Hi,
I am looking at trying to build a C&O model set with an Allegheny 2-6-6-6 locomotive. What are the pros and cons of going with O scale vs HO scale.
Thanks
HO is the most popular gauge/scale right now. That means more and different models are in production, For instance, your 2-6-6-6 triplex is probably in production in HO. It may not be in production in O.
In round numbers, HO is half the size of O. For instance HO trains (well perhaps not a 2-6-6-6) can make it around 18 inch radius curves. O guage needs 30 inches. Which means the benchwork to support a 180 degree turn (complete loop) has to be 36 inches wide in HO, it must be 60 inches wide for O. HO locomotives and rolling stock are less expensive than O gauge.
If you have lots of space, and like the bulk and heft of the larger O models, go for it. If you have space and money constraints like most of us, HO is very appealing. HO is big enough for scratch building and kit bashing even for those of us with aging eyesight.
From your question, I would assume you are just coming into the hobby. Have you found Model Railroader magazine ? For that matter ordinary public libraries often have decent books on model railroading.
David Starr www.newsnorthwoods.blogspot.com
It's definitely about what works best for you and tickles your fancy. HO is what I love. O is popular for those who like the larger trains or trains around the Christmas tree now that the season is fast approaching. O is also for those who grew up on Lionel or other 3-rail manufactures. O requires a significant amount of space and usually those who model it has a huge basement or entire garage dedicated to it. The equipment is quite expensive but in my honest opinion looks almost kind of gaudy and flashy. I think of kid toy trains when I see O layouts especially at model train shows but to each his own. To be honest some HO equipment these days are starting to approcah O prices but that's what happens when you want extreme detail on your new engine.
Do what your heart desires and most of all have fun whatever you decide!!!
Something that needs to be taken into account is, how many different manufacturers are there selling each scale --
Off hand, the only O scale manufacturers I can think of are Atlas, Lionel, Williams, and MTH. Practically all of them are just importers of products made in China.
In HO scale, there are Atlas, Bachmann, Broadway Limited, Accurail, Exact Rail, Bowser, Athearn, and maybe as many as 20 or 30 others from which to choose. Many HO scale products are also imported from China, but a few are made in the USA.
More competition keeps prices reasonable.
For your question about the 2-6-6-6 I believe Broadway Limited Imports had one in HO scale -- MTH may be the only company that had one in O scale.
Don´t underestimate the space buildings take up in O scale! The footprint of a O scale structure is roughly 4 times the HO footprint! I did not consider this when planing my On30 layout - with a sad result!
What's the difference? About $800-$900 more for O-scale vs. HO...and that's just for one 2-6-6-6. It's cheaper, of course, if you get O-scale toy train stuff (then the difference is more like $200), but if you want actual scale models then O-scale is gonna cost you way more than HO in just about every detail.
OTOH, some O-scalers (2-rail guys) say that because their trains are bigger they don't need to buy as many to fill up a layout. But while that's true, if you are a collector and you don't really care about filling a layout (you just want one of everything your favorite railroad had), then your wallet will take much bigger hits in O-scale.
HO is the No. 1 scale in popularity. There are more HO scalers than all other scales combined (I believe it's 55% of the total market). Because of that, there are more things made for HO than any other scale. So if you want some rare unit, then you're probably going to find it in HO and not in O.
Paul A. Cutler III
A C&O modeler, in HO who wanted the big Allegheny 2-6-6-6 (and presumably other and smaller C&O locomotives as well) would probably be well advised to be looking at 30" to 36" minimum radius. That means in O you'd be looking perhaps 60" to 75" minimum radius. Big curves!
Either way, there is no sense running an engine of that size on a small layout pulling short trains -- you are talking major space, lots of cars, big yards. And while HO is VERY roughly "half" of O when it comes to general heft and bulk of the trains, remember that humans are the same size, and have the same general 24" limit on their reach into a layout. So you cannot simply double the size of an HO track plan and assume it'll work fine in O because the tracks would be too far to reach in O. Note Ulrich's comments above about size of layout footprint for comparable track plan.
And on balance I suspect O scale equipment is, car for car and locomotive for locomotive, likely to be more than twice HO in terms of cost. Many guys in O prefer to model more modest railroads, with just one or two locomotives -- a Geep pulling a dozen cars looks impressive in O, not so much in HO -- and assuming a normal size for a layout, the overall cost might be about the same between O with two engines and 24 cars and HO layouts with eight locomotives and 100 cars, assuming the same footprint for the layout: same cost because the size and scope of the railroading is often very different.
Hornby makes a Allegheny in HO. In O you are either going to be looking for a rare and somewhat old imported brass engine (meaning you may have to be skilled just to keep it running), or you need to be a talented scratchbuilder (and that also means knowing how to adjust scale drawings to the fact that O gauge track is not scale width and the scratchbuilder has to know how to adjust for that). Also, I do not know if a commercial turnout is made in O that can deal with a 2-6-6-6 so you are looking at handlaid track, at least to some extent. In HO you could buy such turnouts off the shelf.
Do you have a copy of Kalmbach's Great Model Railroads 2014? It has a fine article on Dr James EuDaly's incredible O scale C&O layout that includes all the big C&O steam including the 2-6-6-6s. But note this: EuDaly built a separate 35' x 50' metal building to house his layout because his house would not acommodate an O scale layout. Why so big? Because he saw no sense in runnning big steam without long trains, 40 feet long -- and that is just 38 O scale hopper cars plus caboose and engine (compared to the real C&O that is not a long train at all). Now Dr. EuDaly is an extraordinary modeler who scratchbuilt several of his models, and was in O scale back when there were plenty of imported brass steam engines for him to buy. And his profession gave him the economic means to buy them, as well as the sophisticated electronics needed to run his big layout, buy and build that separate building for the layout and all the rest.
More importantly, that is not how he started in the hobby. It is how he is ending in the hobby after many decades of modeling. He didn't even go into O until after a decade in HO. He then spent several decades just building rolling stock and locomotives and researching the C&O before he even started to plan that layout. And then he spent decades building it.
As another poster has said, if you are a beginner you do NOT start out with a layout of the size and scope to do justice to a 2-6-6-6. You work up to it. As a practical matter thanks to Atlas and others quite a bit can now be done in O scale without having to build everything and handlay every bit of track. It is a great time to be in O and to get into O and I would not discourage you from giving it a go. But whether HO or O (or N for that matter which you did not ask about but should strongly consider if really big trains and locomotives are your eventual goal), the first goal should be to have a reasonably complete and operating layout soon to get your hands dirty and start learning the skills you'll need to go big later.
Dave Nelson
How old are you, how good are your hands and how wealthy are you?
O is FAR FAR FAR easier to handle vs HO, thats an important factor as we get older, same for eyesight, O is alot easier to work on and easier to fiddle around with your hands to repair or build things. i am working on an HO micro and dam near everything has to be applied by tweezers, it gets old quickly.
Now the biggy, how well healed are you, O is IMHO the better choice for older modelers but O is also the King Daddy of Trust Fund hobbies, it can be frighteningly expensive stuff. HO has far more cost effective options.
Personally I went into G for the same reasons I like O, easier to work and model on, but when I started costwise it was a wash with HO so I went that route, today G is more like O is that regards, costs are crazy high. I'm glad I not really looking for anything anymore.
Have fun with your trains
I have both HO and O, (O is waiting to be put around the ceiling) and I would take HO 10/10 times. You can find about anything in any road name. It is MUCH cheaper than today's new O scale equipment, and it looks alot more realistic. If you want a C&O 2-6-6-6 Allegheny then Rivarossi makes them, look on Ebay I have seen a few lately in the $200 range. All said go with HO!
COTrainFan Hi, I am looking at trying to build a C&O model set with an Allegheny 2-6-6-6 locomotive. What are the pros and cons of going with O scale vs HO scale. Thanks
It depends on what you are trying to do.
Is this to be a mantle display, Christmas tree layout, the beginning of a model railroad hobby?
Do you like to build models?
Do you want to just watch trains run around or recreate operations of the C&O?
O scale models are 6 times the size of HO (remember models are 3 dimensional). They have a really nice heft and appearance when running by. But for a layout they require broader curves and more space for the same amount of railroad as HO - layouts are restricted by width and length , but not height so an O scale layout is 3.25 times as big as the same layout in HO.
O scale models are more expensive than HO, so if money is tight or you want a lot of locomotives (and other stuff) HO may be better. If you want only a few really detailed pieces than O is probably better.
Good luck
Paul
Thanks all for the great comments and suggestions. I am going into this as an endevour to launch a hobby I have always wanted to do. I recently moved into a new home that has a decent size rec room and I planning to building a layout on roughly a 12'x 16' section of it. Budget is an issue but O scale neccessarily won't break the bank for me. I think the steam era of railroading is one of my favorite parts of history and have always loved the C & O railroad and its history.
Please, Please, Please, do yourself a favor and ask this same question on the O Gaue Railroading forum (www.ogrr.com)
The 2-6-6-6 Allegheny is readily available in O Gauge and O Scale, Lionel and MTH have both done this locomotive in Scale proportions and semi-scale proportions
You are getting so much MIS-INFORMATION here, that it is mind boggeling.
One poster refered to the 2-6-6-6 as a TRIPLEX, it is not, it is an Articulated (which Triplexes ARE, but the 2-6-6-6 is not a triplex)
Another poster claimed that an HO version would manage an 18" RADIUS, (which is probably true) but that an O version would require a 60" RADIUS (that would only be true in 2 Rail) Semi-scale models are double articulated(Like most HO Models) and will typically run on 031 curves (which isa 15 1/2" RADIUS, 3 rail O measures curves in DIAMETER, not Radius)
Semi-scale models often have EXCELLENT detail, and with ful command and sound are not that much more than an HO version. Scale size models typically have detail at least equal to and often Exceeding that of HO Brass locomotives, and you can actually SEE the details.
By Volume a SCALE size version is 8 times the size of an HO version not 6, 2x2x2=8, 2 x as long, 2x as wide, 2x as tall, not 2+2+2=6
Each Scale has it's advantages and Disadvatages, I was involved in HO for 35+ years, and have been involved with O-Gauge for 9 years now, I wouldn't go back to HO on a Dare, been there and VERY well familiar with it, MY preference is for the larger trains, if someone else prefers HO, N or Z that is Great for them, and I wont criticize thier choice.
You need to decide WHAT your goals are, if you want to model long distances between points, or Majestic Mountains, then "N"or "Z" scale may be what you need to consider, ifwant want to go find every thing under the sun all in one place then HO is propably what you will prefer. If you want to model and admire the trains themselves, then O or even Large scale(thats going to be an Outdoor layout with sights set on a 2-6-6-6) might be what you are looking for.
There are a LOT more choices in "O" than you are being led to believe here.
The model railroading Hobby is as much one of BALANCES and COMPROMISES, as it is about trains. I have had people tell me that they could NEVER accept that third rail and oversize couplers and flanges(Guess what, Kadee HO couplers are closer to "S" scale than they are HO), then go on to tell me about how they are modeling a 100 mile sub-division in HO on a 6x12 layout.
Which Balances and Compromises you choose to make/accept are up to you, just please see what "O" has to offer, then make an EDUCATED decision about what YOU would ENJOY the most.
This is a PREDOMINATELY HO and N scales forum, so not surprisingly you got mostly "HO" is the only real choice replies. That would be like going to a Harley Davidson forum and asking which is better, Harley or Honda, what do you think THAT answer would be???
There are choices from mere "TOYS" in "O" to Dead On accurate scale models, there is also the same options in HO, there are still "Entry Level" starter sets in HO, that are poor quality "TOYS" as well.
Which ever decision you make, you will need to know abit about what you are buying before you buy.
I have been Enjoying model and real trains for almost 50 years now, I have had a small sampling of "N" a large collection of HO(still have a lot of it) I had some American Flyer "S" scale (which many consider the "Ideal scale) when I was younger, I now collect "O" and still have a bit of "Large Scale", I have Enjoyed ALL of them.
Doug
May your flanges always stay BETWEEN the rails
Personally, I would go with HO scale. I find that HO scale is the perfect size, it is large enough that you can see the details, and easily rerail everything, plus, it is large enough to work on and usually isn't super delicate. It is also small enough that the majority of people can have a reasonable size layout. HO is the most popular scale, for a reason, and being the most popular scale means that you have a lot more selection for locomotives, rolling stock, track, buildings, etc.
challenger3980 The model railroading Hobby is as much one of BALANCES and COMPROMISES, as it is about trains. I have had people tell me that they could NEVER accept that third rail and oversize couplers and flanges(Guess what, Kadee HO couplers are closer to "S" scale than they are HO). Please, Please, Please, do yourself a favor and ask this same question on the O Gaue Railroading forum (www.ogrr.com) This is a PREDOMINATELY HO and N scales forum, so not surprisingly you got mostly "HO" is the only real choice replies. That would be like going to a Harley Davidson forum and asking which is better, Harley or Honda, what do you think THAT answer would be?? Doug
The model railroading Hobby is as much one of BALANCES and COMPROMISES, as it is about trains. I have had people tell me that they could NEVER accept that third rail and oversize couplers and flanges(Guess what, Kadee HO couplers are closer to "S" scale than they are HO).
This is a PREDOMINATELY HO and N scales forum, so not surprisingly you got mostly "HO" is the only real choice replies. That would be like going to a Harley Davidson forum and asking which is better, Harley or Honda, what do you think THAT answer would be??
First, Kadee also sells "scale couplers" that are the scale size of a coupler. If you really want realistic couplers, in HO scale there are Sargent (not sure about the spelling) couplers that look like a real coupler and are the correct size for HO scale, model railroader had a article about them within the last year. You can also get magnetic brake hoses that will connect when the cars couple. And are you really trying to compare slighty large couplers to a third rail? Which one would you notice more? The third rail of course, most people really don't notice or care if te couplers are a bit larger. The third rail is almost everywhere you look on an O gauge layout, and is shiny and stands out against brown ties.
Second, I find it ironic how first you tell the OP to go to an O gauge forum, and then all the way at the bottom, you mention how if you go to a forum on HO scale, you will mostly get the answer of HO. However, this forum is for every scale, more O gauge modelers visit here than HO modelers visit a forum specifically about O gauge. I would suggest posting this question on the Classic Toy trains forum, and Garden Railways forum, and then considering all of the answers on each forum.
As this thread has progressed, the info has gradually been getting better. But the main thread, "it all depends", is still true. In any scale, the Allegheny is a big engine. If this is a mantelpiece display, your choice will be determined by availability, budget, and the overall appearance you're looking for. If you want to build an operating model railroad representing the late steam era C&O railroad, you'll have to make a few decisions. First, you'll need space because the Allegheny requires broad curves to operate well, and to look good when it's operating. Truly accurate C&O cabooses are readily available from Atlas and Walthers in HO scale. The Allegheny engine is available at a fairly reasonable price in HO scale. Additional HO versions of C&O locomotives, such as the T-1 2-10-4; the H-4, H-5, and H-6 2-6-6-2's; and the USRA 0-8-0 are, or have been, available in recent years from BLI, Bachmann, and Walthers. For the freight car freaks, the only truly accurate representations of C&O's typical Alternate Standard twin offset hopper cars are available in HO from Intermountain, although various versions of the AAR standard cars are available from several other manufacturers and many folks accept them as being close enough. In any scale other than HO, you may find it difficult to find all these other products that would allow you to operate your Allegheny in a proper C&O context, and keep the project affordable.
However, most of us compromise. In fact, we compromise a lot. So it depends where you decide to make your compromises.
Tom
You asked about building a model. Just my opinion, if that's your goal, O will provide much larger parts and materials to handle and perhaps slightly better tolerences for hand work. And you'll be able to admire it. However HO will have more parts readily available.
I have been in HO to N and back to HO. If I had the space I would go O because I'm more interested in a few detailed models and scene rather than long trains. But that's just my personal opinion and everyone here will have a different one.
challenger3980 ... By Volume a SCALE size version is 8 times the size of an HO version not 6, 2x2x2=8, 2 x as long, 2x as wide, 2x as tall, not 2+2+2=6 ... Doug
...
Actually, O scale is not twice the size of of HO. In the U.S. O scale is 1:48 not 1:43.5 as in England.
87/48 is 1.8125, cubed for volume, this is 5.9543 (to 4 decimal places). Rounded for convience we have O scale 6 times the size of HO in the U.S.
There probably are some very good practical reasons to help determine a choice of scale. Ultimately it comes down to what tickles your fancy. What you relate to, what makes you want to model in one scale over another. Practical reasons for choosing a particular scale are undeniably important, but so is the difficult to define, feel good factor.
I model in HO & for all the reasons mentioned earlier here. But also HO was a step up in size from an early fascination with N way back in the late 1960's. I model a South Eastern RR where there is not a lot of support from manufactures, but enough. But if I didn’t enjoy kit bashing there would be big gaps in my loco roster.
Some years back there was perhaps what could be described as a fascination with O because this scale was seen as a scale that lent itself to the very real possibilities for scratch building, super detailing and the modeling of back woods narrow gauge. But any choice of scale is dependent on what a modelers expectations are, what he wants to model - there is surely a place for all scales depending on what you have defined as your modeling needs.
Ultimately, the choice of scale is entirely yours based on what gets your enthusiasm up & running. After a while of listening to good, but often subjective advice, you will just feel what will be best for you.
Dusty.
Oh my! I have so often wished I could go full blown into 2 rail scale 'O' as I enjoyed when involved with the Reading Society of Model Engineers in the early and mid 1980's.
I'm into HO, but 'O' would definitely be the preference.
I still tinker...a little, in 2 rail O. But cost and space keep me from totally diving in.
Mark H
Modeling in HO...Reading and Conrail together in an alternate history.
The others had some good information, but forgot to say hello.
Hello. I am a LION and I build subway trains, so no steamy engines in my world.
What may not have been noticed by the others is that you asked about building an engine, while others were talking of building a layout. Were I to build an engine, and money were no object, I would surely go with the O scale. It is easier to see and looks great on the mantle piece. (You do have a mantle piece, I presume!)
If I wanted to RUN that engine on a layout, then you have other considerations to consider.
In any event, enjoy your locomotive. Now see if you can build it in a bottle, just to be different.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
I would rather have 2 rail O Scale but,even a small switching layout would require about 18'..That's 8 feet more then my current HO switching layout.
So,depending on what you want out of O Scale.
I agree that 2-6-6-6 will require large curves probably 72" to look good.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
BRAKIE I agree that 2-6-6-6 will require large curves probably 72" to look good.
... and if you can get "good looking" 72" curves in O scale... just think of the awesome that'd bring you in HO...
-Dan
Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site
V8Vega This same question has come up on O gauge forums and there many people say they were in HO and switched to O, they complain of in HO little tiny wheel flanges and constant derailments. There is nothing scale about a derailment every few scale miles. Engines don't weigh enough to pick up electricity as good and stops for no apparent reason or jerkey operation. Droopy couplers requiring constant height adjustment. Huge radus required again because of little tiny wheel flanges in a attempt to keep it on the track. This big radus really limits what you can do in your given space unles you have a really large space. In HO constantly having to clean the track again because of not enough weight to pick up electricity reliably. And having to clean rolling stock wheels.
This same question has come up on O gauge forums and there many people say they were in HO and switched to O, they complain of in HO little tiny wheel flanges and constant derailments. There is nothing scale about a derailment every few scale miles. Engines don't weigh enough to pick up electricity as good and stops for no apparent reason or jerkey operation.
Droopy couplers requiring constant height adjustment.
Huge radus required again because of little tiny wheel flanges in a attempt to keep it on the track. This big radus really limits what you can do in your given space unles you have a really large space.
In HO constantly having to clean the track again because of not enough weight to pick up electricity reliably. And having to clean rolling stock wheels.
Rich
Alton Junction
So many problems, so little time. If I experienced all the difficulties mentioned for HO scale, I might switch too. However my gleamed track requires almost no cleaning. My consists will run of hours, unless I screw up a turnout move, and my locos don't stall. I must be doing something wrong.
When you said you wanted a "set", that suggested "layout" to me. For your 12'x16' space, the design that seems most appropriate is an around-the-walls arrangement with operation from an open central space. It would be possible to do this in O scale, but HO would provide proportionally gentler curves, longer trains befitting this particular loco, and a mainline run that would appear longer due to the smaller scale. That space would allow you to feature the C&O's double track mainline where the Alleghenies operated. A branch or switching area could intrude into the center of the room, but your 2-6-6-6 probably wouldn't go there.
Have you thought about a real or imagined location to model? The C&O Alleghenies operated in their namesake mountains of Virginia and West Virginia; but they also operated across the flatlands of Ohio to the Lake Erie port of Toledo, so you have some options in terms of scenery.
I grew up in Virgina with parents from West Virginia. My interest would definately lay in that part of the C&O.
Consider the Hinton area in HO. And if you're not a member of the C&O Historical Society, you really need to join.
HO wheels do not cause derailments. What does cause derailments is out of gauge wheelsets, rolling stock that is under weight, bad track work, and other problems that can be fixed by initial inspections, and regular maintance. Wheelsets can be checked and adjusted, weight can be added, bad track work can be avoided in the first place. I doubt that O gauge doesn't have those same problems.
HO scale engines usually have enough weight, and you can always add more weight if needed. Cleaning your track properly is important if you want good electrical reliability for a while. The engines like everything else does need maintance now and then, like cleaning the wheels. However, you do not need to constantly clean everything.
Droopy couplers can be fixed by adding washers, or styrene shims. Again, some maintance is required. I remember there is an article on how you should get on an annual schedule of servicing and cleaning cars for good performance.
There is a saying, "take care of your equipment, and your equipment will take car of you". Everything mechanical needs some maintance, from your car to your tools. I am positive O gauge requires some maintance to run smoothly.
Are you suggesting that 18" radius curves in HO scale are huge? Have you seen a six axle locomotive go around 18" curves? 18" looks somewhat weird with large locomotives, especailly if the OP wants to run large steam engines. I am curious, what is the minimum radius of a large O gauge engine? If you could even match the 18", it would look even worse than HO scale. Also, O gauge tracks are twice the width of HO scale tracks, and O gauge rolling stock is twice as long. Not to mention buildings and details take up more space too on an O gauge layout. HO fits in smaller spaces.
NeO6874 BRAKIE I agree that 2-6-6-6 will require large curves probably 72" to look good. ... and if you can get "good looking" 72" curves in O scale... just think of the awesome that'd bring you in HO...
I would love to see a 72" HO curve since the largest HO curve I ever seen was 40" curves on a home layout.
BRAKIE NeO6874 BRAKIE I agree that 2-6-6-6 will require large curves probably 72" to look good. ... and if you can get "good looking" 72" curves in O scale... just think of the awesome that'd bring you in HO... I would love to see a 72" HO curve since the largest HO curve I ever seen was 40" curves on a home layout.
One of my plans, I had 48" curves, but that kinda turned the whole layout into curved track. Although, assuming xtrkcad is right, one of the curves following the jog in the room's wall is something like 60 or 66"
dstarr HO is the most popular gauge/scale right now. That means more and different models are in production, For instance, your 2-6-6-6 triplex is probably in production in HO. It may not be in production in O. In round numbers, HO is half the size of O. For instance HO trains (well perhaps not a 2-6-6-6) can make it around 18 inch radius curves. O guage needs 30 inches. Which means the benchwork to support a 180 degree turn (complete loop) has to be 36 inches wide in HO, it must be 60 inches wide for O. HO locomotives and rolling stock are less expensive than O gauge. If you have lots of space, and like the bulk and heft of the larger O models, go for it. If you have space and money constraints like most of us, HO is very appealing. HO is big enough for scratch building and kit bashing even for those of us with aging eyesight. From your question, I would assume you are just coming into the hobby. Have you found Model Railroader magazine ? For that matter ordinary public libraries often have decent books on model railroading.
You need to understand what your talking about befor shooting off. I can get more loops on a 4x8 with O than you can with HO I could even thou would be tight and would have to be smaller engines run O-27, O-31, & O-42 on one board .
Also if you like strainimg your eyes repairing HO go for it I don't
Life's hard, even harder if your stupid John Wayne
http://rtssite.shutterfly.com/