What is the right size for O?

These K-Line products illustrate the discrepancy in O gauge.

From the February 2013 issue of Classic Toy Trains.

Generally speaking, the phone queries we receive in the wake of Christmastime fall into two broad categories: Track types and train sizes.

With the former, the callers usually have tried to expand the train layout they have had running around the tree, and discover an assortment of similar – but not directly compatible track brands to select from. Their question? “Why?”

With the latter question, the callers have gone out to add a few cars to their railroad and suddenly discovered rolling stock so far removed from their starter set pieces (or the set some family member received in 1952), they can’t believe they are made for the same gauge of train. As with the track folk, the question is “Why?”

The track questions are usually easier to sort out since the default position is to stick with the brand you started with until you get more experience under your belt to make an informed choice. We also point out the availability of transition pieces that enable them to be mated.

The second point, train size, is a bit more muddled since we have at least 70 years of train production from multiple manufacturers who have been all over the map about what the “right” size is for O gauge might be.

Thankfully, the S gauge community has been far more consistent than the O gauge crowd. Once that “link coupler thing” was sorted out, the battles have been level of detail and realism, not so much the car’s dimensions.

The size problem has its roots with the nature of the product. These were intended to be toys. The 60XX cars we had in 1958 were perfectly fine, but as we grew older and more knowledgeable, we also became more particular. We expected more detailing and better painting that matched what we saw rolling by. In my own railfan experience, I saw trains with boxcars in tow that were mainly of plain vanilla 40-footer into the 1970s – if there were a lot of hi-cubes around, I didn’t take particular note of them until the late 70s.  These days 40-footers are museum material.

Still, as the size of freight car on real railroads kept growing larger and larger, we also wanted those jumbo cars. Providing we had the track to accommodate them, of course!

I had this photo above taken in 2005 – and this clearly shows some of the reason for confusion. Both are K-Line products that arrived at the office in the same shipment. Nothing could illustrate the variety of size in O gauge better than this.

A “small” 0-4-0T that is nearly as tall as a bi-level commuter car. So tall, that the crewman sits on an elevated position. Does it “go” with the passenger car? Not really, but it is the same gauge, the couplers are compatible, and the locomotive can pull the car. Of course, the switcher could go through curves that would derail the coach, but that is another question altogether.

One model is whimsical railroading, the other hard-core commuter railroading. You can have fun with both, but to the newcomer to our crazy hobby, it can be bewildering. The hobby really hasn’t had the degree of standardization that many non-hobbyists might expect.

Should the manufacturers agree on standardizing some common terms in their advertising and catalogs? Would adopting an icon for entry-level-compatible gear be helpful? Would adding stickers to a box with “Traditional,” “Semi-scale,” or “Scale” on them to a set box make a difference? Or would it be a waste of resources, since the newbies will figure it out anyway? Might products O-36, O-31, O-27 be designated “Entry level?”

How can we best help the newbie or as we sometimes call them, the returning newcomers navigate this maze of sizes and detail levels?

What say you? As they say, enquiring minds would like to know. Post your thoughts below!