So far 48 of you have said yes; but, making sure you all have a chance to make your mark on this TrainBoard 10th Anniversity poll question... Click Here --> What Scale <-- Click Here :thumbs_up: :thumbs_up: :thumbs_up: :thumbs_up:
My 2 cents was put in. OK maybe a dime in Today's market. We need more HO'ers to speak up. again my dime.:tb-biggrin:
I responded, but have always suspected that N scalers are the majority on this forum. No matter to me, personally, as they are nice and skilled people who contribute at least as much as those of us in the larger scales, and probably commensurately more. I hope I don't tread on anyone's toes when I quibble with the term 'model', but I don't really model any place or road. I create scenery that passes for something real, although fictional, and run available 'model' trains through the scenery 'cuz I can't make my own engines and rolling stock. I dont have something like Horseshoe Curve, or Tehachapi, or the Moffat Tunnel on my system because it would make my hodge-podge of engines from about 6 different roads seem out of place. Anyway, I am in HO scale, and hope to produce something passable as a true model one day. :tb-biggrin:
Model or Not to Model that is the question Crandell, I 100% agree with you. My collection is eclectic and I feel that the scenery is more important that the specific rail line or the period correctness. I also feel that the diversity also keeps the blahs away, just due to the fact that not only one rail line runs on this track only. My 2 cents(dime). But with that being said I also ENJOY seeing period specific and Owner specific rail lines and pics. To each his or her own. Thanks for the ability to vent, Trainboard.:thumbs_up::thumbs_up:
HO just happens to address my specific needs regarding size. And there's a bit of sentimental attachment to my youth, when my layouts were in HO - I still have the first loco from Christmas 1973. I don't want to model any specific place - especially since my layout will incorporate a fictitious short line, the Possum Lake RR. Just a general boondocks setting, where there's little change and a lot of old facilities still persist. That way I can "model" just about any period I want (my target is from the 50s through the 80s), and even some steam won't look too out of place. The main road I've chosen is CN. My interest is especially in repainting, detailing, or kitbashing locomotives and rolling stock. HO is just the right size for me in that respect, balancing space requirements. I'm nearly finished with my SW1200RM - a beast unique to CN - and I'm really taking a liking to that kind of activity. So even if my "modeling" is not strictly prototype from the roadbed up, I'm having loads of fun - which should be the main motive behind the hobby anyway.
I also added my vote for the Van Buren sub. However, one can tell this forum is ruled by N scalers as the only 5 star threads seem to be N scale layouts.
Now, you can all fix that just by "Rating" your topics like they do... :tb-wink: :tb-wink: :tb-wink: :tb-wink:
I had an N scale layout from 1975 to 1980. But at that time the running characters were not so good. So I switched to H0. And it's much more easy to install an can motor into H0 engines, and sound.... It would be a bigger challenge to build such a critter in N scale. Wolfgang
Have given my vote. Been modelling in HO scale for the past 5-6 years or so, since I 'converted' from OO British Outline. Never really gave N gauge a thought for US outline, mainly because my eyesight isn't what it used to be, but the main reason is I just find HO to be a nice size to be able to fit a decent sized layout into a reasonable space without going overboard.
I model in both HO Scale and N Scale,Milwaukee Road and Rock Island from 1979-1985 as if both the Milwaukee Road and Rock Island were still operating at the time.
Finally getting started in the hobby a year ago at 52, so yeah eyesight was a consideration - plus I had a fair amount of HO "stuff" in storage that I was itching to see run. I can definitely see the appeal of N scale, being that you can fit so much more into a small space, but I like HO. So much more available, not only on the new market but at train shows, flea markets, etc. I had a very brief idea of going with O scale until I saw the price of equipment. Nope! Now a year into it it's HO all the way.
I've been muddling around with HO since the late '70s. I like painting and decalling my rolling stock and have kitbashed things that no manufacturer will bother with. None of them are prize-winners but I have fun. Bill Banaszak, CEO of the NYA&W
Started modeling HO for 2 months now. I liked the idea of N scale fitting more in smaller space but I have lots of room and really wanted a "big" sound from my locos.
I have been trying to put together a HO sized layout for several years. Circumstances keep reducing the available layout size. I started with a whole room, 17' x 13'. Now, I'm down to a table, 60" x 30". So I started looking at N. Got a mess of track, some cars and a loco. Gosh, that stuff is small. I can deal with the ultra small equipment. Failing eyes, a slight touch of arthritis and short, stubby fingers make handling extra small structure parts laughable. So, I am going to use HO buildings with my N sized trains. Maybe, someday I can afford some HOn3 equipment.
It's usually the other way around, isn't it ? I f you go with larger trains (HO) you can then put N scale structures way behind in the layout and they will look as if they're further away in the landscape/ realestate of the RR. If you use N scale trains with HO buildings, the trains will look like a half size live-steam club. No?
I been an HO guy since I was 12 and found I could buy 20 Athearn car kits for the price of one Lionel boxcar.