my view on cost is that like for like, they are similar, what there isn't in N the same as HO is cheapo loco's. there are only really ( my oppinion ) 3 N gauge choices of loco. 1 kato, 2 atlas, 3 some bachmann. the cheaper N stuff is poor. in HO, you have the same 3 and coach load of others from 20 year old moulds. you get what you pay for. buy cheap = buy twice.
another consideration is to get an 8 foot long train in HO is a loco and maybe 6 -7 cars. the same 8 foot in N is obviously more cars. at a similar cost the N obviously works out more. just look at the cost of the newish kato SP daylight setup, a 10 coach train out the box with another 160 bucks to take it upto 18. how many HO coach sets come with 10 coaches to run round your 8x4?
The lack of selection in N scale vs. HO is obvious, and nobody argues that. HO has decades of head start as a scale, and it is the most popular, so it gets the most attention from manufacturers.
To me, that just leaves N scale wide open and ripe for the pickin'!
Besides, kitbashing and scrratchbuilding in N is fun! And isn't that what real modeling is anyways? If you want something special, sometimes you just have to build it yourself instead of buying RTR.
Oh, and I would say that there are more then three good manufacturers to pick from. Model Powers latest offerings continue to improve, and Micro-Ace makes a fine mechanism for kitbashing on. Con-Cor makes a couple of real beautys too, and lets not forget my beloved MDC/Athearns! They're like little swiss watches for the rails!
I'm sure HO has lots more choices though.
hi
You definately have opened a can of worms!!
N scale:
PRO:you get more for the space
CON:not as much stuff is availible
HO Scale:
PRO:You can operate your trains on others peoples layouts, Lots of buildings and details availible.
CON:hard to fit it into a small space.
-Tim
pcarrell,Not only is HO the most popular, it's also more popular than all other scales combined (it's 55% of the hobby, according to surveys). N scale is around 25%.
BTW, who said that kitbashing and scratchbuilding is what "real" modeling is? So all those kids that bought Lionel and American Flyer in the 1950's (all RTR) weren't "real" model railroaders? Does one have to pass some kind of test to be a "real" modeler?
One problem with N scale that folks haven't mentioned yet is operations. Sure, you can run a long train with N, but how about doing local freights or running a freight yard? Switching and reading car numbers just cannot be a lot of fun in N scale.
Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************
Lets keep it a friendly conversation here. It's much more productive, ya know?
Paul3 wrote: pcarrell,Not only is HO the most popular, it's also more popular than all other scales combined (it's 55% of the hobby, according to surveys). N scale is around 25%.
And I never said anything different. HO is clearly the most popular scale, as I stated earlier.
Relax, there's no test. I was just suggesting that to most folks, "modeling" means building something, and that building things has been an enjoyable and rewarding aspect of the hobby from day one. There are modelers in EVERY scale, so it's not scale specific either. However, most folks who run in the scales you mention here tend to be more on the toy and collector side of things. There are modelers in that scale, yes, but that is not so much the majority. Thats why even trains.com calls the forum for that scale the "Classic Toy Trains Forums". There's nothing at all wrong with that. It's just descriptive of the largest portion of what that audience is into, thats all.
My Micro-Trains and Accumate couplers work very well, thank you. Just as well as the big boys trains do. And my loco's are smooth performers too, with just as few stalls as the big boys. As I said, I model the early 1930's. I model a branchline with a connection to a class 1 RR, so most of my trains are short locals.
The reason ops hasn't been mentioned is that it's a non-issue. Ten or fifteen years ago one might have made a minor case of this, sighting the poor loco performance as the chief problem, but it's just not so any more. I think you might be surprised at the performance of todays N scale. And as for reading car numbers, I can see them just fine. And when I get older, well, thats what glasses are for.
I didn't mean for any of the things I said to cause anyone to get upset. I was mearly trying to show that in N scale you can do virtually anything you can do in any other scale, including kitbashing and scratchbuilding, thats all. Sorry if I upset you.
Paul3 wrote: One problem with N scale that folks haven't mentioned yet is operations. Sure, you can run a long train with N, but how about doing local freights or running a freight yard? Switching and reading car numbers just cannot be a lot of fun in N scale.
Seems fun enough to me...!
One ingenious work-around for guest operators who may have trouble reading car numbers is to provide a photograph of the car on the car-card. This may not be practical for switch list operations, but a short discription of the car should be fine. Where photographs and descriptions may be less unambiguous is with hoppers and other car types which tend to run in large groups together. But often they're headed from the same place top the same place, so I would argue it's a non-factor.
Ops in N scale can be just as fun/effective as in HO.
Those of us who have worked extensively in both HO and N are probably in the best position to offer meaningful insight; I was in HO for almost 20 years before going N. I found that N scale fit my lifestyle (active duity military) much better than HO. But that's just me. That's the problem. I can tell you what was good/bad about HO and N from my perspective, not yours. One would argue that if any one scale was objectively superior than all the rest (say, HO...), the others would slowly die off. Instead, we see growth in N and G, as well as a resurgence in S and O.
In the end, "HO versus N" or more properly "what scale is best for me?" is an extremely personal question, one whose answer is not found in an online forum. Then there are the "rubber-gaugers" whose answer to the above is "all of them!"
The best advice I can give is to carefullly examine your modeling objectives versus your constraints. Constraints include space, availability (not just overall, but road-specific), time, money, etc. N scale fit my bill well enough (although I still have to build my own PRR steam engines unlike the vast spectrum of RTR and kit PRR steam available in HO). Even after I leave the Air Force someday I will probably stick with N scale; I found I like the scenery-to-trains ratio N scale offers too much to give up.
If finances allow, perhaps it would be worth buying a little of each (preferably the better-quality stuff) to familiarize yourself with the pros and cons of each.
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
"If finances allow, perhaps it would be worth buying a little of each (preferably the better-quality stuff) to familiarize yourself with the pros and cons of each."
------------------------------------------------------------------
That's a great suggestion. Ideally one would want to visit at least one layout in each scale to get an overall feel for the scale in person.
If that's not possible, try building a small layout, or even a diorama in each scale. That should provide a good visual reference to see if there is an obvious preference.
After making the decision, the 'second-place' scale stuff could be sold off, or kept for a later project. You never know when a particular modelling bug will bite!
Switching works fine in N scale, especially with the smooth-running N scale locos of the last ten years or so. Ditto for yard operations. The car numbers can be small, but having enough light helps a lot.
N scale wouldn't be 15-25% of the market if it didn't work well for a lot of people.
You HO'ers can boost your favorite scale all you want, but no need to trot out urban legends about N scale if you haven't experienced both. Because of the relatively recent emergence of N scale (last 15-20 years) as a more viable choice, most current active N scalers had some experience with HO first (as did I). So we've made an informed choice and N scale works for us. It's not for everybody, but it works for many.
Personally, if I had room, I'd leapfrog mere HO scale and go with S or O scale. But my personal layout space reality demands a smaller scale.
ByronModel RR Blog
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
pcarrell wrote:Whoa, whoa.....lets put the daggers away. It's a friendly conversation here. Paul3 wrote: pcarrell,Not only is HO the most popular, it's also more popular than all other scales combined (it's 55% of the hobby, according to surveys). N scale is around 25%.And I never said anything different. HO is clearly the most popular scale, as I stated earlier.BTW, who said that kitbashing and scratchbuilding is what "real" modeling is? So all those kids that bought Lionel and American Flyer in the 1950's (all RTR) weren't "real" model railroaders? Does one have to pass some kind of test to be a "real" modeler?Relax, there's no test. I was just suggesting that to most folks, "modeling" means building something, and that building things has been an enjoyable and rewarding aspect of the hobby from day one. There are modelers in EVERY scale, so it's not scale specific either. However, most folks who run in the scales you mention here tend to be more on the toy and collector side of things. There are modelers in that scale, yes, but that is not so much the majority. Thats why even trains.com calls the forum for that scale the "Classic Toy Trains Forums". There's nothing at all wrong with that. It's just descriptive of the largest portion of what that audience is into, thats all....
Whoa, whoa.....lets put the daggers away. It's a friendly conversation here.
...
Toy trains are morphing into hi rail where the only difference between scale and hi rail is the wheels and couplers. American Flyer is actually not the large manufacturer in S, American Models and S Helper are - their products are scale and come with scale and hi rail wheels. S Helper actually includes both wheel sets in all their products except steam locomotives. American Models and S Helper each make their own line of track which are roughly akin to Atlas snap track and Bachmann EZ track. Same thing is happening in O with MTH and Atlas. Atlas makes their stuff in 2 and 3 rail versions. MTH has started and is expanding 2 rail versions. Even the folks running Lionel and Amercian Flyer are going more and more with scale structures and scenery. While the pure collectors of Lionel and American Flyer are still there, the hi railers, scale guys, and the narrow gauge crowd are growing and will soon be the majority if they aren't already.
BTW to most folks model railroading means a bunch of crazy old men playing trains - and that works for me.
Enjoy
Paul
bellzbello wrote: Well put, I think I'm a train runner. I have limited space and will only be attempting a 4x8 layout.
Well put, I think I'm a train runner. I have limited space and will only be attempting a 4x8 layout.
Not to start a flame war, you can build a nice HO layout in 4 x 8 but I doubt you'll get as much satisfaction with it over the long run as you would with N is the same space.
I started out with a 4 x 8 HO layout in 1977 but I got tired of just seeing the train run around the track. My 2 year old loved but but he got tired of it after a while and decided it was more fun to see how fast he could get the train to run before it derailed on the 18 inch curves. So I switched to N-scale and I found we both enjoyed it more sicne I could get almost 4 times as much action in the space.
When we moved into our house, I got a nice sized room to run trains in and it was even more enjoyable. But with work and other responsibilities, there was lttle time to run trains.
Irv
Seeing I model in HO and N Scale I will tell you up front there isn't that much of a price difference.A Atlas GP7 is $114.95 in HO and $99.95 in N Scale..A freight car can cost between $7.95 to $39.95 just like their HO breathern-many in the same road name as well.
Atlas make 39 different styles of locomotives including their Shay and 2-6-0.
There is a wide choice of locomotive road names including NH.
You can have sound-just like in HO.
As far as operations..As others pointed out operations can be done in N Scale today just like it was done years ago.BTW That urban legion been around for quite some time.
If one would separate fact from fiction one would see N has a lot to offer including locomotive detail parts.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
loathar wrote:
That's what I was thinking.
I remember the dirty looks I got last year when I posted:
"N if for NO!"
Nobody tried to ask me what HO is for.
Tjsingle wrote: 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!Flamewar Flamewar Flamewar !!
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!
WOW! Two cans of worms in one thread! This should be good!
Flamewar Flamewar Flamewar !!
I disagree. There is no flaming going on here. So far all we've seen is the basic realities of the two scales in question. There's no flaming about the pros and cons of 4x8s either. Everyone here has been friendly and polite.
fyi-my 4x8 HO layout for the boys is fully stocked and still not assembled. Why? Because the back room is still full of unsold tag sale junk! We should have a flame war over tag sales vs eBay!
Since I model in twice N scale (1:80) I tend to sit on the sidelines and laugh as the comedy plays out.
In the ultimate, what scale one chooses to model is a personal decision, and is seldom a product of cold, logical thought. How many of us (including Yours Truly) had their decision made by a gift from a special someone?
No matter what scale you model the cost will be what you, as an individual, choose to spend. Your space will be what you can arrange or finagle, and how you use it will be your decision. At the end of the day, this is a personal hobby, and each of us is unique.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
bellzbello wrote:I'm not trying to start any kind of "fight" over which scale to use. I'm merely just pooling people's opinion. Just pickin' brains. Ultimately, I will make my own decision. Everyone who has responded has been very helpful and polite{so far}. Thank you.
As far as price goes, here's a great site where you can do a side by side comparison for yourself.Modeltrainstuff.com
loathar wrote: bellzbello wrote:I'm not trying to start any kind of "fight" over which scale to use. I'm merely just pooling people's opinion. Just pickin' brains. Ultimately, I will make my own decision. Everyone who has responded has been very helpful and polite{so far}. Thank you.As far as price goes, here's a great site where you can do a side by side comparison for yourself.Modeltrainstuff.com
I'll second, third, and fourth that suggestion.
Sawyer Berry
Clemson University c/o 2018
Building a protolanced industrial park layout
I have done HO scale before and I loved it (when I was at my uncle's house that had plenty of room for larger layouts). When I was at my house there was not so much room and I grew bored with it. Years later I came back to the hobby and I see how well N scale has developed and I chose to use it and I could not be happier. The only complaint I have is the lack of selection when compared to HO, but still the selection is good enough for me.
As far as price goes a lot of it is the same (or at least close enough), but since you can cram more things in the same space with N vs HO so you can definitely spend a lot more.
Modeling the N&W freelanced at the height of their steam era in HO.
Daniel G.
There is one additional benefit to N.
I never see forum arguments over how code 55 N scale rail does not pass the reality test and represents an oversized prototype used only on the Penn Central between Tabasco and East Podunk in May of 1953.
Fewer rivet counters in N perhaps? (They are harder to see).
For me HO works better, it gives the best blend of scenery and detail. Your eyes will likely weaken somewhat as you age. Then again I have a medium-large layout. I have also helped a friend wire a nice N scale layout in a very small room and the local club has a beautiful O layout in a large building. As others have said, check out several of each and see which appeals most to you. Also think outside the 4x8 box if your room allows it.
The mind is like a parachute. It works better when it's open. www.stremy.net
dale8chevyss wrote:For me, HO is small enough. I look at N and don't believe myself or my viewers should have to have magnifying lenses to see the details. I just prefer HO over N and thats my opinion.
What I find odd is I can work on N Scale better then I can HO since I have limited use of my right hand..And thank heavens I can still work on N Scale with my glasses off and I am 60!
As far as magnifying lenses..Hey,HO guys been using 'em for years!!!
larak wrote: There is one additional benefit to N.I never see forum arguments over how code N scale 55 rail does not pass the reality test and represents an oversized prototype used only on the Penn Central between Tabasco and East Podunk in May of 1953. Fewer rivet counters in N perhaps? (They are harder to see).
I never see forum arguments over how code N scale 55 rail does not pass the reality test and represents an oversized prototype used only on the Penn Central between Tabasco and East Podunk in May of 1953.
Actually there are rivet counters in N..
They use magnifying lenses whenever they decide to count the rivets..
And I seen heated discussions on C55 vs C80 track.
pcarrell,I thought I was keeping it friendly. My point about HO being 55% of the hobby wasn't to contradict you, but to point out that not only is HO more popular, it's more popular by a significant amount (which explains why there's so much more available in HO).
"Modeling" doesn't just refer to building kits and scratchbuilding. It can also involve trying to simulate the prototype in how it's operated. Throwing that term "real modeler" in reference to building kits is one of my personal pet peeves when it comes to this hobby. For example, my ex-next door neighbor had a very intense operating layout, with schedules, meets, paperwork, etc., and was operated very realistically as he is a retired tower operator. But all his stuff was old American Flyer S-gauge with no scenery at all, and he never built a model railroad kit in his life. I consider him a model railroader just as much as anyone else. Not a model builder, true. But instead of modeling a railroad's appearance, he modeled it's operations.
As for operations, I wasn't talking about performance of the locos (which I know is darn good these days) so much as the performance of the couplers, cars, etc. It's bad enough in HO scale trying to pick the couplers with a bamboo stick or get the magnetics to work right. N scale cars are so light weight that if you sneeze on 'em, they are likely to jump the track. Trying to uncouple them is a bit of a chore (in my limited experience), and getting them back on the track is even worse.
As for car numbers, I'm sorry, but they are wicked small. It's like trying to read the end numbers on HO cars. And if you weather them...whew! Most N-scalers I've met at shows and the like don't seem to be the type where car numbers matter to them. I don't know how many times I go to a show and see some long N-scale unit train...and all the cars have the same number on them. It happens in HO too, but not nearly as often.
I wonder how many N-scalers actually Operate their equipment? By that, I mean car cards or switchlists, etc. with some kind of car forwarding where each car has to have a different number.
Dave V.,How big are the pictures on these car cards? How big are the cards? If you're modeling the PRR (like I model the NH), you must have a large collection of boxcar red boxcars or just PRR boxcars. For example, I have been known to buy a set of NH boxcars where the only difference is the number. How does one get around the problem of reading miniscule car numbers when one has a group of cars that look identical that could be headed almost anywhere on the layout? This may be a "non-factor" when it comes to unit trains of coal, but with individual cars, how would that work?
I agree that it's really all about what works for the individual. I'd model O-scale if I had the room (and if there was the selection) for the Operations I want to do. But for me, HO offers me the best compromise between size and Operation.
Paul3 wrote: As for operations, I wasn't talking about performance of the locos (which I know is darn good these days) so much as the performance of the couplers, cars, etc. It's bad enough in HO scale trying to pick the couplers with a bamboo stick or get the magnetics to work right. ... snip ... Trying to uncouple them is a bit of a chore (in my limited experience), and getting them back on the track is even worse.
As for operations, I wasn't talking about performance of the locos (which I know is darn good these days) so much as the performance of the couplers, cars, etc. It's bad enough in HO scale trying to pick the couplers with a bamboo stick or get the magnetics to work right.
... snip ...
Trying to uncouple them is a bit of a chore (in my limited experience), and getting them back on the track is even worse.
You need to get out more. Picks work better on N scale M-T couplers than HO Kadees, in my significant experience with both. A number of N scale layouts where I have operated use car cards and waybills. Works fine, but you do need enough light. Once one is used to the smaller cars, it's about the same effort or a little less to re-rail N scale -- and they don't come off the track any more than does HO, assuming careful trackwork. One can buy 6-packs or 12-packs of cars with different numbers from Intermountain. Even MicroTrains is producing multi-number "runner packs" these days.
For someone who insists he's not trying to pick on N scale, you sure keep at it. We get it -- N scale is not for you. It works for lots of us.
Paul,Actually it isn't as bad as you think.I have no problems reading the numbers with my glasses off..Just like I do HO numbers.
Let's not forget the HO cars-especially the steam era browns and oxide reds look the same.
Not to go "off topic" suffice it to say many modelers still don't fully understand prototype operation that also includes safety and work rules.But,that's another deep study topic.
Paul3 wrote: Dave V.,How big are the pictures on these car cards? How big are the cards? If you're modeling the PRR (like I model the NH), you must have a large collection of boxcar red boxcars or just PRR boxcars. For example, I have been known to buy a set of NH boxcars where the only difference is the number. How does one get around the problem of reading miniscule car numbers when one has a group of cars that look identical that could be headed almost anywhere on the layout? This may be a "non-factor" when it comes to unit trains of coal, but with individual cars, how would that work?
I've heard of this being done, but I don't do it myself. I don't have any problem reading my car numbers (and I do have several of the same type, such as the X29, X26c, GLa, H21a, etc.). Not to be sarcastic, but I keep my glasses perscription up to date. It's honestly not a problem. Eevn the weathered ones. On a few of my older X29s, I have wiped the car number clean as was PRR practice when dirty cars were humped.
bellzbello wrote:Can anybody share the pros and cons of either gauge? How do the smaller trains perform? Thanx.
I recently tinkered with N scale, its enough that I want to make some display layout sometime, but my main scale is HO. I bought some 2nd hand equipment and gavem a workover, and I was impressed this rather toylike Santa Fe F unit crawled like a snail. Quite frankly you can make both scales run like champs, so the decision can't be based on operationality. Its more space and size and can you deal with the smaller size of N scale. Commercial equipment is certainly broader in HO than N scale. N scale can get 4 times the layout in the same space than HO. If I were to start fresh I would have to look at what I want to do model wise. At what I want to do today, HO still wins. But your decision what scale is your decision and how you would like to model.
IRONROOSTER 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?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.htmEnjoyPaul
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!
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
Thanks Paul. I'm familiar with those sites, and know the American sources pretty well. The best is the TTScale.com site, which is Elmer MacKay's. Elmer is only just now getting his business back online after having relocated. As he's a one-man operation it was a lengthy haitus. TT Scale in America today is a cottage industry much like S scale was in the early 1980s. However, in Europe it is about as popular as S scale is in America today. The best selection of TT Scale products I can find online in North America is at Euro Train Hobby.
Unfortunately, with the price of the euro vs. the American dollar he doesn't seem to keep too much in stock these days. He also doesn't carry Mehano. Mehano has a bad name in the U.S. because we only get their low-end stuff. For the European market they make much higher grade products, including locomotives with sound decoders.
It is a matter of physics. N scale models are smaller than my individual fingers so I'm not able to work with that scale. Even HO scale, where I'm at, barely qualifies. My extent of compromise stops at HO. I don't want intolerable frustration by changing to a smaller scale. And then there are my eyes.....is that a cricket or an ATSF S-1? And putting both scales under a bit of magnification shows that N scale is less realistic looking. Yes, I could get a lot more into a given space with N, but that's not an option for me. Also, the less I have a "godlike" view of a layout as compared to a sense of being human within the scene, the more I like it.
If you're undecided, dabble in different scales and decide from hands-on experience before making a "full body" plunge.
Mark