I'm in the work shop this morning, drilling #80 holes and installing a BLMA cut lever on a N scale GP40 and it occurs to me I'm spending more time expanding my vocabulary on vulgar language cursing my eyes. Then it occurs to me, this locomotive that will be on display will be viewed by hundreds of modelers and most probably won't even see the details I added. I modeled HO when I was 8, modeling being a very loose term here. Rock Island Tyco RF-16's pulling Coca-Cola tank cars with a Seaboard Coast Line Bicentennial caboose. I got into N in 1986 and discovered Atlas in 1995 and went on from there. I stuck with N even though I was in an HO modular club in Concord NH. I did N for a few reasons, running in a small space, originally 2X4, now 3X6. Long "scale" trains for when I modeled BNSF on modules, and kind of the novelty of detailed N locomotives. Well, I know you guys probably have not read my blog cause mainly the N scale guys do, but I always say, Life comes at you fast and I have found myself pontificating on the subject of why I model what I model. Now for a few reasons on why I'm considering HO. 1. Size matters. I think my favorite aspect of model railroading is getting an undecorated locomotive and cutting, sanding, bashing, detailing and painting it up. I can do this in HO just as well if not better in HO and hey, someone will actually see the cut levers! Finding locomotives, decals and details is a lot easier too. 2. The days of me running four unit consists of medium trains of 70 boxcars is over. For one, I'm strange in that I model the Boston & Maine from 1973 until Guilford as well as late CB&Q to early BN. The areas in which I model did not have those kind of trains (long) Sure B&M had four units on a small train, but that was considered two spares for the other two that would break down! And really, when did you see a large train in central NH on the B&M in 1976? Most of NH was run like a branch line by then. The areas of Illinois I would model would be branch operations. With either one I would model branch operations with less then a dozen cars and would focus on switching. This would allow me a shelf type layout that in actuality would take up only a fraction more room than my previous N scale layouts. That and I don't belong to an NTrak club anymore. 3. The most important. I'm in the serious phase of a relationship with a beautiful woman I have been dating for two years now who has two wonderful children. Her son is 12 and loves history. It is my hope he becomes interested in his future step dads hobby and HO is alot easier to work with. I would rather be building something with him than being holed up in a room somewhere doing my own thing. 4. I love the reliability of the track, the loco's etc. I can still walk over to my closet, pull out my old blue box Athearn GP9 I painted up for B&M some 20 years ago and it will run great and crawl through my turnouts. I have had my N scale layout tack laid for 6 years now and I have yet to do any scenery. I know EXACTLY what I would do in HO. Shelf layout, around the wall, focus on switching using a GP9 or GP38-2 with CB&Q Illinois in 1968 or B&M New Hampshire 1978. Anyway, if your still reading this, maybe you guys can convince me to make the switch back. I want to relax again and enjoy the prototype aspects of the hobby, not curse my way though it every time my eye tries to focus like a cheap SLR camera lens. Let me know please of what Atlas, Kato and others have by way of undecorated Geeps, who the big detail companies still are, is Atlas Code 83 still king? Ideas for small shelf switching layouts etc. I would appreciate it!
sounds to me as though you've already made up your mind. go, have fun, don't lament what you did, use it to make the next thing you do better :thumbs_up:
I think you have made a reasoned & logical decision to switch scales. I'm 60, and still model "N", but I don't even ATTEMPT the fine detail..............heck, I can barely manage the couplers anymore. To be honest, if my best friend wasn't an "N" scaler, and I had the room I wanted, I'd have switched scales years ago!! THERE, I said it!!......................
Jim,What can I say? I model in HO and N. I will say this as cold hard facts based on my experiences and it won't be ear tickling. HO has far more going for it then N for many reasons I won't list publicly.Feel free to pm me. Here's the kicker about HO details..You can't see the details under normal operation viewing plan and simple..Those itty bitty details has a tendency to break off in your hand or during routine maintenance. HO like N needs smooth track work,wheels in gauge and couplers at the correct height but,is a tad more forgiving then N.. HO is easier to maintain and as you noted easier to add uncoupling bars,lift rings,sunshades etc. HO eats the space even on a ISL but,when properly design it will give you lots of enjoyment and the added scenery details will add realism. I have notice since I lost some of my farsightedness N Scale is a tad harder to work on even while wearing my new glasses. N Scale isn't for everybody no more then HO is for everybody since we all have our preferences.. Now for a confession.. I have also decided to built Slate Creek Industrial lead in HO instead of N..Simply put I could not get the details I wanted in N Scale. I will use my N Scale at the N Scale club for the foreseeable future.
This is great guys, just what I wanted. Constructive criticism is always good. Yeah I plan to sleep on this for a while, the N scale layout isn't out the door yet, but when I return from Galesburg that is when I may switch if I do. That said, I will always model N in some form. The past few years I have had a lot of fun with T-Trak, however this is just a focus on scenery and running trains round and round. I think I can achieve a happy medium by doing the hard core detailing and prototype operations here in my apartment in HO and run the N scale with my T-Trak at shows. That said, while I may not have the fully detailed N scale locomotives, I can still enjoy painting them. Besides, N scale locomotives that are detailed don't hold up too well on T-Trak layouts at shows. All of my track design the last ten years has been focused on N. With that said, any ideas on shelf layouts in HO? I would be building this with 1X4 lumber in modules with pink foam as a base. The modules could be no longer than 4 feet a section. What is the minimum depth for a shelf layout with a focus on operations? Is 18" too narrow? What is the minimum curve in HO for a branch? 22"? Maybe I should look at the David Barrow domino approach. Thanks for entertaining my questions, these are factors I must consider for optimum enjoyment. Headed back to the workshop to curse, er detail my N GP40.
Well, I am having fun (not) trying to see and diagnose what's wrong with my N scale Atlas RS1, these past couple of days. If I must leave N, it will be to On30. Where the whimsical world still lives and I already own a few pieces... But I intend to delay this change for as long as possible, as overall, N is still a lot of fun and as yet I have so many good friends in it. Boxcab E50
Jim,A wonderful thing has happen to HO switching layouts they finally became of age and evolved from the "switching puzzle" designs. The go to man is Lance Mindheim. Lance Mindheim Dot Com With today's modern design switching layouts one doesn't need to speed mega dollars on track and could use the better switches like Peco since you will be needing less switches. On small ISL(less then 10') you could use 3 or 4 switches at most instead of the several you needed with *cough* *cough* a time saver/switching puzzle design ISL. The real beauty with these smaller ISLs you can have highly detailed scenes.
I'm with you on the eyesight diminishing. I'm working on a few N-Scale modules for club running, but I'm contemplating what I can do in HO. I really like the proto87 approach. I'm excited about the track choices, details, and SOUND available in HO. I've been accumulating HO products, mostly just to test and fiddle with. Find out what I really like. I'd really like to build a couple of turnouts to see if I can do that. Detail an HO locomotive (I've considered N detailing, but I just hate that it's so hard to handle the dinky dinky pieces.) Testing out different couplers, tracks and cars. So yeah, I'm thinking along the same lines.
I built my layout using hollow core doors, 1 each 24" wide, the other 3 @ 30" wide. Looking back on it, I think I would have been better served using an 18" width. For most of us the tracks and trains are the focus of our interests, not the scenery. With a layout height of 42" inches, reaching even to 30" becomes a chore without a step-aid, and I'm 6 ft. tall. As for radius, you can cut triangular pieces to fit in the corners and probably get any radius you want.
Jim - I tried N scale and came back to HO. I'm very happy with that decision. It is worthy for you to consider if it's the right move for you. I will echo what BoxcabE50 said and at least consider O so you won't have to switch again later on. I would also consider the cons as well as the pros- more space required means you will have consider tighter turning radius in HO compared to N. Should be fine for your era but consider all the points I'll echo Brakie in recommending to look at Lance's work. I have all of his books http://lancemindheim.com/bookstore.htm and HIGHLY recommend them Since you are a Diesel Detail (you've seen their webiste? http://dieseldetailer.proboards.com/index.cgi) you will have easier time to doing it, have more of an opportunity to to do more that you and other will actually see. Usually cheaper too for HO If you make the leap, I would keep the N stuff for at least a year until you have come to terms with the change. If you change back to N you can pick up right where you left off and be happier in your knowledge you tried looking elsewhere (HO) Hope this helps Steve
IN 1980 I switched from N scale to H0 because the running properties were too poor. And I recognized installing a can motor is more easy with H0, and for H0 you could buy true-to-scale ADE-passenger car kits, with baggage rack and more. A lot has changed since this time. But now I'm with H0n3. Same scale but smaller cars, smaller radii. And those Blackstone cars have great details! Ok, sometime I run into problems to rerail a car. You need a steady hand ad good eyes. But I'm short-sighted, I can look without glasses. :angel: But you can also use magnifier. I like details! Wolfgang
Over the years (well, from 1980 until now), I've amassed a large amount of HO locomotives and rolling stock, with a predilection for Frisco. I have a modest collection of rolling stock & diesels as well (All the diesels are Frisco), and until recently had an N scale HCD layout. Several things have led me to return to HO: My eyes- I currently wear progressive lenses (so-called "seamless bifocals"), since I have to have 'em to even read. Small print is a (female canine) as is, and a nightmare with presbyopic eyeballs. I have enjoyed painting, detailing & decaling the Frisco locomotives I have, long before RTR Frisco models became available. I've settled on metal wheels and Kadee number 58s on my rolling stock. When the time comes to start putting decoders in locomotives, I want to be able to see what I'm doing without a magnifyling lens I own a house now, and have room to build a layout in HO and not worry about explaining to some landlord how those nail holes got there, or why the floor is Mandarin Orange in one spot. Now, having said all that, I've seen some awesome models and awesome modeling in N, and am aware of the potentials in that scale, so I see how folks can gravitate towards N scale. However, this is a vision/coordination/overall age thing, and I can go nuts building a well-detailed HO scale layout, even if it is a switching layout like my new one wil be. My opinion, FWIW.............
I had HO when I was a kid, and I'm back in HO now. I too, like painting and detailing locomotives and rolling stock. It's fun. It's satisfying. I just finished an Atlas C-424 and the satisfaction of knowing that I'm looking at the product of my own hands and skill is beyond description. Add the value of gaining experience every time I do one. I've looked at N scale trains at train shows. They're nice, quite detailed, and seem to run very well. If I weren't so enthused by painting and detailing stuff, I would probably be in N, to have more trains in the same space. But to get a look at the details and quality, I have to either switch glasses or take them off altogether and bend down until my eyes are about eight inches from the little devils - and I'll be just 48 this year. But I'm bilingual, and my cuss word repertoire is even richer on the French side than the English one. If I were to start work on an N scale loco, the verbal atmosphere would likely get pretty thick in here...arghh:
If I were to start work on an N scale loco, the verbal atmosphere would likely get pretty thick in here... -------------- Needless to say while working on HO my "verbal atmosphere" was as thick as Ohio River fog which is pretty darn thick.
My Dad worked in profanities like an artist would work in oils Love that line from the Christmas Story. If my future step son had been around yesterday, he might have thought the same thing. This is all good to know and really helpful, I appreciate the honesty in answers. Ever since I was a kid I have been drawn to detailing locomotives and cars. My first project was a WV caboose with the windows welded shut as per an article in RMC back in 1984 IIRC. My first loco was a blue box Athearn F7 in the B&M blue dip. I got a lot done on my N scale GP40 but I would have been done had it been HO, a lot of walking away and calming down, damn age!
Same story here. Plainly put, if you have space to build HO to your liking, do it! For me, everything got easier to see, build, and paint in HO
I have gone back and forth between N-Scale and HO several times now, and here are my thoughts: 1) Nothing can really rival N-Scales scenery-to-track ratio. You'll never even come close in HO. To a certain extent this is a positive, if only because you can focus on scenes instead of vistas, but, at the end of the day, I think it's a downside to HO. A lot of what we do feels very cramped and limited unless you happen to be a person blessed with a massive basement. 2) I disagree about the running qualities of HO vs. N-Scale locotomives. IMO, the best performers I have ever seen were Atlas and Kato units in N. I have no idea why this is, but if you're looking for smooth engines, N-Scale really is king. 3) Yes, the details and sound in HO blow N-Scale away, and the steam engines in N-Scale don't even come close to HO, but in terms of just an easy-to-handle, usable product that isn't weighted down and rendered ultra-delicate by miniscule grab irons and chains, give me an N-Scale diesel any day of the week. To be honest, I think HO engines have gotten too detailed. I see far too many people invested in the hobby literally putting on gloves to handle their trains. That's ridiculous.
Kaiser Wilhelm, I understand and agree with your arguments up to a point. WHile yes, the trains-to-scenery ratio is greater in N scale, one of the trends coming out now seems to be just modeling the right-of-way on shelf layouts, which works for flatland Midwestern layouts (and not so much on mountain lines). As far as smooth running, I have an Atlas/Kato RS1 in HO I'll match up against any locomotive, anywhere. ANd as the owner of Atlas N scale locomotives, I like the way they run as well, and they're light years ahead of the J-class engines from the early days. Details? Well, let's face it- the larger the scale, the easier to detail. How much detailing one does is up to the individual modeler. On my locomotives, I add enough details to say this is a particular Frisco locomotive- I leave the hyperdetailing to the detail freaks. My HO fleet gets hand rails, grab irons, MU hoses, nose Gyralites, amber rotary beacons, proper Leslie air horns, spark arresters if needed, and that's about it. My models are for running, not looking at under glass . I look at N scale detail parts for locomotives, and my eyes cross. I understand your loyalty to N scale, and I respect that 100%. I can see the potentials in N scale, but just as Jim is contemplating, I too have factors pointing to my change to HO scale. And as the stepson of a contruction worker, the language has been known to get a little coarse around here when I'm working on something...............:tb-rolleyes:
Got to agree with Bob. 1. My eyes are not what they used to be, it has taken me two days to put on grab irons, lift rings and cut levers on my N scale engine. I used to do that work in six hours. Maybe it's cause I'm rusty, (five years since my last detailed N scale), the eye Dr. said my eyes were healthy and my prescription has not changed but regardless, this brings me to point 2. 2. After I spend all this time, who is going to see all that stuff in N? Even my fellow modelers wont, and the guys I hang out with are not old, 20 - 50 years old. Let alone, the "joe public" wont see them nor should they care, they just want to see the choo choo. That reality hit me years ago at a show when a couple was so impressed with a BNSF GP9 I did. The oh and ahed all over it until a Thomas train went by. Now at the end of the day, I believe we should do what makes us happy on our rr. So since I do like detailing..... 3. Probably the reason why I don't have anything other than pink plains for a layout is because I'm always detailing. Love it. I geek out on Geeps, go all "Trek" on SD70's. So if I can detail a B&M GP38-2 and my fellow modelers can actually see the windshield wipers, well cool!
I've been dealing with eye issues since I was a young boy. In fact, I was LEGALLY BLIND until I was sixteen. Now, I'm considered to be a "low vison" individual. (I'm 20/60 or 20/70 WITH my glasses!) The joys of being a "person with albinism" (an albino). (This picture is about a year old, but I haven't changed much. If you look closely at my glasses, you can see the graduated lines of my TRIFOCALS.) As much as I'd like to putz with N scale, it's just too small for my eyes to work with (without the aid of a magnifying glass). HO is as small as I can go. That's why I'm going to UPSCALE to two-rail O for my future railroading projects. It will be a lot easier on my eyes and give me the platform I need to scratchbuild structures, and superdetail equipment. So, my obviously biased opinion would be to go with HO. However, I will also tell you TO DO WHATEVER IT IS THAT YOU WANT TO DO. I think your plan of building a "'round the wall" shelf layout for your HO stuff and keep your N collection for the NTRAK meetings is the way to go. I will also encourage you to do a modular layout, as that is what I have done in the past (in fact, as I've pointed out in the RF&L thread, the two workbenches that the project layout is sitting upon were originally two "dominoes" I built to be a new 2.5' x 12' switching layout back in '05. (Financial hardships forced me to abandon that project, unfortunately...) The tabletop dominoes measured 30" (2.5') by 6' (Rober Smaus' "Port of Los Angeles" project layout in the December '90 - March '91 Model Railroader helped me arrive at that dimension, although I think Barrow does 2x4, which is the NMRA "standard") were built from 1/2" plywood and are attached to the shelving units with 1/4" nut/bolt/washer (NBW) assemblies. Two NBWs also held the two units together, so the layout wouldn't wobble apart from each other while I was operating trains. I designed the layout that way, so I could pick each unit up and move it separately, or I could break each unit down into seperate shelves and dominoes, depending on what kind of space I had in the transportation vehicle. When I build my O scale traction layout, it will also be a modular, shelf-style layout, mounted atop bookshelves, with each module measuring 2x4. Although, instead of plywood, I'm going to use 1x4s, as I've found the 1x4s easier to work with (but that's just me). So, yeah, another voice in the "modular" choir. But, those are my opinions on the scale/modular "issue." Regardless of our opinions, Jim, you do what you feel is comfortable for you. If upscaling to HO is what you need to do, then do it. If you want to stay in N, that's fine too. Just remember the old "slogan" that graced the header of Model Railroader magazine for many years... MODEL RAILROADING IS FUN!!! ... and do what you have to do to have fun with the hobby. Alright, I'm getting off the soapbox so other people can chime in here.
