trainnut1250 snjroy challenger3980 Paul3
Hey guys,
Thanks for the info. The great thing about links is that links lead to more links.
It's still early in my ponderings, but it kinda seems that things are moving toward the idea that what I might do is find some decent RTR engine that would form the basic chassis and then search the aftermarket for Proto:48 pieces and parts to upgrade the model to whatever version of accuracy my meager talents allow.
Definitely looking for a steamer. I have a long background in N, and as much as I support and admire that particular scale, N offerings in steam are (how shall I say?) . . . lacking. Athearn makes an HO 4-8-4 painted in UP Greyhound livery, and finding something like that in O would be great. But like I said, I'm only just now doing slightly more than pondering The Great O Adventure. Things may change as I go along.
Paul3 At least now, all the armchair model railroader subscribers get exposed to some high level non-HO & N modeling a few times a year. Maybe an article or two will kick them off the couch and onto the workbench and the next great non-HO & N modeler is born.
At least now, all the armchair model railroader subscribers get exposed to some high level non-HO & N modeling a few times a year. Maybe an article or two will kick them off the couch and onto the workbench and the next great non-HO & N modeler is born.
This thread has got me moving on and idea that has been rambling around inside my noggin for a while. I am in the middle of a pretty ambitious layout build, so I haven't exactly been on the couch watching basketball games. In the past 24 hours I have done a little something to get things in motion. For a lot of the reasons mentioned by others, I cannot see building an O scale layout; what I see is more along the lines of an O scale display. I hope this isn't blasphemous to the dedicated O scalers. Cultural appropriation and all that . . .
Thanks.
Robert
LINK to SNSR Blog
riogrande5761Plainly HO has between 60 and 70% of the market because it is the best compromise between space requirements and detail and cost and availability.
Really!!!!
Over half the folks I talk to would seriously disagree with that statement, including a lot of HO folks. I hear lots of people saying I would be in 'X' scale but I have too much in HO to change. I don't hear many people saying the opposite. And many of us in other scales started in HO and changed becuase it's not the best.
Historic circumstances after WWII gave HO a big boost and after that initial jump start the percentage in HO scale has been declining for the last 40 or so years.
Sure HO, like any other scale, is the best for some folks but not for others. Accurate firgures are not available, but from what I see HO is less than 50% of the hobby.
Paul
At least we know HO is 50% of O!
Steve
If everything seems under control, you're not going fast enough!
IRONROOSTER riogrande5761 Plainly HO has between 60 and 70% of the market because it is the best compromise between space requirements and detail and cost and availability. Really!!!! Over half the folks I talk to would seriously disagree with that statement, including a lot of HO folks. I hear lots of people saying I would be in 'X' scale but I have too much in HO to change.
riogrande5761 Plainly HO has between 60 and 70% of the market because it is the best compromise between space requirements and detail and cost and availability.
Over half the folks I talk to would seriously disagree with that statement, including a lot of HO folks. I hear lots of people saying I would be in 'X' scale but I have too much in HO to change.
Yes really. I suppose those folks can disagree all they want but the metrics don't seem agree with them. I've been in the hobby since I was a teen in the early 1970's and things haven't seemed to have changed a great deal that I've seen from then to now.
I would have to ask why is having HO scale an impediment to switching scales? What with train shows, swap sales lists and Ebay you can sell off your stuff and use the cash to finance some other scale. People should model what they want and not be held back by something they aren't satisfied with. I sell stuff regularly that don't fit my needs and continue to do so.
I don't hear many people saying the opposite. And many of us in other scales started in HO and changed becuase it's not the best.
Of course scale is an individual choice. I still believe HO is the most popular and sold because it is a good compromise between space/detail/fidelity/cost.
Sure, maybe so, and thats because of the increasing availablity of more products in other scales. HO seems to have remained in the high 50's to high 60's (depending on poll) in the last 20 years however.
Sure HO, like any other scale, is the best for some folks but not for others. Accurate firgures are not available, but from what I see HO is less than 50% of the hobby. Paul
Apparently it is best for around 60-65% approximately.
An amalgomation of recent surveys cited the following regarding market size:
The market sizes according to surveys we've done and the ones seen from others goes like this ...
HO - 67%N - 23%O - 7% (includes On30)
All others - 3%
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
Didn't O Scale stagnate Heavily in the 70s? I remember reading an article where a guy actually was scrapping pinball machines for parts for his layout because of lack of parts avalibilty for the scale at the time. It's kind of made a comeback but I think in today's economy the price is the bigger issue.
Why I have HO instead of O:
Cost
Space
Availability of items
Variaty of items
And, lastly, Cost.
Ricky W.
HO scale Proto-freelancer.
My Railroad rules:
1: It's my railroad, my rules.
2: It's for having fun and enjoyment.
3: Any objections, consult above rules.
riogrande5761An amalgomation of recent surveys cited the following regarding market size: The market sizes according to surveys we've done and the ones seen from others goes like this ... HO - 67% N - 23% O - 7% (includes On30) All others - 3%
And these surveys would be???
The few surveys I have seen all have bias built it in. Most seem to be surveys of a particular magazine's readership or something similar. Since no magazine/organization covers all the hobby their surveys aren't very accurate.
I think your figures over represent HO and under represent everyone else.
Here in Florida it is pretty simple, and I get these figures from discussions with hobby shop owners.
.
IF you include non-scale (Lionel and LGB), HO makes up about 50% of the market. IF you only go by scale trains (Z, N, HO, O), then HO is 65%-75% of the market.
In Florida we have a lot of older people that LOVE Lionel, and we have terrific weather and no snow, so outdoor railroading is also quite popular. I doubt these figures would hold true elsewhere.
And... Just in case you don't think Lionel is really cool... you should see some of the Lionel layouts built around Sarasota in 12 by 12 spare bedrooms. These layouts would stand up to most home layouts in terms of detail and craftsmanship. Definitley not Toy Trains, but not Scale Trains either. I think one of these was featured in Model Railroader 3-4 years ago.
Garden railroading is also something that can be done with full operation in a big Florida backyard.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
IRONROOSTERI would be in 'X' scale but I have too much in HO to change
Russell
Ain't my figures. Just some I happened on. Add to that, MR magazines own Guide to Model Railroding Scales and Gauges states regarding HO: "more than two thirds of modelers make it their choice". Two thirds in plain math is 66.7 rounded. Take it up with out hosts and don't shoot the messenger.
riogrande5761 Ain't my figures. Just some I happened on. Add to that, MR magazines own Guide to Model Railroding Scales and Gauges states regarding HO: "more than two thirds of modelers make it their choice". Two thirds in plain math is 66.7 rounded. Take it up with out hosts and don't shoot the messenger.
Sorry, I'm not trying to shoot the messenger.
It just seems that no one, including me, really knows. There's lots of anecdotal evidence, but no actual data. Every time I try to run down some facts, there doesn't seem to be any.
cuyamaBy the way, small switching layouts are only referred to with that acronym on this and maybe one other forum.
Mention switching layout and many modeler and this includes advanced modelers thinks "Time Saver" but mention a Industrial Switching Layout and their ears perk up.
A ISL can be used for any railroad,short line or terminal switching road.
I first heard ISL at a Industrial Switching Layout clinic several years ago.
What we should do is do away with the "Time Saver" design except as a switching contest.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
traindaddy1 Before you "send me to the other forums like the Classic Toys etc., I'd really like to know why, in your opinion, there isn't more interest is the larger "O". As always, many thanks.
Before you "send me to the other forums like the Classic Toys etc., I'd really like to know why, in your opinion, there isn't more interest is the larger "O".
As always, many thanks.
I am modelling all three scales/gauges: O, HO, and N. Cost and space are not an issue for me: I'll make the extra money I need somehow (legally lol) and I have a full-sized basement to work with. All my O rolling stock is/will be custom: for example, I turned an old blue and yellow Lionel Planters Peanut covered hopper into a brown ore-carrying workhorse hopper. I don't mind three rails in fact I like the look of MTH RealTrax when ballasted. I am currently kit bashing an O scale warehouse which I plan to post somewhere here because it is a real model, not a toy.
Space, cost, and availability are the three principal reasons for the lack of widespread popularity of O scale. In my personal opinion, though, the lack of available locos, rolling stock, and structures is the primary reason.
I might add a fourth reason. O scale is too big. I am not talking about the need for greater space. I am addressing the issue of size. Once again, in my personal opinion, HO scale is the perfect size for home modeling. Not too big, not too small.
Rich
Alton Junction
I would like to thank all of you for your replies to my post.
Have been "into" this great hobby for over sixty years, first in "HO" and now, because this "older" body's hands and eyes aren't what they used to be, "O".
Will continue reading and, again, thanks.
I like O scale tinplate and would gladly start a three rail O scale IF I had the money space and time.
Since I don't I stay in HO,
Joe Staten Island West
Added up the cost of my O scale/gauge pre-order of 6 locomotives, 6 ore cars, MTH track, train set for my grandson, Legacy control system. Comes in under $10 k (CDN). I have spent a lot more than that on HO over the last two years.
OldSchoolScratchbuilder Added up the cost of my O scale/gauge pre-order of 6 locomotives, 6 ore cars, MTH track, train set for my grandson, Legacy control system. Comes in under $10 k (CDN). I have spent a lot more than that on HO over the last two years.
Mike
This is relevant to my situation!
I grew up building 3-rail O and now I am currently building an N Scale layout. College and then law school put a damper on that but I graduated about a month ago and decided to return to the hobby. I live in the city so space is at a premium (my envelope was 26" by 50"), O just wasn't an option for that reason. Similarly, I could really only have a switching layout in HO, this is how I landed on N eventhough I own a couple thousand $$$ worth of 3-rail equipment.
The other thing to remember with O is that 1/48 really encompases 3 different groups of people. You have your toy train people, you have your scale 3-railers, and you have O scale. These groups of people don't really buy the same stuff save for buildings that the hi-rail and O scale people can both use. As others have pointed out this drives up the cost of O equipment of all types.
Just an N scale guy in an HO scale world.
Reading Railroad in a small space.
BRAKIEA ISL can be used for any railroad,short line or terminal switching road. I first heard ISL at a Industrial Switching Layout clinic several years ago
We've been through this many times. It's still not accurate, no matter where you heard it. "Industrial" railroads have a specific meaning in the real world -- and it's not any generic switching area worked by a Class 1, Regional, or Shortline.
But it seems it's futile to try for accuracy and clarity on this forum.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
Not apples and oranges at all. Here are four used O gauge cars, three of them I repaired and modified, for the same price as one new CN covered hopper. This more than offsets the locomotive price differences for the same number of cars in both scales .
joe323 I like O scale tinplate and would gladly start a three rail O scale IF I had the money space and time. Since I don't I stay in HO,
I have heard that the term "tinplate" was based on the use by Lionel, among others, of steel rail that was tinplated to lessen rust.
Thus I would think you would be using such track. While 0-72 makes a pretty nice big circle at about 36" radius, regular Lionel 0 was 15 1/2 in radius. Pretty much less than anything in HO.
So it would appear space is covered.
Time, I think, is also. That's because there is no slavish attention to detail. Since it's obviously toy-like, you don't have to get all detaily.
Money? That all depends on how much you spend.
Anyway, I have a pretty decent Lionel tinplate layout stored in the garage. I built it about 20 years ago, when I got back into trains, and thought Lionel would be fun. It kind of is, although most of the accessories don't actually work very well.
Then I saw my first Kadee boxcar, and it was all over. Hello (again), HO.
Ed
cuyama BRAKIE A ISL can be used for any railroad,short line or terminal switching road. I first heard ISL at a Industrial Switching Layout clinic several years ago We've been through this many times. It's still not accurate, no matter where you heard it. "Industrial" railroads have a specific meaning in the real world -- and it's not any generic switching area worked by a Class 1, Regional, or Shortline. But it seems it's futile to try for accuracy and clarity on this forum.
BRAKIE A ISL can be used for any railroad,short line or terminal switching road. I first heard ISL at a Industrial Switching Layout clinic several years ago
I think the term "Industrial Switching Layout" (ISL) is very clear. And accurate. It means a layout where industrial switching predominates. "Industrial switching" is switching that has little, if any, mainline running for the trains. As opposed to Frank Ellison's "wayside switching" where there's a bit of mainline traveling between tasks.
I see nothing in the term that restricts or defines what the railroad entity must be that is on the layout.
I also think it means nothing more. Which may be what's causing angst. And perhaps verklempt.
cuyamaWe've been through this many times. It's still not accurate, no matter where you heard it. "Industrial" railroads have a specific meaning in the real world -- and it's not any generic switching area worked by a Class 1, Regional, or Shortline.
Industrial Switching: A service performed by a railroad for delivering or picking up cars at industries.
Layout: What a model railroader builds to operate his models on.
Oh, heck, why do I bother?
Another comment that came up in this thread was the not-so-nice and not very realistic look of O gauge three rails. I have to agree that most are, not very attractive, but there is one I like a lot. MTH ScaleTrax has a small cross-section centre rail and it is black. I have shown with and without ballast. I also like the look in ballast (this is processed shale from Walton, NS). And, this O-72 turnout is a marvelous piece of model railroad technology!
Terminology aside, for some time now my layout design approach keeps industries and their sidings mostly separate from the mainline, just like you typically see in major cities where industries are often served by belt lines connected directly to yards and their activities do not affect the flow of mainline traffic.
So from Larry's point of view, I have several "ISL's" within my larger double track mainline layout.
All of which would be hard to do in the same way with O scale, even with unlimited space, time and money.
Sheldon
OldSchoolScratchbuilder Another comment that came up in this thread was the not-so-nice and not very realistic look of O gauge three rails. I have to agree that most are, not very attractive, but there is one I like a lot. MTH ScaleTrax has a small cross-section centre rail and it is black. I have shown with and without ballast. I also like the look in ballast (this is processed shale from Walton, NS). And, this O-72 turnout is a marvelous piece of model railroad technology!
Actually, most in this discussion are refering to "two rail" O "scale", with track, wheel and coupler standards similar to HO, just larger. And to reasonably accurate 1/4" to the foot scale models.
richhotrain Space, cost, and availability are the three principal reasons for the lack of widespread popularity of O scale. In my personal opinion, though, the lack of available locos, rolling stock, and structures is the primary reason. I might add a fourth reason. O scale is too big. I am not talking about the need for greater space. I am addressing the issue of size. Once again, in my personal opinion, HO scale is the perfect size for home modeling. Not too big, not too small. Rich
Agreed. Just too big, not just a space thing. The locos and rolling stock are wonderful. The detail is exquisite and the sound can begin to sound less tinny than HO onboard sound, so the equipment is great.
But everything has to be bigger, and better detailed. How about hills, mountains, and trees; and people. How much more detailed would all of this have to be?
If I got into model building, I could see having two or three structures on a layout, then spending time detailing them to the nth degree. All of the scenery items too. Now, the final product would be immensly impressive, IMO. But I'm also an operator and it would simply take too much time to detail all of the background and scenery items to the level it needs to be.
Just too much detail and time needed to make it look right, IMO.
- Douglas
7j43kI think the term "Industrial Switching Layout" (ISL) is very clear.
Honestly the first time I read it I thought you were talking about steel mills or breweries or industrial parks.