Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

N gauge vs. HO

12425 views
82 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2008
  • From: Hatboro
  • 18 posts
N gauge vs. HO
Posted by bellzbello on Saturday, August 9, 2008 8:02 PM
Can anybody share the pros and cons of either gauge? How do the smaller trains perform? Thanx.
Mike
  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: Amish country Tenn.
  • 10,027 posts
Posted by loathar on Saturday, August 9, 2008 8:26 PM


 

  • Member since
    July 2008
  • From: Hatboro
  • 18 posts
Posted by bellzbello on Saturday, August 9, 2008 8:29 PM
I don't get it...
Mike
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 83 posts
Posted by NEMMRRC on Saturday, August 9, 2008 8:33 PM
 bellzbello wrote:
I don't get it...

I believe the message is that you have opened up a can of worms.

I model HO. I do so because I can find plenty of what I like in HO. It's that simple.
  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: Amish country Tenn.
  • 10,027 posts
Posted by loathar on Saturday, August 9, 2008 8:35 PM

Just wait for it...This question ALWAYS turns into a flame war...(here, I'll start)

HO scale has better detail...

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: BC, CANADA
  • 1,279 posts
Posted by Pathfinder on Saturday, August 9, 2008 8:45 PM

HO: Pro: Size is good for working on; good supply of parts and equipment; biggest portion of hobby.

Con: Everyone is/has done it Cool [8D] ; maybe too much stuff, hard to focus;  

 

N: Pro: Size is good for maxamizing your space, you can get much wider vistas, more of a feel for the entire train thing; running quality os much better than a few years ago.

Con: Cost is generally more than HO; less selection of stuff; harder to work on the fine details.

 

I am sure more will add to this.  I am HO but think every once in awhile that N would be good to get back into (I dabled in it back in the 80's). 

Keep on Trucking, By Train! Where I Live: BC Hobbies: Model Railroading (HO): CP in the 70's in BC and logging in BC
  • Member since
    November 2002
  • From: Colorado
  • 4,075 posts
Posted by fwright on Saturday, August 9, 2008 8:52 PM

 bellzbello wrote:
I don't get it...

You haven't been a member long enough.  Model railroading is a personal hobby, and that means personal choices.  And because the choices are personal, we tend to take it personally when others choose otherwise or disagree with us.  Scale is a very personal choice - there is no right or wrong except for you as an individual.  And because choice of scale influences much of what we do in the hobby, those who choose otherwise are "different".  Some factors to consider:

  • Are you a builder or a train runner?  N tends to be more ready to run (RTR) focused than HO (doesn't have to be).  But HO has made a major turn towards mostly RTR in the past 2 decades.
  • Do you prefer longer or more modern trains?  Modern train cars and locomotives are much longer than their counterparts of 100 years ago.  Modeling modern trains takes more space than older eras.  The same is true of long trains.  It's far easier to build a layout capable of handling 30 car trains in N than in HO.
  • How are you with tiny details (relates to the builder question)?  Do you have the steady hands and the ability to work with magnification to do model building in N?  Or install couplers or other details?

My opinion is that for many of us, HO becomes the fall back because the disadvantages of the scale we want to use are too burdensome.  In my case, I would love to use O, On3 and/or On30 as my scale.  But even if I get the minimum track into my space, the sizes of the scenic elements are just too big for me to accomplish what I want to.  N is impossibly small for me to work and fiddle with locomotive mechanisms for 19th Century narrow gauge.  So HO and HOn3 became a reasonable compromise.  Still, every time I go to the LHS, I drool over the On30 stuff.  The power of the dark side is exceedingly strong.

You have similar choices to make.  Good luck.

Fred W

  • Member since
    July 2008
  • From: Hatboro
  • 18 posts
Posted by bellzbello on Saturday, August 9, 2008 9:03 PM

Well put, I think I'm a train runner. I have limited space and will only be attempting a 4x8 layout.

Mike
  • Member since
    October 2005
  • From: Charlotte, North Carolina, USA
  • 352 posts
Posted by WaxonWaxov on Saturday, August 9, 2008 9:41 PM

Having worked in both scales I will say....

N Scale....

Pros: More stuff in smaller space, you get to be one of the 'cool kids' of N scale

Cons: Everything for N is more expensive than the same thing for HO... go figure. Not as much stuff available as HO. Some of the details are lacking. It's hard for people with older eyes to see (road numbers and such)

HO Scale....

Pros: Everything is available in HO before it's available for anything else. Your buddies will be able to run thier trains at your house and vice-versa.

Cons: "been there, done that." 

Another con that some people don't comment on is that let's face it, 1:87 is a screwy scale. I mean seriously, who thought that crap up? S scale (1:64) O scale (1:48) are a lot easier to work with the numbers.

 

 

  • Member since
    November 2002
  • From: Colorado
  • 4,075 posts
Posted by fwright on Saturday, August 9, 2008 9:58 PM
 bellzbello wrote:

Well put, I think I'm a train runner. I have limited space and will only be attempting a 4x8 layout.

With a 4x8 you will be able to do a lot more variety than with HO.  The only reason to pick HO for a 4x8 is that there are drawbacks to N that you can't live with.

A 4x8 in HO is pretty much limited to 18" radius curves unless you settle for an oval paralleling the table edges (in which case you get a 22" radius).  In HO, these curves and table size limit the equipment you can run, the length of trains, and the scenery.  Many have lived within these limitations and built fine HO layouts in a 4x8 space.  Many others have chafed at not being able to run large engines and full size passenger cars.

I do need to point out that there are other configurations for HO (and N) layouts that take the same space as a 4x8 when access aisles are added in, and allow for much greater variety of operations.  See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HOGRR/ for one such example.

In N scale, 15"-18" radius curves on a 4x8 will allow almost any equipment to run.  Trains can be longer than the 6-7 cars typical for a 4x8 in HO.

my thoughts, your choices

Fred W

  • Member since
    November 2015
  • 668 posts
Posted by Tjsingle on Saturday, August 9, 2008 10:07 PM

pro- Ho scale is easy to work with, good selection, great detail.

con- operating prototypical train lenghts like 100 cars+

N scale

Pro-Operations, maximizing space.

con- not as detailed as ho scale but can be highly detailed, not as much stuff, detail parts are small and sometimes hard to work with.

  • Member since
    February 2008
  • From: Memphis, TN
  • 3,876 posts
Posted by Packers#1 on Saturday, August 9, 2008 10:27 PM

I use N scale mainly because I can get the layout I want into the space I've got. There's also many quality manufacturers (Atlas, kato, and Athearn, to name a few) and a variety of diesels, so if you are modeling 60s or up, you have a great selection. The steam locomotive choices are a bit limited, but you can still get a decent roster. It is smaller though, so there isn't as much detail, and those who have bad eyesight beware, but overall, a great scenery-track ratio.

HO scale is bigger, but takes up more room, so you need a bigger space. There's an about equal selection of diesels and steam locos, and the same manufactures in n scale have HO offerings that I assume are up to par. Those w/ bad eyesight can work w/ this scale, and you can get more detail out of it.

I'll stick w/ n. I have a decent investment, and it is really space effiecent.

Sawyer Berry

Clemson University c/o 2018

Building a protolanced industrial park layout

 

  • Member since
    July 2005
  • From: Saskatchewan
  • 331 posts
Posted by skiloff on Saturday, August 9, 2008 10:30 PM
I've done both and like both.  If I had more space to model in, I'd got to HO just for the availability of products, but I like to run long trains with big scenery and N scale fits the bill for the amount of space I have.  Yes, its hard to find the stuff you want in N a lot of times, but I can't spend a tonne of money all at once anyway.  I'm just patient and wait for stuff to come out.  I was so pumped when I saw Rapido doing their passenger cars in N scale.  I can't wait to get my mitts on those.
Kids are great for many reasons. Not the least of which is to buy toys "for them."
  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: Amish country Tenn.
  • 10,027 posts
Posted by loathar on Saturday, August 9, 2008 10:32 PM
 bellzbello wrote:

Well put, I think I'm a train runner. I have limited space and will only be attempting a 4x8 layout.

WOW! Two cans of worms in one thread! This should be good!Tongue [:P]

  • Member since
    November 2015
  • 668 posts
Posted by Tjsingle on Saturday, August 9, 2008 10:40 PM
 loathar wrote:
 bellzbello wrote:

Well put, I think I'm a train runner. I have limited space and will only be attempting a 4x8 layout.

WOW! Two cans of worms in one thread! This should be good!Tongue [:P]

Flamewar Flamewar Flamewar !!

Cajon Pass fire July 22, 2006

 

 

  • Member since
    October 2003
  • From: San Francisco Bay Area
  • 1,090 posts
Posted by on30francisco on Saturday, August 9, 2008 10:43 PM
In HO almost everything's available. The larger size is also easier to work with and have much better detail. N scale is good for long trains, scenic vistas, and modern railroading. For myself, I chose On30 and G scale because I discovered that HO is too small for me. Since I model narrow gauge steam from the early 1900s and love detail, N scale is out of the question.
  • Member since
    July 2008
  • From: Amherst, N.S.
  • 248 posts
Posted by kcole4001 on Saturday, August 9, 2008 10:45 PM

Another point, as Packers touched on, is the era you wish to model.

For example, I'm interested in 1930s steam at the moment. The N scale offerings are rather limited for this era, where HO has a much more varied selection available. So I'm pretty much stuck with HO, not to mention that I already have built up a fair amount of stuff to use.

If you're into diesels. and the modern era particularly, N is really quite a good choice, especially with limited space. So much more operation is possible in N, and the DCC offerings are really getting to be more diverse now.

N has come a long way in the last 30 years, and the detail can easily rival HO if you put in the effort.

The N scale prices seem to mostly be pretty close to HO, some higher, some lower, and the quality and reliablity is every bit as good as anything else available.

"The mess and the magic Triumphant and tragic A mechanized world out of hand" Kevin
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: Culpeper, Va
  • 8,204 posts
Posted by IRONROOSTER on Saturday, August 9, 2008 11:58 PM

As the scale gets smaller you can run longer trains for a given space.  You can also have more scenery, structures, track, trains, etc.  Downside is that the individual items are smaller.  Many people find the smaller scales more difficult to work with, harder to see and appreciate.  There seem to be more operational problems - not that N scale can't run well, you just have to fuss with it more and be more exacting on track laying, cleaning, etc.

As the scale gets larger the trains have more presence, are easier to work with, have fewer operational problems.  Downside is shorter trains, less scenic setting.  Also with larger scales you need more detailing since you have a closer view of the model - this can be good if you really like building highly detailed models.

Thus N (or Z) is for the person who wants the longest and most trains for his/her space and/or a scenic setting.  G is great if you really like watching and hearing the train rumble by and really want to feel you are trackside and/or like building the individual models.  The other scales are in between and strike different balances between N and G.

While HO has the widest selection - Z, N, S, O, and G have sufficient commercial support to make them a viable choice.  TT and #1 have less but can be done by the determined.  

If you can,  I suggest you go to some trains shows that have layouts in the different scales and see which size you like.  Also try building a simple structure or boxcar in different scales.

Don't be afraid to change scales if you find your initial choice isn't working out.  I started in HO, moved to O, and then wound up in S.  Along the way I dabbled in N with my son and have a G trainset the kids bought me for Christmas one year.  They're all fun.

Enjoy

Paul 

If you're having fun, you're doing it the right way.
  • Member since
    May 2015
  • 779 posts
Posted by Dallas Model Works on Sunday, August 10, 2008 12:37 AM
 loathar wrote:


 

Now that is funny!

 

Craig

DMW

  • Member since
    August 2006
  • From: United Kingdom
  • 103 posts
Posted by LudwigVonDrake on Sunday, August 10, 2008 5:44 AM

Love the popcorn smilie! Wink [;)] Soon as I entered the thread I expected there to be a "differenece of opinions"...

And, to my surprise everything seems to be quite resevered. Actually, its helepd my decision (I was tempted by switching to N).

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: In the State of insanity!
  • 7,982 posts
Posted by pcarrell on Sunday, August 10, 2008 8:42 AM

You know, I've never really understood the perception that N scale is more expensive, item per item.  I mean, I just don't really see that a lot, but then maybe it's just because the era that I'm modeling isn't where you see most of the disparity.  I mean, I model the early 30's in N scale, so it's all steam for me.  I can buy high quality steam loco's (of different types) all day long for under $100.  From what I've seen of HO steam, thats about the same.  Do diesels vary that much from scale to scale? 

Now where that argument does hold water for sure is in the overall scheme of things.  Since N scale is smaller insize, you can put, say, more boxcars in a 1' square area then you can in a larger sale.  If you want to fill that 1' sq. area, then you'll have to buy more boxcars (at roughly the same price as HO scale if you shop right), and so in the end, it does cost more.

The biggest difference between the scales, besides size obviously, is that sound is still limited in N scale.  It's getting there, and there are some offerings, and you can ofter add your own, but it doesn't have the availability of HO.

 

 

OK, I'll go back to my corner now!

Philip
  • Member since
    July 2008
  • From: Amherst, N.S.
  • 248 posts
Posted by kcole4001 on Sunday, August 10, 2008 9:25 AM

I think the rolling stock and motive power prices are pretty equal over all between the two scales. N may be a little more, but you have to look at the big picture for such a big decision. Choosing scale is probably the biggest decision a modeler has to make, and usually it's made early without as much experience as you'd want for such a momentous choice.

Where N is going to save a lot of money is if you want to build a lot of structure kits, since N simply has less material in each kit due to the smaller scale, they're generally cheaper than HO, just as HO kits are cheaper than O kits. So if the locos and cars are a little more, it should even out in the end. I'm not really sure about scenery and detail parts, they may be comparable.

Like you said, the sound issue is still lagging a bit for N, but things like the micro Tsunami decoders are pushing the state of the art for N right along. Soon N will be pretty close to the larger scales in decoder availability.

I run HO, but if I was starting over from scratch, I'd very possibly go with N. As I said, for me it's partly a rolling stock/era issue, but there does seem to be more interest in earlier decades lately.

EDIT: since re-reading pcarrell's post, I see what he was getting at more clearly: that N will be more expensive than HO for the same given space. Good point. it slipped by me at first.

DOH! Dunce [D)]

"The mess and the magic Triumphant and tragic A mechanized world out of hand" Kevin
  • Member since
    April 2008
  • From: Los Angeles
  • 199 posts
Posted by Randall_Roberts on Sunday, August 10, 2008 9:59 AM

The argument that there's more selection in HO than in N scale reminds me of the argument that there's more software for the IBM PC than for the Mac.  In 1984 that was an issue, as there was no software for the Mac.  But a few years later I'd hear that argument and reply... there's 12 word processors for the IBM PC and only 4 four the Mac.  How many of them are you going to use?

Yes, there is more selection in HO than in N scale.  But there is more than adequate selection in N scale today.

In recent months I've decided to split the difference and go with TT scale.  But that means I have to get all my trains, track, and accessories from Europe.  Which is ironic, as the scale was introduced here in the United States.

And that opens a whole other can of worms.

Best! 

Randall Roberts Visit http://modeltrains.about.com Subscribe to the FREE weekly Model Trains newsletter.
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: In the State of insanity!
  • 7,982 posts
Posted by pcarrell on Sunday, August 10, 2008 10:05 AM
 Randall_Roberts wrote:

In recent months I've decided to split the difference and go with TT scale.  But that means I have to get all my trains, track, and accessories from Europe.  Which is ironic, as the scale was introduced here in the United States.

And that opens a whole other can of worms.

Best! 

You Sir, are an evil, evil man! Tongue [:P]

For shame!  This is the equivalent of a forum "hit and run"! Smile,Wink, & Grin [swg]

Philip
  • Member since
    July 2005
  • From: Saskatchewan
  • 331 posts
Posted by skiloff on Sunday, August 10, 2008 10:31 AM
I have to agree with pcarrell. I have not noticed a big disparity in N scale being more expensive on a unit by unit basis. Often they are cheaper in my experience. For example, Kato makes the SD40-2 Mid Production for both scales - HO is $179 and the N scale is $100. Granted, the HO model has a few extra features, but its still a marked difference in price. I could site many other examples, too, but I'm just not understanding where people say N is more expensive, unless its as pcarrell says, a cost per square foot.
Kids are great for many reasons. Not the least of which is to buy toys "for them."
  • Member since
    July 2008
  • From: Amherst, N.S.
  • 248 posts
Posted by kcole4001 on Sunday, August 10, 2008 10:41 AM

Normally no one buys everything up front, so the cost per sq. ft. really only becomes apparent later anyway, and we all will find something to spend money on later regardless of scale.

Where the N scaler will be spending money on finishing the layout, the HO (or larger) scaler will be replacing older items, upgrading structures, adding DCC, adding accessories, etc.

It's never ending, one of the joys of the hobby: you're never really finished until the coffin lid is closed.

Angel [angel]

"The mess and the magic Triumphant and tragic A mechanized world out of hand" Kevin
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: Culpeper, Va
  • 8,204 posts
Posted by IRONROOSTER on Sunday, August 10, 2008 10:51 AM
 Randall_Roberts wrote:

The argument that there's more selection in HO than in N scale reminds me of the argument that there's more software for the IBM PC than for the Mac.  In 1984 that was an issue, as there was no software for the Mac.  But a few years later I'd hear that argument and reply... there's 12 word processors for the IBM PC and only 4 four the Mac.  How many of them are you going to use?

Yes, there is more selection in HO than in N scale.  But there is more than adequate selection in N scale today.

In recent months I've decided to split the difference and go with TT scale.  But that means I have to get all my trains, track, and accessories from Europe.  Which is ironic, as the scale was introduced here in the United States.

And that opens a whole other can of worms.

Best! 

There is some American TT here http://www.ttscale.com/ and here http://www.goldcoastrailway.com/ and here http://www.btsrr.com/btstt.htm

Enjoy

Paul 

If you're having fun, you're doing it the right way.
  • Member since
    May 2002
  • From: Massachusetts
  • 2,899 posts
Posted by Paul3 on Sunday, August 10, 2008 11:00 AM

Randall_Roberts,
I'm sorry, but your comparison between PC/Apple and HO/N doesn't hold water.  Sure, one can only use one word processor program at a time, but that does not apply to model railroading where one can be running a dozen trains at a time on a club layout.  Folks don't tend to collect word processor programs as a hobby.  Many people collect model railroad locomotives as part of their hobby.  There's a lot of people that want to accurately model historic eras in prototype railroading that need models that represent that time.  I don't think there's too many people trying to model word processors of the 1980's like WordStar.

To me, N scale does not have near enough for me as a New Haven fan & collector.  In HO, most every single diesel the NH ever had is available, or at least was actually made at one time or another in one format or another (brass, plastic, resin, etc.).  In N scale, not so much.  For example, I have 7 NH specific steam models in brass.  None of these exist in N scale.

There is an adequate selection in N scale as long as you want generic items or the most popular types and railroads (UP, for example).

Paul A. Cutler III
************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
************

  • Member since
    May 2015
  • 779 posts
Posted by Dallas Model Works on Sunday, August 10, 2008 11:15 AM
 Randall_Roberts wrote:

The argument that there's more selection in HO than in N scale reminds me of the argument that there's more software for the IBM PC than for the Mac.  In 1984 that was an issue, as there was no software for the Mac.  But a few years later I'd hear that argument and reply... there's 12 word processors for the IBM PC and only 4 four the Mac.  How many of them are you going to use?

Of course, those four word processors are the only four pieces of software available for the Mac! Evil [}:)]

Craig

DMW

  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: Amish country Tenn.
  • 10,027 posts
Posted by loathar on Sunday, August 10, 2008 11:39 AM
 Dallas Model Works wrote:
 Randall_Roberts wrote:

The argument that there's more selection in HO than in N scale reminds me of the argument that there's more software for the IBM PC than for the Mac.  In 1984 that was an issue, as there was no software for the Mac.  But a few years later I'd hear that argument and reply... there's 12 word processors for the IBM PC and only 4 four the Mac.  How many of them are you going to use?

Of course, those four word processors are the only four pieces of software available for the Mac! Evil [}:)]

Well, there's those, and that Qicktime player that crashes everytime I try to use it.Disapprove [V]

From what I've seen, N scale is about 20% cheaper.

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!