If I had both the space and unlimited budget, I'd probably switch to HO from N. Why? Well, I model the NKP, and I'd really like to date my layout in the twilight of the NKP steam era - say 1956. N-scale steam just isn't "there" yet in terms of either pulling power or sound. I have a half-dozen of the LL/Walthers Berks, which run great and look great until you put more than 8 cars behind one. I'd love to have a Berk that would pull at least 25 reefers on a modest grade. The original run of Walthers 0-8-0 are beautiful - and some of them can't even pull two cars without extensive work on weight and the mechanism (word is that the second run is better). The Kato Mikes do better, of course (they CAN pull 20-25 cars on a modest grade when equipped with a traction tire driver), and maybe in the next generation of steam, we'll see manufacturers finally getting it right (there is some reason to hope, given the Athearn Challenger and Big Boy, which really can pull 40 cars easily and maybe the new 2-8-8-2 from Walthers will be excellent). But unless manufacturers seriously address the weight-over-drivers issue (how about milling the chassis from pure tungsten? Or at least fill every nook and cranny with lead to get the weight up), I just don't see N scale steam ever pulling a realistic-length train. And though I have installed Soundtraxx Tsunami's in all my steam (including the Walthers 0-8-0's), bigger speakers with bigger tenders would make more realistic sound. What I wouldn't give up in N scale is the ability to have prototypical-length trains and prototypical curves and scenery. But if space were unlimited (e.g., an 80' X 80' warehouse?), I could retain that in HO scale and get some benefits from moving to geometrically larger and heavier equipment. But since that's not realistic, my best hope is that the manufacturers will master steam in N scale! John C.
I have been a life long N Scaler and switched to Z 3 years ago as we produced more product. I still dabble in N but have focused it more doing Pacific Electric. N lets me get building structures and weathering RTR Cars out of my system, and The Z allows me to run long trains...best of both worlds I guess. Funny, as my eyesight has gotten older with age, I have migrated to a smaller scale. I did do some scratchbuilding in 1/32 and it was nice not to have to build under a microscope! ) Cheers Joe MTL
Okay, maybe I'm not in the best position to answer this, but... I consider myself to be in the middle of a scale change. That's been going on for years. I'm "in between" a previous HO layout and a future N layout. I am certain that my next layout, whatever it is, will be N. With unlimited space, would I go larger? At shows, the most intrinsically appealing equipment is 2-rail O. But there's a problem with O or even HO. Someone mentioned it already: scenery-to-track ratio. Why build a huge layout if you can't have big scenery? I want deep scenes - that's what my eye needs to be convinced by the model. The only way to do that while maintaining accessibility is to keep the scale small. I'd want all sorts of other things - mountains, city with tall buildings - that couldn't be as big as I want them in a larger scale. Don't forget that, even if you're following linear layout design principles, a layout isn't one-dimensional. Scenes have depth and height as well.
