Width of 2 lane road for HO scale.

[Anonymous]

I know this probably has already been covered. I tried to search for it but could not find it. So what is the width for a 2 lane road on HO scale.

[selector]

It depends on the width of the lanes. If we assume that each lane is 12' wide, and double that, we get 24'. 24' in inches is 24 X 12 = 288". If one inch in HO is the same as 87" in real life, then we need "one eighty-seventh" of 288 inches. To get the answer, we must therefore divide 288" by 87", deriving an answer of 3 1/4" (3.3" in decimal).

Sound good? I thought about it and tried to visualize a road next to a Hudson, and came up with 3", so we can't be far off.

[willy6]

Not to be a rivet counter,i did a little research. 2 lane U.S. highways versus 2 lane state highways and 2 lane local roads and local state laws got me confused.So i cut a piece of styrene, put vehicles on it (after i put on the inner and outer stripes) to check for clearance and decided on 3.5 inches of width.

[bcawthon]

According to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 12 feet is a the standard width for most traffic lanes on through streets, so a 2-lane road would be 3.31", as selector notes. Your 3.5" would yield lanes about 12 feet, 8 inches wide, which is fine, too, as some streets and highways have wider lanes.

Also remember most roads have some kind of shoulder at least a few scale feet wide along either edge to allow for drainage and emergency parking. City streets will generally have parking lanes about 8 feet wide (for parallel parking).

Residential streets are often narrower than 12 feet, especially when they are not through streets. Those lanes can be as little as 9 feet wide, though 10 is more common. At 9 feet, there can be some problems with maneuvering fire trucks. A 2-lane residential street could be about 2.75" in HO scale.

The real test of a good layout street width is not how a car looks on the street, but how a truck looks. Trucks can be up to 8 feet, 6 inches (102") wide, plus mirrors, so 12 feet is a better width because it allows room for the truck to fit comfortably between the center stripe and edge of the road.

Incidentally, back in the 1950s, when the original Interstate Highway System was being built, traffic lanes were 12 feet wide with 10-foot shoulders. Today, 12 feet is the minimum width and requires a lower speed limit in some cases.

[DSchmitt]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bcawthon

The real test of a good layout street width is not how a car looks on the street, but how a truck looks. Trucks can be up to 8 feet, 6 inches (102") wide, plus mirrors, so 12 feet is a better width because it allows room for the truck to fit comfortably between the center stripe and edge of the road.

My opinion. It is better to make streets a little narrow so that they don't overwelm the other scenery and the trains. I like 10-foot lanes.

Good point about needing shoulders.

[Anonymous]

Here is how I did all my streets width. A very easy and simple way. I think the width came out great too.

A piece of 2x4 stud which is not actually 4" wide. Then I taped two pencils on each side. That is how I got the width of my road and they look perfecto. I went with the visual not the measurable aspect

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by [e-mail]

I know this probably has already been covered. I tried to search for it but could not find it. So what is the width for a 2 lane road on HO scale.

Thanks for the question Dave. I have wondered about this myselfand thanks to the respondents. Good information.

Trevor

[bcawthon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by DSchmitt

QUOTE: Originally posted by bcawthon

The real test of a good layout street width is not how a car looks on the street, but how a truck looks. Trucks can be up to 8 feet, 6 inches (102") wide, plus mirrors, so 12 feet is a better width because it allows room for the truck to fit comfortably between the center stripe and edge of the road.

My opinion. It is better to make streets a little narrow so that they don't overwelm the other scenery and the trains. I like 10-foot lanes.

Good point about needing shoulders.

I have often wondered how a prototypically accurate road width could overwhelm anything unless you are doing a scale model of an Interstate and even there, it would be the required median and shoulders on both sides of each traffic direction that ate up the space.[:)]

However, "protoypically accurate" covers several road widths. The 12-foot width is a modern standard for a through street just as 102" is a modern standard maximum truck width.

There are plenty of 10-foot roads around and many that are even narrower, though not by much. In times past, roads were often narrower as were truck widths which were limited to 8 feet (or less in some areas). I know I keep mentioning trucks, but cars are seldom much over 6 feet wide so a truck is a more accurate gauge of what looks right on a layout thoroughfare.

[loathar]

3.5" is prototypical for a 24' wide 2 lane road.(no berm). This looks WAY too wide on a smaller layout. IMHO 2.25"-2.5" looks better. If you have the room for a wide highway, go for it. If not, go a little narrower. Stripes are 6" wide. That works out to a little less than 1/8".

[DSchmitt]

When I worked in LA 20 years ago there was at least one section of elevated freeway that had 10-foot lanes because of the width of the structure. I doubt its been widened since then.

The narrowest lanes on a California state highway (non freeway) that will be stripped is 9 feet. While there aren't many this narrow, they do exist. There are also a few sections of very minor highways without centerline stripes, because they are too narrow for two 9 foot lanes and also a few without stripes because they are not paved..

12 foot lanes and 8 foot paved shoulders are what we would like to have on rural highways and rural local roads, but overall there are more miles of roads that don't meet this standard than do.

[tatans]

Aren't (most), some, road allowances 66 feet?

[bcawthon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by loathar

3.5" is prototypical for a 24' wide 2 lane road.(no berm). This looks WAY too wide on a smaller layout. IMHO 2.25"-2.5" looks better. If you have the room for a wide highway, go for it. If not, go a little narrower. Stripes are 6" wide. That works out to a little less than 1/8".

Hmmm... I think 2.5 inches is about the minimum unless you're doing something like a gravel county road. That's just under 9 feet allowing for the center stripe.

To me, a 40-scale-foot wide road (2 traffic lanes, 2 parking lanes) would be saved for a town's main street where you will probably have a number of vehicle models. That's about 5.5 inches curb-to-curb and will look fine with anything from a motorcycle to Rocky Mountain doubles. Use 10 feet everywhere else and select smaller vehicles. Outside the city limits add maybe a quarter-inch or so of superfine ballast on either side of a 20-foot-wide road for a shoulder and you will have a good-looking street about 3 inches wide that could even be a secondary highway in some parts of the country.

For areas you want the scenery to really dominate, there's nothing wrong with a 2-inch-wide back country road where oncoming vehicles have to yield right-of-way to get past each other. You could even create a mini-scene with a couple of farm trucks and two old codgers arguing about who is going to pull off the road to let the other by.

Don't forget that even though the tracks may only be 4 feet, 8.5 inches apart, a train can be 10 feet or more in width and will tower over any legal truck at a grade crossing. If you are still worried about the vehicles and roads overwhelming the trains and scenery, switch to using actual HO-scale vehicles. It helps a lot to put things in their proper perspective.

[Anonymous]

10 foot is much more common around here. If I'm in a truck or tractor, I'll often get either off of, or to the edge of the road to meet something big. Also, we don't have stripes, except on the new bridge. Sort of anyway, it's such a crappy bridge, that the contractor had to come back and grind off all of the big humps for it to be opened, and they took off the stripes where it was ground. It took two weeks for them to get stripes down on it, and it's less than 50 feet long. Something to think about for building roads. You might also want a construction zone.

Greg

[bcawthon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by trainwreck100

.... Something to think about for building roads. You might also want a construction zone.

Greg

Absolutely! Especially with all the great models coming out from Norscot, Motorart and others.

Bill C.

[tomikawaTT]

Don't kid yourselves that residential streets are narrow! The one in front of my house, a secondary street in a tract-house development, is 45 feet wide!

Quick way to generate a busy looking highway scene without moving cars. Put up the usual 'prelude to a construction zone' yellow signs. Put the flagger (male or female) right where the road either disappears into the scenery or drops off the table. Have "Follow the pilot car" on the flagger's lollipop, but have the "Stop" side facing the line of stopped vehicles. The pilot car is somewhere between hither and yon, and nothing will move until it gets back. (A 24 sheet billboard with a 'Next time, take the time to take the train' sign would be an appropriate touch for a '50's layout.)

[bcawthon]

You could also have an implied accident or roadblock scene with a police car blocking the road and a cop stopping traffic. Busch offers police cars with flashing lights or you could make your own with an LED and simple flasher circuit. I did that for a friend's layout in a mini-scene where a pulpwood truck had lost its load.

[Anonymous]

Hey all thanks for the many replies this will help me out a great deal. Sorry that I didn't get back sooner. Been busy working on the Layout. Almost done with all the plaster cloth, then on to what I think is the best part SCENERY. Once again Thanks all... If you are ever in Hawaii... send me an email for tour of Layout...