Tom - Micro Engineering Code 55 is very nice track, but it can be a pain to work with. It doesn't flex as easily as Atlas, and working kinks out of it is time consuming. But it looks great, has fewer flange problems than Atlas, and a lot of guys are willing to do the extra work.
Personally, I switched to Atlas c55 with my current layout, and have recently finished switching all of my rolling stock to RP-25 compliant wheelsets. I just got my first set of Fox Valley wheels, and it's mighty tempting to dump a few more bucks into them. They are excellent.
Shawnee - Come over to the Dark Side. I've custom painted my own N scale stuff for years, but I also chose a paint scheme that more or less comes out of a can! If you like small steam, you'll be disappointment with the performance in N scale, although there is a surprising variety available in N. If you dig diesels, you'll be just fine. Typical train length on most layouts is about 20 cars, which can easily be handled by one or two of the recent road diesel releases. Some are better than others, but generally speaking, they're all good. If you dig DCC, there's plenty out there also.
There are lots of N scale forums on line, such as Atlas, Railwire, and Scale Rails Online, as well as this thread, where you can learn about specific makes and models, techniques and challenges. They say that in HO you can model a train, but in N you can model a railroad. I think that's pretty accurate. Welcome, and N Joy!
Lee
Route of the Alpha Jets www.wmrywesternlines.net
Also responding to Shawnee,
I never operated in HO nor modeled in that gauge but have always been in N scale. I chose this scale early on like most modelers due to space restrictions, and although that is a good reason, I have found that it also allows some scenic modeling that other scales don't allow. The scenery to trains ration is much larger in N and make it much more enjoyable for railfaning. Industries can be bigger, yards and ammount of trackage can be increased. The engines have improved dramatically over the last 20 years, with DCC now making most on par with their HO counterparts.
You will not have any trouble painting or decaling. Some difficulty with detailing because of the small size but still possible.
Operating as far as uncoupleing cars is the only down side I've found, you just have to be more carefull, but it is a much smaller problem with well laid track and good microtrains couplers on everything.
To Shawnee:
I've been modeling in N scale since the 1970's. I came over to N scale from HO because of space limitations in our house in North Carolina which did not have a basement. I've never regreted the move to N scale. The main reason I like N scale is because of the realistic ratio of track to scenery that you can have in a given space in N scale. I like to run passenger trains and long freight trains and the relatively large radius curves (18" and greater) that you can get into a relatively small space is a real plus. The quality of the locos in N scale has improved considerably since I started in the scale in the '70's. Kato and Atlas have excellent locos and some of their competitors are raising their own standards of quality. You may not have as wide a selection in N scale as in HO, but the quality is certainly there. I especially like the fine details on the N scale freight cars available from Micro Trains. Size may have an impact on what you can pack into a body shell of a loco with respect to DCC, but you can still get enough electronics into a loco to operate it with DCC.
I'm about to start on my last layout in N scale in a room approximately 21' x 28'. It's to be a linear walk-around layout patterned after Dave Barrows HO Cat Mountain and Santa Fe that appeared in the September, 1999 issue of Model Railroader. I'm looking forward to watching my passenger trains and long freights making their way around the broad sweeping curves that I'll be able to build in this much space in N scale.
Welcome to N scale model railroading.
Bob
Hello N Scalers!
I'm an HO guy seriously thinking about switching over to N scale. I've kinda reached the logical limit in my 10x12 layout on what I can do in HO scale without it getting ridiculous. I guess I'll always be tampering with the layout, and recent tamperings have led me to think...may be time before any more investment is made to switch to N.
My layout is still very much in basic running/landscape re-shaping stage, haven't really even opened the HO structure model kits I have except for a couple...probably a hundred fifty bucks worth or so. (probably a bit more, but I don't like to count ) I like the smaller scale and it allows more freedom for track in a small space, obviously. I originally went HO just because I had that as a kid, and wanted to share with my kids. I really didn't think "n" at the time, it seemed "small".
So, a question...please be sincere with me on this...are there any "downsides" to being in N? Are engines and freight cars harder to come by? Are engines less robust? The structure model assortment seems fine. I've decided to get into custom painting, but is that just a micro-pain in N? Are any of you converts from HO,...and can you tell me what a hassle it might be to change al the stuff I have?
What are 1) the things you like best about N, and 2) the things you wish were better, and the things I may miss from HO.
Thanks very much...i can really use some reasoned advice, as this is potentially a big move for me. I want to do the best thing, either tough it out in HO or go over the wall to N.
Wdlgln005 wrote: Dewayne, I can't agree with you more! There s/b some standards: TE at 0% equates to x number of 40ft 1oz cars. A grade of 2% cuts that to x-. A jig for N scale could be made to have a yard/meter stick of Atlas flex/Kato Unitrak. The trick will be to devise a vertical tangent between 0% & 2-4%. I doubt if any Nscale trucks could handle a very sharp angle.
Dewayne, I can't agree with you more! There s/b some standards: TE at 0% equates to x number of 40ft 1oz cars. A grade of 2% cuts that to x-.
A jig for N scale could be made to have a yard/meter stick of Atlas flex/Kato Unitrak. The trick will be to devise a vertical tangent between 0% & 2-4%. I doubt if any Nscale trucks could handle a very sharp angle.
I have to agree with you. Kato Unitrak is very unforgiving on transitions in grade. I am currently playing around with Atlas flex track and Unitrak to get around the abrupt transitions. I have figured out that grade transitions on curves is one of the most difficult things for medium to long wheel base stuff to negotiate. 85' cars and big steam will give constant problems under this condition.
Army National Guard E3MOS 91BI have multiple scales nowZ, N, HO, O, and G.
Thanks for the info.
Another question - how do you guys find Micro Engineering code 55 flex track to work with and operate on?
Tom
Craig,
I run MT low pro's exclusively. Plastic wheels. My helix was all Kato unitrack of 13 and 15" radius curves. It was oval like Indianapolis raceway. IE 90 degree curve, 248mm straight, 90 degree curve, (3) 249mm straights etc... I found that with 180 degree turns, that straight lining was much more frequent with long trains. I even went as far as reinstalling the pizza cutters but was not thrilled with the look, so I went back to lo-pro's and took out the helix. I've seen a lot of talk about Fox Valley models wheel sets. The price isn't out of line either.
I seem to recall reading someplace that introducing a curve into an incline, as in a helix, will increase the amount of pulling force necessary to pull a given weight up that incline with a curve in it. A straight incline will take less force to pull the same weigth up it. In doing your tests of pulling power required to get a given weigth up an incline this probably should be taken into consideration.
Just a thought,
Bob, Craig and all
Thanks for your thoughts. Somewhat discouraging. I have some Consolidations, Mikes, Hudson and a Mountain. I was thinking that a max train would be around 30 40foot cars, plastic wheelsets, pulled by one engine. I was looking at a helix that would have no more than a 1.1% grade on straight sections (elongated oval) with the corners on the flat. Yes a lot of space for a helix but it would add to the 'empire' I am looking at. I was thinking of an 'around the room' type of helix but find that concept does not suit my vision.
I tried a test track 24foot long, straight, temp flex track nailed in place graded as close to 1.1% or slightly more with a Consolidation and 30 cars set at the bottom started from a stop to climb the grade. The digitrax controller set at 60 the engine pulled up from the standing start. I raised the test track to approx 1.5% and got wheel slippage at full power.
Thought I would build the helix and then test again but have to admit that is a lot of work track, cork and wood for what may not work.
ps Without standards for the 'pulling power' rating I would suggest that the ratings would be suspect.
I have seen many post in various forums about the pulling power of locomotives.
Maybe we should E-Mail all the companies that make loc's and ask them to come up with an industury standard for the rating of pulling power.
Something like "at X volts/mA it can pull X oz., X inchs in 5 sec. on a 2% grade."
Any thoughts?
Navygunner,
Are you running metal or plastic wheelsets?
On my railroad, I have switched to metal wheelsets on about 1/4 of my rolling stock. I haven't taken an actual count, but the train lenght of all metal wheelset cars is almost double that of all plastic wheelset cars going up my hills.
I haven't done actual tests to see exactly how many cars I can pull plastic vs. metal wheels. This is just an observation I have made while running trains on the steepest grade of my railroad.
Craig
The Kato Mike with the traction upgrade is a good puller on grades, about 20 MTL 40' box cars and runs reliably. The ConCor 4-8-4's and Santa Fe are strong pullers about 30 40' MTL cars, if you can get a good one. The Bachmann Spectrum class J pulls about 40 40' cars but some have had concerns about the wiring from the tender and derailing issues. The Life Like 2-8-8-2 would pull 24 40' cars uphill when double headed; very nice looking, but weak on power. The specified loads were the maximum number started while completely on my 40"x60" helix with 2% grade. I have since taken down the helix in favor of a wye so do not have any grades anymore for further testing on grades. For deisels, my IM FT abba set pulls better than 3 Kato SD 70's, 4 Atlas GP anythings 4 Atlas 8-40bw's or 4 Atlas H15-44's. The only competition is 2 Atlas Trainmasters that pull pretty good too.
On level track, my Athearn Challenger has pulled 63 cars of MTL, and IM 40' cars. I ran out of room so do not have a max number yet. The J pulled 58 cars, I have not tested the rest as I am trying to get the new track work commisioned. These 2 see the most time on the mainlines on my layout. My preferred load is roughly 35 to 40 cars on the mainline, almost all of my steam models can do this.
These are my impressions on models that I have and that I run on a regular basis. Others have had different impressions.
Tom, with most NSteamers it appears a 0% grade would be best. Most Nsteamers don't pull much on flat & level ground. You'd end up following the prototype & using some helpers. AFAIK you'd be lucky to pull 30 freight cars around curves. The Athearn Challenger may be the only candidate.
AFAIK the Nscale haulers tend to be a ABBA set of EMD F's or Alco FA's. MTL FT's are also good haulers.
Would like to know the thinking on grades in 'N' and steam engines. What is the general feeling of max grade for N scale steam with say a 30 car train?
It has been kinda S L O W lately hasent it ?
i guess every one has been buisy with their layouts?
well same here i guess, i just started making my Kato SD70M look a little closer to the prototype.
Scott, welcome to the forum!
Ya know, new people to the hobby come onto this forum all the time. Since you obviously know a thing or two about trains (you know about the shared trackage in your area) I'd suggest that the first step for you might be the gathering of info. Find out what the trains in your area actually do. Read the back pages of this forum and just soak in information. When you do that, I'm tellin' ya, your vision for "your" RR becomes much more clear. I'd also pick up a copy of "Track Planning For Realistic Operation", by John Armstrong. It's out of print I think, so you might be going with Amazon or something, but that book is worth every penny of what you pay for it, trust me. And one other thing.....ask questions! You've heard it before I'm sure.....The only stupid question is the one you didn't ask.
Dave Vollmer wrote:Seems to me then that 20% of their content ought to be N scale, but it sure isn't!
I hope this doesn't turn into a big argument--which it has before here--but I must agree. I know layout articles are dependant upon submissions by readers and blah, blah, blah. I appreciated every article MR does on N scale modeling, but they certainly have not reached that 20% by any means. They could especially improve in N scale model reviews. They seem to be very few and far between. Now I am NOT MR bashing--I love the mag. Just a little constructive opinion from a devoted subscriber.
Ron
Owner and superintendant of the N scale Texas Colorado & Western Railway, a protolanced representaion of the BNSF from Fort Worth, TX through Wichita Falls TX and into Colorado.
Check out the TC&WRy on at https://www.facebook.com/TCWRy
Check out my MRR How-To YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/c/RonsTrainsNThings
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
Interesting little factoid in today's e-mail from a new online Marty McGuirk article...
"Model Railroader magazine, published by Kalmbach, is the oldest and largest magazine in the world devoted exclusively to scale model railroading. Since close to 20 percent of MR's readers are N scalers, you'll always find an article or two specific to N scale in every issue."
Source: "Introduction to N Scale Railroading"
http://www.trains.com/mrr/default.aspx?c=a&id=602
N Scale = 20%
Conemaugh Road & Traction circa 1956
Howdy! I'm new here, but really miss MRR. I have lots of garage space now (bought a house) and plan on building a decent size layout.
I really want to build a 2' or 3' by 10' or 12', only I'm having trouble coming up with what I want to do on it. I'd like to model BNSF mostly, but also something to do with where I live (San Antonio), which means UP. I don't mind mixing the roads on the layout, due to them sharing the trackage rights down here, but not sure how I'm going to do it :P Any suggestions?
Jerry Britton sponsors my site.
His Keystone Crossings site is awesome! You may find some stuff you're after too, since he does Eastern railroading.
Ya know, I missed that entirely!
My bad!
pcarrell wrote:Did ya catch that link I gave at the bottom of the last page Dave? I think you'd find it interesting!
Yeah...
Funny thing about that... Have you noticed my URL?
I think you'll find it's similar.
MTennent wrote: This was posted to the Yahoo N Group.A new video has been posted to the Rochelle Subdivision blog at http://www.stpaulrochelle.org/blog It's well worth a look - a sound equiped Challenger on a very nice layout.Mike Tennent
This was posted to the Yahoo N Group.
A new video has been posted to the Rochelle Subdivision blog at http://www.stpaulrochelle.org/blog
It's well worth a look - a sound equiped Challenger on a very nice layout.
Mike Tennent
Great video and great layout! I remember it being written up in NSR.
I'm not sure I'm sold on onboard sound in N, though.
Dave Vollmer,
I don't know if you've seen this before, but I stumbled onto it and thought you might be interested in it.
http://kc.pennsyrr.com/motiveops/index.html