Why did you choose the scale you're in?

[pcarrell]

I was thinking about the different scales and the reasons that I chose N scale for myself even though I model steam power.  I liked the vast scenery thats possible and the fact that a 20" curve is concidered quite generous for the most part.

That got me to wondering, why do other people choose the scales they're in?  Is it because they got started as a hand-me-down, or maybe it's the selection of stuff from a certain scale, or I don't know.

So I guess the best way to find out is to just ask.

Why did you choose the scale you're in?

(Notice this is not a what scale is "better" then another question.)

[C&O Fan]

I'd love to model N scale for all the reasons you've posted and more

but my eyesight prefers HO and soon it will dictate O

When i get to live steam it's time to quit

[jeffrey-wimberly]

Why did I choose HO? The main reason is my medical problems. I have no feeling in my hands, making it difficult to work with small items, so N-scale, while I like it and have built 2 N-scale layouts in the past, was out. I have some difficulty with HO also but don't have the space for a good O-scale layout so HO is a happy medium.

[fwright]

I would prefer to use O for my TOC standard/narrow gauge layout set in Oregon logging country.  Availability of On30 equipment was a real temptation.  Then started planning the footprint of just a few critical structures.  Also realized that 12" trees were a minimum in O to get the feel of trees towering over trains, and 20" trees were more appropriate.  With a 6"-8" max elevation gain on my switchbacks, things started getting too disproportionate real fast.

There are those who have made O/On30 work well in limited spaces, but I didn't think I would pull it off.  So I tucked my tail between my legs and went to HO/HOn3 as a reasonable compromise.  Side bonus is that I prefer to build from kits rather than buy RTR.  It's still possible to buy loco kits in HO/HOn3.  Quickly spent a couple hundred on some HOn3 kits to "lock" myself in, and prevent "rubber gauging" when I visit the LHS.  And after seeing some gorgeous HOn3 like Steve Hatch's, I'm convinced I made the right choice.

Fred W

[SOU Fan]

I'm in N scale because of the space.  When I get more space, I will convert to HO.  I like the detail of HO alot more and so i'm starting to collect, paint, and detail  HO engines.

-Smoke

[wjstix]

My scale trail is pretty long and winding. I started out with an S scale American Flyer train set (including an oval of Atlas S snap track). Later at about age 10 I got an early N scale 'old west' train set which was neat but didn't last too long. At 13 I started into HO which was horrible - Tyco engines, brass rails, etc. and I would have quit the hobby but a year or two later I bought a friend's c.1957 Lionel train set for $3. I spent the next 15 years as a tinplater then a hi-railer (running scale equipment on 3-rail track.)

<> Finally in 1987 I decided to go to HO, the thought of being able to do so much more (at much lower costs) was pretty exciting. I contemplated N, but I wanted to run steam, and at that time steam didn't run so well in N.

I recently moved, and contemplated (again) switching to N, but I'll stay in HO. It's small enough to fit a lot of track and scenery, but big enough to run beautifully - esp. with DCC. 

[on30francisco]

Last year I decided to model a small logging/industrial layout in Large Scale indoors. Before that I modeled in On30. What made me switch scales was when I scratch built a model in Large Scale that I originally built in On30, I found it much more relaxing and enjoyable - and the detailing potentials are fantastic; It was a pleasure to super detail it and you didn't need a microscope to see it (or do it). I can also use common materials and wood in construction. Since scratch building is much  easier, I can have unique equipment instead of the common, garden variety equipment that populates most other layouts, however, I do use some RTR equipment. Large Scale does take up a lot of space but I'm concentrating on super detailed, individual scenes. 

[loathar]

N's too small for my hands and eye sight and O's too expensive and takes up too much room. I think HO has the best selection of products and the best detail for the money.

I would like to build a logging layout one day with that On30.(??) The O scale that runs on HO track. I think those are pretty neat, but I guess you have to do a lot of scratch building with them.

[Dave Vollmer]

N scale is portable...  perfect for a guy like me in the military.

Even if I don't have a layout room at my next assignment, I could still run the layout in the back of my Honda Odessey!

[SpaceMouse]

I like creating scenes. HO and N are about equal for me in detail of scenery and structures. N has the edge for train length, and HO has the edge in cost per/sq ft/  N of course gets more in that sq ft.

But for me it came down to the Lilliputians. I can paint a pretty good Lillipution. I can't fathom getting a Microminiputian to the level of expression I can in HO.

[tomikawaTT]

I could say that my scale chose me!

Between 1957 and 1960 this former NYC in HO modeler decided to model the Japanese railway scene that I was immersed in at the time.  The available Japanese-prototype models were HOj, 1:80 scale running on 16.5mm (HO standard) gauge.  Since my interests included the entire railroad scene, I ended up with a LOT of freight cars (which cost less than $2.00 each when new,) a number of brass steamers (lots cheaper than US prototype equivalents) and, as of 18 September, 1964, a specific time and place that I wanted to model (the area between and to the west of Agematsu and Kiso-Fukushima in Central Japan.)

Ever since, my modeling has been locked in a time warp.

Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)

[on30francisco]

N's too small for my hands and eye sight and O's too expensive and takes up too much room. I think HO has the best selection of products and the best detail for the money.

I would like to build a logging layout one day with that On30.(??) The O scale that runs on HO track. I think those are pretty neat, but I guess you have to do a lot of scratch building with them.

On30 has a lot of excellent quality RTR equipment available as well as kits. The Bachmann locos are all RTR, excellent runners and some are cheaper than HO. On30 can fit in the space of HO, especially logging layouts, as most equipment can handle 18 inch radius curves (although the bigger the better). True, structures are bigger but you can concentrate  on quality not quantity. Scratch building and kit assembly is MUCH easier in O and larger scales. For more information, google in "On30" as a lot of supplies are available from proprietary and cottage industries as well as some mainstrean manufactures. There's a lot of supplies out there that are not listed or distributed iby Walthers.

[NSlover92]

I started out in O gauge, but due to the price and the size it takes to build a decent layout, I switched to HO. HO is probley better then O in my opinion, it is cheaper but still is detailed pretty well. For the 60 bucks it costs for a new car in O I can almost buy a decent Athearn RTR loco. Just my two cents. Mike

[jasperofzeal]

First set was HO and second one N.  I liked them both, but at the time N didn't really offer much when it came to equipment and such, so I stopped with N.  Today there are a whole lot more offerings in N scale than there was 10 years ago.  I stuck with HO because I like the fact that the details are seen easier and there is so much support for this scale.  I have been debating if I should switch to N because as some said, the space advantage is a plus, but I've invested so much in HO equipment....what to do?

[loathar]

Dave-Don't you have problems keeping your trains on the tracks when you hit pot holes?

On3O-Thanks. I think it would be cool to do a super detailed 4x8 or 5x9 logging layout. Maybe a few years down the road.

[jblackwelljr]

I really considered "S" a year and a half ago when I re-entered the hobby - I have a big enough basement to do a decent-sized layout and the scale just seems ideal.  Prices are just too high for quality equipment.  "N" is nice but like many others, it's too small for my aging eyes and dexterity (although I can still play a mean lick on my Les Paul).  So, I settled on HO - priced OK and a whole lotta choices out there in equipment and accessories

[orsonroy]

I actually didn't choose HO, it was chosen for me. Way back in '75 or so, my dad (who has been an N scaler since about 1968) handed me a box full of his old HO stuff.

Now, I've chosen to STAY with HO for a few reasons, mostly boiling down to the largest availability of stuff, and the best bang for my hobby buck. I've stared longingly at O 2-rail and have seriously thought about switching to N (I've got a fair amount of N scale stuff), but after I thought about what I like to do in this hobby, I decided to stay with HO.

Staying with HO means that I have access to the largest selection of "off the shelf" steam engines and rolling stock for the pre-1950 period. Staying with HO also means that when I scratchbuild a structure or freight car, or superdetail a base steam model, I have access to the greatest selection of detailing parts in the hobby. It's one thing for me to scrape off a lot of cast-on steam piping and replace it with aftermarket brass detail castings, but it's a LOT harder to do the same thing in N or O (don't even think about it in S!).

 Is HO the perfect scale? Heck no; I'd rather be modeling in O. But I can't get a B-11 or H-5 in O scale, let alone any cabooses or passenger cars that I need. And I really don't relish the idea of scratchbuilding 50 or so double sheathed boxcars!

[pontoonman]

Very easy. I'm almost 70. O is too big, N is too small. sooo went with HO, started last fall and enjoying it.

 

Pontoonman

Newington, Ontario 

[IRONROOSTER]

I started in HO, moved to O and settled on S.  HO was just too small for building plus I liked the presence of a larger scale, but I didn't have enough room for O.  I find S to be the right size between big enough to work with and small enough to have layout.  While it doesn't have the economy lines of HO, it doesn't matter because over the long haul I have caught a few sales, bought a piece here and a piece there. So after 15 years I have plenty of stuff.

Enjoy

Paul 

[Bill54]

I went with HO scale over O because of cost and space.  I seriously considered N scale about a year ago.  I actually purchased some track, locos, and rolling stock, set up a small temporary layout and tried it for a few months until I found it to be too small for my liking.

HO seems to be right for me.  I have a 15x24 space to work with so I can have a modest layout.  I already had quite a bit of HO locos, rolling stock and track so that was also taken into consideration. My biggest concern was having enough room to build a layout where I could run trains with 15-20 cars.  Thankfully HO was the happy medium.

Bill

[Hawks05]

When I visited my friends house his dad showed me his HO layout which I hadn't seen since it was just starting when they moved in, which was roughly 10-12 years before that when I was about 5 or 6. I fell in love with his layout and discussed trains with my parents and when they said yes I went with HO because that's what he had and he explained how it had the most to offer in terms of equipment and detail. I went with him and his friends to a show and the rest is history. I don't think I'll switch any time soon. For one I'm a broke college student so HO is expensive enough, and even though I'm relatively young, my hands aren't equiped for N scale, I have what my dad calls, guitar fingers, so picking up small items doesn't work well for me.

I love the look of a nice HO modern day layout and can't wait to model mine like those.

[WCfan]

When I was a kid I got HO scale train set. Then when me and my dad went to the LHS we had should get the same equpiment in that scale(I had no choice to get an N scale train set). So  bacisaly that's how it goes. Now I have too much equpiment to go and switch.

[CMSTPP]

I like HO scale. My father is in O scale and I thought about switching over to O, but it's just to big and way to expensive at the moment. I can't do that, so I went with HO. It's not to big and it's not to small and you can fit a lot of detail into it. So HO is for me. And the Milwaukee road looks perfect in this scale.

James

 

[pcarrell]

Some of you have some really great stories behind your choices.

[Zandoz]

My adult adventure into model trains started out in HO for two reasons...it's what the guy who got me reinterested in had...and it was where the availability of Wabash line stuff was.  After a number of false starts due to venu and health changes, I gave up on ever having a real HO layout.   For some bizaar reason (probably boredom) I was looking at train stuff on ebay when I happened across an N scale Kato Super Chief  A set.  After a few weeks of seeing me looking longingly at Kato's Super Chief pages, wife said to go ahead and do something on the dining room table.  I didn't argue much.

My little N scale layout is kinda my last ditch efffort at having a layout...not even enough room for a 4x8 so that pretty much left the only practical option to nothing being N.

BTW...as a kid I had Lionel 3-rail...inspired by my uncles whimsical basement room Xmas/winter theme layout.  As has been the issue all my life, I accumulated a large amount of the stuff, but never got to build a layout.  Now comes the real horror story...I'd accumulated enough track alone to fill an two and a half foot cube box...all the lionell stuff collected over probably12-15 years was stored in a garage my dad had rented. One time I came home from college, and the entire garage was gone...bulldozed.  Dad had told them to go ahead and bulldoze it since there was nothing in it of value.

[jecorbett]

My roots in HO go back to the early 1960s when my brother and I purchased a used 4x8 layout. Prior to that I had both a Lionel and American Flyer train sets, neither of which last very long. I immediately appreciated the greater realism, particularly in the track, that HO offered. I was unaware of two rail O scale at the time. We had lots of fun, and some frustrations with that layout until other interests took over and we sold the layout. When I returned to the hobby as a young adult in the mid 1970s, HO was the logical choice. In fact, I don't even remember it being a choice. I just never considered anything else. N was too small. Lionel unrealistic. And I still didn't know about two rail O scale and S scale. If I were to make a choice today, knowing what I know now, it would probably still be HO although S would get some consideration. I think these are the two ideal sizes. Anything smaller than HO is just too small and O just requires too much space to do what I want to do. S would probably get nixed because there just aren't the choices that are available in HO. I'll probably be an HO guy until I tip over unless my eyes and hands get so bad that I have to go to a larger scale.

[Bob grech]

I guess you can call my preference to HO "The Goldielocks Effect" Not too big, not too small,  just the right size. 

[pbjwilson]

Some of you have stated that HO is getting to small to see and that O is to big and expensive. Dont forget about S scale. American Models and S-Helper are making some awesome models. I was into 3-rail O for the last 10-12 years and have switched to S scale. Just has the right look and size I was looking for. Lots to choose from if you just look for it.

[vsmith]

In the past did HO N and lastly HOn30, got sick of the crappy drives and the Northridge EQ was apparently sick of my tiny layout and layed it waste. Got out of the hobby for several years till we bought a house, then got interested in G scale, which eventually got very into due to the heft and extreme easy ability to kitbash. Everything is easier compared to HOn30.

[modelalaska]

N all the way. Saw my first N locos and cars about three years ago and thought wow, I can have quite a layout in a smaller space and the detail on the units was excellent.
Peter