My father's layout was O27 when I was growing up, and although it was a pretty nice layout, the lack of realism of 3-rail and the wide gaps between ties and the fixed/tight curves with the sectional track--you get the idea. I wanted more realism relative to all of the above considerations, and in addition there being so much more available in HO than other scales, HO was the only reasonable choice for me. PCarrell's points about N-scale are well taken--having "effective" bigger curves and running longer trains is a definite advantage, but as I'm now in my mid fifties and have to use my Optivisor for lot of detail work on my HO locos, rolling stock, etc.--you get the picture.
Jim
G scale, big, hefty, super detail, runs forever and indestructible- kind of like real trains! You can run it in the rain or snow, use track power (DC or DCC wired or wireless), battery/radio control power or LIVE STEAM. You can preprogram trains to run on timers or just let them run for days on end in circles if you like. The scenery is live, the rocks are real.
There is nothing you can do in a smaller scale that can't be done better in G. That is why I picked it.
The Dixie D Short Line "Lux Lucet In Tenebris Nihil Igitur Mors Est Ad Nos 2001"
I guess I didn't choose! My parents origionally got me a O scale set when I was a kid and then I wanted more stuff switches etc. Well they saw that O was too expensive and bought me an HO set. At that time we could buy Tyco HO cars at K-mart for .99 a peice... The rest is history!
Plus now I love kits so what other scale is there???
SamV
I'm into HO scale, I got into it cause it was the scale of my first train set.
Colby
yougottawanta wrote:Dave first let me say thank you for your service to our country. Men like you make me proud to be an American... ...Again BIG THANK YOU. Secondly love the picture of your N scale,how long did it take to build all of those trees? Nice job!
Thank you for the kind words!
Many of the trees you see came from previous layouts, so it would be difficult to say how long they took (I believe in recycling, especially as it applies to model trains). Most of the trees are simply Woodland Scenoics Foliage Clusters hot-glued directly to the mountains.
I show step-by-step how I built my layout on my webpage. Just follow the link in my signature block.
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
I inherated a huge chest of my great grandfather's trains. None of his engines are that good, they're really old, but I use a couple train cars and all his buildings. I just kept building up stuff.
I started out, like so many older modelers, with a Christmas gift "O" scale Lionel way back in 1947. Now that I am returning to the hobby after all of life's other tasks for a family man, the decision was made based upon:
After considering all of the 5 above, I chose HO.
From the far, far reaches of the wild, wild west I am: rtpoteet
yougottawanta wrote:Thanks for the web site. Amazing ! Did you build the web site also ? I enjoyed the connections to You Tube Great scenes. Ihave another question in the Sept 2006 section you have a picture of steam at Lewis Port "St Lewis pulls away" I assume the smoke and steam has been added to the picture ?
Yes, I've had some experience in building websites (such as my research site here):
http://mesolab.meas.ncsu.edu/~drvollme/
You'll probably notice many of my pictures have smoke, steam, and sometimes digital sky added. I use Paint Shop Pro 7, but I bet any good image editor would work.
R. T. POTEET wrote:I sorta blundered into N Scale.Like most people in that far off day and age - the early '60s - HO Scale was really the only way to go. I considered TT Scale but it was loitering on its deathbed at that moment with very little commercial support so I naturally began in HO Scale where I remained for the next nineteen to twenty years. I did not have a home layout from 1964 when the Air Force transfered me from Washington state until 1978 when I retired. I belonged to three clubs in the interim and I constructed several die-cast kits, mainly of steam locomotives.Upon my retirement I immediately began an HO Scale layout which I very quickly abandoned simply because I grew very tired of the plan which I had selected. I then began a second layout which I really did not like any better than the first but which I did push to a point of completion where I was at least able to run some trains around my oval.After three years of frustration I settled back in a mood of contemplation. There were a couple of things which I observed.1. With the space available to me - and this was not likely to increase in the immediate future - I was probably never going to manage anything except a 'chase the caboose' oval.I have since gained a little better knowledge of track planning and realize now that I could probably have fitted more railroad into the room available and probably have escaped the obvious oval - but that knowledge lay in the future.2. My motive power was simply not conducive to my space allocation. At one time in the early '70s I had ordered a Bowser Challenger but it was out of stock at that particular moment. More than half of my fleet was Cary/Mantuas which are not the largest locomotives on the planet but were just a little too big for 18 inch radius curves. They looked like aitch negotiating that radius. I realized that I should have been building MDC lokes over the years but I was, then as now, primarily interested in heavy duty Class I operation; I did, however, give some serious consideration to doing just that, switching to a shortline operation. Another way I could have gone would have been with an industrial switching pike but my interests at that moment did not motivate in that direction.Instead I went with N Scale which I had randomly toyed with over the years but which had always eventually wound up on swap tables somewhere. I no sooner began my first N Scale layout when my wife and I went into a remodeling project and down it came; six months later when I resumed the hobby I elected to go with Micro Engineering Code 55 rail where I have been every since. My first Code 55 pike was an N Scale adaptation of the HO Railroad That Grows.This remodeling did not actually increase the (allocated) space available for a layout; it did, however, increase the size of the living room and I contemplated some sort of a portable layout - put up and take down - but when I suggested that idea to my wife I got a do-you-know-how-to-spell-divorce-lawyer glare and I promptly abandoned it.I have been a mobile home resident for the past seven years and an apartment dweller for the nine years preceding that. I have, in the past twenty-five years, acquired quite a bit of N Scale equipment, both motive power and rolling stock. I am, for reasons beyond the pale of this discussion, currently between layouts; I am giving serious contemplation to returning to the HO Railroad That Grows concept. My eyesight is not what it once was, and my fingers don't quite have the agility they once had, but I don't envision myself ever - bad word - leaving N Scale to return to HO Scale. It does look suspiciously, however, that my next/future layout will have to be portable.
I model in both HO and N (layouts currently under construction). Started when I was a kid in HO, and the stuff was never sold, so when I decided to get back into model railroading, I have all the HO stuff, but my house has no room...my father is also a huge train buff, and we decided we'd build a layout together in the attic of his barn. So that's the story on why HO. Of course the still better than N selection of available equipment was a factor, but mostly because since I'm lucky enough to be able to share it with my father as he gets older he can't really see the N scale, although he's fascinated by it as well.
In my house, I've only got a 12'x12' bedroom for a model railroad. Since I don't like modeling small-time railroading the only option to have something realistic is N scale, which I've always been intrigued by anyway. So I'm slowly building a collection, and the two N layouts, the room size and a doorway sized one that I'll use to rediscover my lost modeling skills.
I plan once I win the lottery to move into G scale for the yard, and maybe even the 1 foot gauge stuff to surround the property with and ride around on.
Occams Razor wrote: I plan once I win the lottery to move into G scale for the yard, and maybe even the 1 foot gauge stuff to surround the property with and ride around on.
Hey, you reminded me. My cousin has the 1 foot stuff(he has the money though). Those things are cool. I really like the Big SD-45s and up. Or in my cousins terms"curve Strightiners"
My Youtube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/JR7582 My Flickr Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/wcfan/
Oh dear oh dear, how many times must I say that G scale is no more expensive than good quality HO, IF you are very careful about your purchasing and wise in your spending. G can be low cost, in fact it's easier to scratchbuild rolling stock and track in the larger scale than any other. Dirt and rocks are free (they are laying around everywhere!), as are many landscaping plants for "scenery".
My point is not to turn you off to the scale you model in, far be it! But to maybe make you take a more objective look at G as a viable scale no matter what your finances.
tangerine-jack wrote: Occams Razor wrote: I plan once I win the lottery to move into G scale for the yard, and maybe even the 1 foot gauge stuff to surround the property with and ride around on. Oh dear oh dear, how many times must I say that G scale is no more expensive than good quality HO, IF you are very careful about your purchasing and wise in your spending. G can be low cost, in fact it's easier to scratchbuild rolling stock and track in the larger scale than any other. Dirt and rocks are free (they are laying around everywhere!), as are many landscaping plants for "scenery".My point is not to turn you off to the scale you model in, far be it! But to maybe make you take a more objective look at G as a viable scale no matter what your finances.
A major problem for me in G is the scale mess. The track is standard gauge for #1 - of which there is only a little available. Then there's a compromise of 1:29 for standard gauge. Then you have scales of 1:24, 1:22.5, 1:20.3 for narrow gauge. Many products aren't lablelled as to which they are. Most structures seem to be 1:24 as are other scenic details, so they're too big or too small for most of the scales. For scratch building I think most parts are 1:24 (hard to tell with some manufacturers) which seems to be the least available scale of the lot for rolling stock. I know all of these problems can be overcome (or are ignored by many), but for me the bother exceeds the gains for what would be a side scale anyway.
If G is to take the next step, it will need to settle on one scale (1:24 would seem logical) and provide standard gauge products in that scale. Just my
Enjoy
Paul
tangerine-jack wrote:Oh dear oh dear, how many times must I say that G scale is no more expensive than good quality HO, IF you are very careful about your purchasing and wise in your spending.
Then there is track. A really crappy Bachmann turnout is $29, a really small LGB $30 (also on sale), while a good LGB might be found on sale for $100 or even a #6 Aristocraft (also yuck) for $102.
it's easier to scratchbuild rolling stock and track in the larger scale than any other.
To his dismay I suspect, I loved playing my oldest brothers O guage Lionel trains and accessories. He kept all his HO safe from my wicked childhood hands, but they looked so cool to me I dreamed of getting at them. When My folks decided I was old enough for my own model train, they purchased an N scale set for me. I have never loooked back, although I lost my first collection in a house fire, have since replaced everything I ever had and added plenty to the new collection. Now, my eyes are not as sharp as they were and I find N difficult to work on, (ie: have a Kato 2-8-2 I can't get those dang detail parts into). So, although I have no plans of abandoning my beloved N, I started my wife on HO over the past couple years so now I can enjoy both those scales. We even have our first future train room mostly complete...just need funds to finish the floor.
Bottom line, N chose me and I stuck with it for all the possibilities everyone else here has already mentioned! :^) -Rob
Originally, I got into HO because that's what I grew up with (my father is a model railroader from way back).
I've stayed with HO because:
1). The selection is so much better in HO scale. For example, compare the Walthers HO catalog with the Walthers N&Z and Large Scale catalogs. It's not even close. On a related note, HO scale also offers the most models for the New Haven...the road I model. You can't get an N, Z, S, O, or G scale model of New Haven's "Comet", but in HO you can. Likewise with most NH steam power. About the only accurate non-HO steam power commercially available is the N-scale Bachmann Spectrum 4-8-2 and the O-scale Williams I-5 4-6-4. That's not saying much. And forget about finding non-HO FL9's (except for Overland brass in O-scale). So if you want to model a specific railroad (that's not the ATSF, UP, SP, etc.), HO is the way to go.
2). My club is HO scale only. I'm a 17 year member of said club, so I'm kinda reluctant to give that up (at the moment...).
3). I can model a larger chunk of reality with HO than I can with S, O or G.
4). It's much easier to detail, mask, paint, and decal in HO scale than in N or Z.
In short, HO is a great compromise...which is why I believe that HO will be the majority scale for decades to come (and I'm sure that's what O-scalers said in the 1940's, too).
Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************
yougottawanta wrote:Amazing, PHD ! Who said our military is uneducated ? Hillary ?
I believe it was John Kerry who suggested that...
Check out the Deming Sub by clicking on the pics: