challenger3980,Well, of course Model Railroader is mostly about HO and N. They are the two biggest scales by popularity. If HO is 55% of the market, and N is 25%, O, G, S, OO, TT and Z are all less than 20%...combined. MR is a business, after all. Would you tune your business for less than 1/5th of your market share? Or the remaining 80%?Still, it's not like MR totally ignores other scales. In the past year and a half, MR printed:June 2018: Strategic structure sizing - The sheer mass of structures can be an issue in O scale, but careful choices can mitigate them.May 2018: A spot of England In Georgia - An OO scale British Railways layout lets a husband and wife re-create the area where they grew up.December 2017: The best of the Badger State - Scenes from Wisconsin served as inspiration for this 22 x 24-foot S scale layout.November 2017: Big and busy on the Pennsy - Signature scenes of the 1950s highlight the O scale Nassau Division.November 2017: Z scale in a closet - This 2 x 3-foot layout features the steam-to-diesel transition-era in southern Indiana.
August 2017: A Z scale piece of the USA in France - Homemade photo-etched and 3-D-printed parts enhance a coal-hauling layout with handlaid track.January 2017: Scratchbuild a diesel shell from styrene - This S scale Whitcomb 65-ton locomotive started as a cardboard mock-up.And there were three O-scale and one Z-scale product reviews, plus at least two "Heritage Fleet" columns on O-scale.Is it a lot? Nope. But it's there.
challenger3980 Basically Model Railroader is an inaccurate title for the Magazine and Forum, it Should be Titled HO & N Scale Monthly.
By some estimates, HO is around 70 percent of the hobby, with N coming in around 15. You sell to you buyers and that group is pretty clearly defined.
If you actually look at page counts and compare them to buyer percentages, I scale, particularly traction, gets disproportionately more press coverage.
Paul3 challenger3980,Well, of course Model Railroader is mostly about HO and N. They are the two biggest scales by popularity. If HO is 55% of the market, and N is 25%, O, G, S, OO, TT and Z are all less than 20%...combined. MR is a business, after all. Would you tune your business for less than 1/5th of your market share? Or the remaining 80%?Still, it's not like MR totally ignores other scales. In the past year and a half, MR printed:June 2018: Strategic structure sizing - The sheer mass of structures can be an issue in O scale, but careful choices can mitigate them.May 2018: A spot of England In Georgia - An OO scale British Railways layout lets a husband and wife re-create the area where they grew up.December 2017: The best of the Badger State - Scenes from Wisconsin served as inspiration for this 22 x 24-foot S scale layout.November 2017: Big and busy on the Pennsy - Signature scenes of the 1950s highlight the O scale Nassau Division.November 2017: Z scale in a closet - This 2 x 3-foot layout features the steam-to-diesel transition-era in southern Indiana. August 2017: A Z scale piece of the USA in France - Homemade photo-etched and 3-D-printed parts enhance a coal-hauling layout with handlaid track.January 2017: Scratchbuild a diesel shell from styrene - This S scale Whitcomb 65-ton locomotive started as a cardboard mock-up.And there were three O-scale and one Z-scale product reviews, plus at least two "Heritage Fleet" columns on O-scale.Is it a lot? Nope. But it's there.
I never claimed any percentage figures about any scale, but your post and others just validate my view that the magazine title would be more appropriate as HO & N Scale Monthly, than MR.
The as shown small coverage and Holier than Thou attitude of many HO and N scalers are why, I no longer subscribe to HO &N Scale Monthly, I mean MR.
Just give the magazine a more accurate title is my point.
challenger3980 Paul3 challenger3980,Well, of course Model Railroader is mostly about HO and N. They are the two biggest scales by popularity. If HO is 55% of the market, and N is 25%, O, G, S, OO, TT and Z are all less than 20%...combined. MR is a business, after all. Would you tune your business for less than 1/5th of your market share? Or the remaining 80%?Still, it's not like MR totally ignores other scales. In the past year and a half, MR printed:June 2018: Strategic structure sizing - The sheer mass of structures can be an issue in O scale, but careful choices can mitigate them.May 2018: A spot of England In Georgia - An OO scale British Railways layout lets a husband and wife re-create the area where they grew up.December 2017: The best of the Badger State - Scenes from Wisconsin served as inspiration for this 22 x 24-foot S scale layout.November 2017: Big and busy on the Pennsy - Signature scenes of the 1950s highlight the O scale Nassau Division.November 2017: Z scale in a closet - This 2 x 3-foot layout features the steam-to-diesel transition-era in southern Indiana. August 2017: A Z scale piece of the USA in France - Homemade photo-etched and 3-D-printed parts enhance a coal-hauling layout with handlaid track.January 2017: Scratchbuild a diesel shell from styrene - This S scale Whitcomb 65-ton locomotive started as a cardboard mock-up.And there were three O-scale and one Z-scale product reviews, plus at least two "Heritage Fleet" columns on O-scale.Is it a lot? Nope. But it's there. I never claimed any percentage figures about any scale, but your post and others just validate my view that the magazine title would be more appropriate as HO & N Scale Monthly, than MR. The as shown small coverage and Holier than Thou attitude of many HO and N scalers are why, I no longer subscribe to HO &N Scale Monthly, I mean MR. Just give the magazine a more accurate title is my point. Doug
Doug,
You know, I have been at this hobby about 50 years, and my family was in this business, and I grew up working in hobby shops selling model trains - of all scales.
And I have print copies on MR back into the 50's. There was a lot more two rail O scale back then..........
I considered it at one point, and you know what I decided? I decided I wanted to model more than just one small part of some short line.
And while I live pretty well, and have spend a good bit on model trains in 50 years (most of those trains I still have by the way), and have a 1,000 sq ft train room, I have never seen this hobby as something where I could or would spend thousands of dollars on one locomotive, or hundreds of dollars on one piece of rolling stock.
Model Railroader is just a reflection of what the modelers have chosen, nothing more, nothing less.
We sometimes want to think they lead the way somehow, but they don't. They simply reflect the trends.
Sorry the trends are not what interest you.
I have the same problem in a different way. I am an HO modeler, but I have no interest in DCC or sound. It's been several decades since there was any good DC signaling or control articles in MR............
I could write one, about my own advanced cab control system with CTC, working interlockings, signals, working ATC, radio throttles, etc - but no one is interested.
Two rail O scale has also become a niche market in this hobby, partly because it requires all three of the following:
Lots of money
Lots of space
And a pretty high level of modeling skill given the limited selection of products.
That is by default going to be a limited group of people.
Most of us can't or won't afford the dues in your club....sorry you think we are the snobs......we are the proletariat......
Robert, ruling out eBay is pretty hard when you're looking for 2-rail O scale steam engines. They're aren't that many options. There are reputable people selling 3rdRail/Sunset engines there.
Also, O Gauge Railroad (OGR) magazine has a message board like this, with a "wanted to buy" section. Folks there sometimes sell their like-new "shelf queen" 3rdRail/Sunset engines.
Good luck
Doug,If they did really change their name as you suggest, then that's all they'd print: HO and N. As shown above, they explore other scales. Not often, true, but they do. Do you want to eliminate all other scales from MR? At least now, all the armchair model railroader subscribers get exposed to some high level non-HO & N modeling a few times a year. Maybe an article or two will kick them off the couch and onto the workbench and the next great non-HO & N modeler is born.MR is a general interest model railroading magazine covering all scale model railroads. MR's content is a reflection of this hobby as a whole; the more popular the subject, the more likely will it appear in the magazine. Non-tinplate O-scale is not that popular (sad, but true; remember I like it, too); it's not going to appear every month in a general interest magazine like MR or RMC. If they did, they might gain hundreds of O-scale readers and lose thousands of HO and N scale modelers.Sheldon,I agree 100% with you on this one. Heh. Bet you never thought I'd say that!
Paul, I'm sure that a lot of subscribers would cancel because of ADDITIONAL Material, I'm not suggesting that MR cut any HO/N material, but more coverage of other scales would increase it's appeal to more readers.
Seems that MR was getting thinner by the year, just not any Less advertising, before I let my subscription expire. And YES, I understand the Advertising pays the bills more than subscriptions do, but I was starting to feel like I was paying more for advertising than content at the end, YMMV.
challenger3980...I'm not suggesting that MR cut any HO/N material, but more coverage of other scales would increase it's appeal to more readers....
If you want to see more O scale stuff in Model Railroader, perhaps it's time more O scale modellers submitted some articles.
Wayne
I'm just going to leave this here:
If I had unlimited funds and resources I would jump to O but I don't so I'll stick with HO!
Steve
If everything seems under control, you're not going fast enough!
NWP SWPIf I had unlimited funds and resources I would jump to O but I don't so I'll stick with HO!
You do have unlimited funds and resources. Your life is just beginning, and you have not made any decisions or commitments that will limit where you will go or what you can accomplish.
The choices you make in the next few years will be very important.
Do not sell yourself short.
I'd really like to know why, in your opinion, there isn't more interest is the larger "O".
2- Price, which may not be an issue for US models, but European O-scale products are way too expensive.3- Accessories. Again, this might not be the case in USA, but on the other side of the atlantic track material is limited, and there is virtually no buildings.
I model in several scales and the BEST scale for modeling trolleys is O scale. I have some heavy electrics in HO and a large collection of Milwaukee road in N scale. I think N scale is the best for modeling mainline passenger trains. I don't have a ton of space but O scale trolleys don't take alot of space. Building the overhead wire is actually fun in O scale !
Randy
Randy Stahl I model in several scales and the BEST scale for modeling trolleys is O scale. I have some heavy electrics in HO and a large collection of Milwaukee road in N scale. I think N scale is the best for modeling mainline passenger trains. I don't have a ton of space but O scale trolleys don't take alot of space. Building the overhead wire is actually fun in O scale ! Randy
Completely agreed, if I was going to model trolleys or interurbans, O would be the only choice. Because of both the trains and the urban scenery.
I wouldn't have thought a topic like this is necessary as the reasons seem pretty straight forward and and have remained so:
- Space requirements.
- Cost
- Availability.
Space is surely the biggest reason; as it is I can barely fit in what I need to in the spaces I've had. Sure, if I wanted to have a switching layout, maybe O would be doable but I want to run mainline trains.
Plainly HO has between 60 and 70% of the market because it is the best compromise between space requirements and detail and cost and availability.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
trainnut1250 snjroy challenger3980 Paul3
Hey guys,
Thanks for the info. The great thing about links is that links lead to more links.
It's still early in my ponderings, but it kinda seems that things are moving toward the idea that what I might do is find some decent RTR engine that would form the basic chassis and then search the aftermarket for Proto:48 pieces and parts to upgrade the model to whatever version of accuracy my meager talents allow.
Definitely looking for a steamer. I have a long background in N, and as much as I support and admire that particular scale, N offerings in steam are (how shall I say?) . . . lacking. Athearn makes an HO 4-8-4 painted in UP Greyhound livery, and finding something like that in O would be great. But like I said, I'm only just now doing slightly more than pondering The Great O Adventure. Things may change as I go along.
Paul3 At least now, all the armchair model railroader subscribers get exposed to some high level non-HO & N modeling a few times a year. Maybe an article or two will kick them off the couch and onto the workbench and the next great non-HO & N modeler is born.
At least now, all the armchair model railroader subscribers get exposed to some high level non-HO & N modeling a few times a year. Maybe an article or two will kick them off the couch and onto the workbench and the next great non-HO & N modeler is born.
This thread has got me moving on and idea that has been rambling around inside my noggin for a while. I am in the middle of a pretty ambitious layout build, so I haven't exactly been on the couch watching basketball games. In the past 24 hours I have done a little something to get things in motion. For a lot of the reasons mentioned by others, I cannot see building an O scale layout; what I see is more along the lines of an O scale display. I hope this isn't blasphemous to the dedicated O scalers. Cultural appropriation and all that . . .
riogrande5761Plainly HO has between 60 and 70% of the market because it is the best compromise between space requirements and detail and cost and availability.
Really!!!!
Over half the folks I talk to would seriously disagree with that statement, including a lot of HO folks. I hear lots of people saying I would be in 'X' scale but I have too much in HO to change. I don't hear many people saying the opposite. And many of us in other scales started in HO and changed becuase it's not the best.
Historic circumstances after WWII gave HO a big boost and after that initial jump start the percentage in HO scale has been declining for the last 40 or so years.
Sure HO, like any other scale, is the best for some folks but not for others. Accurate firgures are not available, but from what I see HO is less than 50% of the hobby.
At least we know HO is 50% of O!
IRONROOSTER riogrande5761 Plainly HO has between 60 and 70% of the market because it is the best compromise between space requirements and detail and cost and availability. Really!!!! Over half the folks I talk to would seriously disagree with that statement, including a lot of HO folks. I hear lots of people saying I would be in 'X' scale but I have too much in HO to change.
riogrande5761 Plainly HO has between 60 and 70% of the market because it is the best compromise between space requirements and detail and cost and availability.
Over half the folks I talk to would seriously disagree with that statement, including a lot of HO folks. I hear lots of people saying I would be in 'X' scale but I have too much in HO to change.
Yes really. I suppose those folks can disagree all they want but the metrics don't seem agree with them. I've been in the hobby since I was a teen in the early 1970's and things haven't seemed to have changed a great deal that I've seen from then to now.
I would have to ask why is having HO scale an impediment to switching scales? What with train shows, swap sales lists and Ebay you can sell off your stuff and use the cash to finance some other scale. People should model what they want and not be held back by something they aren't satisfied with. I sell stuff regularly that don't fit my needs and continue to do so.
I don't hear many people saying the opposite. And many of us in other scales started in HO and changed becuase it's not the best.
Of course scale is an individual choice. I still believe HO is the most popular and sold because it is a good compromise between space/detail/fidelity/cost.
Sure, maybe so, and thats because of the increasing availablity of more products in other scales. HO seems to have remained in the high 50's to high 60's (depending on poll) in the last 20 years however.
Sure HO, like any other scale, is the best for some folks but not for others. Accurate firgures are not available, but from what I see HO is less than 50% of the hobby. Paul
Apparently it is best for around 60-65% approximately.
An amalgomation of recent surveys cited the following regarding market size:
The market sizes according to surveys we've done and the ones seen from others goes like this ...
HO - 67%N - 23%O - 7% (includes On30)
All others - 3%
Didn't O Scale stagnate Heavily in the 70s? I remember reading an article where a guy actually was scrapping pinball machines for parts for his layout because of lack of parts avalibilty for the scale at the time. It's kind of made a comeback but I think in today's economy the price is the bigger issue.
Why I have HO instead of O:
Cost
Space
Availability of items
Variaty of items
And, lastly, Cost.
Ricky W.
HO scale Proto-freelancer.
My Railroad rules:
1: It's my railroad, my rules.
2: It's for having fun and enjoyment.
3: Any objections, consult above rules.
riogrande5761An amalgomation of recent surveys cited the following regarding market size: The market sizes according to surveys we've done and the ones seen from others goes like this ... HO - 67% N - 23% O - 7% (includes On30) All others - 3%
And these surveys would be???
The few surveys I have seen all have bias built it in. Most seem to be surveys of a particular magazine's readership or something similar. Since no magazine/organization covers all the hobby their surveys aren't very accurate.
I think your figures over represent HO and under represent everyone else.
Here in Florida it is pretty simple, and I get these figures from discussions with hobby shop owners.
IF you include non-scale (Lionel and LGB), HO makes up about 50% of the market. IF you only go by scale trains (Z, N, HO, O), then HO is 65%-75% of the market.
In Florida we have a lot of older people that LOVE Lionel, and we have terrific weather and no snow, so outdoor railroading is also quite popular. I doubt these figures would hold true elsewhere.
And... Just in case you don't think Lionel is really cool... you should see some of the Lionel layouts built around Sarasota in 12 by 12 spare bedrooms. These layouts would stand up to most home layouts in terms of detail and craftsmanship. Definitley not Toy Trains, but not Scale Trains either. I think one of these was featured in Model Railroader 3-4 years ago.
Garden railroading is also something that can be done with full operation in a big Florida backyard.
IRONROOSTERI would be in 'X' scale but I have too much in HO to change
Russell
Ain't my figures. Just some I happened on. Add to that, MR magazines own Guide to Model Railroding Scales and Gauges states regarding HO: "more than two thirds of modelers make it their choice". Two thirds in plain math is 66.7 rounded. Take it up with out hosts and don't shoot the messenger.
riogrande5761 Ain't my figures. Just some I happened on. Add to that, MR magazines own Guide to Model Railroding Scales and Gauges states regarding HO: "more than two thirds of modelers make it their choice". Two thirds in plain math is 66.7 rounded. Take it up with out hosts and don't shoot the messenger.
Sorry, I'm not trying to shoot the messenger.
It just seems that no one, including me, really knows. There's lots of anecdotal evidence, but no actual data. Every time I try to run down some facts, there doesn't seem to be any.
cuyamaBy the way, small switching layouts are only referred to with that acronym on this and maybe one other forum.
Mention switching layout and many modeler and this includes advanced modelers thinks "Time Saver" but mention a Industrial Switching Layout and their ears perk up.
A ISL can be used for any railroad,short line or terminal switching road.
I first heard ISL at a Industrial Switching Layout clinic several years ago.
What we should do is do away with the "Time Saver" design except as a switching contest.
traindaddy1 Before you "send me to the other forums like the Classic Toys etc., I'd really like to know why, in your opinion, there isn't more interest is the larger "O". As always, many thanks.
Before you "send me to the other forums like the Classic Toys etc., I'd really like to know why, in your opinion, there isn't more interest is the larger "O".
As always, many thanks.
I am modelling all three scales/gauges: O, HO, and N. Cost and space are not an issue for me: I'll make the extra money I need somehow (legally lol) and I have a full-sized basement to work with. All my O rolling stock is/will be custom: for example, I turned an old blue and yellow Lionel Planters Peanut covered hopper into a brown ore-carrying workhorse hopper. I don't mind three rails in fact I like the look of MTH RealTrax when ballasted. I am currently kit bashing an O scale warehouse which I plan to post somewhere here because it is a real model, not a toy.
Space, cost, and availability are the three principal reasons for the lack of widespread popularity of O scale. In my personal opinion, though, the lack of available locos, rolling stock, and structures is the primary reason.
I might add a fourth reason. O scale is too big. I am not talking about the need for greater space. I am addressing the issue of size. Once again, in my personal opinion, HO scale is the perfect size for home modeling. Not too big, not too small.
Rich
Alton Junction
I would like to thank all of you for your replies to my post.
Have been "into" this great hobby for over sixty years, first in "HO" and now, because this "older" body's hands and eyes aren't what they used to be, "O".
Will continue reading and, again, thanks.
I like O scale tinplate and would gladly start a three rail O scale IF I had the money space and time.
Since I don't I stay in HO,
Joe Staten Island West
Added up the cost of my O scale/gauge pre-order of 6 locomotives, 6 ore cars, MTH track, train set for my grandson, Legacy control system. Comes in under $10 k (CDN). I have spent a lot more than that on HO over the last two years.
OldSchoolScratchbuilder Added up the cost of my O scale/gauge pre-order of 6 locomotives, 6 ore cars, MTH track, train set for my grandson, Legacy control system. Comes in under $10 k (CDN). I have spent a lot more than that on HO over the last two years.
Mike
This is relevant to my situation!
I grew up building 3-rail O and now I am currently building an N Scale layout. College and then law school put a damper on that but I graduated about a month ago and decided to return to the hobby. I live in the city so space is at a premium (my envelope was 26" by 50"), O just wasn't an option for that reason. Similarly, I could really only have a switching layout in HO, this is how I landed on N eventhough I own a couple thousand $$$ worth of 3-rail equipment.
The other thing to remember with O is that 1/48 really encompases 3 different groups of people. You have your toy train people, you have your scale 3-railers, and you have O scale. These groups of people don't really buy the same stuff save for buildings that the hi-rail and O scale people can both use. As others have pointed out this drives up the cost of O equipment of all types.
Just an N scale guy in an HO scale world.
Reading Railroad in a small space.
BRAKIEA ISL can be used for any railroad,short line or terminal switching road. I first heard ISL at a Industrial Switching Layout clinic several years ago
We've been through this many times. It's still not accurate, no matter where you heard it. "Industrial" railroads have a specific meaning in the real world -- and it's not any generic switching area worked by a Class 1, Regional, or Shortline.
But it seems it's futile to try for accuracy and clarity on this forum.
Not apples and oranges at all. Here are four used O gauge cars, three of them I repaired and modified, for the same price as one new CN covered hopper. This more than offsets the locomotive price differences for the same number of cars in both scales .
joe323 I like O scale tinplate and would gladly start a three rail O scale IF I had the money space and time. Since I don't I stay in HO,
I have heard that the term "tinplate" was based on the use by Lionel, among others, of steel rail that was tinplated to lessen rust.
Thus I would think you would be using such track. While 0-72 makes a pretty nice big circle at about 36" radius, regular Lionel 0 was 15 1/2 in radius. Pretty much less than anything in HO.
So it would appear space is covered.
Time, I think, is also. That's because there is no slavish attention to detail. Since it's obviously toy-like, you don't have to get all detaily.
Money? That all depends on how much you spend.
Anyway, I have a pretty decent Lionel tinplate layout stored in the garage. I built it about 20 years ago, when I got back into trains, and thought Lionel would be fun. It kind of is, although most of the accessories don't actually work very well.
Then I saw my first Kadee boxcar, and it was all over. Hello (again), HO.
cuyama BRAKIE A ISL can be used for any railroad,short line or terminal switching road. I first heard ISL at a Industrial Switching Layout clinic several years ago We've been through this many times. It's still not accurate, no matter where you heard it. "Industrial" railroads have a specific meaning in the real world -- and it's not any generic switching area worked by a Class 1, Regional, or Shortline. But it seems it's futile to try for accuracy and clarity on this forum.
BRAKIE A ISL can be used for any railroad,short line or terminal switching road. I first heard ISL at a Industrial Switching Layout clinic several years ago
I think the term "Industrial Switching Layout" (ISL) is very clear. And accurate. It means a layout where industrial switching predominates. "Industrial switching" is switching that has little, if any, mainline running for the trains. As opposed to Frank Ellison's "wayside switching" where there's a bit of mainline traveling between tasks.
I see nothing in the term that restricts or defines what the railroad entity must be that is on the layout.
I also think it means nothing more. Which may be what's causing angst. And perhaps verklempt.
cuyamaWe've been through this many times. It's still not accurate, no matter where you heard it. "Industrial" railroads have a specific meaning in the real world -- and it's not any generic switching area worked by a Class 1, Regional, or Shortline.
Industrial Switching: A service performed by a railroad for delivering or picking up cars at industries.
Layout: What a model railroader builds to operate his models on.
Oh, heck, why do I bother?
Another comment that came up in this thread was the not-so-nice and not very realistic look of O gauge three rails. I have to agree that most are, not very attractive, but there is one I like a lot. MTH ScaleTrax has a small cross-section centre rail and it is black. I have shown with and without ballast. I also like the look in ballast (this is processed shale from Walton, NS). And, this O-72 turnout is a marvelous piece of model railroad technology!
Terminology aside, for some time now my layout design approach keeps industries and their sidings mostly separate from the mainline, just like you typically see in major cities where industries are often served by belt lines connected directly to yards and their activities do not affect the flow of mainline traffic.
So from Larry's point of view, I have several "ISL's" within my larger double track mainline layout.
All of which would be hard to do in the same way with O scale, even with unlimited space, time and money.
OldSchoolScratchbuilder Another comment that came up in this thread was the not-so-nice and not very realistic look of O gauge three rails. I have to agree that most are, not very attractive, but there is one I like a lot. MTH ScaleTrax has a small cross-section centre rail and it is black. I have shown with and without ballast. I also like the look in ballast (this is processed shale from Walton, NS). And, this O-72 turnout is a marvelous piece of model railroad technology!
Actually, most in this discussion are refering to "two rail" O "scale", with track, wheel and coupler standards similar to HO, just larger. And to reasonably accurate 1/4" to the foot scale models.
richhotrain Space, cost, and availability are the three principal reasons for the lack of widespread popularity of O scale. In my personal opinion, though, the lack of available locos, rolling stock, and structures is the primary reason. I might add a fourth reason. O scale is too big. I am not talking about the need for greater space. I am addressing the issue of size. Once again, in my personal opinion, HO scale is the perfect size for home modeling. Not too big, not too small. Rich
Agreed. Just too big, not just a space thing. The locos and rolling stock are wonderful. The detail is exquisite and the sound can begin to sound less tinny than HO onboard sound, so the equipment is great.
But everything has to be bigger, and better detailed. How about hills, mountains, and trees; and people. How much more detailed would all of this have to be?
If I got into model building, I could see having two or three structures on a layout, then spending time detailing them to the nth degree. All of the scenery items too. Now, the final product would be immensly impressive, IMO. But I'm also an operator and it would simply take too much time to detail all of the background and scenery items to the level it needs to be.
Just too much detail and time needed to make it look right, IMO.
- Douglas
7j43kI think the term "Industrial Switching Layout" (ISL) is very clear.
Honestly the first time I read it I thought you were talking about steel mills or breweries or industrial parks.
BRAKIE cuyama We've been through this many times. It's still not accurate, no matter where you heard it. "Industrial" railroads have a specific meaning in the real world -- and it's not any generic switching area worked by a Class 1, Regional, or Shortline. Industrial Switching: A service performed by a railroad for delivering or picking up cars at industries. Layout: What a model railroader builds to operate his models on.
cuyama We've been through this many times. It's still not accurate, no matter where you heard it. "Industrial" railroads have a specific meaning in the real world -- and it's not any generic switching area worked by a Class 1, Regional, or Shortline.
To this point, Genessee and Wyoming has an entirely separate business unit with a different name for indstrial switching. Different POC than other customers and everything.
7j43kI have heard that the term "tinplate" was based on the use by Lionel, among others, of steel rail that was tinplated to lessen rust. Thus I would think you would be using such track. While 0-72 makes a pretty nice big circle at about 36" radius, regular Lionel 0 was 15 1/2 in radius.
Except Joe323 explicitly stated 3rail scale..so no, he would probably need O72 (or larger, yes I think it goes to O128 now).
Examples of scale locomotives that wont run on O27 or O31 curves
3Rail NYC Hudson (O36 or O54)
NYC Hudson with PT-2,3 or 4 tender O72
NYC Niagara PT-5 tender O72
B&A A-1 Berkshire O54
NYC Mohawks (all- O54, Lionel one you can lie to and run around O48 at very slow speeds, ive seen it done)
P&LE A-2 Berkshire O54
USRA 0-8-0 (O31 or O36)
NYC USRA 2-8-2 (O36 little fuzzy on this one)
F3 ABA set (O36 or O54 little fuzzy)
E8 ABA set (O54 also fuzzy may have been O72)
So... Space not covered..
Time...probably same as HO to be honest
Money...well lets not turn this into one of those threads, but scale stuff is comparable to new production HO brass (read that as you will spend approximately the same amount acquiring the locomotives as you would if pre-ordered new brass). Freight cars and passenger cars are about the same, except you cant buy singles from MTH.. though shalt only buy 5 car sets or 2 car expansion packs with dining car or single dome cars that NYC never owned....freight cars are also leaning that way, you can buy only 6 car sets unless your dealer is willing to break up a set for you.
I would have to agree with you except...track pans...
Also IMO, RCS is a better product, when I was in O, RCS was all I used. Made in US of A, pretty much never goes out of stock, and they are pretty nice people.
Wood ties and machined points.
IRONROOSTER,Regarding the ratio of scales in the hobby, you're right in that no one survey is going to be capable of doing a 100% accurate poll. Any poll will be biased either for or against certain scales depending on who runs it. So lets look at certain things or events that embrace the entire spectrum of the hobby like train shows, items for sale, or clubs.
For example, take this year's Springfield Show. Certainly the largest train show in the country and all scales are represented therein (even Lego). There were at least 28 layouts. HO was, by far, the dominant scale with 14 HO layouts (50%). O had 6, N = 2, G = 4 and S = 1 (plus one Lego). And it's not just the number of layouts, it is the size of them.
Looking at the show diagram (http://www.railroadhobbyshow.com/files/files/ARS%202018%20Floor%20Plan.v4.1.FINAL(2).pdf), and doing some quick and dirty math, I get a total of 4620 linear feet of layouts (the circumfrence of all the layouts combined). Of these, 2568' are HO. Doing the math, I get 55%.
Or look at the Walthers catalogs for each scale (pre-2017 when they combined things). The HO catalog was typically 1000+ pages. The Large Scale (O, S, G, etc.) catalog was less than 400 pages. The N & Z catalog was also less than 400 pages, I believe. If it's 1800 total Walthers pages, HO would be around 55% of the market.
Another measure of popularity are clubs. I can't speak for the entire nation, but here in Southern New England (MA, CT & RI - population 11+million) there are at least 32 different club layouts/groups (some clubs do multiple scales). Of these 32 layouts, 19 of them are HO scale, which is 59%.
Sorry, but HO is clearly the dominant scale. While the exact percentage is debatable (why would you think it's less than 50%?), the clear advantage of HO is indisputable.
Paul3For example, take this year's Springfield Show. Certainly the largest train show in the country and all scales are represented therein (even Lego). There were at least 28 layouts. HO was, by far, the dominant scale with 14 HO layouts (50%). O had 6, N = 2, G = 4 and S = 1 (plus one Lego). And it's not just the number of layouts, it is the size of them.
But there is no Z layout and yet some number of folks are in Z - at least enough that there's a magazine for it. This is another example of anecdotal evidence. It's interesting and indicative that HO is a popular scale. However, if you went to the York show I suspect that you would have a very different set of numbers.
Paul3Sorry, but HO is clearly the dominant scale.
But is it dominant? or just the most popular.
Paul3the clear advantage of HO is indisputable.
By this do you mean it's the best scale to be in? That's really a subjective determination each of us makes based on our own desires of what we want out of the hobby.
Doughless richhotrain Space, cost, and availability are the three principal reasons for the lack of widespread popularity of O scale. Rich Agreed. Just too big, not just a space thing. The locos and rolling stock are wonderful. The detail is exquisite and the sound can begin to sound less tinny than HO onboard sound, so the equipment is great. But everything has to be bigger, and better detailed. How about hills, mountains, and trees; and people. How much more detailed would all of this have to be?
richhotrain Space, cost, and availability are the three principal reasons for the lack of widespread popularity of O scale. Rich
Space, cost, and availability are the three principal reasons for the lack of widespread popularity of O scale.
Space, cost and availability are not issues for many of us in my opinion. I snapped a picture of part of my basement, entirely devoted to model trains. There is a lot more basement not showing behind the camera and behind the wall on the right. All of the homes in my neighbourhood have basements this size or bigger - our home is smaller than most here. There is plenty of room for a great O scale layout, plus HO and N layouts too ( both of the latter in progress in the picture). Cost and availability can be minimized by building my own structures, rail cars, etc. My layouts don't depend on manufacturers making stuff I want or need, I do that. And, adding detail is not work, it's the most fun part of the entire hobby for me.
Also in my basement, behind the picture of some of my layout areas, room for a structure/scenery construction center, and a very large hardcopy model railroad library. There is a lot of room for all aspects of my hobby in my basement. Oh, almost forgot, plenty of storage space under all the layout surfaces for piles of family stuff.
OldSchoolScratchbuilder Doughless richhotrain Space, cost, and availability are the three principal reasons for the lack of widespread popularity of O scale. Rich Agreed. Just too big, not just a space thing. The locos and rolling stock are wonderful. The detail is exquisite and the sound can begin to sound less tinny than HO onboard sound, so the equipment is great. But everything has to be bigger, and better detailed. How about hills, mountains, and trees; and people. How much more detailed would all of this have to be? Space, cost and availability are not issues for many of us in my opinion. I snapped a picture of part of my basement, entirely devoted to model trains.
Space, cost and availability are not issues for many of us in my opinion. I snapped a picture of part of my basement, entirely devoted to model trains.
It's not that most modelers don't have space to put up some kind of layout. It is that the space that is available could hold so much more if the scale were HO or N than O. For what space you devote to O, you could double the amount of "layout" for HO.
As for cost, you just spent $10,000 on O scale stuff and "a lot more than that on HO over the last two years". Very few modelers on this forum can afford to spend $20,000 plus over a 2 year period on their model railroad. And, once again, it is not the aggregate cost but the cost per item. Everything in O costs more than a comparable HO item, be it a loco, rolling stock, whatever.
As far as availability, you did reinforce my point. O scale structures are not readily available so you will have to build your own.
For those reasons, there isn't more interest in O scale.
OldSchoolScratchbuilder Not apples and oranges at all. Here are four used O gauge cars, three of them I repaired and modified, for the same price as one new CN covered hopper. This more than offsets the locomotive price differences for the same number of cars in both scales .
Dominant, popular, best, or pick another word. Or just look at the numbers and forget words.
Yes, the statistics are somewhat moving targets and if you look at other countries where space is more limited, I would expect smaller scales to be significantly higher in numbers. But in the US, country-wide, polls and figures listed in magazines seem to put HO approximately in the 55-65+ range.
Of course, everyone is free to choose what works best for them, which is the great thing about the hobby. As a general rule, whatever has the highest numbers seems to have more choices available, probably because manufacturers are more likely to sell models in higher numbers and recoup their investments.
It would be interesting if MR magazine could cite their numbers from over the years from their data gathered. The best one can do is to amalgomate all the data and provide an average within frames of time.
richhotrain Scratch, you are totally missing the point. It's not that most modelers don't have space to put up some kind of layout. It is that the space that is available could hold so much more if the scale were HO or N than O. For what space you devote to O, you could double the amount of "layout" for HO..
Scratch, you are totally missing the point.
It's not that most modelers don't have space to put up some kind of layout. It is that the space that is available could hold so much more if the scale were HO or N than O. For what space you devote to O, you could double the amount of "layout" for HO..
My point is that many modellers want more, just like you have stated. But in my opinion quantity is far less attractive than less with quality and hand crafted structures and scenery. I am not impressed by sprawling layouts of made-in-China plastic buildings. I also don't like the toy-like accessories that Lionel produces. If I buy a kit it is for the purpose of completely kit bashing it into something else that I will feel is a job well done.
Example, Elevated Warehouse O-Scale Kit No. 484 by American Model Builders, Inc. First bonus, it's made in the USA, second bonus, it's not plastic, third bonus, it was very affordable as a kit someone bought and never used.
I am taking apart every single strip and reassembling my way except the floor, which will become a subfloor and never be seen. Adding lots of my own materials including the sandstone finish on the outside walls, a shale roof, and real glass windows. I can build over 100 of these warehouses and fit them comfortably in my designated O-scale areas, but of course, I only need one.
This is an interesting discussion. I built several structures from scratch and enjoyed the process, but i could never do that in HO scale. HO structures are just too tiny for my fumble fingers.
On the other hand, HO track seems better for a small layout than O gauge. My layout is six by seven and that seems like enough. Besides, other things need to happen in the basement than just my stuff. “Its not the size that counts.”
The obvious compromise is ON30. HO track, O structures.
The GnomeHO structures are just too tiny for my fumble fingers.
I never considered HO structures or building to be "tiny". "Too small" might be a better term when addressing a general group of people who may be modeling everything from Z to G and above, since words mean things.
No offense meant. “Tiny” is not a perjorative; it just means quite small. This is in comparison to O, which we might say is quite big. The relative sizes seem much different when i am trying to scratch build.
i would not say “too small” or “too big” because that sounds judgemental. My observation was pragmatic, not judgemental.
i will try to remember not to use the word Tiny.
No offense taken. Just pointing out that "tiny" isn't how most would describe HO structures; the term could be misunderstood unless qualified. You know how people are, especially model railroaders, so I've learned over the years. You gotta talk like a lawyer or you get hammered!
The Mayor of Gnomeville says Have a good day!
Tiny: a 2-56 screw
Tiny: a 00-90 screw after you've been working with 2-56 screws awhile
IRONROOSTER,York is a collector-only TCA show. Naturally, you're not going to find much in HO, N or Z there. It's like pointing out there aren't any airplanes at an auto show.OTOH, Springfield is not a tinplate collector show or a Scale-only show. It is a all-trains show. I have seen a T-Scale (1/450th) layout there in the past. Heck, they have live steamers in 7.5" gauge every year (just not on a layout) and even a real two foot gauge steamer from the Boothbay museum running in the parking lot. If it is a train, it is welcome at Springfield.
Springfield has a nationwide appeal, most every major manufacturer is there, and 20,000+ people come through the door every year. There are 9 acres of display space in use, and HO is clearly the most numerous scale at the show. I've been to every Springfield show since 1991, and always HO has been clearly the dominant scale there without question.
Please note that I did not post an opinion on what is the "best" scale. It is the best scale for me because I want to model entire trains for a certain railroad and yet still have the ability to easily detail and handle equipment. HO allows me to do what I want. It won't be the best scale for everyone else, but it is clearly the best scale for the majority of model railroaders in North America.
HO is both the most popular and the most dominant. What scale do you think is more popular or even close to HO? And shouldn't there be more non-HO clubs if HO wasn't as dominant as it is?
Paul3What scale do you think is more popular or even close to HO?
Paul, N Scale would be a close second and there are several N Scale clubs plus two N Scale weekends a year with 100% N dealers and N Scale display layouts.
This year's N Scale national convention is at Salt Lake..
I dunno how close N-scale is, Brakie. Certainly the amount of product, number of clubs, and presence at large train shows isn't that close to HO. Not that I'm saying it isn't popular. Clearly, N-scale is the #2 scale in North America (and more popular in Japan), but it still is perhaps half as popular as HO.
Coincidentally, Jim Kelly, in his N Scale Insight column in this month's MR, says, "Modelers in HO outnumber those in N by about five to one."
Bubbytrains
I am wondering here...
How are we ranking all this? It seems all we are counting is number of modelers. That might not matter so much to all cases with manufacturers.
Think about this... If no more HO was ever produced, would that drastically drop the number of HO modelers? I doubt it. There has been so much manufactured, and as the hoarders (and there were TONS of them) leave the hobby, lots of quality HO product is available to be had.
The HO product that is produces now is to fill needs, and improve where there is a large enough market. For Scale Trains to sell any SD-40s, they had to make every other SD-40 obsolete. That is a high bar to maintain. Lord knows, plenty of SD-40s have already been manufactured.
N scalers, though lower in number, might buy a lot more product. When I was in N scale I purchased scores of undecorated Kato locomotives. GP-30s, GP-35s, SD-40s, SD-7s, and many more.
I only need about 30 locomotives to run my planned HO layout, and I already own 90% of them.
I would bet N scalers buy more locomotives than HO scalers.
Now, to stay on topic... back to O scale. If someone makes a good O scale 2 rail GP-7 that is better than anything else, it is a fair bet that nearly all O scalers will want one. That makes the market that much better. If they make the same locomotive in HO scale, well... I already have all the GPs I need (4).
So while the markets may differ by percentage of active modelers, I would be much more interested in knowing which scale makes the best choice to introduce a new model into.
I'll bet O, whether it is 3rd, 4th, or 5th place, is still a viable market that could grow.
Maybe I am way off base.
Kevin, you make some very valid points.
Another thing with O Gauge, is that while it is true, there isn't as much selection, but from the manufacturers veiw point, there is a LOT less competition for what is produced.
There is ocassionally some overlap in models offered, but for the most part there isn't too much of the same thing produced by multiple manufacturers simultaneously , and often when it does happen, it is in different "Niche" markets, say Lionel doing a Scale 3 Rail GP 30, while at the same time, MTH may be offering a semi-scale GP 30, most likely in mostly different road names.
I won't say that duplicate models are NEVER made by multiple MFGRs simultaneously, but it is much less common to compete with identical models as it is in HO.
Kevin,Well, I'm ranking HO as the #1 scale by number of modelers and the amount of product being produced right now. New HO stuff comes out all the time. Heck, not only that, but entirely new HO companies are being created pretty consistently: Moloco, Tangent, ExactRail, ScaleTrains, Spring Mills Depot, etc., are all relatively new companies. And just this month, Arrowhead Models just started up. It's not all the decades old manufacturers in HO like Atlas, Athearn, Bowser, and Walthers.
There have been many models (and paint jobs) yet to be done in HO scale, and many others that were done long ago and are out of date. Modelers want accurate models and appear willing to update their collection with new models, so there's enough business to keep the HO manufacturers going for quite some time.
It may be that N-scalers individually buy more engines and cars than HO-scalers, just like it's logical that HO-scalers buy more than O-scalers, and that O-scalers buy more than G-scalers, etc. But having individual modelers in a smaller scale purchase more models than those in a larger scale doesn't mean that there are more overall sales in the smaller scale. It isn't the amount of models the average modeler buys alone that's important, it's the total number of modelers times the average number of models purchased.
IOW, you could have N-scalers averaging twice the number of models vs. HO modelers. However, 20,000 N-scalers buying 100 models each compared to 100,000 HO-scalers buying 50 models each would mean that HO would still out sell N by more than double.
If N scalers really did purchase more locos overall than HO scalers, then why aren't there more N-scale locos for sale than HO locos? Because there's no way companies wouldn't follow up on that. I mean, they have house payments to make, too.
If you think O (or N) is the best scale to introduce a new model into, you would be...incorrect. They are both very profitable scales, don't get me wrong, but there's a reason why HO has the largest Walthers catalog and why historical associactions generally just offer HO products. The NHRHTA, for example, has only ever offered HO models in the past 50 years or so even though most of the Board of Directors have historically been O-scalers out of the Stamford Club (a scale O-scale club that's been around since the 1930's).
Paul,The following companies offer N Scale ExactRail, ScaleTrains, Spring Mills Depot,Fox Valley, Rapido, Scale Trains,Broadway Limited and Wheels Of Time.
The last track I had N Scale was right after HO in popularity. I don't pay any attention to those surveys because a lot of N Scalers don't buy MR but,reads N Scale and N Scale Railroading magazines.
There's always something new coming out in N Scale.
If one wishes to learn about N Scale one should visit one of the N Scale forums instead of asking questions about N on a HO forum since the majority of the HO guys has no real clue when it comes to N Scale..
Paul3 IRONROOSTER,Regarding the ratio of scales in the hobby, you're right in that no one survey is going to be capable of doing a 100% accurate poll. Any poll will be biased either for or against certain scales depending on who runs it. So lets look at certain things or events that embrace the entire spectrum of the hobby like train shows, items for sale, or clubs. For example, take this year's Springfield Show. Certainly the largest train show in the country and all scales are represented therein (even Lego). There were at least 28 layouts. HO was, by far, the dominant scale with 14 HO layouts (50%). O had 6, N = 2, G = 4 and S = 1 (plus one Lego). And it's not just the number of layouts, it is the size of them. Looking at the show diagram (http://www.railroadhobbyshow.com/files/files/ARS%202018%20Floor%20Plan.v4.1.FINAL(2).pdf), and doing some quick and dirty math, I get a total of 4620 linear feet of layouts (the circumfrence of all the layouts combined). Of these, 2568' are HO. Doing the math, I get 55%. Or look at the Walthers catalogs for each scale (pre-2017 when they combined things). The HO catalog was typically 1000+ pages. The Large Scale (O, S, G, etc.) catalog was less than 400 pages. The N & Z catalog was also less than 400 pages, I believe. If it's 1800 total Walthers pages, HO would be around 55% of the market. Another measure of popularity are clubs. I can't speak for the entire nation, but here in Southern New England (MA, CT & RI - population 11+million) there are at least 32 different club layouts/groups (some clubs do multiple scales). Of these 32 layouts, 19 of them are HO scale, which is 59%. Sorry, but HO is clearly the dominant scale. While the exact percentage is debatable (why would you think it's less than 50%?), the clear advantage of HO is indisputable.
This isn't really a fair comparison. If price is a driving factor (as it is for me) the price of used HO is by far the lowest in the hobby.
If you really want to do O scale, you can of course drastically reduce your costs by buying used, repairing, etc, but doing the same in HO is even cheaper still.
This is not to say that HO is necessarily the "best" scale, but it definitely has the cheapest prices and the widest selection of cheap used stuff.
Last week I suggested that On30 is the obvious compromise because it takes advantage of HO track while still running larger trains. I am a newbie so the forum let me get away with that opinion. Over the last few months I purchased an Ho starter set, ordered an On30 Porter, set up the layout, made several O scale structures from scratch, bashed an Ho box car to make it into a narrow On30 high sided gondola, acquired an On30 Trolley, set up a separate line for it, etc..
The Mogul arrived and also an On30 flat car. The plan was working fine until then.
The Mogul derails at the small bumps in the track. The tender and the flat car are more difficult to set on the rails than the Porter or the Ho cars. Too wide. Can't see under them.
The penny finally dropped. The new cars are larger than the Ho cars and the little Porter. That is why they do not run as well. Hmm. The flaw in the On30 concept has presented itself.
Well, the Porter loco pulling a bashed tall gondola and two regular Ho gondolas still chugs like a champ and my trolley is great. I will not get any points for realism, but heck, my layout is a gnome village. Realism is not a goal.
https://youtu.be/voS6dePOx3c
SeeYou190It seems all we are counting is number of modelers. That might not matter so much to all cases with manufacturers.
I don't think the manufactures look at it that way. They look at models sold and base their production on it.
I'm not sure how this matters in the ratio argument. I point out all the time to folks who are complaining about the cost of new models, that there are lots of cheaper options on the secondary market - forgetting the nutty priced models on Ebay. At train shows you can indeed find a lot of good deals.
Yes, but there have been many complaining for years that a really good "top notch" SD40-2 was still needed. ST stepped in to fill that need. More evidence however that HO is popular and has about a 2/3rds market share.
There were already SD40-2's from Bachman, Athearn, Broadway, Intermountain and KATO (miss any) and yet ST stepped in and offered an even better one. Is there demand in N-scale enough for that kind of selection?
I don't know if there is any evidence to support the idea that, across the board, N-scalers purchase more product than HO modelers. Just because they are roughly half the size doesn't mean they actually buy more because they can fit more in a given space. HO modelers seem to, based on my anecotal observations, often have very large collections with enginens exceeding 100, 200 and even more than 300, and rolling stock (freight cars and the rest) in the 400-600+ range.
But are you representative of HO modelers? There are people buying all those runs of HO engines out there in numbers. I don't "need" as many as I have, but I would hazard I am like many HO modelers with "way more" than I will ever need or run.
I would bet N scalers buy more locomotives than HO scalers. . . - Keven
- Keven
Based on what? What is the evidence that you would make this bet? Size? Again, sales figures may put your bet in doubt.
OldSchoolScratchbuilder Doughless richhotrain Space, cost, and availability are the three principal reasons for the lack of widespread popularity of O scale. Rich Agreed. Just too big, not just a space thing. The locos and rolling stock are wonderful. The detail is exquisite and the sound can begin to sound less tinny than HO onboard sound, so the equipment is great. But everything has to be bigger, and better detailed. How about hills, mountains, and trees; and people. How much more detailed would all of this have to be? Space, cost and availability are not issues for many of us in my opinion. I snapped a picture of part of my basement, entirely devoted to model trains. There is a lot more basement not showing behind the camera and behind the wall on the right. All of the homes in my neighbourhood have basements this size or bigger - our home is smaller than most here. There is plenty of room for a great O scale layout, plus HO and N layouts too ( both of the latter in progress in the picture). Cost and availability can be minimized by building my own structures, rail cars, etc. My layouts don't depend on manufacturers making stuff I want or need, I do that. And, adding detail is not work, it's the most fun part of the entire hobby for me.
My twist on the space issue is not the lack of it, its the fact that all of the scenery items are simply too big for my liking. I like details, and the bigger the items, the more detail that's required, IMO.
Building industries that dwarf HO scale equipment takes long enough in terms of time and tedium as it is, but twice the scale means twice the details and twice the tedium to get it to look right.
I don't want to spend that much time on details. Others may like it, or might not care about it.
traindaddy1 Please "don't shoot the messenger" Seems like (to me) that the "Model Railroader" guys and gals concentrate on HO and smaller gauge/scale projects. Before you "send me to the other forums like the Classic Toys etc., I'd really like to know why, in your opinion, there isn't more interest is the larger "O". As always, many thanks.
Please "don't shoot the messenger"
Seems like (to me) that the "Model Railroader" guys and gals concentrate on HO and smaller gauge/scale projects.
OldSchoolScratchbuilder richhotrain Scratch, you are totally missing the point. It's not that most modelers don't have space to put up some kind of layout. It is that the space that is available could hold so much more if the scale were HO or N than O. For what space you devote to O, you could double the amount of "layout" for HO.. My point is that many modellers want more, just like you have stated. But in my opinion quantity is far less attractive than less with quality and hand crafted structures and scenery. I am not impressed by sprawling layouts of made-in-China plastic buildings. I also don't like the toy-like accessories that Lionel produces. If I buy a kit it is for the purpose of completely kit bashing it into something else that I will feel is a job well done. Example, Elevated Warehouse O-Scale Kit No. 484 by American Model Builders, Inc. First bonus, it's made in the USA, second bonus, it's not plastic, third bonus, it was very affordable as a kit someone bought and never used. I am taking apart every single strip and reassembling my way except the floor, which will become a subfloor and never be seen. Adding lots of my own materials including the sandstone finish on the outside walls, a shale roof, and real glass windows. I can build over 100 of these warehouses and fit them comfortably in my designated O-scale areas, but of course, I only need one.
Should have responded to this post.
All of it impressive. Very much so.
For me, it strikes me as more time spent on building scenery items than building or operating the railroad.
Model building is great, but its not what draws me to the hobby. Others may differ.
And the larger the scale, the more details needed, the more time needed to where it crosses the line of starting to take away available time for the trains.
But detailed O scale stuff looks reall, really cool.
Doughless My twist on the space issue is not the lack of it, its the fact that all of the scenery items are simply too big for my liking. I like details, and the bigger the items, the more detail that's required, IMO. Building industries that dwarf HO scale equipment takes long enough in terms of time and tedium as it is, but twice the scale means twice the details and twice the tedium to get it to look right. I don't want to spend that much time on details. Others may like it, or might not care about it.
This rings pretty true to me.
I do like adding some detail, but I find HO is perfectly sized for the amount of detail I want to add to structures make them look "right" to me. I've done alot of model building (wargames scenery) in aproximately O scale and while I never strove for precise accuracy, it has been my experience that alot more detail is required to get it looking "right" and not toys'ish at that scale.
wjstixIf the question is "why doesn't MR do more articles on O scale?" then I think the answer is best shown in the recent (can't remember the month now, May or June?) issue of the NMRA Bulletin regarding O scale/gauge.
MR is not the NMRA, Apples to six or seven Cadillac dealerships.
Its in the May 2018 NMRA Magazine, the email is called the eBulletin...spent 30min reading through emails before I figured out where to look.
wjstixI wouldn't be surprised now if the majority of 'O Scale' 1:48 layouts in the US aren't high-rail layouts.
I would be. Exactly zero Hi-Rail layouts are Oscale. They are Hi-Rail layouts. The track is not scale, it cannot possibly be because the flanges are not scale. The couplers are generally not scale (claws or Kadee's, as the only option for scale couplers at the moment are about $54 a pair, and most people dont spend money on that if they are into 3rail, from my experience).
Im a 3-rail Hi-Rail modeler, but I didnt take offense to Mr. Getz's article, which btw also stated there was a 3-rail MMR. He did state that the NMRA was focused on scale modeling, and was not interested in duplicating the efforts of other groups that focused on "tinplate" (his words, I just read that as 3rail). LCCA and TCA both adequately cover O 3rail.
There are "highrail standards in the NMRA standards", I dont know if anyone uses these or not.
Mr. Getz did lump all 3-rail into one term "tinplate" which is arguably not that accurate. I wouldnt really call anything other than tinplate "tinplate". Tinplate is actually a different thing entirely.
But I wouldn't expect a guy who has spent his life modeling other than O and reads CTT to understand the nuances of O section of the hobby. Nor would most scale modelers care. Why, its not fully scale modeling, and you can only show someone so many pictures of the NYC track pan guard rails (the ones that prevent a scoop lowered too early from smashing into the end of the track pan and causing a derailment) before they call you on there isnt really a prototype for that. But its fun trying.
If I win the lottery, I am building a 12" to the foot scale railroad with three rails and a giant roller underneath...for fun, also so that I can point to it and justfy it to scale modelers....
To the toys point. Aren't all of these technically toys?
Oh and this thread from CTT provides some interesting viewpoints:
http://cs.trains.com/ctt/f/95/t/270263.aspx
BMME....
You pointed out that hi-rail is technically not O gauge. But apparently common usage in the field lumps them together.
”Interested in O gauge, S gauge, and Standard gauge toy trains? Are you a fan of Lionel, MTH, American Flyer, and other brands of toy trains made today and in the past? If so, the Classic Toy Trains Toy train operating and collecting forum is just for you.”
So, maybe the hi-rail folks consider themselves to be a relaxed group of O gaugers but the ”serious” O gauge prototype modelers might disagree.
The tribalism is the model train fan community is fascinating. Fan is short for Fanatic, after all.
The Gnome BMME.... You pointed out that hi-rail is technically not O gauge. But apparently common usage in the field lumps them together. ”Interested in O gauge, S gauge, and Standard gauge toy trains? Are you a fan of Lionel, MTH, American Flyer, and other brands of toy trains made today and in the past? If so, the Classic Toy Trains Toy train operating and collecting forum is just for you.” So, maybe the hi-rail folks consider themselves to be a relaxed group of O gaugers but the ”serious” O gauge prototype modelers might disagree. The tribalism is the model train fan community is fascinating. Fan is short for Fanatic, after all.
That is not what I said. Or possibly not what I meant since my post was confusing...
I said that it technically not O "Scale". Hi-Rail is definitely O-guage. All of it runs on O-Guage track. Except as noted below...
In reality, both scale out to about 5' between the rails so I'll bring Proto48 into the conversation for arguements sake.
Edit:
Above I transposed the words O scale and Hi-Rail in my reply to Stix...
Should have read "Exactly 0 Hi-Rail Layouts are O scale" vice "Exactly 0 Oscale layouts are Hi-Rail."
On its own the sentence makes sense, but it context it was confusing, since correccted.
Ok. Now i see, (said the blind man, as he picked up his hammer and saw).
wjstixThe editorial basically says any O layout with three rails is a "toy train" layout, and the NMRA doesn't cover "toys". So a $1200 Sunset brass locomotive that's made to run on two-rail O gauge track is a "scale model", but the exact same engine built to run on three-rail O gauge track is a "toy".
Both these models, as well as all my HO locomotives, are toys.
Why do we get so hung up on this? My model soldiers are toys, my 4WD truck is a toy, we all play with toys.
You got a point Kevin and I look at it this way.
Everything's a toy. It started that way at childhood and been that way ever since.
Bigger boys have bigger toys. Some of the kids that played with their trucks a lot when they where kids have an excavation company now.
Some of the kids that played with her Hot Wheels a lot, now have a classic car or two, restore them for a living, or both.
People with lots of money have yachts and jets. Those are nice toys! I don't think they played with boats and planes when they were kids. They just have lots of money.
The Trains we admired and watched all the time when we were kids were just too neat. A little plastic one that rolled back and forth just wasn't good enough. It didn't Rumble, Hiss, Shake the Ground, and Thunder Down the Rails. But they were just too darn big to play with and certainly would not fit in the basement. We were all forced to downsize.
Still love trains
PS..... All the other kids toys got bigger. I guess ours started out as Huge Steel Beasts and somehow just got smaller. They're still real neat to watch though..... It's a Model Railroad thing they probably wouldn't understand.
All of which strays from the initial question, why not O.
Answer: It is too big, takes up too much space, is more expensive than HO or N, and lacks the the availability and diversity of smaller scale locos, rolling stock and structures.
richhotrain All of which strays from the initial question, why not O. Answer: It is too big, takes up too much space, is more expensive than HO or N, and lacks the the availability and diversity of smaller scale locos, rolling stock and structures. Rich
Well, doesnt that depend if the op was asking about wht O isnt covered in MR very much. Then its kind of applicable. But not fully.
BMMECNYC richhotrain All of which strays from the initial question, why not O. Answer: It is too big, takes up too much space, is more expensive than HO or N, and lacks the the availability and diversity of smaller scale locos, rolling stock and structures. Rich Well, doesnt that depend if the op was asking about wht O isnt covered in MR very much. Then its kind of applicable. But not fully.
Here is what the OP asked in his initial post:
richhotrainis more expensive than HO
I dunno, some of those HO cars are pretty expensive - over $60.
The scale is 1:48. If your trains are 1:48 it's O scale. Sure the track may be a little high, but except for some very small protoXX groups, everyone's models are out of scale in some parts like wheels, couplers, etc.
And some big manufacturer's sell their trains with both "HiRail" wheels and "Scale" wheels like Atlas. When it comes to structures their is very little difference - Plasticville is available in HO and O, so is Woodland Scenics.
The only real difference here is size. But that works both ways depending on what you're doing and what you want out of the hobby.
For me I don't have a basement the size of a gymnasium or Convention Center. I am generous to my hobby but spending $500-1,000 or more on a locomotive does not fit my budget parameters for this hobby, not even close.
If what I stated above was feasible I probably would do O scale. The bigger the better right.
There is trade-offs with a big scale like O in comparison with N scale. One must be willing to spend a whole lot more time on detail. You can pretty much almost see a fly on a telephone pole in O scale. On the other end of the spectrum N scale is much more forgiving. HO scale is the happy medium right in between.
Maybe that's why HO is so popular (edit) and O scale some what takes the backseat.
wjstix,For one thing, many of the 3-rail models are not the same as their 2-rail versions. The couplers, coupler pockets, coupler mounts are all different. The wheels tend to be smaller and the flanges are huge. Diesels tend to have split pilots to handle sharper curves and other compromises are made for them to operate on very tight curves. So yes, they aren't scale models but are instead toy trains because the emphasis isn't on the accurate reproduction of the prototype, but instead on the ability to be played with. The fact that they share the same shell of a scale model is irrelevent.
BMMECNYC,Well, there is a prototype for center 3rd rail that I know of, and that's the Nantasket Beach Branch of the New Haven RR in Hingham and Hull, Mass. It was one of the first heavy electric lines in the USA and used an "A" shaped center rail to supply DC power to the self-propelled cars and motor baggage cars.http://www.catskillarchive.com/rrextra/3rail.Html
It was eventually removed due to the electrocution hazard because people that wanted to cross the tracks would step on an outside rail then step on the center rail. Bzzzt!SeeYou190, and Track fiddler,The problem will calling everything in our hobby a "toy" is that the word is not really a compliment nor is it really accurate for scale modeling. A toy is something for a child to play with and something of little to no value (by dictionary definition). Now, scale models are not for children (choking hazards along with breakable parts) and some are quite expensive in time or money spent. They are hardly toys.
Tinplate O or S are indeed toys: they are meant for children to play with.
Put it this way: a scale model of a building made by an architect for a client is something no one would call a toy. I do the same thing, and suddenly it's a toy? Nope. Not buying that.
IRONROOSTER,Sure, some HO is more expensive than O scale. I have brass HO locos that cost way more than even scale O-scale plastic locos. But there is no equivalent to Athearn in O-scale. I can go to any train show in the US and find an Athearn BB car for $5 or less. Can you say the same about scale O-scale?
Paul3The problem will calling everything in our hobby a "toy" is that the word is not really a compliment nor is it really accurate for scale modeling. A toy is something for a child to play with and something of little to no value (by dictionary definition). Now, scale models are not for children (choking hazards along with breakable parts) and some are quite expensive in time or money spent. They are hardly toys.
What is the old saying? The difference between men and boys is the price of their toys. I'm past caring anymore if someone calls my fine scale models "toys". I'm not bothered.
In the grand scheme of the universe, these trains we have really are "toys" for our amusement, even if they are more "sophisticated" vs. childrens toys.
Paul3 I can go to any train show in the US and find an Athearn BB car for $5 or less. Can you say the same about scale O-scale?
Well, the train shows I have been going to lately want $7-10 and up for Athearn BB - some as high as $15. But you're right, the cheapest O scale I have seen lately at train shows run $20 to $25.
OTOH if you're happy with plastic wheels and horn hook couplers, I'm not sure why the 3 rail wheels and couplers bother you.
Paul3 A toy is something for a child to play with and something of little to no value (by dictionary definition). Now, scale models are not for children (choking hazards along with breakable parts) and some are quite expensive in time or money spent. They are hardly toys. Tinplate O or S are indeed toys: they are meant for children to play with.
You need to check prices if you think Tinplate is of "little to no value". New Tinplate is more expensive than plastic. And the plastic can be quite expensive. A lot of it has fragile details to boot. By your definition "Tinplate O or S" are not toys.
Hey Paul3
Although you somewhat offended me a little, I can laugh along with it.
No big thing here and with all due respect you should read your text a little more closely before you make a false analogy. And since you grouped SeeYou190 and myself together I'll clarify what he said too. Basically in a nutshell he said O scale trains that run on 3 rails are considered a toy by the NMRA but the ones that run on two rails are not. He went on to say he doesn't know what the big hang-up is, he could even consider his four-wheel-drive a toy. Basically I elaborated on what he said in a little more detail. I did not categorize our model trains alone as toys either. I basically said everything in the world that is acquired and fun can be considered a toy. Bigger boys have bigger toys. I don't know about you but when I take my 69 classic car and go 0 to 60 in 5 seconds, alert and aware of my surroundings and doing it only where it's safe, such as a controlled environment...... It's a Fun Toy! .... No sense putting rocket science to it.
Okay then, I feel good about setting things straight.... have a great day
IRONROOSTER Well, the train shows I have been going to lately want $7-10 and up for Athearn BB - some as high as $15. But you're right, the cheapest O scale I have seen lately at train shows run $20 to $25. Paul
Paul, do you go to the Timonium show? I really thought I've seen Athearn bb kits and the like there for less than what you quoted, but I haven't really priced them the last couple times. I have picked up nice RTR Intermountain and ExactRail there for as little as $8 (IMRC) and $10 (ExactRail). I'm just up the road from you on 15 about 10 miles and I think I still make it to Timonium in less than 2 hours on Saturdays. (I do grocery shopping in Culpeper on weekends )
riogrande5761I really thought I've seen Athearn bb kits and the like there for less than what you quoted, but I haven't really priced them the last couple times.
Jim,I've also seen BB and Roundhouse kits $15.00 and used BB and Roundhouse with KD and metal wheels selling for $20.00 at several tables while other dealers had the same kits for far less.
I seen a guy fork over $65.00 for a new undecorated BB SW7 cow and calf set. Both engines was powered He was happy as a 2 headed woodpecker in a bucket of worms since these was new and both had their detail bag..
Although I understand the idea that all our trains are "toys", I kinda go more for what Louis Hertz (IIRC) believed - that they're ALL models, as all electric trains are miniature versions of real trains. Some are just more accurate than others.
If we're saying scale trains have to run on 'scale' track...I'd note that running 1:48 scale equipment on O gauge (1.25" gauge) track means running on track that's five feet wide in scale, instead of the correct 4' 8-1/2" standard gauge....no matter how high the rails are!
BTW you know Lionel hasn't made "tinplate" track for several years now. They only do their "Fastrack" with scale ties and roadbed.
http://www.lionelstore.com/LionelStore%20Product%20Images/612033-1.jpg
When I was a "hi-railer" in the 1970's-80's most of my equipment - except for some craftsman's kits I built - were the old Atlas cars (both RTR and kits). They came with wheels with deep flanges that ran fine on 'tinplate' track from Lionel or K-Line. It was very easy to remove the large truck-mounted Lionel compatible (more or less) couplers and put in Kadees. I presume the deep flanges worked just as well on Atlas' O two-rail track they produced then...so I'm not clear how putting a car on two rail track makes it 'scale' but the exact same car sitting on three rail track is a 'toy'?
Sunset Models Inc. had a "3rd Rail" line of 1:48 brass engines that run on three-rail track.
http://www.3rdrail.com/
These engines are a lot more detailed than some of the "scale models" currently on the market.
riogrande5761 IRONROOSTER Well, the train shows I have been going to lately want $7-10 and up for Athearn BB - some as high as $15. But you're right, the cheapest O scale I have seen lately at train shows run $20 to $25. Paul Paul, do you go to the Timonium show? I really thought I've seen Athearn bb kits and the like there for less than what you quoted, but I haven't really priced them the last couple times. I have picked up nice RTR Intermountain and ExactRail there for as little as $8 (IMRC) and $10 (ExactRail). I'm just up the road from you on 15 about 10 miles and I think I still make it to Timonium in less than 2 hours on Saturdays. (I do grocery shopping in Culpeper on weekends )
I do go to Timonium shows with my son (I drive to Sterling, he drives from there) to most shows. I also, hit a smattering of Greenberg and local shows like the Bunker Hill Train Club show in Ransom, WV.
The prices to me seem to be going up. I'm not really into collecting Athearn BB, but I do collect MDC/Roundhouse Old Timers. So I kind of notice the used HO prices and it seems like Athearn BB has been creeping up over the last 2-3 years. But I am only interested in unbuilt kits (used new stuff so to speak), so maybe the used built ones loose in cardboard boxes are less. I consider those to be junk boxes and just skip over them - although that may be too harsh.
Of course at a train show you can occaisionally find a good price - I picked up a couple of TrainMinature boxcar kits for $4 a piece last year. But those were the only unbuilt new in box kits sitting in card board box, the rest were used cars without boxes just sort of heaped in there. So finds at good prices are there, just not the norm.
I love O scale 2 rail, but with only a 8 foot by 9 foot train room, I lack the space for what I would desire in a railroad. Even HO scale is tight in that space. I dislike plastic engines, diecast metal or brass is prefered and I am a diesel person, so mostly high doller brass if I want modern diesels. I do have an old All Nation F3 that I am slowly painting up in Monon passenger colors for display purposes. For what most O scale brass diesels sell for, I can get G scale for my garden railway or 1 1/2 inch scale for my ride on line my wife and I just started building.
Silly NT's, I have Asperger's Syndrome
Lionel O36 FasTrack has a middle rail. does it qualify as hi-rail?
The Gnome Lionel O36 FasTrack has a middle rail. does it qualify as hi-rail?
Hi rail is generally considered to be track which supports the deeper flanges of Lionel or American Flyer trains (and compatibles). In the past the smaller flange wheels did not operate these rails. Although Lionel's O gauge Fastrack is still a sheet of metal folded over, their American Flyer Fastrack has rail that is approx. code 125 and has a rail cross section like that of MicroEngineering track. It will support both deep flanges (HiRail) and RP25 flanges (Scale), although the turnouts and crossings have wide/deep flange ways for the HiRail wheels.
So yes Lionel O36 Fastrack is hirail
Paul,
thanks. That helps. I guess that means the old stuff will run on the fastrack.
A starter set is not expensive. And i am not into building roadbeds or filing points or nailing track down, so the rtr sounds good to me.
If i get a starter set, i can take my time finding a few used tinplate cars.
not sure how the new line will interface with the on30 lines, but i can figure that out later.
The GnomeIf i get a starter set, i can take my time finding a few used tinplate cars.
As a fun fact I've seen a pretty nice O-27 layout on a 36" x 80" hollow core door.
The guy used Lionel O-27 cars,locomotive and structures from the 50s.
Larry,
I think you are saying that 036 will not run 027 cars from the fifties. is that correct?
BRAKIEJim,I've also seen BB and Roundhouse kits $15.00 and used BB and Roundhouse with KD and metal wheels selling for $20.00 at several tables while other dealers had the same kits for far less.
Modus operandi at shows and Ebay. My point is, generally you don't have to pay elevated prices for Athearn blue box and the like. There has been a glut of kits on the market over the past 10 years after the emergence of RTR and it has been evident at the shows I go to.
I have been going to 3-4 shows a year and really haven't noticed much change myself. People comment on stuff so I make it a point to look around to see if I see those things myself, but pretty much each time I see a high availability of low priced kits at shows. Sure, things vary a bit from show to show, but over all I it doesn't seem to have changed much that I see.
My "common sense" guess as to the reason for high availability is due to: 1) people had bought/hoarded more kits than they had time to build and have been selling them off since they can buy RTR and 2) semi related, kits have been going back on the secondary market as part of estate sales as modelers with collections pass away or sell off stuff no longer needed.
The Gnome Larry, I think you are saying that 036 will not run 027 cars from the fifties. is that correct?
Stix, thanks. The old cars will run on the new track. That works for me!
BMMECNYC Mr. Getz did lump all 3-rail into one term "tinplate" which is arguably not that accurate. I wouldnt really call anything other than tinplate "tinplate". Tinplate is actually a different thing entirely.
This is the point I was trying to make (and which you state more clearly). Tinplate to me is like the MTH/Lionel Corporation reproductions of the 1930's Blue Comet, not detailed and weathered models running on fully scenicked layouts like say Norm Charbonneau's layout.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1wreJCi2Ob-MFme9L7Lp9g
We're basically all adults playing with electric trains in the view of most 'normal' people. As NMRA membership continues to decline year after year, it seems odd to exclude a certain percentage of people who share the same interests and might wish to join us, just because their electric trains run a little differently than ours.
It's kinda splitting hairs. O Scale Railroading magazine seems to do fine showing layouts in two-rail O, hi-rail, On30, etc. Why can't the NMRA welcome all those folks too?
p.s. Yes I know the name changed, but the NMRA's magazine was "The Bulletin" for a very long time. Gets harder as you get older, I still catch myself referring to Milwaukee's baseball team as the Braves...or Kansas City as the A's.
The guy's layout look like a 0-27 layout from the 50s Lionel Ad.
0-27 cars and locomotives should be right at home on 0-36 track.
Larry, thanks. Will the old couplers be able to link with a newer loco?
Stix,
I tried to quote your post, but something in it is broken and I cant actualy quote (i dont know what the problem is, but there is some sort of forum software error).
Anywho,
NMRA isnt excluding anyone, the National just isn't "catering" to the three-rail world (at least Mr. Getz isnt).
The Nutmeg division has toured on several occaisions 3 rail layouts, and they were just as well received as the 2 rail layouts. And at least one Large scale tinplate layout.
I dont know if we've done a On30 layout. I could ask the layout tour coordinator, but we try to hit at least one 3rail a year.
As to Lionel not making Tinplate, MTH now makes reproductions of the large scale 3 rail trains (which we also just toured back in February). I think it was a result of a lawsuit, and I believe it was somehow related to K-line (someone who says they are in the "know" told me this, but I take everything I hear about "Ogauge land" (my words as an Oguage 1:48 scale except oversize rail, claws and how did I forget Talgo trucks, guy) with a salt block (much larger than a large grain, its a farming thing).
Wow, that was rambly and doesnt make complete sense. I blame Thimble Island Mutually Assured Distruction.