# Minimum space for reasonable O layout



## SKMoss (Mar 12, 2012)

Good morning all. Hope your weekend is going well.

This probably isn't a simple question and I apologize if it's been asked and answered. I did some searching here and didn't spot anything.

I'm contemplating switching scale. I'm in N now and am considering HO and O. 

I'm looking for better detail that's available in both as compared to N.

Now to the question. My dedicated "Train Shed" is 10' deep and 12' wide. Interior is a tad larger than 9' X 11'. 

Is this an area big enough to have a reasonable experience in O Scale. 

My plan is to model logging operations. Probably the Sugar Pine.

Thoughts and advice greatly appreciated.

Steve


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

It wouldn't be big enough for me. In O scale I'd want something twice that size. That's even on the smaller side for HO. For me.


----------



## seayakbill (Jan 16, 2016)

You might want to check out S Gauge .

Bill


----------



## SKMoss (Mar 12, 2012)

MichaelE said:


> It wouldn't be big enough for me. In O scale I'd want something twice that size. That's even on the smaller side for HO. For me.


Kind of what I figured. The shed was built with N in mind. I have done a couple of plans in HO that work out ok. I just didn't want to deal with planning an O for that area if it was silly.

Thanks.


----------



## Nikola (Jun 11, 2012)

I disagree and think that is enough space. You can do an 027 layout on a 36" door. It is tight but it can be done. You have tons of space by comparison.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

I didn't say it wasn't enough for a layout. It isn't enough room for what _I_ would want for a layout.


----------



## Guest (Apr 29, 2018)

O-Gauge has a significant advantage is as much as the train equipment is a nice size to handle and be able to see all of the details more closely. I have seen many very nice O-Gauge layouts in the size you describe. 

I am partial as I have been an O-Gauge guy for a very long time. I started with a 4x8 ft. layout and was very happy with it. Also remember that this part of the forum is dedicated to O-Gauge, so most of us would be partial anyway.


----------



## Spence (Oct 15, 2015)

You could check an MTH catalog where they have various track plans for different size layouts.


----------



## Bryan Moran (Jan 15, 2017)

Your question is timely. I am considered a "newbie" here as I am still building my O Scale layout and making all kinds of entry level errors. 

I think that space is too small for O Scale. I have a basement half and I have built an approximate 7 x 16 or so layout. My curves are the issue. I had to sell some expensive O72 ish locomotives because I have a small end which is basically 6 1/2 feet necessitated by the stairs coming down and people with laundry etc need to turn that corner. 

On that end the best I can do is about O42 or a hybrid up to O54. On O Scale the stuff we like to buy in terms of buildings or scenery takes up more room so I would go to that scale between O and HO (what is it? S) 

But then you have to ask - is there enough S stuff available?

I am not an HO fan - too small - but that is by far the most popular scale as you know. 

Using your interior dimensions of 9' by 11' you obviously need room to sit and observe/enjoy. So - your layout would be ? 6.5 x 10' ?? Just guessing. That reduces those long runs of consists we usually enjoy. 

Go HO or S. My opinion based on real world experience. Most O scalers would say my 7 x 16 ' layout is too small (I agree) but it is the best I can do in the space I have.


----------



## SKMoss (Mar 12, 2012)

Bryan Moran said:


> Using your interior dimensions of 9' by 11' you obviously need room to sit and observe/enjoy. So - your layout would be ? 6.5 x 10' ?? Just guessing. That reduces those long runs of consists we usually enjoy.
> 
> Go HO or S. My opinion based on real world experience. Most O scalers would say my 7 x 16 ' layout is too small (I agree) but it is the best I can do in the space I have.


Thinking around the wall layout. 

The shed door is in the middle of the 12' wall and a lift out/duck under could be an option. When I built the shed I made sure the door opens out. It's a nice shed. insulated, drywalled, air conditioned. Even has a porch. Its wired for both florescent shop lighting AND track lighting. Basically this, but the door is a normal exterior home door. 

http://socalsheds.com/sheds/shed-styles/porch-sheds.html


----------



## SKMoss (Mar 12, 2012)

Oh, whats this 042/054/072 stuff? (Newbie question I know, sorry)


----------



## SKMoss (Mar 12, 2012)

Um, I tried to reply to Bryan's post, but got a message my post is moderated. ummm non of my others were. any idea what's going on?


----------



## TexasSP (Sep 8, 2011)

SKMoss said:


> Oh, whats this 042/054/072 stuff? (Newbie question I know, sorry)


Those are the track diameters. O gauge whether scale or traditional goes by track diameter unlike the other scales. 2 Rail O scale uses radius like all others.

The space can work great depending on what your expectations are. Do you want to run non scale equipment with good detail, or scale equipment with great detail? If non scale it's plenty of space.

If scale it could be plenty of space depending on your wants. If big steamers and/or modern 60' plus cars are your wants, the space is too small. You need to be able to utilize O72 minimum just to make it work, but realistically will want bigger diameter curves so it looks good.

If you want to run scale equipment but don't mind the small steamers and shorter than 60' equipment, it will work well.

Now, what you won't get either way is realistic inclines, you will have to utilize 3% grades to do any over and under elevation type changes.

I am in the boat where I have a decent amount of space at 12 x 14 but still can't get happy with what I want. So I am exploring different scales again and possibly a 2 rail O scale modular club.

Let everyone know what you're trying to accomplish and you will get better guidance. Of course you may not be aware of all the differences in the O gauge world and need more tie to analyze, which is understandable. It's rather conveluded. Then there is the matter of the control systems. 3 rail O uses MTH DCS and Lionel Legacy/TMCC for command control. 2 Rail O scale uses DCC. DCC can be used for 3 rail, MTH Proto 3 locomotives are DCC from the factory, Lionel and Atlas 3 rail locos are not.


----------



## Big Ed (Jun 16, 2009)

SKMoss said:


> Oh, whats this 042/054/072 stuff? (Newbie question I know, sorry)


Refers to the curves radius O/72 connected together makes a 72 inch circle O/42 a 42 inch circle.
O/72's curves will handle a larger wheelbase train as some of the larger trains won't run around the O/42 curves.


----------



## Big Ed (Jun 16, 2009)

A picture,











Different train sizes,


----------



## Bryan Moran (Jan 15, 2017)

SKMoss said:


> Oh, whats this 042/054/072 stuff? (Newbie question I know, sorry)


No need to be sorry. I am just a few months ahead of you! hwell:

So, the curves come in different wideness. O Scale locomotives and some rolling stock have minimum curves for which they will operate before binding or derailing. For instance, I purchased an MTH Centennial Union Pacific and it had a recommended minimum curve of O72 - which is pretty wide. If I were to run that on a track section with a curve rating of O36, it would get stuck or derail as the wheels tried to turn "too tight". 

I only knew this AFTER buying the locomotive. I started buying Lionel Fasttrack in the O72 and O84 size. No problem right! ? But in placing O72 track down it takes at least 8 feet and probably more like 9 feet for that "turn" meaning I had track on that end sticking 2 1/2 feet into the "air" unsupported by layout board. 

On my "narrow" 6 1/2 feet end of my layout, I can only run O54 and even then it is close. So I can only buy locomotives and rolling stock rated at O60 or less. (You can try and get O60 because it says "recommended" curve) My short end is a hybrid. 

Some on here say you can not use hybrid, others say you can. In other words, I run O60, O54, O42, O36 on that short end, add all of them up and divide for an average. Right now I have no locomotive that has a recommended O60 or higher. I have a couple with O54 recommended. 

You can start the curve with O60, then move to O36 as long as you come back toward O60 and of course run some of the trains through that to make sure they don't derail. 

That's O Gauge for you.


----------



## Bryan Moran (Jan 15, 2017)

Thanks Big Ed - visual is always better. 

Most Lionel and MTH ready to run sets (RTR) all feature O36 or O31 track because they are meant as Christmas gifts that can be set up under the tree or on carpet "pretty quickly". 

O36 would work great on your layout but limits you to purchasing O36 or maybe O42 locomotives and rolling stock. There are a lot of O36 rated stuff out there with more than enough detail for me. But I like the flexibility that if I see something I like, I can buy it, so I squeezed O54 out of my short end. On the other end, where I have about 8 feet of layout board, I am still running O60. 
Hopefully the photos will attach here, showing my roughly 16 x 7 layout


----------



## Bryan Moran (Jan 15, 2017)

The 3rd photo shows the 6 1/2 foot end I have to deal with where the other end is 8 feet "wide" The last photo shows the super long MTH Union Pacific Centennial with a recommended O72 curve to operate. 

My layout is limited by needing to access the main fuse panel for house electricity on the other end or my layout would have been 20 x 7, which would allow long slow runs of trains.


----------



## Big Ed (Jun 16, 2009)

Watch when buying O tubular track too, if your thinking of buying tube track.

There is O/27 and then O.
Most prefer the O tube track.

The difference,


----------



## SKMoss (Mar 12, 2012)

TexasSP said:


> Let everyone know what you're trying to accomplish and you will get better guidance. Of course you may not be aware of all the differences in the O gauge world and need more time to analyze, which is understandable.


Ok so the more I think on it the more I’m leaning toward logging or coal. Shay, Climax, Heisler , so short steam.

I’m more into scenery than ops but some switching is good.

In my moderated post I mention a round the wall layout with a lift out at the entrance.

What kind of depth (edge to wall) is normal. I’m 6’ and reach is pretty good, but corners of wall layouts are always an issue.


----------



## Nikola (Jun 11, 2012)

MichaelE said:


> I didn't say it wasn't enough for a layout. It isn't enough room for what _I_ would want for a layout.


Yes, and my reply was that it was plenty big enough for me. We can all look at the same initial condition and reach different conclusions. That is wonderful and the spice of life. :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## Big Ed (Jun 16, 2009)

Hi Bryan,

Watch how close you lay that track back by the what looks like a chimney in the wall.
Looks pretty close?
Some cars might rub while negotiating the little jog in the track running by it?


----------



## TexasSP (Sep 8, 2011)

SKMoss said:


> Ok so the more I think on it the more I’m leaning toward logging or coal. Shay, Climax, Heisler , so short steam.
> 
> I’m more into scenery than ops but some switching is good.
> 
> ...


Based on that, I think you have some decent space. For around the wall, it will work fine. You can do a lift out, or if high enough a duck under works too.

I would have now more than 30" depth near the corners although you can fudge it some on the straights.

If you go with O54 min curves, you can run anything in this world pretty well. But check the recommendations on the locos you want, they are different. 

You could also consider On30 narrow gauge logging, which uses 2 rail and DCC still. So if your already have DCC control systems, you can still use. Reasonable pricing for DCC equipped locos from Bachmann and others. I have seen some awesome narrow gauge layouts like this in O.


----------



## SKMoss (Mar 12, 2012)

TexasSP said:


> You could also consider On30 narrow gauge logging, which uses 2 rail and DCC still. So if your already have DCC control systems, you can still use. Reasonable pricing for DCC equipped locos from Bachmann and others. I have seen some awesome narrow gauge layouts like this in O.


On30 might well do the trick. I have plenty of DCC power already. 

Things seem to be coming together.

Steve


----------



## Rocky Mountaineer (Sep 19, 2015)

SKMoss said:


> ....
> Now to the question. My dedicated "Train Shed" is 10' deep and 12' wide. Interior is a tad larger than 9' X 11'.
> 
> Is this an area big enough to have a reasonable experience in O Scale.
> ...


I so wish I could show you photos of an O-Gauge 3-rail layout that is "only" 6x10. And you would see that your 9x11 space has the definite potential to yield a satisfying experience -- especially for a logging operation.

Unfortunately, the link to the site that I had bookmarked several years ago no longer works.  So I have no way of tracking down what happened. In case anybody here might know the layout I'm referring to by recognizing this link, perhaps they can shed more light as to who the owner is and if he's posted photos of the layout elsewhere:

http://home.comcast.net/~graz6....cgi-home.html-.html

That link was in the signature line of an OGR forum member years ago. The last time I referred somebody to it was in 2014, and the link worked then. Now? Seems a bit of a mystery... 

In any case, the scenery details of this layout were spectacular. And if you didn't read that the layout was only 6x10, you'd swear it was much, MUCH larger. It was truly an inspiration to model train enthusiasts as to what can be done with O-Gauge trains in a very modest amount of space.

If I find that this layout is still documented somewhere else online, I'll definitely post more info on this thread. Or if anyone else here recognizes what I'm talking about from the link above, please chime in with more info. I wouldn't mind seeing photos of that layout again myself!!! 

David


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

SKMoss said:


> Um, I tried to reply to Bryan's post, but got a message my post is moderated. ummm non of my others were. any idea what's going on?


Don't know why, I released it.


----------



## cole226 (Feb 8, 2013)

A point to point logging operation in On30 would give you plenty of room for proto typical rr operations.

24-30 inch shelf around 3 walls. lots of room for switching, logging camp, sawmill, etc.

these rr often operated equally forward and reverse.


----------



## SKMoss (Mar 12, 2012)

gunrunnerjohn said:


> Don't know why, I released it.


Thanks. I thought maybe due to link in it.


----------



## Rocky Mountaineer (Sep 19, 2015)

Folks,

As a follow-up to my post above, I found out that the owner of that 6x10 layout goes by the username GRAZ on the OGR Forum. The account still exists over there, and he appears to have last visited OGR earlier this month according to what I can see as a mere guest visiting the site. Since I can no longer log in over there with my disabled account, I can't view user profiles to see if there's any current email contact in GRAZ's profile. I sent an email to his former email address, and it bounced back as undeliverable.

So if any of you with active OGR accounts want to look this fellow up, he might still have photos of his great layout online in a different location than the link I posted earlier. Go for it... you won't be disappointed!!! 

David


----------



## Lee Willis (Jan 1, 2014)

Yes, its big enough. You always want more room. But it would be a lot of fun, and if you are creative you can do a lot with that space.


----------



## Wood (Jun 9, 2015)

I like that shed. Great man cave.

There used to be a gentleman from England or somewhere in Europe who posted here. He modeled O gauge on small platforms and did beautiful work. Several magazines have shown small layout building projects that are very nice. If modeling is your calling, size really doesn't matter. It takes a lot of research, such as the members have posted here, but it would be very interesting to watch your progress. 

I hope you choose O gauge.


----------



## SKMoss (Mar 12, 2012)

SKMoss said:


> On30 might well do the trick. I have plenty of DCC power already.
> 
> Things seem to be coming together.
> 
> Steve


So looking for loco options in On30 and seem a little sparse. I know I’m just looking in wrong place but can’t find shays or climax . Found the Bachman Heisler. 

Where’s good places to buy?


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

Is this the one you're talking about Dave?


----------



## Matt_GNo27 (Feb 7, 2016)

seayakbill said:


> You might want to check out S Gauge .


Yes, assuming that SKMoss is interested in scale modeling, and given his posts on this thread, I assume that he is.

But at the risk of stating the obvious, remember that traditional S-gauge—American Flyer—uses 40" diameter curves, so it takes up more room that traditional O-gauge and O-27. You could do a lot with a 9'x11' space in O-27.


----------



## HenryL (Nov 20, 2007)

The question is what do you consider reasonable? For me that space would be a non starter but if you like smaller equipment with small curves that can be more than sufficient. I think what you need to do is pick up some track planning guides, look at the internet, look at the Classic Toy Trains track plan data base to see what appeals to you.


----------



## Rocky Mountaineer (Sep 19, 2015)

No John, but that's another good example of a "small" layout capturing a Lionel postwar O-27 look-and-feel. The one I'm referring to had a distinctly hi-rail, scale look to it. Plus it was never photographed to see the entire layout at once, if I recall correctly. So you only saw very detailed vignettes. Very superbly done -- giving the impression it was much larger than it actually was.

David


----------



## Lee Willis (Jan 1, 2014)

Look at posts of what Chiefmcfuz has. He has a thread now on running trains. He crams a lot of fun into a relatively small space compared to many. He might give you some good ideas. He has a great layout.


----------



## SKMoss (Mar 12, 2012)

Lee Willis said:


> Look at posts of what Chiefmcfuz has. He has a thread now on running trains. He crams a lot of fun into a relatively small space compared to many. He might give you some good ideas. He has a great layout.


Thanks for the suggestion.


----------



## SKMoss (Mar 12, 2012)

HenryL said:


> The question is what do you consider reasonable? For me that space would be a non starter but if you like smaller equipment with small curves that can be more than sufficient. I think what you need to do is pick up some track planning guides, look at the internet, look at the Classic Toy Trains track plan data base to see what appeals to you.


Small equipment and tight mountain curves is (after a lot of thought) exactly what I'm after. 

I've got all modern diesel in my N Scale. I can run pretty decent sized trains at our club. (www.ShortTrackRR.org). My shed just isn't big enough for the size of N Scale layout I want. 

But I've always wanted a good logging layout. Always being defined as after riding on the Sugar Pine near Yosemite behind a Shay.

So I'm thinking now that I can build a layout in the shed (think orientation 11 wide by 9 deep) that starts with a logging camp in the front right corner, mill along the back wall centered with a small island extending into the middle of the room, and finally a small town in the front left corner.

I can also add a lift out that would let me run in a continuous loop. Run spurs into logging camp, mill, and town. Giving me option to run point to point from camp to east side of mill pond. And from the west side of mill/pond to town. 

I'll throw a trackplan together to better visualize.

Thanks,
Steve


----------



## Vulcan (Nov 12, 2015)

So what scale are you going with?


----------



## SKMoss (Mar 12, 2012)

Vulcan said:


> So what scale are you going with?


Looks like On30. 

We'll see for sure after I throw together a track plan and find out how long 2 and 3 truck shays are. Need to make sure that considering the potential track plan above, that the back of the engine isn't still in the camp while the front is already at the mill.  

Steve


----------



## Vulcan (Nov 12, 2015)

Good choice.


----------

