# Converting a HO track plan to N scale



## EvanK (4 mo ago)

Hello,
I recently decided to build an N scale layout that could fit under my bed due to limited space (Maximum size of 75" x 38" by 12"). I found a track plan that I really like but it's in HO scale and i don't know how to convert it. I guess my questions are are along the lines of: Is a #6 turnout in HO going to correspond to a #6 turnout in N scale? What is the equivalent of a 18" radius curve in N?
I would also need it to be about 3 inches less in length as in HO it's 12 x 5 feet (87/160=0.54 12*0.54=6.48 6.48*12=77.76 so a little longer than my 75" limit).
Here is the plan I found








It's low quality as i had to convert it from pdf to jpg
-thanks


----------



## Mixed Freight (Aug 31, 2019)

EvanK said:


> Hello,
> I recently decided to build an N scale layout that could fit under my bed due to limited space (Maximum size of 75" x 38" by 12"). I found a track plan that I really like but it's in HO scale and i don't know how to convert it. I guess my questions are are along the lines of: Is a #6 turnout in HO going to correspond to a #6 turnout in N scale? What is the equivalent of a 18" radius curve in N?
> I would also need it to be about 3 inches less in length as in HO it's 12 x 5 feet (87/160=0.54 12*0.54=6.48 6.48*12=77.76 so a little longer than my 75" limit).
> Here is the plan I found
> ...


Well, basically you have it figured out. N-scale is 54% the size of HO-scale. Multiply any linear dimension from the HO-scale version by 54% to get the linear N-scale dimension.

If 75" is your absolute length, then you may have to drop the siding off of the left side of the layout plan, and shorten the yard tracks a little bit.

Your 38" maximum width is actually a little better than the calculated scaled down width. 54% of 60" (5') equals about 32-1/2", so at 38", you have a little extra to play with on the width.

54% of 18" HO radius equals 9.72" of N-scale radius, or basically the old standard of 9-34" radius offered in N-scale track. Since #6 turnouts refer to an angle, then yes, a #6 HO turnout directly corresponds to a #6 N-scale turnout. No difference there.

Like I said, you have it figured out. Good luck.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

Yep! N scale is a little bigger than half the size HO. So just take any measurement in HO and cut it in half then round up to whatever is available in N gauge. An 18" radius curve in HO would be 9.75" or thereabout.

But if you can, go with 11.25" rather than 9.75". If you have the width.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

I have done this for someone in the past. It does work, after a fashion, but it's not a perfect process. Linear dimensions scale properly but there are other issues to contend with.

A true #6 turnout (that is, one with a straight diverging leg, as opposed to a curved track section) is the same in both HO and N. The angle of the diverging track will be identical. However, the dimensions of the turnout may not be strictly proportional. The lengths of the legs may be longer or shorter, requiring balancing "tweaks" to the dimensions or alignment elsewhere on the layout. Using flex track as opposed to all sectional pieces makes this fairly easy to overcome.

The other issue is the availability of parts in the other scale. The layout I was reducing used a 15 degree crossing, which did not exist in the available N scale track. This issue required more creativity to overcome.

Your best bet is to invest in a decent track planning software tool (I recommend Anyrail) and actually plan the layout in the smaller scale, making any necessary changes digitally and making sure they work before buying any track.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

I agree 100%. The other suggestion would be to use flex track. 

In my opinion, N gauge code 80 Atlas flex track with Peco turnouts is a great combination.

I designed my layout in Anyrail using Peco code 80 track. Anyrail doesn't know you can mix the 2 products, so you have to choose one brand, and I figured it was better to make the plan using the turnout brand since the flex track gets bent anyway.

Good luck, have fun and keep asking questions!


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

JeffHurl said:


> I agree 100%. The other suggestion would be to use flex track.
> 
> In my opinion, N gauge code 80 Atlas flex track with Peco turnouts is a great combination.
> 
> ...


Um, not in any incarnation of Anyrail that I am familiar with. You can select as many, or as few track libraries as you want, one at a time, or all at once (at the price of screen real estate). I have mixed three or more different manufacturers' products in the same layout design. It will also freely let you mix track codes (you have to be smart enough to understand that you will need to shim the lower track height), so make sure if you don't mean to mix codes thst you select libraries with the same code. The only thing it WON'T let you do is connect different scales of track together (for obvious reasons), although you can have sections of different scales on the same layout, not connected together.


----------



## EvanK (4 mo ago)

CTValleyRR said:


> I have done this for someone in the past. It does work, after a fashion, but it's not a perfect process. Linear dimensions scale properly but there are other issues to contend with.
> 
> A true #6 turnout (that is, one with a straight diverging leg, as opposed to a curved track section) is the same in both HO and N. The angle of the diverging track will be identical. However, the dimensions of the turnout may not be strictly proportional. The lengths of the legs may be longer or shorter, requiring balancing "tweaks" to the dimensions or alignment elsewhere on the layout. Using flex track as opposed to all sectional pieces makes this fairly easy to overcome.
> 
> ...


I was able to find the 30 and 19 degree crossings in code 55 that I would need online. The lengths of the turnout legs shouldn't be a problem as I will be using only flex track. The concern that I now have is finding the right curved turnouts but also finding out what number corresponds to each of Peco's sl turnouts.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

EvanK said:


> I was able to find the 30 and 19 degree crossings in code 55 that I would need online. The lengths of the turnout legs shouldn't be a problem as I will be using only flex track. The concern that I now have is finding the right curved turnouts but also finding out what number corresponds to each of Peco's sl turnouts.


Again, no concerns there that any decent track planning software couldn't get you through.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

CTValleyRR said:


> Um, not in any incarnation of Anyrail that I am familiar with. You can select as many, or as few track libraries as you want, one at a time, or all at once (at the price of screen real estate). I have mixed three or more different manufacturers' products in the same layout design. It will also freely let you mix track codes (you have to be smart enough to understand that you will need to shim the lower track height), so make sure if you don't mean to mix codes thst you select libraries with the same code. The only thing it WON'T let you do is connect different scales of track together (for obvious reasons), although you can have sections of different scales on the same layout, not connected together.


I'm glad the program let you mix. I was able to add many libraries, but they wouldn't connect with each other.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

JeffHurl said:


> I'm glad the program let you mix. I was able to add many libraries, but they wouldn't connect with each other.


The software will let anyone mix, if you tell it to. Make sure, on the "Settings" tab, you have checked the box that says, "Allow mixed rails". That will let you freely mix codes and types of rails, so long as they are fundamentally the same (scale, gauge, and rail configuration). It used to be the default option; I'm not sure if they changed that, or if you deselected it at some point. I certainly wouldn't want to limit myself to just one brand / code. The example below has, in order: Atlas Custom Line code 100, Walthers Track Code 83, Microengineering Code 83 flex, Peco Code 83 Streamline, Peco Code 100. As you can see from the circles at the joints, they are all connected together.


----------



## TNTWOLTEMD (6 mo ago)

EvanK said:


> Hello,
> I recently decided to build an N scale layout that could fit under my bed due to limited space (Maximum size of 75" x 38" by 12"). I found a track plan that I really like but it's in HO scale and i don't know how to convert it. I guess my questions are are along the lines of: Is a #6 turnout in HO going to correspond to a #6 turnout in N scale? What is the equivalent of a 18" radius curve in N?
> I would also need it to be about 3 inches less in length as in HO it's 12 x 5 feet (87/160=0.54 12*0.54=6.48 6.48*12=77.76 so a little longer than my 75" limit).
> Here is the plan I found
> ...


I see a reveres loop but can`t see any way to return to original


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

TNTWOLTEMD said:


> I see a reveres loop but can`t see any way to return to original


Assuming you mean that there is no corresponding reversing section to return to the original direction of travel. There isn't, you would have to back through the reversing section.


----------



## TNTWOLTEMD (6 mo ago)

CTValleyRR said:


> Assuming you mean that there is no corresponding reversing section to return to the original direction of travel. There isn't, you would have to back through the reversing section.


okay, just don`t care much for backing trains even though it`s done in real life


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

TNTWOLTEMD said:


> okay, just don`t care much for backing trains even though it`s done in real life


OK, but this isn't your layout. The OP might not care. I personally like reverse moves for switching cars and serving industries, but I'm not a big fan of thing it to compensate for a track design.


----------



## TNTWOLTEMD (6 mo ago)

CTValleyRR said:


> OK, but this isn't your layout. The OP might not care. I personally like reverse moves for switching cars and serving industries, but I'm not a big fan of thing it to compensate for a track design.


I wasn`t dissing that layout, just a comment.


----------

