# Pondering the switch



## thx712517 (Dec 31, 2010)

Hi there. I'm contemplating a switch from HO down to N. I've got a 9' x 18" space for a layout and what I want to do, layout-wise, seems to be a bit too much in HO. I started out with LGB when I was a kid, but the problem there was cost and lack of space. In my late teens I picked up some HO stuff and expanded on that for a while. Right now I can run on the floor and it's fine, but in a year or less I'll need to have it up off the floor and behind a lockable door for safety reasons.

So now I'm looking at something smaller, and that seems like TT or N. I can't really find anything in TT at the moment, so that puts me toward N. I'm having a devil of a time finding New York Central equipment in N though. I thought for sure at this point there would be a Niagara or a Hudson or a Mohawk in N, but I'm coming up empty. Am I just not searching in the right places? 

And for those of you who have gone from HO to N, what's it been like? I like how the HO equipment has nice details and you can handle it a bit without too much worry, and I like the knuckle couplers.


----------



## Smokinapankake (Sep 8, 2011)

N is just about the same as HO, just smaller. The wiring is the same, as both run on direct current, not AC like O and Marklin HO. N has a remarkably wide selection of equipment available, much better than even 10 years ago. I wonder why you're having trouble finding NYC equipment as the Central has always been one of the more popular roads with railfans and modelers. Keep looking - it's out there - however, diesels are far more affordable and availabe (generally) than steamers, with a wider variety of prototypes modelled, and are usually easier to convert to DCC. 

As for couplers, I have no experience with Micro-Trains or Accu-Mate N scale (standard on Atlas equipment), but they look about like their HO counterpart, and I'm told they work the same. 

Typically, N scale stuff has truck mounted rather than body mounted couplers, however this has changed in the last 5 years or so. This can affect tracking of trains when backing, especially on curves. This is also why most N scale stuff with truck mounted Rapido style couplers came with massively oversized flanges on the wheels. Again, this has changed significantly in the last 5 years with the advent of body-mounted knuckle style couplers.

9 feet by 18" should give you a nice layout, although I would guess it would have to be a point to point or switching type layout as 18" won't give you enough room for a loop using sectional track (standard size is 9-3/4" radius, a 19-1/2" circle on track center). 

I really like N scale, and messed with it exclusively for many years, until the Athearn blue boxers caught my imagination. There is alot to like about N scale, and I've been debating lately whether or not to convert back to N myself. Here are some of my reasons, in no particular order:

1 - Track/scenery ratio. Most model railroads (about 99.9%), to my eye, have far too much track compared to the scenery surrounding it. The world is big - HUGE - and trains are a very small part of that world, relatively speaking. 

2 - Broad radius turns. Trains look better on sweeping curves, not sharp corners. Model trains as well as real ones, run smoother with less derailments or other trouble when they are kept as straight as possible. It is my thinking that if you really liked a 4 x 8 HO track plan, you should build that same track plan on a 4 x 8 in N scale. This will allow you to get a better scenery/track ratio, while allowing broad radius curves. 

3 - Railroad availability. Let me explain what this means to me. If you have broad curves and longer passing sidings, you are not limited at all in what motive power or rolling stock you choose to run. Your railroad is available to be run every inch of with whatever loco/rolling stock combo you desire. 

4 - The equipment itself. I personally like Rapido couplers. Lots of other folks don't, and that's okay. I like to pick up a boxcar that is only about 3 inches long and marvel at the detail. The locomotives are like little jewels - magnificent examples of miniaturization that run smoothly, quietly (some are almost silent!) and reliably. As nice as or nicer than a LOT of HO equipment. I like the shiny metal wheels that comes (or used to, anyway) on the rolling stock. I like that you can run long trains in a reasonable space. 

N scale has it's bad side as well, but you'll find that with anything anywhere you go. If you choose to see nothing but bad, you'll see nothing but bad. 

I don't like code 80 track. It looks way too big compared to the size of the trains, but it is necessary to accomodate the huge flanges found on much of the rolling stock. You can get smaller code track, but be aware that any older locomotives you may have probably won't work because of their huge flanges. 

Track work is less forgiving of sloppiness but that, too, applies to all scales. I can't imagine scratch building in N would be any fun at all, but I don't think it would be fun in HO, either. 

Cost is approximately the same as HO scale, and in some instances much more. But in other examples N costs much less. 

Dang, I've about got myself to make the change!


----------



## thx712517 (Dec 31, 2010)

I'm still learning the ins and outs of searching for model railroad equipment. I know about modeltrainstuff, and I've visited eBay from time to time, but if you can point me in the right direction that'd be great. If I can find one of the NYC trifecta in steam I'd make the switch asap.


----------



## jargonlet (Dec 21, 2011)

There are some Concor NYC steamers out there and a few newer smaller ones. Many of the newer ones are generic steamers with NYC decals but it's better than nothing. You should check this site out. It should help you see what has been made.

http://www.spookshow.net/trainstuff.html


----------



## thx712517 (Dec 31, 2010)

Sounds cool. Now I know with HO my 18" radius turns were pretty small for a lot of the stuff I wanted to run. With the N, I think I might do a modern-era layout that would allow me to get started and have fun, and then introduce steam locomotives as I find them as "restored excursion tour" kind of things. What's a good radius to handle Amtrak-style stuff and modern 6-motor diesels in N?


----------



## jargonlet (Dec 21, 2011)

My layout is 3 1/2' by 5 1/2'. I have had success running modern deisels as large as SD70ACE. I own a few steamers. I have a 4-8-4, 4-4-2, 4-4-0, 2-6-6-2, 4-6-6-4 and 2-8-8-4. Most of them ran fine. The 4-4-2 and 4-8-4 would not run on the layout but I think it was the radii due to the grades. Also an SD80 would not run on the layout. They all had issues of derailing on the grade itself but nowhere else. If my layout was flat, I think that I could run anything on it.


----------



## thx712517 (Dec 31, 2010)

I think I'm getting this narrowed down a bit. I've got about 10' in a straight shot with the option to add another 4' section later on. I'd like to do a Water Level Route kind of double track mainline to run Amtrak and run freight, with a yard for freight sorting and a locomotive restoration shop off a siding. 

What software do people use for designing layouts?


----------



## jargonlet (Dec 21, 2011)

Not sure which track you are going to use but here is a good option for a double track.
http://www.modeltrainstuff.com/Kato-N-20181-Unitrack-Concrete-Tie-Double-Track-Su-p/kat-20181.htm
Most people say that if you are going to go double mainline in N scale that you should go no smaller than a 4' wide layout. You could probably do one in 3 1/2' but any smaller would be tough. A single line layout would be doable in 18". It all depends on what you want to run on it. If you go with a smaller radii some of the larger equipment may not run on it. Then again it may. Some stuff that should run on my layout won't and some stuff that shouldn't does.


----------



## Fifer (Apr 21, 2011)

thx712517 said:


> And for those of you who have gone from HO to N, what's it been like?


It is a lot like anything such as Drinking , Drugs, or even Smoking. You need to Decide and Do.
What I can tell you is if it were any of these things you would NEVER regret it.
I went from HO to N some 20 years ago and have never looked back.
They try to entice you with those great sound equipped locomotives but after a while , sound is over rated and annoying.
IMHO :smilie_daumenpos:
Mike


----------



## Smokinapankake (Sep 8, 2011)

Mike, I absolutely agree with your assessment about sound. I want my model trains, be they N or HO, to be absolutely SILENT. I don't want to hear a growling locomotive over the click and hum of rolling stock wheels on the rails. Unfortunately, to get this you must pay premium bux in either scale......


----------



## thx712517 (Dec 31, 2010)

Been over at another forum and one of the fellows there was kind enough to come up with this layout for me.










Looks really cool, far better than something I could draw. Uses Kato Unitrack. Maybe this is a false assumption, but it seems like N scale people are focused even more on prototypical distances than the HO bunch are. Or maybe I just have a different tolerance for "realism" in my layout.


----------



## Smokinapankake (Sep 8, 2011)

That's why I like this forum, and chose to join up here - not so much prototypical operations emphasis and disdain for others who don't believe that their model trains are actual, real railroads doing actual, real work. 
This is one of my pet peeves about the people who gravitate toward model trains (or any scale modelers, whatever their persuasion). Of course there are people who are very narrow-minded who cannot accept that any way other than theirs could possibly produce a sense of satisfaction for the builder/player. 

I gotta stop now or I'll rant n' rave for another 5 paragraphs or more. 

It's your railroad and if you enjoy it in your way then that is absolutely all that matters. 

The track plan above looks like a brain buster with lots of possibilities for interesting movements of cars. You gonna build it?


----------



## thx712517 (Dec 31, 2010)

I have to admit I like the idea of a railroad model, you know? Quasi-prototypical with a reason for its existence and a rhythm to its movements. I also like the ability to put it into continuous run mode and let it go. 

I'm leaning very heavily toward building the layout above. I'm thinking a loading dock of some sort on the bottom right, a brewery or plastics factory on the top right, a small passenger station on the bottom left, and the building with a pair of tracks running into it will be my locomotive restoration shop, justifying (to me at least) the running of any era locomotive that suits my fancy.


----------



## airshot (Jan 12, 2014)

I started with HO then switched to N, then back to HO, now back again to N....have decided I like the N much better now that many more upgrades have been given to N scale. I can get a lot more running room in much less space for less $$. I do not have high dollar equipment just run of the mill stuff, made most of my own scenery. I have a double mainline with two sidings and a yard all within a 24 x48 layout, never could do that in HO. N is more difficult to handle with my old and shaky hands but the compactness of the train is worth it. Being small
it becomes easier to cover up the imperfections in your scenery. Just my .02 cents anyway.

Airshot


----------

