I have never been into DCC either. I know that it is easier to wire, but I like DC. Mainly becuase I like workin on my layouts.
Lionel collector, stuck in an N scaler's modelling space.
Army National Guard E3MOS 91BI have multiple scales nowZ, N, HO, O, and G.
Chuck, your layout is looking good.
I got the "Circuitron" AR-2 and DT-4 wired in to control my trolley up and running. I really like the function of the Auto-reverse unit from Trainelectronic.com, but this unit can not do intermediate stops. I suppose I could have tried to tie all three units together and get the results I wanted, but that would have been more money than I wanted to spend.
I removed the rear coupler and found there is no way to convert a standard Rapido coupler to fit, so I ordered a set from Kato.
Thanks for all your help.
They are (2 of them) phase III. Kato sold them in a two loco set (both powered.) I think the road #'s are 94 and 34. When I purchased the loco's I also got a 5 passenager car set of Con-Cor phase iv cars.
Sure be glad when I get my layout to a piont I can get things running again.
These are in Amtrack colors.
Just a little info.
Atlas will be doing a re-release of their "N" scale shay loco sometime in Jan. 07
In case you didn't know.
Hey all, I am an HO modeler in the past, but the townhouse my family and I are in just cannot support HO, so I am thinking about making the jump to N. ALL my brainstorming session are in HO and thus all my drawings are in HO.
My question is this: Is it safe to assume that you can just multiply all things HO by 0.54375 ( which is 87.1/160) and call it N scale?
Additionally, do rules like "3 axled locos should do not take to anything less than a 22" radius curve in HO" scale down to "3 axled locos should do not take to anything less than a 12" radius curve in N" accurately?
Dave Loman
My site: The Rusty Spike
"It's a penny for your thoughts, but you have to put your 2 cents in.... hey, someone's making a penny!"
claymore1977 wrote:Hey all, I am an HO modeler in the past, but the townhouse my family and I are in just cannot support HO, so I am thinking about making the jump to N. ALL my brainstorming session are in HO and thus all my drawings are in HO. My question is this: Is it safe to assume that you can just multiply all things HO by 0.54375 ( which is 87.1/160) and call it N scale? Additionally, do rules like "3 axled locos should do not take to anything less than a 22" radius curve in HO" scale down to "3 axled locos should do not take to anything less than a 12" radius curve in N" accurately?
I too have switched to N and I am using a HO plan for my layout, I did the conversion by X 0.54 allowing some space for error and I drew it out on the foor and it worked, the only thing that has to be kept the same was the aisle width. My next problem is which track to go for; I want to get away from Peco European track and go with either Atlas or ME.
Shaun
I too have switched to N and I am using a HO plan for my layout, I did the conversion by X 0.54 allowing some space for error and I drew it out on the foor and it worked, the only thing that has to be kept the same was the aisle width. My next problem is which track to go for; I want to get away from Peco European track and go with either Atlas or ME.Shaun
Good to know that its worked for others. And as for the aisle width.. lord knows I would like to scale down my gut by 0.54375! Just doesnt work that way.
Since this will be my first N layout / first layout in quite a while, whats a good track to go with? I am leaning towards Atlas code 80 just due to its availability in my area.... comments concerns?
9 3/4" seems to be the standard for in just like 22" is the standard.
RR Redneck wrote: 9 3/4" seems to be the standard for in just like 22" is the standard.
Not quite. Actually, 11" is the N scale equivalent to 22" in HO. 9 3/4" for N is like HO's 18" radius. You'll need 11" at the very least to get 3-axle diesels around a curve. Broader is better. I run 6-axles diesels and medium steam, and I use a 13 3/4" minimum.
Good luck!
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
claymore1977 wrote: Since this will be my first N layout / first layout in quite a while, whats a good track to go with? I am leaning towards Atlas code 80 just due to its availability in my area.... comments concerns?
Welcome to N-scale!
Track choice will depend on your modeling tastes. You certainly can't go wrong with Atlas code 80. It's been around for many years, it's dependable, can accommodate older deep flanged wheels, and there is a wide choice of accessories. It's also less costly and easy to find. However, some will point out that this type of track is too ‘toy-like' in appearance.
Atlas code 55 has been around for a few years now and has continued to expand in its offerings. It looks more realistic than code 80, but will not accommodate older deep-flanged wheels. However, since you are just getting into N-scale, this should not be a big issue for you. Most locos made over the past ten or so years are compliant, and you can always either pass over or change out any deep-flanged wheel sets on rolling stock.
I don't have any experience with ME track, other than it's not as widely available and is pricey. It seems to draw the more advanced and discriminating modelers.
I'd suggest you first consider Atlas code 55 as you are new to the scale and are not tied down with older equipment with flange issues. If you don't like it, then code 80 should do just fine.
Hi Dave,
Good questions you have there.
You can indeed shrink an HO layout down by the method you describe, with a few exceptions.
Human areas don't shrink well as humans don't tend to shrink well. Track spacing (parallel tracks) is another thing to pay attention to, especially on curves. Also, you need to keep in mind any reach issues. Usually this isn't a problem as it usually gets better, but some plans actually develop problems when you shrink them that don't exist in "full size".
Curve radius minimum in N is usually set at a minimum of 9 3/4" for a tight radius curve. 11" is better, and 15" is pretty good.
But I would suggest that those should all be thought of as minimums.
You see, by just shrinking the layout by 0.54375 and adding back in the human space, you lose one of the main advantages of going to N scale. You loose the chance to offer bigger curves (from the trains perspective) then your HO buddies could ever hope for. You lose the vast scenic possibilities that the scale has to offer as well.
Look at it this way. In HO scale trains that can handle a 24"r curve always look better on a 28"r curve, right? Same is true for N. A train that can squeeze around a 9 3/4"r curve will look much better on an 11"r curve. N scale trains on a 22"r curve look great, and the same train on a 30"r curve approaches a very realistic look.
Add to that all of that the scenic possibilities of N scale, with the ability to model wide open vista's and scenery that dwarfs the trains in a very realistic way and you've got the makings of a real eye catcher.
Now, with all that said, you're not in a situation where you can model floor to ceiling mountains and huge 30"r curves.
For your situation you might concider shrinking that layout by a bit less then 0.54375. Maybe shrink it by .4 or something so you still get the smaller size you need, but also allowing you to begin to take advantage of the other real benefits of N scale. Instead of dropping the minimum radius to 11", how about doing the same layout with a 13 or 15 inch minimum radius? What about giving yourself an extra 6" for scenery in some key areas. It can make a world of difference in the appearence of things. A overcrowded scene, for example, becomes believable when you do this.
One last thing.......
Keep asking questions! We're not afraid of them. We like them, even the ones you think are stupid. We're like that, we're gluttons for punishment!
Hi, as pcarrell said if your not carefull you can loose the advantage of N scale, when I transfered the HO plan I used to N I took advantage of the space and increased the curve radius my minimum radius is 24 inch but the average is 30 inch with some as large as 50 inch. I also increased the aisles from 24 inch to 30 inch minimum. All I now have to do is buy my track, not having seen the Atlas track as it's not available in the shops here in the UK ( I have a choice of Peco or Peco here in the UK) I was a bit concerned at the plastic frog I have gotten use to the reliability of Peco and the 99% metal contruction of the frog.
claymore1977 wrote:Well the only real reason I am seriously considering the switch is so that I can FIT a layout in period. It will prolly have to just simply scale down without changing much. Bigger and Better comes with a basement :)
One other thing to be aware of when going from HO to N scale is how the couplers/trucks work. In HO the couplers are body mounted. With N scale they are mosly truck mounted and when upgrading to Micro-Trains couplers you usually purchase the complete truck with couplers built in. I have found this to be a bit more expensive that HO but coupler height problems virtually go away with N scale. Also coupler length is important. There are short long and medium coupler lengths. Different cars use different lengths. I find it is really a matter of just trying to match what was there. I buy my trucks by the 20 pack which will do 10 cars. I always have some on hand this way and I save a fair amount of money. I started early and have all of my trucks switched over. Now I don't have to worry about a big expense of doing a massive switch over. Just some thoughts. I really think you'll eNjoy N scale once you get going. I have always been an HO'er and really miss the larger rolling stock and buildings but what everyone says about the fact you get more sceanery and more space between buildings really ballances things out. It is just a matter of getting used to the differences and not letting them get in the way of you having fun.
Rob Newman
GNP007: thanks for the tip, sounds like a money and stress saver long term!
Now I am after SP/UP/D&RGW locos and I am having trouble finding a manufacturer that has these road names. Found a few, but I am unfamiliar with the quality of these brands. Any suggestions? Looking for medium-low cost/ medium quality, DCC equipped machines.
Weighing in on the brands of locomotives: I find Atlas and Kato to have some of the best for the money DCC equipped locomotives. They run well, they are reasonably quiet. Those two brands will likely have most of the diesels you are looking for in the UP/SP/D&RGW flags.
However, if your looking at steam equipment, well thats a different beast as far as price and selection. Concor makes some great running steam, many with the ability to put in DCC in their most recent models. Still waiting on Athearns line to come out, so don't know yet. Lifelike and Bachman also produced some good models in the last couple of years but as with all of these, the price is substantially higher.
If your thinking sound as well. Well I can vouch for both the E7s from precision craft models and the PA/PB from concor. Although the PCM seam to work much better: both in sound and running.
I guess it really comes down to era modeled, price desired, and equipment choice.
Well, and I know people will gather the lynch mob with this comment, but I am not really all that excited about steam. Perhaps because I am a young'n at 28, but I grew up with SP diesels thundering across the AZ desert landscape.
Sound can wait till its more affordable. Every year gigatronics get cheaper, smaller and faster, so its only a matter of time.
Not worried about loco motor sound all that much as I plan on having ambient noises on the layout, aka sawmill noise, downdown traffic noise, bubbling creek, cross buck bell, etc.
Atlas and Kato eh? Will check em out thanks!
Sorry for the slight off topic but I really want to add some icons to the bottom of my sig but can't figure out how. I see some of you have. Can someone please help me out here?
Thanks
GNP007 wrote: Sorry for the slight off topic but I really want to add some icons to the bottom of my sig but can't figure out how. I see some of you have. Can someone please help me out here? ThanksRob Newman
just use the HTML tags for Images:
<IMG SRC="http://blah blah.com/pictures/blah.jpg">
where the URL in the SRC= field points to what ever graphic you want (anywhere on the net!)
Like, if you wanted to steal mine:
<IMG SRC="http://home.comcast.net/~dloman77/site_images/3xSPs.gif">
claymore1977 wrote: GNP007 wrote: Sorry for the slight off topic but I really want to add some icons to the bottom of my sig but can't figure out how. I see some of you have. Can someone please help me out here? ThanksRob Newman just use the HTML tags for Images:<IMG src="http://blah blah.com/pictures/blah.jpg"> where the URL in the src= field points to what ever graphic you want (anywhere on the net!)Like, if you wanted to steal mine:<IMG src="http://home.comcast.net/~dloman77/site_images/3xSPs.gif">
<IMG src="http://blah blah.com/pictures/blah.jpg">
where the URL in the src= field points to what ever graphic you want (anywhere on the net!)
<IMG src="http://home.comcast.net/~dloman77/site_images/3xSPs.gif">
BINGO! Thanks. Now back to our regularly scheduled broadcast. :-)
A few weeks ago I thought I seen on eBay a listing for the "end tie" piece that would fit the end of a section of flex track. I can't seem to be able to find them on the web anywhere (even the Atlas site.) Do any of you know what I'm talking about and where I can find them?