why does everyone hate 4X8 layouts?

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE

Chip,A round the walls layout also requires space..Where? You need the space to decent make turn back curves..Its best to use all 4 walls.This will save space.Still a round the walls layout has limitations and can be a space eater and not to mention needing to attach the layout to the walls and drilling into the center of the wall raisers..

If you have 9 x 12 feet to work with you can have 2 4ft blobs to create a folded dogbone, or reverse loop if you have DCC. You may have to stagger the blobs if you have access on the shorter side.

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith



Hmmm...I mentioned this same point in my earlier post, even included a PDF drawing illustrating it, although I was a bit more generous including 3 feet for walkaround that could be better used for layout space. The layout should move around you, not move you around the layout.

I know you did. It's just that a lot of the more recent posters seemed to have skipped the ongoing arguments and went straight to posting.

[jecorbett]

I have a large around the room layout with a peninsula planned down the middle but I can still appreciate a well done 4X8 or any other small railroad whether an island or shelf layout. Not only can small layouts be good switching layouts, but the small size allows a level of craftsmanship that is not practical with a larger layout. Those of us with large layouts have to settle for the good-enough approach in much of what we do if we want to get anywhere near completed in our lifetimes. A small layout gives you the opportunity to build structures and scenery of contest quality.

[waltersrails]

Its just comes down to how you look at it

[vsmith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by andrechapelon

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

Just to bring the argument back into the conversation. The biggest reason why people don't like a 4 x 8 is that they take up 9 x 11 space when you count walkarounds and a 9 x 11 shelf, U shaped layout is much more versatile and easier to reach and operate. People gravitate toward the 4 x 8 because they don't think in term of space and cutting a piece of plywood.

The I only have space for a 4 x 8 doesn't hold up.

Or to put it more bluntly, the 4x8 uses space inefficiently. You need access on both of the 8 foot sides and at least one of the 4 foot sides. With a minimum of 2 feet wide clear access space on those 3 sides, the minimum sized room you need for a 4x8 is 8 x 10. Furthermore, you're limited to 18-22 inch radius curves. The primary (and probably only real ) virtue of the 4x8 is that it is the size of a standard sheet of plywood and all you have to do is build a relatively sturdy framework to support the plywood sheet. IOW, it's the easiest route but probably not the optimal one.

Iain Rice has come up with some nice track plans (8 x 12 - "Small, Smart and Practical Track Plans") ), which feature 30 inch radius curves (nice for those 80-85 foot passenger cars), plenty of staging and at least enough room for 14 car freights (40-50 foot steam era cars) plus caboose and a couple of 4 axle diesel units. Not only that, but there's plenty of room for staging a variety of trains. Built on shelves suspended from the walls high enough off the floor, most of the floor space could still be useable for other things.

For those who are interested, you might want to check out the 3 part series by Don Spiro in Railroad Model Craftsman (yeah, I know I'm going to Hell for mentioning RMC). Spiro kinda turns the conventional wisdom on its head when it comes to layout building. The September, October and November, 2005 issues are the relevant ones.

Andre

Hmmm...I mentioned this same point in my earlier post, even included a PDF drawing illustrating it, although I was a bit more generous including 3 feet for walkaround that could be better used for layout space. The layout should move around you, not move you around the layout.

[trainfreek92]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ondrek

I forgot to mention that the 0-4-0 will do the radi that leads into the building too, and that radi is well, not really sure, but 6" is my guess. with that radi, the tender will not work though so if you have a dockside 0-4-0 you can do anything really. that was my plan, two trains on this, the 0-6-0 ran around bringing goods in, and a 0-4-0 would pick up the car, pull it to the siding and push it into the bulding, then get the empty from the other line in the samebuilding and put it back on the main line for the 0-6-0 to take off to the rest of the world. If you have doubts of this working, I do have a 10meg 40sec video that shows the 0-4-0 going from the main up to the siding and into the two lines that go into the building.
I also have vids of the two trains running the main line loop no tenders attached, in the vids though, but i did do tenders no on video.

Kevin

6????? this is Ho we are talking about

[Anonymous]

I didn't take time to plow through all the responses, but to me the problem with a 4X8' is that we are allowing the size of an uncut sheet of plywood to dictate our layout. Most spaces that will hold a 4X8' will hold a 5X8' or 6X9', both of which permit wider radius curves that look and operate much better.

Moreover, a 5X8' is 25% larger than a 4X8'. A 6X9' is 35% larger, meaning that you have a lot more room for structures and scenery, as well.

In any case, after building several layouts, I've gone modular with nothing wider than 3' .

Your local lumber yard or big box store (Home Depot, Lowe's) will cut plywood for very little cost and the first cuts are usually free.

John Timm

[Soo Line fan]

One way to gain access to both 8' sides and still have it against the wall is to put it on casters. Attach the backdrop to the wall and move the layout away when access is needed.

Jim

[BRAKIE]

Chip,A round the walls layout also requires space..Where? You need the space to decent make turn back curves..Its best to use all 4 walls.This will save space.Still a round the walls layout has limitations and can be a space eater and not to mention needing to attach the layout to the walls and drilling into the center of the wall raisers..

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

Just to bring the argument back into the conversation. The biggest reason why people don't like a 4 x 8 is that they take up 9 x 11 space when you count walkarounds and a 9 x 11 shelf, U shaped layout is much more versatile and easier to reach and operate. People gravitate toward the 4 x 8 because they don't think in term of space and cutting a piece of plywood.

The I only have space for a 4 x 8 doesn't hold up.

Or to put it more bluntly, the 4x8 uses space inefficiently. You need access on both of the 8 foot sides and at least one of the 4 foot sides. With a minimum of 2 feet wide clear access space on those 3 sides, the minimum sized room you need for a 4x8 is 8 x 10. Furthermore, you're limited to 18-22 inch radius curves. The primary (and probably only real ) virtue of the 4x8 is that it is the size of a standard sheet of plywood and all you have to do is build a relatively sturdy framework to support the plywood sheet. IOW, it's the easiest route but probably not the optimal one.

Iain Rice has come up with some nice track plans (8 x 12 - "Small, Smart and Practical Track Plans") ), which feature 30 inch radius curves (nice for those 80-85 foot passenger cars), plenty of staging and at least enough room for 14 car freights (40-50 foot steam era cars) plus caboose and a couple of 4 axle diesel units. Not only that, but there's plenty of room for staging a variety of trains. Built on shelves suspended from the walls high enough off the floor, most of the floor space could still be useable for other things.

For those who are interested, you might want to check out the 3 part series by Don Spiro in Railroad Model Craftsman (yeah, I know I'm going to Hell for mentioning RMC). Spiro kinda turns the conventional wisdom on its head when it comes to layout building. The September, October and November, 2005 issues are the relevant ones.

Andre

[SpaceMouse]

Just to bring the argument back into the conversation. The biggest reason why people don't like a 4 x 8 is that they take up 9 x 11 space when you count walkarounds and a 9 x 11 shelf, U-shaped layout is much more versatile and easier to reach and operate. People gravitate toward the 4 x 8 because they don't think in term of space and cutting a piece of plywood.

The "I only have space for a 4 x 8" argument doesn't hold up.

[Anonymous]

I don't hate them. i don't love them either. they are a practical soloution to a problem. I also know some people who would love a 4x8 layout. they are better than having the trains sitting in a box not being used. say you could start out with a 4x8, then when you have finnished you can put another 4x8 board next to it. this means you can have either 4x16 or 8x8. That would almost fill up a small room. and also if something goes wrong on a huge layout it is much harder to find the cause than on a smaller layout. then there is the COST!!! involved in making a huge layout. the list goes on, and on[2c]

[Anonymous]

I messed up the second image - 2004 -

[Anonymous]

I started with 4' x 8' and it's now up to 6 1/2' x 9 1/2' using a foam base.
I built a wodden L-girder platform on rollers first so I can roll it to whatever area of the living room I want when my wife wants to rearrange furniture. (She got tired of me being out in the garage all the time. Now, I have my layout inside where I see it all the time and she has me inside with her.)
I can also move it if we decide to move. The layout is not attached to the platform and I keep the layout a maximum of 30" high so it will fit out the door.
I do the old timers, so the cars and locos are short.
Because you have 4 x 8 laterally doesn't mean you can't vertically with your track, also.
I'm switching to On30 and still have enough room to run 2 lower ovals, 2 upper ovals, and a "back and forth" section on the upper levels. I'm working on rearranging some of the track to accomodate the On30.
If you're into long diesels and cars it doesn't work well.
From this in 2001 -

To this in 2004 -
[imghttp://www.sarget.com/xmas04-1.jpg][/img]

[waltersrails]

i like 4x8 its basic and easy for all most any house. some times isn't always bigger is better. As long as you have some space to have a layout. That sounds good enough for me.

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jecorbett

I really think you can get the most from a 4X8 by putting a full length double sided backdrop down the middle. Now instead of a race track oval, you have a shelf layout with two 2X4 sections. You can have two towns, a town and a rural area, or even use one side as a staging yard for the other. You can operate it like a switching layout with the added bonus of being able to do continuous running when you want.

Sometimes I agree with you. It makes sense from an operational point of view. Other times I look at seeing a more grand landscaping scheme.

I like both ops and railfanning. Ceratinly the backdrop down the center has a lot of possibilities for both. I would probably go that route if I built another 4x8--which I won't.

[Anonymous]

Try two 4x8s in an L shape. Its worked for me

[Anonymous]

You could do a layout of two 4x8s in an L shape. This has worked for me.

[jecorbett]

I really think you can get the most from a 4X8 by putting a full length double sided backdrop down the middle. Now instead of a race track oval, you have a shelf layout with two 2X4 sections. You can have two towns, a town and a rural area, or even use one side as a staging yard for the other. You can operate it like a switching layout with the added bonus of being able to do continuous running when you want.

[ondrek]

I forgot to mention that the 0-4-0 will do the radi that leads into the building too, and that radi is well, not really sure, but 6" is my guess. with that radi, the tender will not work though so if you have a dockside 0-4-0 you can do anything really. that was my plan, two trains on this, the 0-6-0 ran around bringing goods in, and a 0-4-0 would pick up the car, pull it to the siding and push it into the bulding, then get the empty from the other line in the samebuilding and put it back on the main line for the 0-6-0 to take off to the rest of the world. If you have doubts of this working, I do have a 10meg 40sec video that shows the 0-4-0 going from the main up to the siding and into the two lines that go into the building.
I also have vids of the two trains running the main line loop no tenders attached, in the vids though, but i did do tenders no on video.

Kevin

[ondrek]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRJN

There is no way to loop an HO scale train in 2x6 feet, curses.

no way to loop an HO in 2x6? I HAVE a 2'x4' with continuous running.

here is the proof:
http://www.vermontel.net/~kevin_ondre/HO%20Train/2x4%20layout%2014_800x600.jpg
Now, having this, and if you look you can see that the radi is actually LESS than 12"
I didnt fini***his layout. as I needed the turouts for the 4x8 that I started for my son.
this is how far i got before I switched focus:
http://www.vermontel.net/~kevin_ondre/HO%20Train/DSCN0007_800x600.jpg
what can I get to run on this?
0-4-0's the one in the picture is the AHM/Riverossi 0-4-0 with tender, drawbar extension not required.
0-6-0's with a slightly extended draw bar.
23' cars

So, if you want continous running in 2' wide, you can do it, BUT you are limited to the engine types and rolling stock. thas all though.

Kevin

[Anonymous]

the fun thing about MRRing is you are NEVER finished- there is always something else you could do to your layout- i agree a small layout would be more complete and posssibly more detailed beacause if you have a smaller area to work with you will spend more time scenicing a 4'x8' than a 4'x8' section of a huge layout-why so? well if all you have is 4'x8' there won't be pressure that there is so much more to do like there would be if there was 20'x20' to go

[BRJN]

There are times when you want to play with the trains. A switching layout is good for this. There are also times (like me right now) when you want to just sit back and watch the trains go on and on. There is no way to loop an HO scale train in 2x6 feet, curses. And we will not discuss the fact that my unheated garage with layout is sub-freezing at the moment...

[BRVRR]

My BRVRR layout is 4 x 10. It is set up in a 10' 6" x 9' 6" 'spare 'bedroom'. The train table is mounted on rollers which run on tracks mounted on the walls. Thus, I can pull the table away from the back wall and 'duck under' to the back side for operations and maintenance. I have a double tracked main line, a three track engine facility, a yard with two long tracks (7-9 cars each), a four siding industrial area, a long siding for the grain elevator and a reverse loop. I can run 6-wheeled-truck SD40-2s, FP45s, Alco PAs, E8s and 4-8-4, 2-8-2 and 4-6-4 steamers on both main lines without trouble. Not even the Atlas Snap-Switches give them any trouble. Crowded? Certainly. Satisfying? You bet. My grandson and I can run continuously or switch the sidings, or build trains in the yard and engine facility. Would I like to have a bigger layout? Most certainly. I have racked my brain and RTS trying to work out a practical 'around the walls' layout that would give me all the features I have now. So far no luck. What I have is more entertaining and fun to operate than a dream that might never be constructed.

The Lakeshore Limited passing a slower freight on the BRVRR.[:I]

Dreaming is fun, but running trains beats dreaming![:D]
More pictures and a track plan on my website, link is in my signature. Enjoy.[:D]

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jcmark611

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE
[
How about GP38s,GP38-2s,GP40,GP40-2,GP50s,B23-7s and other such common 4 axle units aren't these part of todays railroading? If you think all these kids see is pig/stack trains I highly suggest putting some time in trackside and watch the show.[:D]

Those are great locomotives but finding them on the head of road train today is getting more and more rare. In fact, while I was a conductor and engineer for CSX I rarely remember having 4 axle power on the train, unless we were going to set it out for a local to use.

I know that 4 axle power still exsists and is still used by Class 1 but, mostly on locals and branches. Not terribly enduring to youngsters but, maybe that is a poll we could have for the younger members of our board.

But like I said, if you like 4x8s then build away. In fact I actually am going to go out and buy the new MRR just for the article on the 4x8 railroad.

Here's looking out my front window at work.

[Adelie]

Well, I see another distinction. A few people have voiced satisfaction in having a layout finished. But one of the wierd things about this hobby is that most layouts are never finished, including those where everthing is completed. The owner then decides to redo a section of it to improve upon it in some way. The allure of this hobby to some is the building. Dreaming up something, putting the idea down on paper (or 1s and 0s on a hard drive), constructing and then detailing.

Maybe part of this round of the debate involves where people fall on this particular issue. Do you eagerly look forward to the day your layout is finished, or do you eagerly look forward to the day when you start on the work to redesign and rebuild a "perfectly good" 2x6 section of your layout?

[ondrek]

I have room for a larger layout. If i really really wanted too. But I choose to go with a 4x8 because with that size, I know that i will actually finish it.

Also, I find that having yourself confined, brings out a more creative design, it makes you think harder and is more of a challenge.

I have my 4x8 and when thats done, I will return back to my 4x2 with continuous running.

I Found that I have plenty of varity in my 4x8. there is continuous running. some switching if i feel like it. and a point to point logging spur with plenty of room left over for wide corn fields and a town with a center green.
http://www.vermontel.net/~kevin_ondre/HO%20Train/CMVTRR7_4x8.jpg
http://www.vermontel.net/~kevin_ondre/HO%20Train/CMVTRR7_4x8_05.jpg

Plus my 5yr old son thinks its very cool and he's the real reason for building it anyhow.

Kevin

[rolleiman]

I was at a train show once in Columbus Ohio (I think, been awhile) where a guy had a 4x8 switchback layout. Basically, it looked like 3x8 feet of Timesavers stacked one behind the other.. The other 12 inches was building backdrops.. This May have been a module from a larger layout but it could be run as a stand alone 4x8. He had 3 or 4 freight cars on the layout and one locomotive. There had to be 25 or 30 turnouts on this thing, all controled by ground throws.. He could litteraly spend over an hour moving cars from front to back with the various puzzles he could set up.. Was it a realistic arrangement?? Probably not but If THAT isn't enough Operation for somebody,then most basement empires wouldn't please them either.

[Anonymous]

I dont know what all the fuss is about with 4x8 with enough size i have a 4x8 and it has a downtown section 6-10 buildings 5 sidings yes five (can hold 7-9 cars each) a roadhouse( holds 1 loco at a time), a huge lake, a waterfall, a park a dead forest and a major road running through it, u just have to know what to do with it and how to do it right, i can run my dash 9, 6 wheel round the track at full speed without derails on a modified 18" radius, lets see on track right now i have a 7 car coal, 12 car impack, 8 car boxcar and 6 locos from sidings to roundhouse

[Anonymous]

Hello all. I've just finished reading through this thread and just want to put in my 2 cents. I don't mind the 4x8 in fact I agree with some of you that at least you have a layout and your having fun. Isn't that the point? What it comes down to is time, space and money. True the space a 4x8 takes up can better be used for a around the wall or a U shape but to each his own. Someone a few post back suggested loping off the corners and reattaching them. In my view this eliminates the thing that most 4x8's have in common which is the track is perpendicular to the edges. Avoiding this can make the 4x8 much more enjoyable to view and operate.