There are lots of posts and articles about people who have gone from HO to O narrow gauge and are happy with the change. I have modeled the Tonopah and Tidewater in HO for 7 years but am thinking about going to On3 or On30 and modeling a version of the Death Valley RR. My question is: Has anyone gone to the large scale and regretted the decision andgone back to HO? Thanks - Nevin
I went from N to HO many years back, was thinking of going to On30 when I started my layout a few years back but stuck with HO as I had too much invested in HO and wanted to capture a different feel than On30 has. For what you want to model, if you have the space, On30 seems like a great fit, just relize, though it is easier to detail in a larger scale, it is also less forgiving.
I started in HO many years ago. After about 3 or 4 years I decided it was a little too small for building things. I know, plenty of people scratch build in N scale, but it's a prefence thing - I just like working with bigger pieces. So I switched to O scale for a few years, but that was a little too big when it came to building a layout. So I switched to S scale. I find S scale to be a nice fit between large enough to work with and small enough for a layout.
On30 trains are very close in size ot S scale. So close in fact that some S scalers convert On30 to S scale. But the buildings are still O scale which require a footprint 3.28 times the size of HO. So the question is do you have the room for it? Also, since On30 is narrow gauge you pretty much only run home road stuff - no interchange. So if you like the size of On30 trains, but like standard gauge you might want to consider S. If you like narrow gauge railroads go with On30 - it's easier and cheaper than On3.
Good luck
Paul
No actual experience in O since my early days in Lionel. I do some Fn3, but it's been awhile.
The only drawback to On3 or On30 is the bulk of the structures. They're four times as large, volume-wise. Selective compression and prototype choice help a lot with this. So really not a showstopper for what you're doing, which didn't really have any huge structures IIRC.
You may want to look more into the differences between On3 and On30. On3 stuff tends to want broader curves. On30 will do HO size curves with ease, because the locos and rolling stock are designed that way. Of course, if you scratchbuild, then this is not much of a restriction, but if you do either RTR (common in On30) or kits (common in On3) you will want to consider things more carefully than first appearances may indicate. The critical area is with the trucks and their swing vs the frame, but also some issues of difference with couplers.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
mlehmanThe only drawback to On3 or On30 is the bulk of the structures
About a year and a half ago, I started a On30 shelf switching layout. When designing the layout, I completely underestimated the space requirements for buildings. In the end, this made me give up the project and the scale.
Do I regret having moved to a larger scale? Yes, it was a costly failure.
I am in HO and have been for 45 years, but I have had the opportunity throughout the years to tinker in 2 rail 'O' and larger. I do like HO...but I will say honestly, if I had the space and $$'s, I would go much larger and not look back.
I regret not getting more involved in larger scales when I had the chance.
Mark H
Modeling in HO...Reading and Conrail together in an alternate history.
"About a year and a half ago, I started a On30 shelf switching layout. When designing the layout, I completely underestimated the space requirements for buildings. In the end, this made me give up the project and the scale.
Do I regret having moved to a larger scale? Yes, it was a costly failure."
I had a very similar experience to this. I had been itching to do something in On30 for years, so with my HO layout being torn out for building repair, I decided to finally build a module in the interim. I really like working in O as its easier on my eyes and my hands, but I badly miscalculated how much room it took for O scale structures to look correct. I dont intend to give up though, I am still finishing up the module and may eventually put an On30 level under the new HO scale layout.
Many years ago left HO for 1:29 - then downsized to a small house and went to armchair railroading - then moved to a subdivision house with a basement but small, small backyard... tried O scale 2-Rail - ok but saw the light and went back to 1:29 indoor shelf layout on 3 - 2x6'8" doors... could write a book but won't about the joys of trying to install handrails on a USA Trains GP-7 and an S-4... almost had a heart attack over the price of LGB R5 switches - but they do look nice... very simple trackplan (sort of an "Inglenook" with a crossover)... no sound in the locos - but again that is ok with me... limited to 40' Boxcars... lots of compromises with large scale and small space but so far very pleased with the project ... started operating the layout and happy with the performance of 1:29 locos... not getting any younger and eyesight becoming an issue and before 0 scale tried to install couplers on a beautiful H0 CP-Rail Proto Switcher... truly all thumbs! So returnd the switcher to George's Trains and they were vere understanding! USA Trains 1:29 scale is the way to go for me - long story short - no regrets leaving HO and O for indoor 1:29...
If some catastrophe obliterates my present layout and rolling stock (without obliterating me in the process) I'll go to On762 with the insurance money - modeling either the Kiso Forest Railway or the Kurobe Gorge Railway, or possibly both.
In both cases the need for structures will be minimal (both operated in trackless wilderness areas) and the rolling stock is miniscule (even by On standards) - but adding details will be lots easier. Also, the operations will be a lot less hectic than those of the prototypes I now model.
I doubt that I'd regret the change, because the prototypes are my two favorite rail routes...
(The only reason for not changing right now is my existing investment in JNR prototype HOj.)
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
I went from H0 to On30 some years ago to overcome poor eyesight and clumsy fingers due to age. I went back to H0 when I learned and experienced that larger scales need even more fine details than smaller or they look like toys. e.g. a bend wire is an acceptable 1:87 door handle. It is just what it is in O scale a bend wire but no door handle.
Reinhard
faraway I went from H0 to On30 some years ago to overcome poor eyesight and clumsy fingers due to age. I went back to H0 when I learned and experienced that larger scales need even more fine details than smaller or they look like toys. e.g. a bend wire is an acceptable 1:87 door handle. It is just what it is in O scale a bend wire but no door handle.
How the times change.
Back in the 70's I bought a craftsman O scale Quality Craft auto boxcar kit that included wire and instructions for bending same into door handles.
Enjoy
I've been in N-Scale for over 25 years now. I've toyed with the idea of going to HO and I started collecting things here and there, but it will have to wait until we finally settle down into our own place...even then I think I'll be running both scales.
Bob Berger, C.O.O. N-ovation & Northwestern R.R. My patio layout....SEE IT HERE
There's no place like ~/ ;)
Grew up with S-scale (American Flyer), dabbled with some hand-me-down N-scale, then settled on HO. HO, for me - provides ample trackage, detailing, and the widest product availability options for my choice of prototype (New York Central - steam & early diesel) than any other scale. I plan on sticking with it until my hand skills go away on permanent vacation.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
Can't help much with the question in the OP since I have been in HO since the 1960s. I will say that if I were to consider a different scale it would be S. I have too much invested in HO to change now but if I were starting out from scratch, I would give serious consideration to S. To me it is the ideal scale. What might discourage me would be the selection as compared to HO. I would have to find out what is available before committing to S.
I have made the transition from a smaller "popular" scale (N) to a larger less commercial scale (S) and I do not regret it. However there are unintended consequences to this leap that may or may not influence your decision.
If you like to do your purchasing at hobby shops, train shows, and swap meets you may discover that your options are now severly limited. With a few exceptions you will find almost nothing in your scale in the LHS. And that annual swap meet you attend religiously may have only 2 or 3 vendors offering products in your adopted scale, amongst the dozens and dozens of vendors hawking HO and N. (Lionel being the sole exception to this rule, due to its commercial popularity.) Suddenly you are doing your new train shopping out of cataloges and on eBay. That can be jarring for persons not comfortable with purchasing items sight unseen.
You may also discover that your favorite hobby publication concentrates on the "Big Three" scales (N, HO, Lionel) to the virtual exclusion of most other scales. The only way to read articles by fellow modelers in your new scale, or get up to date product information, will be to subscribe to association publications specifically directed to modelers of your chosen scale, or wait for the issuance of some "special issue" of the standard publications.
I have figured out what is wrong with my brain! On the left side nothing works right, and on the right side there is nothing left!