Is N scale finally 'scale'?

[Anonymous]

How many details on a prototype train traveling 70 mph do you really see. If you want "scale" models, buy them. Who cares what "scale" they are. As a model railroader, I find N scale to be a trade off. You gain the advantage of having a little space hold a nice layout, as well as having a large space with an awsome layout. The practical reality is the train must stay on the track hence the need for functionality. If prototypical details on locos and rolling stock and such are whats important to you then maybe N "scale" (yes i said "scale") is not perfect for you. The fact that they are detailed enough to present themselves as realistic may be insufficient for your taste. In that case they will always fall short. But I say that if you truly consider details as important in the model railroad hobby, you must consider the layout in total. Not just the train running on the track. What good is a superdetailed loco and cars, if they just run around on a mediocre layout or just plywood. Ask yourself if detail is really important to you. If it is I am convinced that the level of detail that is compressed into an N scale layout is greater in quantity and that is a quality all it's own. The scene in Nscale can be developed to a greater degeree than in HO scale. You can have an industrial area or town with more in it on the same footprint than HO scale. I believe this fact to be of critical importance. When you see a train, ask yourself, how much of the rest of what's in your view can you create in HO or larger scales. I believe in N you can do more. Grousing about flanges and rail head height to me is really irrelevant. Who looks at that when the train rolls by? I don't, do you? If these are the things that you look at perhaps it is more of a collector mentality you have. Not that that is bad, but as someone who enjoys building a layout and running a train, I think you get more bang for the buck in NScale. Furthermore, when is the last time you took a photo loop to the train store. I have several Atlas tank cars and many Microtrains cars that when you look at them under a loop you see things that are not visible with the naked eye. Such as fine print which is legible and crisp and my favorite, rivets and bolt heads.

[Tracklayer]

I'm an old N scaler from way back (20 years), and can testify to what others have said about how much things have advanced in N scale over that time.
However... I still have mostly Rapido couplers on my rolling stock and I'm not into DCC yet, but have a great little three and a half by six foot, two track layout that I very much enjoy - which I hope to double the size of in the not too distant future.

Tracklayer

[Anonymous]

I have been modeling Nscale for over 30 years. It is excellent equipment and great space value I like. I used Peco code 55 on my last layout and hed virtually no derailments for 3 years. If you are careful and do your roadbed right you will also have good operation with this size rail. I love N scale.

[jkroft]

definitely love N scale...........definitely hate sleeper ties and putting back together a coupler assembly which I accidentally took apart.

[trainfan1221]

I am in N scale, and can be a stickler for things looking real. I have little problem with the size of details, as long as the overall look of things is good I am satisfied. There is no reason to have products that aren't proportioned well these days. Maybe the flanges are a little bigger, but I don't find this too noticeable when actually on the track. as for couplers, I guess we're still waiting, but it took years for scale HO couplers too.

[Anonymous]

If I was starting from scratch, I would probably pick N scale. It's the thought of replacing my HO rolling stock, engines, and decoders that keeps me from converting. Plus, HO has more kits whereas N seems to have more RTR, and, well, N scale equipment seems to be priced like women's clothing ("How can a skimpy little thing like <that> cost so much...?)

[csmith9474]

After seeing the OUTSTANDING job that Kato did with the Super Chief, it looks like life is gettin' pretty good for you N scalers. I am truly impressed.

[tomikawaTT]

QUOTE: Originally posted by gvdobler

The other night I was on final approach over Las Vegas on Southwest Airlines and I looked out the window and caught a quick peek into a passing garage door that was open and was I almost blinded by these huge flanges on a model railroad and I thought --- oh, N scale for sure.

If that was my garage, the scale is HOj and the huge flanges are RP25 on code 108 wheels.

Seriously, I have seen beautiful work done in every scale. Some N scale layouts recently featured in the US and Japanese model mags had me wondering about scale until I read the captions.

On the other hand, some layouts in every scale are seriously ugly - including my under-construction efforts. The Plywood Central is unlikely to win any beauty contests, no matter what scale it's built in.

If the object is to capture the flavor of BNSF in northern Arizona, or UP (ex-SP) in southern Arizona, by all means go N scale unless you have an empty warehouse and a megabuck to build in a larger scale. If the object is to build a perfect scale model of (fill in the blank,) it will be easier in a larger scale, as long as (fill in the blank) is a single building or piece of rolling stock.

The thing that leans me away from N is physiology - arthritis doesn't do a thing for manual dexterity, and reading microscopic reporting marks without using binoculars is a challenge I can live without.

Unfortunately, none of us are getting any younger.

Chuck

[Adelie]

My guess is that most of us live with the Talgo couplers. I'd love to switch to body mounts, but I have a large enough fleet that the cost and time would be prohibitive. Since almost all of my fleet has Micro Trains, Atlas or Intermountain trucks, I'd be replacing good to very good trucks with similar models simply to body mount the couplers. I'd have to win the lottery so I could give up work to justify that amount of time.

Intermountain cars have the option of mounting either way. I believe the hole for mounting the coupler is already in the frame. The kits can easily have their couplers mounted on the body, while the RTR cars are truck-mounted.

[nucat78]

I'm just laying track so this is premature, but are a lot of N-scalers switching to body mount couplers? I've been out of the hobby for several years and talgo mounts used to be my beef against N-scale. Now that I'm back in N, I'm wondering if I should put conversions to body mounts on the to-do list.

Also, anybody make a pop-in replacement knuckle coupler for N-scale? I've seen references to Unimate and Accumate but I thought Accumate is HO and above and haven't found much on Unimate.

Thanks!

QUOTE: Originally posted by bikerraypa

QUOTE: Originally posted by hyperion

I think it pretty much boils down to whether you want to model a train or a railroad.

I converted to N [...] MTL body mounts are replacing my old Talgo trucks [...].

[ATSFCLIFF]

I model in N scale and agree that in the early years outsized couplers, large flange wheels and poor details had been the bane for most N modellers. These are things of the past, take a look at the knuckle couplers by MT, wheelsets by Atlas & InterMountain, the detailing on engines and rolling stock by Kato, Atlas and IM. The code 55 tracks by MicroEngineering and Peco are well made and look realistic. It all depends on what you buy and, as in all scales, add ons, little detailing makes the models look better.
Cheers,
Cliff


http://cliffordconceicao3310.fotopic.net/c328807.html

[navygunner]

I started out on an HO 14'x8' layout that Dad built back in the early 1970s. The middle 10'x4' foot space was filled in with industry and housing. I loved running it, but wanted to make deliveries to the industries.

With N Scale I am able to have that and more on a 11'x3'6" layout.. I can run the California Zephyr and a DRGW PA/BA or CB&Q ABBA consist or a N&W Y3 or 2 with 40 70 ton hoppers without having the train in a turn. Plus I have a yard and industrial spurs with track to service them.

I don't have a basement, so the small spare bedroom that my layout exists in has to get-r-done. The detail, quality and availability of N Scale has taken a huge jump in the past 10 years. HO is nice, but if you have room for an empire in that scale, imagine what can be done in N! I generally run a 4 loco MU of C44-9CW's, SD-70's, SD-80's, Trainmasters, H16-44's; plus N&W Mallets, NKP Berkshires's or the occasional Yellowstone. Oh! and a C of G 2-10-2 or N&W J Class loco's. My average train length is about 5' long, that would be almost 10" in HO. Do the math and assess your abilities, then make your decision. I opted for bigger trains are better.

[Anonymous]

As a guy who is getting back into the hobby and who has limited space, I have found this forum to be very helpful. I like the idea of modling a railroad as opposed to a train. I have some nicely detailed HO equipment that I basically have on display, and its good for that, but if I employed HO in my new layout, I would be very limited (given my space constraints) in the scope of what I could and could not do. You guys have sold me on N

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by archie2

Every time this question or something similar pops up, somebody invariably cites the Reid Brothers. Yes, their layout is beautiful. But, honestly, how many modelers out there can duplicate it in N scale? N scale has made great strides, but as I see it, big drawbacks must be overcome before you can truly call it "scale." Here they are:

Wheel flanges. Way oversized. Sure, you can get smaller sizes but how many modelers have converted?

Rail height. Like flanges, you can use code 55 rail, but most modelers don't.

Handrails. Thick.

Couplers. Even Kadees are oversized. They are in HO, as well (except the #58's), but they still look better in HO.

Talgo trucks. No need for comment.

Detail. Molded on or missing altogether. To my eye, at least, detail does not disappear or become irrelevant just because the scale is smaller.

I am an N-scale guy and have been for years. I fully recognize that the scale has its limitations. For instance, scale sized handrails would be great, but they would also be extremely fragile...and yes, more detail would be great, but again, is it always necessary to have that detail?

For me, the important question to ask is this...do N-scale's limitations distract you from the simple pleasure of running a great layout? Not in my opinion...this hobby is about fun or relaxation or whatever it is that floats your boat...we have enough things to stress about in everyday life...no need to bring that stress to your hobby.

Brad

• Reply
• Edit