If you had to switch..............

[pcarrell]

The last question I had about the perfect layout size was quite revealing.  It got me to thinking........

We all love the scale of models that we picked, for whatever reasons, but if you had to change scales, what scale would you choose now and why?

Myself, I'm an N scaler, but I might give Z scale a good hard look because of the vastness of scenery that can be accomplished, but in the end I'd probably go with HO because virtually everything is available or S scale because I like the "heft" of it!

Now how about you?

[lvanhen]

I'm in HO now, but the eyes don't improve with age!!  Maybe G!

[KlickyMobster]

I model HO now, but if I had to start over again, Z scale without a question.  I like the fact that I can have extremely long mainlines and tons of track between towns.

[stebbycentral]

My last jump was from G to On30, though I also still have an N scale layout.  I suspect that if and/or when I finally settle on one scale it will be On30.  Primarily because I am more of a model builder than an operations person. 

[C&O Fan]

I'd go from HO to N and hire a teenager to do the close work

[fwright]

If I had to switch, it would be larger.  From HO/HOn3 to S/Sn3 or O/On3(0).  Advantage of moving larger is easier to construct smooth running mechanisms in my 19th Century world.  Disadvantage is the large increase in space needed for structures and scenery.  Until I can't achieve the results I want anymore, I will likely stay.

....modelling foggy coastal Oregon, where it's always 1900...

Fred W 

[verheyen]

Still German (DB and DR-East), but definitely DC based H0 (though N is tempting). I have an extensive "collection" of AC-based H0, mostly Märklin but lots of other brands too. Restarted in the hobby 10 years ago and actually had a very low critical mass of stuff. Would have been the perfect time, but alas..., stuck with what I had. No regrets though, really.

Due to a club N-scale module project I picked up that scale as well and really like it. My wife also has Z, and my daughter Oe(I think) in the form of Fleishmann Magic Train that runs on H0 DC track...

My layout would also be very different, but that's another story...

Peter

 

[MisterBeasley]

I'd wait a few more years, until they get sound in N as a regular thing.  I'm in HO now, and I can't imagine running silent trains again.

Or, if price were no object, I'd do a big outdoor 2-rail O-gauge layout.

[tstage]

Philip,

Even though I'm in HO, I grew up with American Flyer.  So, I'd have to go with an S-scale layout.  Although detailing in HO is pretty amazing, S would even be better.  I would think that decoder installs would be a bit easier, too.

Tom

[Milepost 266.2]

It all depends on how much room was available to me.  Oddly, the more room I have, the smaller scale I would go.  If all I had were room for a shelf layout, it would be On30 and filled with craftsman kits and tiny detail.  Give me a 30x60 warehouse, and I'd go N scale, running 100 car autorack trains over several scale miles of track, with full size yards and massive complex industries to switch.

 

[rfross]

I made the switch a couple of years ago from HO to 2-rail O and haven't looked back. I really like the weight and the feel of this larger scale, which also happens to be easier on my fifty something year old eyes. Plus because it is bigger it takes less 'stuff' to fill a given space. The cost of a lot of O-scale items is significantly higher than HO but again, it takes less in a given space.

I sold off twenty some years of my HO stuff on eBay and used the proceeds to fund my upgrade to O. My only problem was that I had started construction of an HO three wall shelf layout in a spare bedroom and I decided to keep the newly constructed benchwork and had to work within those constraints as I developed my track plan. O is quite a bit bigger so it took some work to get the plan right. But now that I'm happy with the plan I'm about ready to lay the first track and get something running.

[KING_MEMPHIS]

 

I am modelling in Z scale right now - and if I had to change I would change to H0.   Everything in Z is so tiny. You have to be VERY careful to lay the tracks - even the tiniest gap will cause a derail.  Z has no sound.  Not so many structures or trains (beside Märklin) are available.  I would like to run US; but that is actually not possible ( as far as I know (?)).  It is very difficult to put a train back on the track by hand unless you use the railer ( donø't know what that little red thing is called in US )  

As a young boy I drove H0 - and I remember how easy it was to operate the trains with your fingers if that was necessary.  If you sneeze close to a Z-train - you will blow it far away.   Even though I'm only in the early fifties - it is hard for me to see - and enjoy the details on the locos and waggons.     The only great thing is that you can have a lot of layout in a little space.   That's why I chose Z scale, when I returned to the hobby.   I have not regretted it yet; but there are several disadvantiges ( where is my spelling-checker ).

 

[pcarrell]

I would like to run US; but that is actually not possible ( as far as I know (?)). 

Micro-Trains makes Z scale American loco's, rolling stock and track.  Thats just one company, but I'm sure there are others.

[R. T. POTEET]

To me, this issue boils down to one of desired minimum radius. I like full length passenger cars - 80' heavyweights and 85' lightweights; these cars require a substantial radius to avoid a toy-like appearance. I converted from HO Scale to N Scale in the early-'80s largely because the space available to me for layout construction limited me to 18" radius curves and this prohibited my utilization of, not only full-length passenger cars, but longer wheelbase locomotives as well.

Let me insure that I do not get misunderstood on this matter: I enjoy immensely the panorama of N Scale modeling and I have seen the scale grow over the years both in product availability and quality but ..........

.......... but, now in my mid-60s the old eyesight ain't what it once was and the old hands get a little stiffer year-by-year. I have, over these past twenty five or so years, remained a 'closet' HO Scaler; you indicate a desire to go even smaller - from N Scale to Z Scale. I still maintain those old aversions to 18" radius curves in HO Scale but were I able to acquire a space that allowed me 36" radius curves - 30" at an absolute minimum - I would, most likely, return to HO Scale. Kalmbach's 1950s-era Practical Guide to Model Railroading has a design which has always impressed me; this layout would, I calculate, require a 20' by 30' area. The original design specified 24" radius curves - for HO Scale: less for TT Scale; more for S Scale and O Scale - but I would aspire to 36" radius. If I really had my druthers in this matter and I could acquire a space just a hair wider and 50% longer I could go to where I really would like to go and that is to two-rail O Scale.

N Scale has an advantage that is sometimes overlooked even by N Scalers; utilizing a 3" scenery buffer one can turnback trackage on the width of a 48" platform. Voice what criticisms you wish against 4X8 plywood sheets but that constitutes a perfect size for an N Scale layout IF space available is really restricted. Both HO Scale and O Scale would require some sort of pop-up access and I'm afraid that crawling on hands and knees is rapidly getting beyond my desired capabilities. Access, therefore, would have to be via some sort of an access under the platform which can best be accomplished with a roll-around chair.

[SilverSpike]

Another great question Philip! 

I have to agree with those who mention the eye sight issue, HO is small enough for me and I have so much invested in that scale there is no way I am going to switch. I just got my first eyeglass prescription for reading a few months ago, so up close detail work is starting to be more of a challenge.

Plus HO is in my blood, grandfather had HO layout in 1950's and 1960's, dad and I had an HO layout in the 1970's, I've have been in an out and in again with my HO kits, layout, etc since the early 1990's to present.

[loathar]

Probably On3O or similar narrow gauge logging layout. Just a bit bigger for the eyes and hands with the same track as HO.

[riogrande5761]

N scale is more attractive than it used to be since for SP and D&RGW modelers now have tunnel motors available, plus alot more of the freight cars I wanted.  However, two factors hold me back, well really three.

1) Flanges are still huge on N scale I've been noticing.
2) N scale only gets harder for me to appreciate as my vision pushings thing farther back with age.  I don't want a scale I need reading glasses to look at.
3) I'm heavily vested in HO now and it would be a huge loss and cost to replace it all with N scale, especially now that many of the limited production items would be very hard to get.

[IRONROOSTER]

I started in HO, switched to O and then to S.  I don't envision changing again (but I still have all my HO and O just in case).  But if for some reason I had to restrict my layout to bedroom size or less I would seriously consider On30.  It's about the same size as S but you can get by with sharper curves.

Enjoy

Paul 

[Occams Razor]

I currently work with both HO and N.  If I had to change, I'd probably go Z, everytime I go to a show or expo I'm floored by the work being done in that scale locally. 

I also like the Narrow gauges (How does one rerail Zn3 though?  That's just small.), but they require much more scratchbuilding which my work schedule doesn't allow.   Similarly although I love O and G gauge for their details and ruggedness, I don't have the space or budget for them.

[csxns]

I am in HO but if i changed it will have to be 12 inches to the foot.

[Guilford Guy]

I'm with David, definitely 2 rail O scale.

[pastorbob]

I do HO in the basement and garden railroad in the backyard, and would not,  will not, change for any  reason.

Bob 

 

[New Haven I-5]

 I'm work in HO scale and I would change to Z or 3-rail O scale.

[New Haven I-5]

 Wait..... maybe G scale?!

[Guilford Guy]

I am already in G scale and its lots of fun but I find the detail on 2 rail O by atlas exceeds USA trains and Aristo Craft.

[New Haven I-5]

Or 2-rail O scale.

[tomikawaTT]

If I had to switch I would bail out of all my 'mainline' aspirations and go with my 762mm gauge logger - in On30.

Then I would re-do my plastic and kitbashes to give them appropriate superstructures.

The brass locos and other non-convertibles would find new homes through E-bay, for a reasonable bid plus S&H.

The space and benchwork would remain the same, only the scale would change.

Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)

[SilverSpike]

I am in HO but if i changed it will have to be 12 inches to the foot.

Now I like that answer because if I had my druthers and a powerball winning ticket I would buy a few 1:1 locos, a kitchen car and diner car set too.

Then, I could build a traveling HO layout inside a new 80' boxcar!

[BRAKIE]

Good question..I model in HO and dabble in N Scale..I would consider 0n30 for a change or perhaps a small 2 rail O Scale switching layout.

While not exactly wild about this,I have seen 2 Lionel layouts built on a 36"x80" hollow core door.

[Cederstrand]

No question, if I had to switch it would be to HO in a heartbeat. These eyes are not getting any better. (presently have N scale)

However, if money was not an issue, it would be Live Steam all around our farm.

Rob