why does everyone hate 4X8 layouts?

[Anonymous]

I started with a 4X8 forty years ago. The main problem with it was watching the train chase its caboose and the curve and turnout radii. I now am in the process of starting a 9X12 with a 5x8 operating pit in the center. It is based on one of Ian Rice's plans in Small, Smart, and Practical layouts. In other words, I am building an around-the-room type of layout. That will give me the luxury of having a staging yard on one side and a working yard on the other. Not much room for scenery in between, however. But, it will also give me the chance to use nice, wide-radii curves on the layout. And, that is the other problem with a 4x8: you can only use a maximum of a 22-inch radius curve. That limits you on both rolling stock and locomotives that you can run without trouble. Yes, yes, I know that a lot of locomotives will take an 18" and most will take a 22" curve, but they still often look like fertilizer when they do. Also, the overhang and clearance problems can be problematic.

[Phil1361]

I have nothing against 4 X 8 layouts. I would rather have a 2' X 16' switching layout as trains going round and round in circles bores me after a while. But as what was written above- to each his own.

[JimRCGMO]

As several others have pointed out, most of us (those in HO especially, since a lot of MR layouts used the 4X8 size format) have had (or still have) such a layout. For those in the tinier scales (like N, TT, Z, etc.), the size wouldn't seem to be as much of a hindrance, actually. I had a 4X8 layout when I was in junior high and partway into high school. (Never quite finished that one, though). [:O][;)]

The main problem I saw/see in the 4X8 layout (for HO) is that due to the smaller radii you have problems running longer cars (for example, most passenger cars) and engines - unless you are modeling a narrow gauge RR, where everything tends to be shorter, anyway. If you run passenger cars on the 18 to 22 inch radius curves on a 4X8, they overhang a lot on the curves. One MR/Kalmbach book even kind of acknowledged this fact by suggesting that if you raise the track level closer to eye level, you don't notice the overhang so much as if you are looking 'down' at the track.

I currently (partly due to living in a smaller apartment) am working on a semi-modular layout that I can later work into an around the room layout when I get more space. I have two modules started, about 2' X 4' (plus a few inches wider near where they join), because I want some switching tracks and some buildings/scenery. That would be harder to do in a narrower section (like 18 inches or under). Later, I can add corner sections which have wider radius curves for passenger cars, longer engines, etc. This way, I can have them look good on the curves and the straighter tracks.[:)]

Blessings,

Jim

[wjstix]

Nothing wrong with a small layout, for many years as a teenager I had a 4-1/2' x 10' layout (a 9 x 5) cut in half and both halves rotated 90 degrees)...and that was in O scale !!

But I think one problem is newer modellers come in with unrealistic expectations. "I need help designing a track plan where I can run three trains at once, the largest pieces of equipment being a UP 4-8-8-4 Big Boy and 80' passenger cars, and I want three industries and at least three passenger depots....oh, and I only have room for a 4'x8' layout. "

[IRONROOSTER]

As have many others, I started with a 4x8. It's a good size because you can get it set up wiith a minimum of carpentry. Since it is usually set up in the center of the room or with one end against the wall, you have good access to doors, windows, closets, etc in the room. The chief limitation of the 4x8 in scales larger than TT is the maximum radius - 22". By using a bigger table such as 5x10 you can get a 28" radius at 6x12 you can get to 34". Beyond this size you have access problems to the center.

One of the traps in this hobby is feeling that you have to max out the railroad for the space available. The three ingredients of the hobby are time, space, and money. If any of these are limited, then you need to limit the layout accordingly. One way is the table or island layout.

Enjoy
Paul

[Anonymous]

That's one bird brain smiely was he seduicial[(-D][(-D]

[Anonymous]

i don't like shelf layouts- you need much more room- i know they can be modular but it's still easier to have a few 4'x8' tables if you ever move to a different house. I would want to have 4'x8' 's lined up in the middle of the room or along the wall to get a size of 4'x16' or even 4'x24' -Let the 4'x8' live on

[gvdobler]

I would bet a poll would show that the majority of people on this forum have a 4x8 layout or 3x6 or some version of the 4x8.

I can't imagine anything more boring than a 16' switching layout 2' deep. Back and forth instead of round and round. But that's me, I like to see main line action. If I want a puzzle, I'll get a Rubik's Cube.

If someone has a 4x8 that they enjoy and use as opposed to someone with an around the wall that they never run or work on, who's having more fun?

Different stroke folks.

Disclaimer: No insult intended to anyone unless you diagree with me. [:D]

[ICRR1964]

When we first bought our house I had a 4 by 8 in one of the 5 bedrooms in our home, it went in a oval run with 2 switches that came into the center for my transfer yard and supplied industries. There was a total of 7 spurs in the middle feeding several industries, and it worked great. After I built my 3 car garage, a year later I asked my wife if I could put an addition on the south side of the garage for a train room! She liked the idea allot so I started contruction and finished in 3 weeks. The addition is 24ft deep By 20ft wide. After taking apart the old layout and doing the bench work for the new, I decided on using 3 walls and using 4 by 8 end to end in a "C" shaped setup. I have 2 trains that are running at all times, almost 20 switches to watch, 18 industies to feed, and 1 small yard for the holding zone.

I have a freind of mine who hated this whole setup and refused to run his trains at all on my setup, told me it was to deep and it was funny looking, his narrow 2 ft waide runs he said were better and easy to get at, which is true. But he is only 5ft 2inches tall with short arms, I am 6 ft 2 inchs with long arms. So it works pretty good for me having the depth, it all depands on what each MRer wants. To each his own!

[BRAKIE]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

My biggest problem with the 4x8 is the one I built. If you do like I did and place the switches all on one panel, then the far ones are out of reach. This is a problem if you want to set cars out and do run arounds and the like. Throw a switch. Run around uncouple a car. Run back throw a switch. Run around dorp a car. Throw a switch. Run back and uncouple. Run back and reattach the loco.

IF you use the same space for a U shaped layout, you don't have to run around your layout.

Chip,That's one way of losing weight and getting exerise..On the other hand why not use KD's uncoupling magnets and remote switches?

[John Busby]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Stuckarmchairing

4x8's are fine if your into the whole running in circles scene, but If your into realistic operation (Like myself) that space could be used better for a shelf layout.

hi
That's interesting I managed to get three stations two levels and a realistic operational layout on eight by four
The only thing that annoyed me was I could not get enough pre grouping fish wagons and a railway hearse wagon for something different in rail traffic.
I also found it scenically challenging and was able to go into a higher level of detail
than you see on the large layouts including a badger set, weasels herons birds rabbits, foxes domestic gardens etc etc.
its all a question of are you prepaired accept short trains and use a bit of brain power to get the best out of the space avalable
regards John

[Big_Boy_4005]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SteelMonsters

What kind of 7 1/2" gauge layout can you put on a 4X8[?]

If you use very strong benchwork, you might be able to display a locomotive on it, and maybe even go back and forth an inch or two.[;)]

How many sheets of plywood would it take for a layout like that?[:0][:p]

40 x 80 feet is more like it.[8D]

[SteelMonsters]

What kind of 7 1/2" gauge layout can you put on a 4X8[?]

[Anonymous]

Well, you did it.

[SpaceMouse]

My biggest problem with the 4x8 is the one I built. If you do like I did and place the switches all on one panel, then the far ones are out of reach. This is a problem if you want to set cars out and do run arounds and the like. Throw a switch. Run around uncouple a car. Run back throw a switch. Run around dorp a car. Throw a switch. Run back and uncouple. Run back and reattach the loco.

IF you use the same space for a U shaped layout, you don't have to run around your layout.

[Anonymous]

I don't hate 4x8s at all. In fact, were it not for 4x8s, we might not have some of the great influence on the hobby we have today.

[miniwyo]

Well im working on starting one that fits in a spot that I have but its 4x6 but I also want to make a shelf layout all the way around the room, possibly a doubletrack mainline if I can get the material I want Its perfect has a lip all the way around the edge to keep the trains on it in case of a derailment and wide enough for 2 tracks.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE

QUOTE: Originally posted by Greyryder

I dislike small looping layouts. I'd rather take that 4x8 sheet, cut it in half, and build either a 2' deep 16' long shelf switcher, or or an 8x10 l shaped switching layout. Watching a train go around and around doesn't entertain me. I'd be rather dropping off and picking up cars at a bunch of industries.

Well check out the layouts I posted..I also prefer the switching type layouts but,these small layouts was built for switching.[:D]

Saw a link to that site in another thread. Some of those are pretty neat, but a little bit smaller than I like. I'm building a 4 1/2' x 1' switcher. I've already extended a few feet out for staging, though. It's good to have a "rest of the world." :)

[Anonymous]

My 3X6 is N scale. I have added a 1'X4 1/2' extension off the one side for staging, but thats simply because the oppotunity to build over the TV presented itself[:D]

I personally prefer a smaller layout (not as small as 3'X6', but thats all I get for the time being) because as some haev mentioned, they're more likely to be finished.

Ive seen some huge layouts that are never finished, or they are finished by cutting corners in teh scenery and track department and the owners and viewers find them less than satisfactory due to the lack of realism. Im hoping with my 3X6 footer, I can superdetail everything from one corner to the other.

[jecorbett]

I would guess a majority of HOers and N-scalers started with a 4X8. Its a great way to get started but its only a start. Those who get hooked by this hobby naturally are going to want to progress to something more sophisticated and over the last couple years, shelf layouts have become the choice of a majority of serious modelers. It allows for more prototypical back-and-forth operation rather than around-and-around. That's not to say you can't do operations with an oval layout but it requires a little more imagination. Every year I've intended to build a 4X8 Christmas layout with a winter scene but there's just too much to do right now with the big layout as that is taking priority.

[Big_Boy_4005]

I think the problem with the 4x8 in HO is the curves.

If you want some kind of continuous run, you run into some serious limitations. N and even 3 rail O can make better use of the 4 foot dimension when it comes to their curve radii. There is nothing WRONG with the 4x8, but most people desire more.

[dinwitty]

matter of preference, the hobby is about fun.
my design is now shelf design max 18"x4 foot but modular in design. I would have to remove a shelf to do up close work on it and I can place it on a comfortable place and work it carefully.
I can place a temporary shelf to keep things running.
When your going to accurately build a North Shore Milwaukee terminal, your gonna want to do it right.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Train 284

I dont think it is really hatred. In fact I would love to build a around the wall type layout, but I have no room! A 4x8 is as big as it gets. I don't have very much extra room.

I know 4x8 is good for the simplicity to getting it going.
I've been that route, and all of them layouts are history.
When you have a certain goal your looking for the right thing to do.

[Train 284]

I dont think it is really hatred. In fact I would love to build a around the wall type layout, but I have no room! A 4x8 is as big as it gets. I don't have very much extra room.

[Anonymous]

I started to think when Mister Beasley said we all have a 4x8 in our past. Mine was a 027 Lionel, Fort Apache was at one end and some thing else at the other. I even have a picture of it. That was over 45 years ago. I still have the train and Fort Apache. Thanks for jogging my memory MB.

[MisterBeasley]

"To promote domestic tranquility," in the words of Thomas Jefferson, forced me into a free-standing table layout instead of a fixed around-the-room layout. I started designing a 4x8, and found it just too confining. Instead, I opened up my belt a couple of notches in either direction and ended up with a 5x12. It's not ideal, but realistically it's already pushing the envelope on the family front.

Cheese3 up above made a very good point - a 4x8 is much more likely to be nearly completed than a project that could be great, but in most cases just ends up overwhelming. With my 5x12 (60 square feet) I've got almost double the area of a 4x8. I've been working very steadily for 8 months now, and I figure I've got another year to go before the building covers the last bit of pink foam.

The 4x8 format may not be ideal, but there are probably more trackplans for that footprint than any other. The availability of building materials in that size drives this, of course, but it's really what you make of it. 4x8 makes an excellent "first layout," a place to learn, make mistakes, but still end up with something to be proud of. I'll bet most of us have a 4x8 somewhere back in our resumes, and it's hard to think back on it without a smile.

[Anonymous]

If you have to have the 4x8 style layout, you're better off with a 5x9 (ping-pong table size) layout. You can have a much better radius with 5 feet to turn around in than 4. But as someone already mentioned, around the wall usually takes up less space, but gives a lot more layout room. Oh, and the bigger ones usually aren't complete and detailed because they are easy to modify, which means about the time everything's perfect someone takes a keyhole saw to it.

Greg

[selector]

Hate is such a strong word. I think that their preference is merely for something a little more practical. While a sheet of 3/4" ply is "dark and dirty", it leaves a great deal to be desired in terms of the limitations it imposes by virtue of its shape and dimensions in its monolithic form...as modelers soon learn. Virtually every person finds that they have become bored with the outer loop and two small switch yards or spurs. And that, aside from a minor variation here and there, is what the 4X8' sheet affords.

If you take that sheet and rip it into three equal lengths, now you can do something. Or, if you take both corners off one end, in three large equilateral triangles, join those at the other end to mirror the shape of the cut end, now you have more room for your curves on your oval. It isn't so much the area, it is the shape.

[Anonymous]

4x8's are fine if your into the whole running in circles scene, but If your into realistic operation (Like myself) that space could be used better for a shelf layout.

[BRAKIE]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Greyryder

I dislike small looping layouts. I'd rather take that 4x8 sheet, cut it in half, and build either a 2' deep 16' long shelf switcher, or or an 8x10 l shaped switching layout. Watching a train go around and around doesn't entertain me. I'd be rather dropping off and picking up cars at a bunch of industries.

Well check out the layouts I posted..I also prefer the switching type layouts but,these small layouts was built for switching.[:D]

[DSchmitt]

[:D]Because 4 x 8 is too big[:o)] Look at this site:

http://carendt.com/