I am new to the forum, I will give some background info. I currently am mainly involved in 3 Rail O Scale, however I keep contemplating switching to HO. Over the years I have accumilated a good amount of O so switching over sounds kind of dumb. My current layout is 12'x22', but am finishing the basement and will have a space of 24'x24' next to the current layout. The plan is to take the old one down and build a new layout. I would like to be able to operate like a point to point, but have loops so I can run trains in a circle if I wish. I probably wouldnt fully get out of O but I would like to get more into building kits and making more realistic scenes. The O Scale stuff is nice, but my issues are the price (steam engines are $$$), takes up space and you need wide curves for decent looks, center rail, and non fixed pilots and oversized couplers, and a not as wide diversity in product as HO. It seems like a lot of HO guys use the NCE Power Cab system so I am looking into that unless there is something else I should look into. One question I have is will you be able to lash up 2 engines from different makes that have dcc? Also what track do alot of people preffer? I looked into Atlas and Peco Code 83 because they look decent and price isnt too high. I will probably have more questions since im unsure of how much I would switch over. Thanks.
Welcome to the Forum and maybe welcome to HO scale.
NCE is the system I use and I like it very much but there are many Digitrax, Lenz, and others out there who will teel you theirs is best. While I strongly support your use of NCE from the layout size you describe the PowerCab model may not be sufficiently robust. I think you should be looking at the 5 amp Power House system.
For flex track, I chose Atlas code 83. It was (and I think still is) the cheapest and I like the way it curves smoothly even as you adjust the radius or curvature. Even after having been laid in a curve for long periods it will still tens to spring back to straight if all constraints are removed. But, this springyness is exactly what some folks don't like. I am not familiar wo=ith Peco track but I think it tends to hold its shape if you out a curve in it.
Yes, you can lash up engines from different manufacturers so long as they all haqve decoders installed. The only problem that can come up is that one engine may run much slower or faster than others at the sale throttle setting. But this can be adjusted by changing various control variables that are part of all DCC systems.
Welcome to the forums!
The Power Cab is a great starter system and can be expanded upon as your needs grow.
You can lash up any engines of any manufacturer as long as they have a DCC decoder in them. You may have to speed-match some of them, but not difficult to do.
Atlas and Peco are two popular brands of track. MicroEngineering is another brand.
Jay
C-415 Build: https://imageshack.com/a/tShC/1
Other builds: https://imageshack.com/my/albums
One thing to be aware of is that with a smaller scale you tend to have more locomotives, cars, buildings, track, etc. for a given space. So while each item is cheaper, overall you may not save much money and may in fact spend more.
Good luck
Paul
I'm also a NCE user. I started with a 5 amp PowerPro and 5 amp booster for the layout. But the PowerCab proved a very useful idea when I actually set up my programming track. It can do everything the big system does, plus there is no need for a booster for the programming track when dealing with sound engine. I'd say start with a PowerCab. It can do everything you need as you start. You can also add the booster if you want, but easiest to just pick a PowerPro at that point.
Stick with 5 amps. Being in O, you might be tempted to go big, but if you have a short, you can really melt stuff down with the overkill of 10 amps in HO.
I won't throw dirt at other systems. They all suit someone. One of the things usually remarked on about NCE are the relatively intuitive controls and commands. Since the radio fix a few years back, wireless is rock solid. I reccommend it, although good to have a command bus for the PowrrCab (you can, however, send it to NCE to get wireless custom installed) to plug in when using it in walkaround mode on the PowerPro system and for when a radio throttle loses signal for emergency reacquisition of control (which never happens here, so ??).
Then, if you're into computers just a little, there's JMRI Decoder Pro, which lets you turn old Mac and Android phones into virtually free wireless throttles. Friends can use their own phone to operate, all for about $149 less than the average $150 cost of a radio throttle.
BTW, it's easy enough to run point to point, but have a loop system set up for continuous running if desired. People have been doing it for years. It's all about how you arrange track and configure your operations. I've got something very much like that on my layout. Great for test runs or just watching things go round in Relax mode. David's just being, errr, , ornery -- or at least way overly precise for Friday evening
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
Welcome. I like HO.
I ended up with the 5 amp NCE system (with a 2nd utility controller) and like it. For me it got down to NCE and Digitrax. You might give them both a try if you can.
For track I went with Atlas code 83 flextrack. I chose Walthers-Shinohara turnouts, swayed alot by the wide selection of types. Peco and some Atlas types are also popular. I like the popular Tortoise switch machines. I have 3 Atlas 90 degree crossings...very disappointing as there are (in the 2012 versions at least) improper clearances that require modification. Wish I had used another brand crossings.
Modeling HO with a transition era UP bent
davidmbedard"Point to point" and "loop" are 2 layout types that are contrary to each other. A loop of any sort (unless you are modeling a flood loader Baloo track) is Co. Pletely realistic as the prototype rarely does that. I think perhaps picking a prototype is in order....or looking at MR mags as see what speaks to you?
Yeah thats sort of my idea that I am thinking of. My layout now is basically just independent loops with a couple switches. After 7 years, watching trains go in a circle gets old without something for them to do.
rrebellFunny, that is what I have! I can go point to point from two yards or loop it with mostly hidden track, my layout was designed that way because I wanted both, which I got, in fact you can't realy tell the back loop is part of a giant dogbone.
You, too?
Ah, the brutal logic of hidden track, artfully hidden crossovers, various elctrical gizmos,es p w/ DC, etc.
Do wish I had less hidden track, but you gotta do what you gotta do. I'm also satisfied I don't have any less. Another good reason to think a big project over carefully.
Is sharing the space with O just a display of O or so, or something more substantial? i.e. what % you plan to devote to each? Overlapping staging/helixes, etc?
mlehman Is sharing the space with O just a display of O or so, or something more substantial? i.e. what % you plan to devote to each? Overlapping staging/helixes, etc?
Im not sure if I understand this correctly but do you mean O as in O scale or something else? If its O scale, I'd keep O and HO seperate. My thought right now is to have something with a 2 track main and incorporate both freight and passenger operations. I would like to have a staging yard to keep full trains in. Theres alot I want but I would have to think about what I really want and what to sacrifice.
Im assuming O is O scale. My plan might be to build something like a 5'x2' HO switching modular with an industry and If I feel I would rather have an HO layout over O, then I would make a layout dedicated to it. I definitely want a staging area to park full trains and would like to have 2 main lines if possible, probably a wall layout in a U or G shape. maybe build it so a level below can be added if it ever gets to that point. I really need to sit down and think about what I want and what to sacrifice.
Hello, and welcome to the forums. As you can see below in my signature line, I was at the same point you are several years ago. Switching from 3 rail O (DCS) to 2 rail HO (DCC) was an adjustment. I suggest seeking out a model railroad club in your area, your Local Hobby Shop may be able to point you in the right direction.
As for your initial layout plan thought of a point to point with an optional loop, it is what I did. There is no right or wrong answer. The answer and question are what will make you happy? I use the NCE 5amp system. It is a bit of investment. You could start with a Power Cab and expand later as well. I use a mix of Atlas code 100 and Code 83 flex track, as well as Peco code 100 and Shinohara Code 83 turnouts (the Shinoharas are all #4). If I were to do it over I would use Code 83 and code 70.
If you decide to switch to HO you may wish to select a specific modeling time period and season, as well as a railroad prototype or a prototype to base your railroad on (proto-freelancing). Do your homework before you start buying (which you have already started).
I still have my 3 rail stuff stored at my parents house. I just dont have room for the 3 rail empire I want right now. I admit that I miss the size and detail of the O scale locomotives. I plan to return to it eventually.
I will probably keep most of my O stuff, I am currently thinning out some stuff I havent used. I have DCS now and newer Lionel stuff has seemed to only be problematic for me, so its basically all MTH (more options in ho). Even with the space, I feel that 18-21" passenger cars need really wide curves to look good and put 5-8 of them on a train and its almost 14' long not including an engine.
Pennsy and New Haven are the 2 main roads in my collection. I like the 1950s-1970s steam to diesel era and would be the era I would probably model. Probably a mix of New England and Pennsylvania, more freelanced. My O layout is basically a bunch of loops and almost no switching so switching is a big thing I want to include.
I had a point to point setup, out in the open, and loops in hidden staging. I discovered that, before the staging was fully hidden, I liked being able to run the loops just to watch the trains slowly make their way around the layout.
Well, the far end of one point (it's an around the room layout) was close enough to the other end, I continued the track on about 6 feet and made it a loop. It can still serve as p to p, just by operating it that way, but can serve as that loop too. I considder it one of the most enjoyable improvements I've made to the layout. I can watch trains now, unhidden, make rounds around the layout when I feel like it, which is more often than I'd have originally thought!
As a suggestion, you could hide a small section of the visible loop behind scenery or buildings to disguise the loop for p to p operation...
Regarding which track to use, only for what it's worth, I've used Micro Engineering track exclusively out in the open. Code 55 and 70. It looks good but is a pain to work with. The springyness mentioned earlier would be a welcome change to the fragile and kinkyness. But it was all there was to choose from at the time, that or Atlas code 100. Which works fine in the hidden staging. Your proposed layout is about 2x as large as mine, so my point is; whatever you choose, make sure it's user friendly.
Welcome to HO! Dan
bmccarronOver the years I have accumilated a good amount of O so switching over sounds kind of dumb.
I wouldn´t go that far and call it dumb, but give yourself a second chance to rethink it.
I know the folks in here will kill me for this, but I do think there is many a fine Hi-Rail layout around. My personal favorite is Norm Charbonneau´s now gone layout - take a look here:
Norm´s Train Pages
Take your time and go through all the pages! Heck, this layout would even fit into your 24 by 24 space!
If I had the space and the funds - this would be what I´d be wanting to have.
Honestly, if you are enlarging the room, I would just use the added space for HO and leave the O alone. I took down my 3 rail layout when I built the Cherokee Valley and the Cawdor Southern, and I regret it so much, for now I'm back at the beginning, running 3 rail O on the floor with traditional track. As it is, I might start moving towards OO instead of continuing with my work on the CV. Since you're considering the switch just so that you can do some more building and model work, why not try a small (4'x8'? 5'x9'?) layout that can incorparate an industrial area inside of a loop, with access leads on both sides? That's the scheme used on the CV/CS. Plus, that allows you to get everything you seemed to want, and, despite the size, can allow for plenty of the work you stated you sought. Especially if you leave some TO running off the edge for expansion options, if you find yourself so desirous.
Sir Madog bmccarron Over the years I have accumilated a good amount of O so switching over sounds kind of dumb. I wouldn´t go that far and call it dumb, but give yourself a second chance to rethink it. I know the folks in here will kill me for this, but I do think there is many a fine Hi-Rail layout around. My personal favorite is Norm Charbonneau´s now gone layout - take a look here: Norm´s Train Pages Take your time and go through all the pages! Heck, this layout would even fit into your 24 by 24 space! If I had the space and the funds - this would be what I´d be wanting to have.
bmccarron Over the years I have accumilated a good amount of O so switching over sounds kind of dumb.
Rich
Alton Junction
If you do decide to stay with 3Rail O, give Ross Custom Switches a try, they make an excellent product.
My current layout consists of GarGraves and Ross switches, just havent wired the switches so they are manual as of now.
I probably wouldnt abandon O. My dad collects O so theres his stuff mixed with my stuff so chances are there would still be both.
Right now the basement is in the process of being cleaned and finished. The layout was fine for many years but we have a couple articulated engines now and they dont make it in a few spots and the benchwork isnt friendly for wiring. I have to climb on the table to get to the middle and I will avoid that in the future at all costs. The plan was to take the old layout apart while building the new one on the other side of the room, something like a U or G shape dogbone layout. I probably will build something small first for HO and then incorporate it in a bigger layout if I get to that.
LION runs the mane lion of him point to loop, but with nine miles of track on this circuit, and trains running four to five minutes apart, and a 20 minute run time, visitors cannot tell what they are looking at, other than it is a lot of trains.
LION has an additional 5 miles of track configured in two loops, but nobody can ever see that they are loops, all they can see is a northbound express track, and a south bound express track, with trains arriving every 3 minutes or so. There are two trains on each loop, so it is a busy track.
The local tracks (point to loop) have six trains running on them and the tower operator at 242nd street has to be on his toes. Fortunately the tains of LION (all simple DC) run automatically via a system of analog control.
You can see pictures of layout on web site of LION, here is the control center of the railroad: block control, station stops and signals...
Here is Control Tower of LION, a representation of a GRS model-5 interlocking machine...
Welcome to HO! The room is 24 x 27 the trains run on three levels, go ahead and COUNT them!
LIONS like to keep things SIMPLE!
RAOR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
When I was in junior high school (1970s) I switched from 0-27 to HO because I wanted more realism. If that is what you are looking for then switch. 0-27 is considered toy trains and there is nothing wrong with being a toy train collector, but if your interests are more about having accurate scale models go for it.
Of course you are going to want all of the room in the basement for HO which can take up more space than 0-27 because it has a larger minimum radius.
Don’t be in a rush to get rid of your 0-27 equipment. Some of it might have sentimental value. Also you might want to have both a toy train layout and a scale model layout. Or keep the 0-27 stuff for under the Christmas tree.
I still love my old 0-27 trains, and my HO.
When I was in middle school, I swapped over, and boy am I glad I kept my equipment. It shall always get the larger portion of my efforts, but my Cherokee Valley gave me some modeling projects, something I will admit I enjoyed, especially given the cost of Lionel parts. I have run out of reasonable projects with the CV, however, and shall probably start work on an OO scale layout soon.
NCE is quite easy to use. It's also has a slightly better radio implementaiton. (When you aren't breakng the darn antennas off the cabs)However in Digitrax's favor, I find the hardware simpler to hookup (standard 6 wire phone cable vs NCE's 8 wire...finding a 8 wire crimper & wire is a pain and expensive) I also find Digitrax's opto isolated boosters to be a little more bullet proof.A lot of people prefer code 100 Atlas because it's cheap and very easy to lay. Code 83 Atlas is another favorite but it's more expensive. (I could never figure out why a product that uses less metal cost more...but any way) If you buy anything like a walthers turntable, it is best to use walthers code 83 track so the ties line up on height.Micro engineering, and Walthers Shinohara are considered some of the best pre built switches. But they will cost you some coin. PECO and Atlas are considered the best buys. However none of them conform to NMRA standards. All of them deviate at least a little. Only Fast Tracks swiches (http://www.handlaidtrack.com/) are considered comfortant, and they are pretty darn nice too. But you have to have the time to hand make turnouts.And yes you can get two engines to run together nicely. But it's best done with custom speed tables and a computer to program it. It can be time consuming to set up the first time, but worth it. I know people who calibrate their speed step to the speed in SMPH. (speed step 7 = 7 smph, step 60 = 60 smph)
Don - Specializing in layout DC->DCC conversions
Modeling C&O transition era and steel industries There's Nothing Like Big Steam!
I recently switched from Digitrax to NCE. It's a expensive change but well worth it. I actually enjoy my trains again. I am also replacing my Digitrax AR-1s auto reversers.
I use Atlas code 83 and code 100 track with Walthers/Shinohara swithes.
But with all the room you have and the large inventory of O gauge, why change?
South Penn
I dont plan to get rid of O, I have been thinning some items out that I rarely use but I always liked HO and the high level of detail and it takes up less room. Most of my O stuff is Scale 3 rail but scale passenger cars and auto racks for example need wide curves to make them look right. There are more items available in HO and O scale is pretty much down to MTH, I havent had the best luck with newer Lionel items.
I would leave the current layout up (for now) and start the HO one, probably a smaller one with expansion potential, in the available space. Then, once you have the (small!) HO layout runnable, probably before you start scenery so you have an alternative project to break up the monotony, begin rebuilding the O layout, perhaps as a more traditional one scince the HO would allow the scale factor to be entertained.
i had jumped into O scale about a year ago and built up a pretty sizable benchwork in my basement. i had already accumulated a ton of track and turnouts , some rolling stock and other items. then as i began to learn what todays HO offers in terms of the sound / smoke etc etc that had drawn me to the modern O, i compared the costs of doing what i wanted to do and made the fateful decision to swithc scales. so now i have a massive benchwork which is an incredible blank canvas for HO and i can do so many more point to point LDE's that i wanted to incorporate in my original O plan. anyhow, im selling all my O stuff on ebay and its flying out pretty fast... im able to parley that into my HO equipment. i feel i made the right choice. good luck