Hello Everyone,
I am thinking about switching from N scale to Ho scale. I am seeking advice on on modern Ho equipment and layouts. I like details and Ho scale has way more of that and options too. The space i have is 10x24. Hopefully that will be sufficient for a decent layout in Ho.
Thank You
Welcome to the forum.
OklahomaRailfanI am thinking about switching from N scale to Ho scale. I am seeking advice on on modern Ho equipment and layouts.
You might want to be more specific on your questions so that others can help. There are many modern-era layouts being built in HO -- as well as in N.
OklahomaRailfanThe space i have is 10x24. Hopefully that will be sufficient for a decent layout in Ho.
Many layouts have been built in that space (or less) in HO. Modern era locomotives and rolling stock are generally longer, so that requires a much broader minimum radius in HO than N, of course. Many modern era layouts in HO use 28" or larger radii, so naturally a lot less layout will fit in HO scale in a given space than would fit in N. Structures are roughly 4X as large in terms of footprint area; and passing sidings, yard tracks, etc. must be scaled up to fit.
Not to say that it can't be done, but you'll probably find that you need to adjust your expectations of what will fit relative to N scale.
Good luck with your layout.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
If you like details HO scale is far better than N scale and there are many after market parts for all kinds of models for locomotives and rolling stock plus vehicles, structures and scenery. Modern HO equipment has a minimum radius of 22 for most cars while some of the ones with detailed undersides require 24 inches. Some steam locomotives require larger radius.
Hey OklahomaRailfan!
Welcome to the forums!!
I will qualify my answer by saying that my layout has not been built yet. I have been working on the design for several years using 3RdPlanIt while waiting for the layout space to become available. It is now available by the way.
My original layout plan was for a 10' x 22.5' folded double return loop. I was able to achieve minimum 26.5" curves with most being above 30". Recently, I expanded the layout plan to 12' x 23.5'. The reason for the expansion was to allow for larger radii in the helices that access the lower staging area. The plan permits me to have a mountain/mining area that is about 6' x 10', a service terminal about 6' x 6', a 5 track yard which will hold about 40 cars realistically and includes an arrival track and yard lead and caboose track, a downtown/train station scene about 13' long and an industrial area that is about 9' long. The station track will hold an ABA consist of FP7s and 9 passenger cars. There are eight industrial spurs.
Yes, there will be a lot going on. My point is that I have been able to fit a lot into a space similar to what you have available.
I will also say that I have found HO to be an ideal scale for doing things that I really love like scratchbuilding structures and industrial switchers and railtrucks. Adding details like working caboose marker lights and ditch lights has also been relatively easy. Many of my vehicles have working headlights and tail lights. I couldn't imagine trying to do that stuff in N scale.
Regards,
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
It´s one of those die-hard myths that N scale is rather crude and cannot be sufficiently detailed. The degree of detail finally depends on your own dexterity!
Bubule´s Turtle Field RR shows explicitly, how detailed N scale can be these days - take a look here:
http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/11/t/217622.aspx
Ulrich:
I made the link clickable.
The key word in being able to do N scale in fine detail is indeed "dexterity". Many of us lack sufficient quantities of that key ingredient to satisfy ourselves in N scale. Its more important IMHO to be satisfied with the work you can do in whatever scale works for you. I know that you have done some fine modelling even in Z scale, but I couldn't go there even if I wanted to. I'm happy where I am in HO and HOn30.
Thank You Cuyama
The reason I am considering getting into Ho scale is that i like the greater detail of the locomotives. That is reason 1. Reason 2 is that i am partially blind. That has not stopped me so far in N scale but it may later on. I know i won't be able to do everything that I want to In the space that I have like I can in N scale, but I wasnt sure if something decent was feasable.
Thank You for your advice. It is appreciated.
Details are what I am after. Especially on modern freight locomotives.
I also like the availability in HO scale.
It looks like Ulrich is trying to talk the OP out of switching. I agree with you Dave, dexterity is a major issue and it's hard enough to install those itty bitty grab iron parts on my HO Proto 2000 gondola kit - I'd need an electron microscope and mechanical motorized mini tweezers to do the same thing on N scale.
A 10x24' room would allow you to build and design a decent layout, especially if it is around the walls (and using a lift out). I would suggest minimum curves of 28" to ensure most longer modern rolling stock will manage, but I use 32" inch minimum since I have fair amount of long 89' autoracks and TOFC flat cars as well.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
When I was still in the "thinking about building a layout" stage, I considered N because of the ability to run prototypically long trains. I quickly changed to HO after seeing an N scale layout at a train show. My eyes and hands aren't what they used to be. Besides, there are many more offerings in HO than in N.
Marlon
See pictures of the Clinton-Golden Valley RR
hon30critter, (Dave) Thank You!
Heres the thing. I like my N scale. However I like details as well. Ho scale seems to be excellent in the detail department. I will keep what trains I have in N scale, but Im thinking I want to go to Ho and do an Ho layout.
I love how detailed the modern locomotives and buildings are in Ho.
You mentioned that you could not imagine things like lighted vehicles in n scale, well here's a major factor. I love those kinds of details. I will also say this, I am partially blind. That's another major factor for me.
It sounds to me like your layout is going to be quite incredible. Also that ho is the place for extensive detail.
Thak You. Good luck with your layout.
OklahomaRailfan Hello Everyone, I am thinking about switching from N scale to Ho scale. I am seeking advice on on modern Ho equipment and layouts. I like details and Ho scale has way more of that and options too. The space i have is 10x24. Hopefully that will be sufficient for a decent layout in Ho. Thank You
one question ,by modern do you mean era, or what the current offerings in ho are like?
Speaking as a long time HO operator, welcome aboard. 10 x 24 feet is a decent size, you can build a fine HO layout in that amount of space. Have you read "Track Planning for Realistic Operation" by John Armstrong? It's thought provoking and chock full of essential information, clearance requirements, easement of curves, lots of good stuff. Modern can be anything from the end of the transistion era, say 1960, to present. Freight cars grew from 40 foot to 50 and longer feet. All steam was retired. Cabeese went away sometime in the late 1980's. Roofwalks on box cars went away around then too. Diesel locomotives grew in horsepower and length. GE grew from an also-ran to as big as EMD.
With a ten foot room width you can do turnback loops with say a 36 inch radius and still have room for aisles, and eliminate the need for duck unders. I have a duckunder on my layout and I really wish I didn't. This wish grows stronger as I grow older.
Was it me, I'd try to get enough track up to run trains as soon as I could. As time permits, lay more track, do the scenery and so on. But think up the minimum amount of benchwork and track work you need to run a train and do that first.
As far as rolling stock, any maker who advertises in Model Railroader makes good stuff. And you can get nice stuff at trainshows for very cheap. It may need a little tinkering, or a new coat of paint, but it's good and it's low cost.
DCC is all the rage now. If you have multiple engineers running multiple trains all at the same time, DCC is the way to go. If its going to be just you, running one train, DCC is overkill. And you can start off without DCC, and upgrade the layout to DCC later without much trouble. You will have to install a DCC decoder in each locomotive, but that's perfectly doable.
Good luck and Merry Christmas.
David Starr www.newsnorthwoods.blogspot.com
It's easy when switching scales to go nuts buying stuff. I'd suggest - especially if you're interested in sound - spending the money to buy a few top-of-the-line engines, rather than "one of everything".
BTW if you're interested in changing to a larger size to be able to do more detailing, ever think about On30 - 1:48 scale models running on HO gauge track? Because it's narrow gauge, the equipment will take sharp (18-22"R) curves quite well, whereas O standard gauge generally needs 36"R or larger (with many layouts built with 5' or 6' radius curves!).
I was thinking about switching scales also N to HO.
It was going to be 1994-1996 (I could expand into the late 80s and late 90s.) The focus point is the Southern Pacific/Cotton Belt. HO has more accurate details to accomplish it.
Don't forget about Amtrak with Superliners I and II with F40/P40/8-40BHW.
I bought an HO Amtrak station just in case if I do switch.
Amtrak America, 1971-Present.
wjstixBTW if you're interested in changing to a larger size to be able to do more detailing, ever think about On30
Why not switch to model airplanes as well? SMH. The OP specified "modern" so just a guess here, but I don't think On30 is part of that description. What would be more helpful would be to read what the OP stated and try to help within his parameters. Just sayin...
Funny, I was thinking of switching to N, from H0.
Albeit, I do not have a layout built yet (still struggling with planning) and while I already have about dozen locos and 30 or so cars in H0, we share about the same space, mine being 23.5' x 12'.
I keep reading how I need larger curves, larger switches - never enough inches in a curve. Yet, I read above that one can make a decent H0 layout in this size space.
So, how does one squeeze all the needed trackage into this space?!? Unless you go to N and forefeit some level of detail to gain 4x more track and scenery.
Consequently, I've been going through this fellow's website (http://www.altamontandblueridge.com/) and his N layout looks superb. Not to mention his meticulous attention to every detail of the layout and around it (electrical, HVAC, building construction, lighting and so on...)
Sigh.
YouTube Channel
Website
If highly detailed locomotives (and rolling stock) is what you want, then O scale is the way to go - especially where eye sight is the problem.
If the layout is the most imporatant, then stay with N scale. Elevate it near eyelevel for good viewing.
If you need a good compromise between these, then S scale is the way to go.
Good luck
Paul
I'm quite happy working in HO. If I were to change, I think I'd go to scale O. Layout options do get constricted in that scale, but I do recall a 4 x 8 O scale layout in Model Railroader once upon a time. And I wouldn't end up with so many cars and locos.
Ed
Think before you leap..What these Horribly Oversize modelers isn't telling you I will.
Modern freight cars range from 50-89 feet all of a sudden a 3' section of track holds a GP38-2 and three cars or a GP38-2 and two 89' cars or three SD80MACs. That nice 18" radius N Scale curve now jumps to at least 32"-24" will work but,those long locomotives and cars doesn't look right IMHO. Buildings triple in size etc.
My personal experience. Had I thought long and hard about selling my N Scale because my vision became blurred-this was due to a new medication not my eye sight going South-I would have sold my HO instead.
Why you may wonder?
A 12' board doesn't yield much of a Horribly Oversize switching layout.
All of that beautiful detail on cars and locomotives can not be seen under normal layout operation viewing.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
BRAKIE Think before you leap..What these Horribly Oversize modelers isn't telling you I will.
When I was a kid, I had two American Flyer S-scale trains that ran in circles, and later ovals. Not much else except the locomotives and a few freight cars.
As an adult, I started an HO scale layout back in 2004. I am fortunate to have a large basement because prototypical model railroading takes up a lot of space - - an awful lot of space.
I have thought about converting from HO scale to N scale but the cost is high and I am intimidated by the smaller scale and the lack of available product to replicate by HO scale layout.
Now, some will tell you that HO scale does not require a lot of space. That may be true if you are content with short wheelbase locomotives and simple operations. But, if you like passenger trains, long freight trains, stations and yards and lots of scenery, be it mountains or urban settings, you need a lot of space in HO scale.
I run a lot of passenger trains on a double main line. I need 2 feet of space just for a crossover between the two mainlines. I need 6 feet of space to take the trains around the curves at the ends of the layout. I need 6 square feet (i.e., 6' x6') for a turntable and 9-stall roundhouse.
Trust me, you need lots of space to build a prototype HO scale layout and, even then, it doesn't exactly look prototypical after taking selective compression into account.
Rich
Alton Junction
Youbalso need to account for curves especially if you plan to build a modern layout. Longer Rolling stock requires longer curves with greater spacing ( Don't ask me how I know this I found out the hard way though it does make for some interesting rules on the SIW.).
Joe Staten Island West
Not to be defending Horribly 0versized against the iNsignficant, the Oversized and the Scratch scales, but I was told at the LHS that H0 occupies about 70% of the hobby, while all the other scales are the remaining 30%.
To be honest, I did not find that misleading. Matter a fact, a sales gentleman I spoke to was a N modeller. He also told me that if he had to start over, would go N again, because he likes long trains and, has space constraints at home. Yet, he would've been quite happy to sell me whatever scale I wanted, as they carry both H0 and N.
But looking at this warehouse size store, it had 2-3 shelves of N and isles of H0, so he didn't really need to tell me anything. Big stores like this one don't care that much about scale detail, long trains and 89' autoracks. They carry what people are looking for and what makes the sales.
And, it's not the first store I was told that the hobby is in a decline and suffering. The influx of new modellers is not what it used to be, and this gentleman pointed out that teenagers (and pre-teens), spend more time on their mobile phones than on anything else, including trains.
Besides we have seen manufacturers scaling down their productions to limited and one-time runs, and some of them going out of business. Yes, we have more small manufacturers coming up today, which is good, but they are also falling in line with the (shrinking) market demands.
H0, N...it's a tough decision that I'm also faced with myself. Maybe should just go (back to) virtual and stare at the computer screen. But that neither creates social interactions with other people nor build friendships and many various skills one acquires in this hobby.
TrainzLuvrAnd, it's not the first store I was told that the hobby is in a decline and suffering. The influx of new modellers is not what it used to be, and this gentleman pointed out that teenagers (and pre-teens), spend more time on their mobile phones than on anything else, including trains.
Many of those teens enjoy Train Sim far more then model trains simply because you are a virtual engineer facing the problems of a real engineer even running a local is possible all for $24.95-59.00 depending on your package. The hobby can't match that experience in any scale. I know that as fact since I have Train Sim 2017.
I guess nothing is left to imagination anymore.
BRAKIEMany of those teens enjoy Train Sim far more then model trains simply because you are a virtual engineer facing the problems of a real engineer even running a local is possible all for $24.95-59.00 depending on your package. The hobby can't match that experience in any scale. I know that as fact since I have Train Sim 2017.
I have one of the earlier train sims, but I didn't find that as much fun as running the model trains. It's a different kind of experience.
I also have a Lionel sim that simulates running Lionel trains on floor layouts with puzzle switching tasks. I found that to be a lot of fun.
TrainzLuvrNot to be defending Horribly 0versized against the iNsignficant, the Oversized and the Scratch scales, but I was told at the LHS that H0 occupies about 70% of the hobby, while all the other scales are the remaining 30%.
I think those figures are for scale model railroading. I think there are a lot of folks into 3 rail O gauge. At least in terms of stuff, there seems to be almost as much as HO. And there seems to be a lot of interest in sceniced 3 rail O gauge layouts.
TrainzLuvrAnd, it's not the first store I was told that the hobby is in a decline and suffering.
Brick-and-mortar hobby stores are suffering. On-line retailers are doing pretty well.
The hobby has allegedly been in a death spiral since slot cars took off in the 1960s. 50 years later, it looks like it must be a pretty shallow dive. If one can buy what they need from a variety of sources to complete a layout today, what does it matter?
TrainzLuvrBesides we have seen manufacturers scaling down their productions to limited and one-time runs
Which results in a much wider variety of more-accurate products and roadnames than "back in the good old days." Plus, nearly everything that's ever been made will eventually come up for sale on eBay and other resale sites.
It's never been a worse time to be in brick-and-mortar model railroading retail. It's never been a better time to be in the model railroading hobby.
I think that it's helpful to recognize that many, many people who talk about HO vs. N (and the hobby in general) on forums have themselves never completed a layout in any scale. Many of today's active N scale modelers built one or more HO scale model railroads first before switching, so they know the strengths and weaknesses of each. The inverse is not true.
HO scale is fine. N scale is fine. I personally think folks should make their decisions for themsleves and not be swayed by the gabbers in the virtual kaffeeklatsch.
cuyamaI think that it's helpful to recognize that many, many people who talk about HO vs. N (and the hobby in general) on forums have themselves never completed a layout in any scale. Many of today's active N scale modelers built one or more HO scale model railroads first before switching, so they know the strengths and weaknesses of each. The inverse is not true. HO scale is fine. N scale is fine. I personally think folks should make their decisions for themsleves and not be swayed by the gabbers in the virtual kaffeeklatsch.
Why, thank you, for putting me in my place...
TrainzLuvrWhy, thank you, for putting me in my place...
That certainly wasn't directed at you, sorry it came across that way. I was talking about people pontificating to newcomers like yourself.
[So maybe I was putting myself in my place .... ?]