why does everyone hate 4X8 layouts?

[John Busby]

Hi all
Full size passenger cars??
So the 3 compartment 4wh coaches I use are not full size
coaches then[?]
In spite of them being reasonably accurate
models of 4wh caledonian railway coaches.
They are one of the limitations I accepted to get a decent 8X4 layout
I would have used Stevenson's Rocket and coaches if I had to to get a layout that would fit in the space I had because a small railway is better than none.
I also think a small layout is more challenging than having space for a decent sized dream layout
regards John

[Dayliner]

As some of you have suggested, part of this is the old "continuous-run vs point-to-point" debate. My present layout began as a 2x6 switcher and expanded to (part way) round the walls. I've enjoyed building and operating it, but the "mainline" run is too short for serious running--it's still a glorified switching layout. The 4x8 guys have it all over us round-the-wallers because they can set up some continuous running fairly quickly--and that helps to maintain interest in the early stages of building a layout. There were times in the early days when I would have loved just to watch the trains run. We're moving to a new house next month with a much bigger train room, and I plan to build a bigger "round-the-wall" with a longer run--but I'm also going to be thinking about how to incorporate a continuous-run feature into the track plan.

[trainfreek92]

I am building a 4x8 layout with a 36x80 door extension. my original plan was to have just a 4x8 but wanted more space so.......... i have a good chunk of the basement for my railroad so it really does not matter 2 me if it is inpractical. i would build a bigger layout but just do not have the funds.

[brothaslide]

Personally, I would love to have the time, money, and space to construct a "super" layout but a 4 x 8 or a module is more practical for me. Bottom line - I have nothing againts a 4 x 8 layout but I would like a huge layout. . .

[Anonymous]

This got me to thinking about some of the nasty-grams published in the letters to the editor section of RMC and MR back in the 1960's. Hate would be putting it mildly.

[Anonymous]

BNSF has somewhere around 200-300 gp38-2's and about 1,500 Dash9-44cw's- so you can see most people wil want to run a few 6-axle locomotives to be prototypical

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: [i]Originally posted by jcmark611

I know that 4 axle power still exsists and is still used by Class 1 but, mostly on locals and branches.

A 4 by 8 can be a good representation of a branch line or industrial.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Itsed65
[
Sure more room would be nice, but its all about making the most of the space that you have!

ed

VERY true ! More "new" people should heed this and build a layout, instead of just dreaming about the one they hope to have. I have to laugh when a train magazine does an article on a "small layout", and it ends up being 3 times larger than mine. If you model a urban or city setting, and keep sidings to a minimum, it will give you enough to keep you busy for a long time...and provide a great learning experiance as well. Joe

[Anonymous]

i can run a 6axle Athearn AC4400 sucessfully on my 18" (sharp) curves, freight cars much over 50' don't work the greatest- but i've run a 62' reefer sucessfully on these curves- it only derails if there are a lot of cars behind it- i suppose my biggest gripe is sharp curves- a 4'x8' has to have short trains but i run 20 car trains on my 4'x12' and it looks okay

[Anonymous]

yep, around here its gp-38s and boxcars, and thats it.

[oleirish]

Boy what a change on this forum,A while back the subject came up about 4X8's and someone on here called them toy train layouts not model railroads,after seeing the links Brakie posted,I would not call them TOY TRAINS,nice work Brakie.and as stated a 4X8 is better than sitting around talking about it and having no Idea what thay are talking about!!!Agreed around the wall is good but not everyone has the room.

JIM

[BRAKIE]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jcmark611



The real problem with 4x8s now is you cannot model today's equipment on it.

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]

[wjstix]

I think part of it is that a lot of us who've been around awhile know there is probably going to be a point where someone building an HO 4' x 8' layout is going to get frustrated with it due to the layout's inherent limitations (sharp curves especially) and that they'll probably end up chucking it for a different layout - so why not build the second layout first and save time / money / effort ??

BTW I suppose scale should enter into this...if I had to start all over from square one on a new layout and only had room for a 4 x 8, I'd be tempted to go down to N scale or even Z, so I could still run longer trains and use fullsize passenger cars etc.

[Anonymous]

I don't think it's a question of EVERYONE hating them, just those that see no need in them or get no satisfaction from operating or watching a 4x8 layout.

For me, I am not a 4x8 guy. I cannot get what I want in a layout from a 4x8. For those who do, go on and build to your's heart's content. It's not my layout so I cannot tell you how to build it.

The real problem with 4x8s now is you cannot model today's equipment on it. Which is worse on the kids. If I was a kid I would want to model double stacks and piggy backs becuase that's all I see going by the house but, you cannot do that on a 4x8, which kinda leaves the young uns out.

[BRAKIE]

Don,As far as photography I believe lots of modelers are also railfans..Dating? I believe that's how we woo women into marrying us.[}:)]

What say you about these small layouts that are highly operatable? Should these be past by because some are 4x6? I think not..A small layout including a switching layout beats none at all.

http://www.gatewaynmra.org/layouts/mr2001.gif

http://www.gatewaynmra.org/project10.htm

http://www.gatewaynmra.org/layouts/gcrr2.jpg

http://www.gatewaynmra.org/layouts/gcrr2.jpg

[John Busby]

Hi all
The secret to a successful 8X4 is to have a layout that should have short trains small locomotives etc definitely no 4-8-8-4's
it also needs to be divided scenically to break the round and round effect.
a branch line is ideal.
Its been said have extension built in well that's where the main line comes in
that's the extension point.
on the 8X4 is the mainline station one end of the line one very simple intermediate station make sure its got a small industry of some sort to generate traffic then you have the branch terminal with a different industry maybe two a loco shed and fuel water if applicable a couple of town buildings
The intermediate station has the industry and a road off the board to town and a depot or at least a shelter.
The main line station has the branch track heading for the main line a couple of sidings for branch traffic. if and only if you can squeeze it in a small industry but have a couple of town buildings.
The down side is trains are only three maybe four short freight cars one of which is a bobber caboose.
passenger trains are one combine or may be drovers caboose and refrigerator car.
The trick is to make it all fit it can be done with a continuous run to get a bit of distance into the point to point run or you can just lazily watch trains go by
The loop is also handy for running in new locos or testing repaired ones.
regards John

[jeffers_mz]

I don't hate 4x8's, I'm building one for my kids right now. It has forty feet of mainline, a railroad interchange, four towns (one is an imaginary one where the staging area is), a large mining area, 11 tunnel entrances, four bridges, four creeks, two (and maybe more) waterfalls, twelve turnouts, nine blocks, two yard areas, two return loops for a total of four ways to reverse direction, and two levels.

The room it's in serves triple duty, being a bedroom when the kids are here, a music room when they aren't, and a train room all the time. It's also a storage room for a ton of camping and climbing equipment. In the spring I'll start a pole barn, which will eventually house the gear storage and studio, so maybe then we'll expand the trains, but right now, there isn't room for an around the room set or anything larger than a 4x8.

You can pack a lot of activity on a 4x8 in some circumstances. A mining area can imply mountains, which hide enough track to avoid too "busy" of an appearance, steep grades and tight curves. You probably can't run a lot of long freights or big passenger cars, but the prototypes from the gold rush mining days don't support that anyway.

They'll be supplies and passengers coming up from the staging area, with freight trains being broken down and re-formed at the supply hub/interhange, then heading on up to the mines with coal and passengers. The empty coal cars and ore have to come back down, then be reordered and sent back down to the staging area main branchline.

I'm guessing it will keep us busy for several years, which is the whole point, right?

[rolleiman]

Can't say hate the 4x8, I've built quite a few. Especially when I didn't have the space for a perminant setup (rental house) and couldn't attach a layout to the walls.. Done the module thing too.. But I think that if space is available for even a Semi-perminant 4x8, after all, you have to set it up somewhere, the space can be better used.. Even a 1 foot wide shelf around a room will provide more railroading that you could Ever hope to cram onto a sheet of plywood. It can be more perminatant and even functional too.. Think book cases with several shadowbox railroad scenes.. How much wall space do you currently give up to nic-nak collections?? Or Family photos (that could be framed and nicely displayed on a shelf)?? Don't hate them, just think there are better options..

Jeff
[:)]

[Don Gibson]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE

Don,There are some that doesn't have a basement or tons of money to spend building a layout..IMHO a 4x8 beats no layout or worst ...waiting on that "dream" layout that may never come

- OR spending it on another hobby, such as Photography? How about Dating?

For my money, a 1.5 - 2' narrow switching layout provide's more activity, more challenges, and more fun than ANY round the round (loop) RR.- let's see, scale 60mph = 1' per second HO.. And roughly 12' of track is ? ... once around a 4X8 is about every 12 second's. No activity ,worse, reptition becomes BORING to my brain. BEST of all, it can be shoved against a wall, and into corner's. I have 18" wide modules along the wall. More than bookshelves, but less than my large TV.

I enjoy running passenger too - I run 10 car passenger train's at a club where more time elapses between repeat's. 10 - 85' cars is 10' in HO plus engine. An ABBA adds' another 3 feet. Even 12 feet of train on a 4X8 has the engineer 'sniffing' his own tail.
No thank's.

BRAKIE In terns of cost :
4 pieces of 8' ply = $65
Av. engine = 75
turnouts = 20 ea.

SInce turnout's are the cause 99% of derailment's, I use Shinohara made turnout's with pleasing result's.
.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE

Don,There are some that doesn't have a basement or tons of money to spend building a layout..IMHO a 4x8 beats no layout or worst being a armchair dreamer waiting on that "dream" layout that may never come..

Amen. I only have 3'X6'.... if I had a 12X12 room to spare, Id definately fill it.

[BRAKIE]

Don,There are some that doesn't have a basement or tons of money to spend building a layout..IMHO a 4x8 beats no layout or worst being a armchair dreamer waiting on that "dream" layout that may never come..

[Don Gibson]

PHASE I. Bring it out and run it around the Xmas tree.

PHASE II: Mount it on a sheet of plywood, so you can play with it between Xmas's.
Positive's: Add equipment, building's.
Negative: Still run's in circles.

PHASE III: Finding permanent spot; Building an 'Empire'.

4X8's? It's a 50 year old design with minimum carpentry, curves, and equipment limitation's.

HATE? Naw. Some of us graduate, some don't.

[Anonymous]

I currently have a 10x12 U-shaped layout, but once I move I will probably go against the popular wisdom and build a 4x8, quite possibly following the basic structure of MR's latest project layout. I really like the portability of a 4x8, the simplicity of the benchwork, and the chance to do some scenery that has real depth. The nice thing about the current feature layout in MR is that the track plan includes interchange tracks at both ends, so if I ever do decide to build a bigger, more open layout, I can integrate it very easily.

[on30francisco]

I started out with a 4x8 Lionel layout with "Super O" track over 40 years ago. I also built "The HO Railroad That Grows" on a 4x8 over 20 years ago. I now have a movable layout built around the perimeter of the room. I think around the room layouts are a much more efficient use of space, permit broader curves, allow longer runs, and allow better scenic effects. Since I sometimes like to kick back and just watch the trains run, I built an easily removable bridge (a simple, unscenicked 2x4) across two sections. Although a 4x8 may not be the most efficient use of space, I have enjoyed and learned a lot from the ones I've built.

[on30francisco]

I started out with a 4x8 Lionel layout with "Super O" track over 40 years ago. I also built "The HO Railroad That Grows" on a 4x8 over 20 years ago. I now have a movable layout built around the perimeter of the room. I think around the room layouts are a much more efficient use of space, permit broader curves, allow longer runs, and allow better scenic effects. Since I sometimes like to kick back and just watch the trains run, I built an easily removable bridge (a simple, unscenicked 2x4) across two sections. Although a 4x8 may not be the most efficient use of space, I have enjoyed and learned a lot from the ones I've built.

[steveblackledge]

Nothing wrong with a 4' x 8' , i cut my teeth on one as a kid, it gave me hours of fun, thats what it's all about, Fun, Fun, Fun, my friends got a great little layout in N scale, that's on a 3' x 3'

[selector]

Maybe we should tell our friend that, while there is nothing inherently wrong with the typical 4X8, if you actually decide that that is the way to go at present, at least make it easily added to, or make it easy to mate to a larger trackplan. Honestly, there are some wonderfully creative designs, but they almost always get put aside or modified by the modeler after a short while. The reason is that our thinking is limited without actual learning and experience. Once we get that experience, and see what limitations we didn't appreciate when we elected to go with the slab, that is when all that work gets put aside. What I am suggesting is leave some open ends near the edge, and that will allow you to build another module, maybe a shelf, for a decent yard, staging, whatever.

The real killer of any layout is a lack of variety. if you don't have a couple of other things to make the trains do besides circle and back into spurs or sidings (about all you can do in so many 4X8 plans), its life will be what Hobbes said in Leviathan; "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and SHORT."

Build the 4X8...honestly, go ahead and learn, but please leave one track-end open near one edge so that you can add to it, and not have to throw out all that time and money.

[Anonymous]

I built the Turtle Creek Central -- with a couple of significant modifications -- which is a cleverly -- deceptively clever -- designed 4 by 8 track plan. It can be operated as a point to point with the tunnel used as a staging area. You can also have continuous running for the kids. I thought I would build it for my kids and then move on to something else, but I've grown attached to the track plan.

There are other excellent 4 by 8 track plans, especially those that are waterfront switching layouts. With a bit of creativity a 4 by 8 can be a whole lot more than an oval, a passing siding and a couple of spurs.

With that being said, the worst part about a 4 by 8 in HO is trying to line things up and join the oval, especially when using flex track. If a single turnout is just slightly misaligned it can throw the entire layout out of whack. Since a 4 by 8 is usually built by a beginner, laying the flex track becomes a baptism by fire because trying to align a loop to turn outs is probably the most difficult part of working with flex track. Laying flex track is much easier to learn on a point to point. In that setting you can save the return or reverse loop for the very end, after you've become handy enough with the Xurons that it is second nature.

[vsmith]

part of it because experienced modelers know that its an inefficient use of space, just to give an example, Look at the PDF file below, assuming your typical 4 x 8 layout with a miniumum of 36 inches clear each side for access, yields a 10'x 14' area thats the actual layout "area". Now if instead of walking "around" the layout you instead build the layout "around" you. Take that 4 x 8, cut it in half move them to opposite corners and connect them with 24inch wide shelf system with a backdrop and you get a much larger and more dramatic layout with far more potential, all in the same effective area that the 4 x 8 occupies. [;)]

Open me:
http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/vsmith//4x8%20alternate%20area%20example.pdf