I'm in the process of planning a new layout and am a novice in this hobby. Initially I was thinking about planning a layout based on the HO gage. As I've thought about it and what I would like in a layout, I've begun to think that N gage might be more to my liking. I like the idea of a long train stretched out and running back and forth through a valley setting. It seems like that scale might also provide more possibilities for more realistic scenery. The reason I initially was thinking about HO was because I like the size and detailing available in HO Locomotives, rolling stock and structures. What are the pros and cons from the perspective of those of you who have much more experience than I in the hobby.
One of the most asked questions, that usually end up with thread a mile long that turn into flame wars. You might want to try the search engine.
Basically you've already identified the pros and cons.
HO - more equipment available, more detailed equipment.
N - more railroad per square foot, longer trains, more panoramic scenery.
I have to disagree with the realistic scenery part. I think it is much easier to do realistic looking scenery with the larger the scales. I mean even with ballast. Seldom do I see N-scale ballast that doesn't look baseball size when one sticks a camera up close. Even HO people are hard to paint and make look realistic. O and G are much better in that regard.
Both scales have there pros and cons, as stated before. The choice, which scale you want to model in, depends. IMHO, on the type of operation you envision for your layout. If you like to watch trains run through some spectacular scenery, N scale is very well suited, because it allows for a more spacious design than HO scale. Just take a look at MR´s project layout, the Salt Lake Route. If switching operation is your game, than HO scale is better - gives you more of the real thing. With a lot of attention to detail and, maybe, sound, even a small layout will give you the reward you are looking for.
N scale allows for a surprising amount of detail and realistic look. Long gone are the days of crude detail, or the lack of it. Take a look at Dave Vollmer´s superb work in that scale. However, I find, that N scale requires a careful choice of viewing perspective. To get the right view, you have to bring up the layout close to eyelevel.
If your younger, have the eyesight and dexterity and limited space, go with N.
If your an older fart like me , go with HO...(or On30) You have to choose what level of detail your capable of and what you want to acheive in your own little train world.....(it's more of a personal thing...)Don't over spend buying things that won't fit into your game plan. That's where a lot of first time layout builders go wrong.
Tom
I model in H0 myself. I wanted a transition era urban switching layout, where trains would be switchers with short cuts of cars (no more than eight 40-foot cars). Since I have a small room where aisle location is pretty much a given anyways, and I like the size of H0 scale equipment, especially when viewed up close, I went for H0 scale.
But for flexibility when it comes to fitting a layout into a room, it is hard to beat N scale. The most important track plan design difference is curve radius for turnback curves, and how this affects reach.
In H0 scale, a fairly sharp turnback curve (at 22" radius or less) at the end of a bench needs 4 feet of depth. Which is too deep to reach across from just one side. So you need access from both ends, or prairie dog style popups in the middle of the curve, or hovering over the layout in a ladder contraption (which then needs quite a bit of aisle space to set up and use).
In N scale, a fairly gentle turnback curve (say 15" radius - about the equivalent of a 27" radius curve in H0 scale) can be fitted onto benchwork that is 30-32" deep. Which you can reach across if necessary.
That makes it possible to have turnback curves and peninsulas in N scale you could not fit into the same space in H0 scale.
An example, using the same available layout space:
1) Classic table layout in H0 scale, using 24" radius curves
2) Same area in closeup, donut shape around the walls layout in H0 scale
3) Same area, sketching a possible N scale configuration:
Now - it is not a totally fair comparison - aisles are pretty narrow in the last (N scale) configuration.
But it gives you an impression of how curve radius affects what we can fit in a given area.N scale's smaller curve radius (even when using medium curves instead of sharp curves) has a major impact on what you can fit into a given space.
But as for what you want - that's up to you. As I mentioned - I am perfectly happy with H0 scale, despite being well aware of the fact that N scale would have given me room for longer trains and more or bigger buildings on my layout.
Here is e.g an 8 foot long and 24" deep part of my warehouse district (very far from close to completion)
Here is a four foot or so section of another part of the layout with less dense track work - turnback curve comes in at far end, and runs behind the building on the left, before reappearing behind the camera:
Anyways - what I am saying is that both H0 and N can give you a nice layout. And that thinking outside the rectangular table can open up more options, both in H0 and N scale.
But it may be a good idea to consider curve radius and reach when you are evaluating the space available to you, and what kind of layout you want to build, not just how the trains look.
Smile, Stein
loathar If your younger, have the eyesight and dexterity and limited space, go with N. If your an older fart like me , go with HO...(or On30) You have to choose what level of detail your capable of and what you want to acheive in your own little train world.....(it's more of a personal thing...)Don't over spend buying things that won't fit into your game plan. That's where a lot of first time layout builders go wrong. Tom
Tom,There are a lot of us old windbags in N Scale..Just because one ages is no sign he can't model in N Scale and believe it or not there's still a lot of modeling to do in N.
As far as HO vs. N both have there pros and cons.
I model in both scales and see very little real differences other then HO having more goodies.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
You have identified some key differences already.
Smaller scales like HO, N, and Z favor long trains and higher scenery to track ratios giving a nice effect of the train running through the country side. You also can fit more railroad into a given space. This is especially true of N which is probably the best choice of small scales.
Larger scales like O and G favor more detailed models and focus more on the train than the scenery. It is however difficult to fit a layout into the space most have available. Because of the scale confusion in G, O is probably the better choice
An intermediate scale like S offers some of each. The trains and other parts are big enough to enjoy working with them, the trains have a nice visual preference, and a layout can be done in a reasonable space. S is the choice for a nice overall effect.
On30 is good if narrow gauge and a 1900 era layout is your desire. The trains are about the size of S standard gauge, but run on HO track.
I started with HO which I found too small and tried O which I found too large so I went into S which I found just right. Along the way I built an N scale layout for my son and dabbled a bit in G.
While most of us have a scale preference, all of them are fun. You have to decide what characteristics are most important to you.
Enjoy
Paul
I think the pro's and con's have been well covered. Only thing I will add is go to a hobby shop or club where you can see the equipment first hand and see what you feel comfortable with.
Cuda Ken
I hate Rust
I have been doing n scale for 30 years or so , and recently decided to get into DCC , but added an HO layout to do this. Have to say , and I am 63 , there is a difference in working with the 2 , but nothing that patience and a good pair of prescription eye glasses ( not the cheapo reading glasses from the drug store) can not take care of. I have one of those magnifiers with a light and it is a pain!!!
The previous posts have basically given you what to look for. The only thing I'd ad is to go out and purchase one or 2 N and HO gauge rolling stock and replacement couplers. Take them home and change the couplers out. This will tell you if you'd mind working on very small parts vs HO.
Another thing I feel you should do is go to an LHS or Club and listen to a sound equipped HO locomotive. You might not start out with sound but you should expose yourself to it before making the decision. Sound and taking an hour to change 1 loco coupler is what prompted me to change from N to HO early on.
Springfield PA
The decision is really up to you.
I have done O, HO and N.
Assuming youhave ruled out O and G scales, then your choices really come down to:
HO: larger, easier to see and work with, wider selection of products of all types available, better detail and easier to add details, more popular, cheaper.
N scale: smaller, get more layout in a same sized space, more limited selection of products of all types, less detail and harder to add details-especially if dexterity and eyesight are limited, less popular, more expensive.
SOme other serious things to consider:
DO you want straight good old fashioned DC or do you want to go DCC for operations? DCC requires less wiring. DC is cheaper, DCC with decoders installed can be expensive if you can't install the decoders yourself. If you are less electrically inclined, DCC may be the way to go. There are just as many valid arguements on both sides for the DC/DCC issue.
Long trains rolling through the countryside can depend more on locomotive pulling power than size available for layout. Good motive power will allow for the longer trains you desire. Poor locomotive power in any scale will mean smaller trains.
As was pointed out about the scenery in N in that things don't always "scale down" to N so well. {ballast the size of baseballs, couplers the size of a small car}. Also scenery can be more difficult to work with on the smaller scale if dexterity and eye sight are issues.
what type of layout space and layout type {around the walls, "plywood prairie", modular, etc.} you want are bigger things to consider. You won't get a "long train stretched out and running back and forth through a valley setting" with a layout that is only 8-10 feet long even in N scale if space is limited. {If you have a half or whole basement, then you lucky duck, you can pick either and have your longer trains.}
DO you like a large supply of RTR with details already supplied or DIY? DO you plan to scratch build? DO you plan to "super detail" RTR stuff?
I now have a very small HO layout and run N scale only at christmas time under the tabletop tree. Space wise for my small HO layout I should have perhaps gone with N scale as I can get more into the space {3.5 feet x 5.1 feet}, BUT i find it more and more difficult to work with the N scale stuff under the tree as I grow older, both in abilities and more importantly, patience.
Good luck wiht your choice and keep us aprised of your choice and progress!
-G .
Just my thoughts, ideas, opinions and experiences. Others may vary.
HO and N Scale.
After long and careful thought, they have convinced me. I have come to the conclusion that they are right. The aliens did it.
galaxy Long trains rolling through the countryside can depend more on locomotive pulling power than size available for layout. Good motive power will allow for the longer trains you desire. Poor locomotive power in any scale will mean smaller trains.
Lots of good advice here, most notably that there are pros and cons to both. It really boils down to what tradeoffs you are willing or required to make for your own layout (because there are always tradeoffs). The question isn't "Which is better, N or HO?", but rather which one suits your personal needs, desires, and tastes better.
To an extent, though, I have to disagree with the above statement. It's true that the pulling power of your locomotives will definitely limit the lenght of trains you can pull, you layout size will play even more of a factor. Car and locomotive sizes vary, but in any given 10' section of track, you will be able to put about 1 loco and perhaps 15 cars in HO scale. In N, it will be more like 1 loco and 30 cars. Neither is prototypical, but the N scale comes closer to it.
To run that same train with it's 30 car consist and not be able to see both sides of the train simultaneously, requires much more judicious planning for lines of sight, including view blocks, hidden track, scenic dividers and other tricks of the trade in HO scale than it does in N scale. Not that it can't be done; it's just more work.
Connecticut Valley Railroad A Branch of the New York, New Haven, and Hartford
"If you think you can do a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right." -- Henry Ford
If you have a preference for steam locomotives, go with HO or larger. There is barely anything available, ready to run, in steam in N scale, and it may be like this for a good number of years. Broadway Limited has no plans to release the M1b any time soon, that was really going to be the breakthrough model in the n scale market. I doubt it will ever be produced. For whatever reason, there just haven't been enough preorders which I find surprising, nevertheless, thats the reality. Apparently there just isn't enough demand for these kinds of steam engines in n scale.
As others have also pointed out, if you like sound, go with HO, although even in this small scale, there is still a lot to be desired concerning sound quality and bass. The larger scale Lionel trains tend to have much better sound files and speaker capability.
makeitrealattrains.com It seems like that scale might also provide more possibilities for more realistic scenery.
It seems like that scale might also provide more possibilities for more realistic scenery.
I agree, you can get "more" scenery in a given N scale space, but it doesn't necessarily follow that it will also be "more realistic". Realism comes from observation and skill in modeling applications. Even then, as I have discovered over the years, what looks real at a 45 deg angle from 400 scale feet (afforded by the Mk I eyeball) is not necessarily what the camera lens will show from 50 scale feet away at a scale eye level. Realism means different things to different observers.
If you are under the age of 50, as a very broad rule, N scale is quite possibly a way to achieve your aims. Hopefully your aims include erecting a functional and nice layout in time to enjoy them with your aging eyes and hands. If you are likely to take six to ten years to finish the layout, you may find that you will essentially fail in the long run. Of course, we have members here well beyond 50 who are perfectly content with N scale...so it's only a suggestion that applies to a good number of us...not a hard rule.
I am in good health, and now halfway through my 58th year. I found 12 years ago that I needed more light to read city street maps under the dome light in a car. I soon found that part of the problem was that I also needed bifocals. Once that happens, your way of modeling, and way of appreciating your creation, changes quite a bit. You will need a lot more light, and getting close to see tiny details will necessarily mean tilting your head up as if you were trying to read fine print through the bottoms of the bifocal lenses. It gets old really quickly if you built your layout only 4' off the ground. Suddenly you are thinking seriously of layout #4, but it will have the functional surfaces no less than 5' off the ground, or higher.
All this to say....the advice about giving each a try, hopefully at someone else's layout nearby, is sure to convince you one way or another, and who better to issue the verdict than the very person who needs it!
-Crandell
N scale couplers the size of small cars? Ridiculous, but typical of the kind of comments dispensed on this forum whenever the question of N scale comes up.
For the Original Poster, bear in mind that some of the HO-centric advice you receive comes from people with no layout in any scale, but (apparently) opinions on every scale.
N scale is not for everyone. But there are many fine N scale layouts that show what can be accomplished, including 71-year-old Sy Diamond's well-done N scale layout in the October, 2010 Model Railroader.
Just to shoot down some other misconceptions masquerading as "truth" in this thread.:- There are good-running steam models in N scale. Not the variety of models in HO, but they do exist. - More and more N scale locos come factory-equipped with DCC decoders. For someone starting out, there's almost no need to install decoders yourself.- Most N scale rolling stock now comes factory-equipped with magnetic knuckle couplers compatible with MicroTrains (formerly Kadee). For someone who is just starting out, there's little need to do a large number of coupler conversions. And they aren't that hard with an optivisor, anyway.
If the Original Poster would like an accurate reflection of the current state of N scale rather than urban legends from non-practitioners, seeking out a forum with an active N scale group of posters would probably be more enlightening. I'll send the Original Poster some suggestions as a "Conversation".
Best of luck.
Byron
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
cuyama For the Original Poster, bear in mind that some of the HO-centric advice you receive comes from people with no layout in any scale, but (apparently) opinions on every scale. Just to shoot down some other misconceptions masquerading as "truth" in this thread.:- There are good-running steam models in N scale. Not the variety of models in HO, but they do exist.
Just to shoot down some other misconceptions masquerading as "truth" in this thread.:- There are good-running steam models in N scale. Not the variety of models in HO, but they do exist.
My brother has a 20x7 ft O gauge Lionel layout, we have made a lot of progress in 1 year on that at his house. I have an HO layout, that I have been working on, but there have been setbacks.
We also have some n scale stuff with Kato track that we run on his dining room table, its not a 'layout', but we run the Kato GG-1 with the Broadway Limited passenger set on DC and we love it.
My comment about steam was offered as advice, and this was coming from someone who loves n scale as a size. The Kato stuff is some of the best model train equipment I have ever owned in any scale. I'm not denying that there are a few steam models in n scale, I was simply pointing out to someone deciding whether to go N, that there are very few steam types availabe when compared to HO, excluding brass of course.
As I said, Broadway won't be making the M1b anytime soon, and it was announced 5 years ago. I'm not blaming the company however I am pointing out that if one were a steam fan, particularly PRR (like me), then he might want to consider HO instead if starting out fresh, and trying to decide on what scale.
Welcome to the forums.
Lots of good, thought provoking answers. Age, eyesight and dextarity certainly have a place in your thoughts. However, if you are planning on purchasing R-T-R equipment and assembled structures, they become less. To some the building of the individual parts is very important, some prefer building scenery, while others prefer to get things rolling. Concider what is important to you, put them with your other "druthers" and hopefully you will have a long, happy journey with model railroading.
Good luck,
I've seen well detailed layouts at train shows in both n and ho scale but I prefer n scale because of its size. I must admit to a little bit of prejudice, having recieved a Bachman n scale train set many many moons ago and n scale has come along way since then.
Companies like Kato, Atlas, Deluxe Innovations and Intermountain have raised the bar for performance and detail with their offerings of locomotives and rolling stock. I primarily buy and run rtr equipment in a 60's to late 70's era so there are plenty of choices available.
If I were starting out today from the beginning it would be a tough choice. I agree with one of the previous posts that you should run some trains of both scales and decide from there.
Dave
cuyama N scale couplers the size of small cars? Ridiculous, but typical of the kind of comments dispensed on this forum whenever the question of N scale comes up. For the Original Poster, bear in mind that some of the HO-centric advice you receive comes from people with no layout in any scale, but (apparently) opinions on every scale. N scale is not for everyone. But there are many fine N scale layouts that show what can be accomplished, including 71-year-old Sy Diamond's well-done N scale layout in the October, 2010 Model Railroader.
I think you're unfairly casting aspersions on the advice given so far. With the exception of the couplers comment -- which looked to me like it was intended as a bit of hyperbole rather than a statement of fact -- the advice given here looks like a balanced assessment of the tradeoffs involved with either scale. Most of the posters on this thread have in fact tried both, and most of them said so.
A rant against "HO-scale propagandists" does the OP no favors either. For example.
{quote user="cuyama"]
Just to shoot down some other misconceptions masquerading as "truth" in this thread.:
- There are good-running steam models in N scale. Not the variety of models in HO, but they do exist.
[/quote]
Actually, this poster said that there aren't as many choices available. Not that there aren't any. Which is exactly what you admit here.
- More and more N scale locos come factory-equipped with DCC decoders. For someone starting out, there's almost no need to install decoders yourself.
Right, but again, the point made was that, because of the size difference, it's harder to install your own if you have to. Which you might want to if you are not satisfied with the factory-installed version. So when you're just starting out, you don't need to, but what about 10-15 years down the road after you have a significant investment in N scale equipment?
- Most N scale rolling stock now comes factory-equipped with magnetic knuckle couplers compatible with MicroTrains (formerly Kadee). For someone who is just starting out, there's little need to do a large number of coupler conversions. And they aren't that hard with an optivisor, anyway.
Again, right. The point was that when you do need to change them out, it's harder because of the smaller size. And while I often wear 2.5x magnifying glasses when I'm doing modeling work, I have yet to find an optivisor that I can wear comfortably, or workbench mounted lighted magnifier that I can use comfortably.
Overall, if you consider the advice given with an open mind instead deciding that the community is biased against N scale, it's a pretty fair assessment. But I guess we can't have this discussion on these forums without someone claiming bias, can we?
CTValley wrote:Overall, if you consider the advice given with an open mind instead deciding that the community is biased against N scale, it's a pretty fair assessment. But I guess we can't have this discussion on these forums without someone claiming bias, can we?
-------------------------------
And most of it is outdated anyway and about as useless as saying as you get older you can't see/model in N Scale. The op should read and judge each reply.
As a side note serious N Scalers are using MT Z Scale couplers which they body mount on their cars.
Also noteworthy is several manufactures are trying body mounted couplers with their latest releases.
One more strange phenomenon about N Scale..The longer you model in N it seems to get larger and after a short period of time you can see how big and bulky HO looks.
As I mention I model in both and after not seeing any HO for about 3 weeks(80% is at the club the other 20% is in storage totes) HO seem as large as O Scale!
On a more serious note the RX for my eye glasses has change and now I need to wear 'em when I work on my N Scale...At 62 that is to be expected but,I don't see any warning lights saying I can no longer model in N so,I will conditnue to enjoy modeling in the wee scale.