Utterly stunned by "N" gauge...........

[coachmann]

Yes, boweled over by the latest N gauge stuff too after seeing a Class 150 Unit. It's small for people with eyesight difficulties its potential is obvious.

[johnteal]

Interesting thread to read, having G in the garden and on a small indoor layout, Some On30 and a bit of OO, I thought I had all the scales covered, but 3 weeks ago I started modern image N layout. Having dabbled for a bit I concur I like the potential of long trains running through scenery in N, but the fun of scratch building something with weight and size in G.

 

John

RJR

[NZmodeller]

Hi Everyone,

 

I started in N a couple of years ago and I'm beginning to realise I've got in at an exciting time. I always said after my efforts as a teenager in OO that any future layout would be in N. Nowadays, most of the models I dreamed about as a teenager are now available in N, some of them quite breathtaking in their detail. British N scale does have it's issues, the couplings are a definite weakness and the old issue of the track being 4 inches too narrow (although if you didn't know that it probably wouldn't bother you).

 

OO on the other hand has a more discernable issue with the rails, that's quite a niggle, twice the percentage difference and almost twice the size is in the region of four times the error. Today's OO models are also fantastic but their accuracy almost draws attention to the discrepancy in the gauge, even if it is code 75.

 

There is a point to this, OO has neither the space saving options of N or the detail and prescence of O and it has the biggest inherant gauge compromise. It is only the advances in DCC technology that are preventing it's decline. Even so, sound will become more prevalent in N and if you really want a big speaker/sound chamber O is the way to go for that anyway.

 

The advantages of OO are being eroded quite rapidly, there will soon be the same level of choice and almost the same level of detail in N and if you're really fussy about that you will graduate towards P4, EM or O gauge anyway. OO gauge could be on the brink of decline.

 

Yes I'd love an O gauge layout too, I still dream, in the mean time I'm 100% sure I made the right decision to model in N, it just gets better and better.

 

 

 

Peter

[Dave777]

That’s quite a feisty post there, Peter! I remain utterly unconvinced that OO is going anywhere because I just don’t think there’s either market pull or market push for it (ie, manufacturers aren’t pushing its decline and the customers aren't pulling for it either). If you’re citing OO’s death is partly due to O gauge’s more detail, then N isn’t the answer because despite the increases in N detail it’s still a ‘chunky’ scale compared with OO or O. If you want true fidelity in 2mm scale, go genuine 2mm modelling and not N gauge.

 

There is a point to this, OO has neither the space saving options of N or the detail and prescence of O…

As I’ve said somewhere else on this forum, one thing that always surprises me in O is that the detail level doesn’t go up a notch again. When it gets to O, I expect detail levels to go through the roof, but it never seems to work out that way from the O gauge stuff I see at exhibitions. And I don’t think it’s because O gauge is undetailed – I think it’s because OO sets the bar pretty high in the first place, and also because there’s few UK outline RTR manufacturers in O to push the boundaries and keep the rate of improvements up. I find it interesting that often when people speak of O gauge they talk about the ‘presence’ of the models (me included) – we rarely mention increased detail levels. No doubt someone will come along now and post some amazing bit of O detail, but my overall impression of the scale as a whole is that detail levels aren’t a huge leap forward over OO. Both are high in this regard and while N is catching up, it’s not overtaking (and to be honest, I think OO and O will always be more detailed)

 

It is only the advances in DCC technology that are preventing [OO’s] decline.

Really? The only thing preventing it? You honestly think that?

 

The advantages of OO are being eroded quite rapidly, there will soon be the same level of choice and almost the same level of detail in N

But how do we define ‘soon’? It’s not as if OO is standing still, the number of OO releases is at least keeping up with, if not exceeding, the rate of N gauge ones, so it’ll be decades I suspect before the two are comparable with regards to choice.

 

 

 

Can I just say - what a shame that a thread that started off praising N gauge has turned into a OO bashing thread. Blimey, I’m a keen N-gauger but can’t see much value in driving a wedge between the scales and saying ‘my scale is better than yours’. Each have their pros and cons, and each are far from perfect.

[298]

Are you going to make the same assumption about Continental or American HO, considering N gauge standards are as good in these markets and larger scales are also gaining in popularity..? No, because the important factor that is often forgotten is the proportion of sales of Trainsets to newcomers, who require something more robust that N gauge but cheaper and less space consuming than O.

 

I'd agree that N gauge is getting better, but only because the manufacturers are putting the effort into catching up. If I was starting a UK prototype from scratch i'd probably choose N, because the WCML prototypes available are better in this scale than OO at the moment (any manufacturers who make a class 86, take note...).

[Edwin_m]

Having to step on or round my five-year-old's Trakmat-sized baseboard on the living room floor, and having to lift same if we need the room for anything else, I rather wish I'd been a bit more forceful in suggesting he should have N gauge and store it under the bed. He's making a fairly good job of destroying the couplings so "robust" isn't the word I'd use.

 

Back to Brio I think.

[coachmann]

Its funny that as soon as 'N' gauge takes a giant leap forward with scale looks the old sandwich boards pop up with '4mm scale/00 on the brink of decline'.

You ain't seen nuthin' yet.....

[pudzyp]

Whilst i don't buy the argument that oo is in decline, i am at present considering moving to n due to space constraints . Think the detail on n gauge has come on rapidly and has attracted people like me to consider it as a viable option

[NZmodeller]

Thanks for your replies guys,

 

Living down here I have a different perspective. Whereas in the UK there is usually a preference for british outline models, here there is no such default so there is more of a balance between British, Continental and American models. The rest of the world has more or less standardised to 1/87 and 1/160 yet somehow the UK has created it's own quirks, the anomoly of gauge, tension locks, rapidos and dear old aunty Elsie, bless her. It's probably true to say that OO scale is pretty safe, you really need to be in your teens to deal with N gauge and most fathers can't wait that long to buy their boys a train set so it will continue to be the starter gauge for most, it was for me.

As many of us do I sometimes contemplate what scale, era or country I would place a second layout if I had the chance of building one. European HO would be ahead of OO but a real challenge would be NZ120. Over here the anomoly of gauge is in the prototype!

So that's where I'm coming from, I'm an ex-pat Pom so my own layout is 1970s British N scale for unashamed nostalgic reasons - and lack of space! I can live with the anomolies of British N, even Elsie has her place and even advantages. OO has much less appeal for the reasons I outlined in my earlier post but that's just my opinion. Looking at the latest RTR models in OO the word stunning comes to mind there too and the choice is quite unbelievable so it's a great time to be modelling any scale, whatever your requirements.

 

Peter

[DavidB-AU]

Now if only Peco would make real code 55 track to match the RP25 wheels on modern stock. An N equivalent of Peco code 75 or something as reliable as Atlas code 55 that looks British.

 

Cheers

David

[F-UnitMad]

... but my overall impression of ( O ) scale as a whole is that detail levels aren’t a huge leap forward over OO. Both are high in this regard

As an O scale modeller I actually find myself agreeing with you. When I moved from N to HO I found that details that could be omitted/overlooked in N needed to be done properly in HO; finding such details rather tiny at times I moved up to O scale; the level of detail I go for is about the same as HO, it's just that the bits are bigger and easier to deal with..!!!

[Dave777]

 

you really need to be in your teens to deal with N gauge and most fathers can't wait that long to buy their boys a train set so it will continue to be the starter gauge for most, it was for me.

 

That’s a very good point, I hadn’t thought of that before. A contributing factor is the lack of trainsets in N gauge too, it’s something that Farish/Bachmann don’t seem to be pushing to a great extent with just the token 2 or 3 sets each year. I guess trainsets equals kids, and with ‘for adult collectors’ on every Farish box it makes sense to not go to town on the trainset front.

I always thought that the old Farish sets came in such massive boxes too! Surely you want to promote the small space you need for N gauge, so why use such a big box? The answer is so it looks like you’re getting more for your money I suspect – paying £100 for something that fits in a shoebox for Little Johnny probably doesn’t appeal (doesn’t seem to stop my girlfriend though), plus having everything on show in little windows across the front looks better. Catch-22 though really - there are few trainsets in N so there isn’t much of a market, but there isn’t much of a market because there are so few trainsets…

Having said that, one could argue that Bachmann don’t particularly do this in OO either, I’m guessing because they know they’re up against Hornby who are just so synonymous with trainsets in the UK. Hornby are just so good at it, what with their tie ups with Marks & Spencer and the big mail order catalogues, to name but two other ways they get their trainsets out there, that competing would require a massive advertising push that would need big sales to claw it back. You have to pick & choose your battles.

Can’t help but feel that right now I’m doing the thing I usually point out to others on here though – banging on about how to sell model railway items when Bachmann and Hornby know far more about it than me

 

…it's a great time to be modelling any scale, whatever your requirements.

 

This is true. We started the thread with N, but N and OO and O are all going through great times at present on the RTR front.

 

 

[John M]

Strangely enough I appear to be going in the opposite direction after starting our in OO as a teenager I moved to N and now in middle age with failing eyesight have recently moved up to G Scale in the garden.

 

I was not really happy with the compromises involved in attempting to fit a OO Gauge layout into a small bedroom at the time my parents were not too happy about the mess either. I acheived reasonably good results with quite a presentable narrow round the walls U shaped N Scale shelf layout, in terms of spaciousness, operational interest and reliable operation.

 

Later I developed an interest or got hooked on North American railways and built up a sizable collection of Kato and Atlas locos and stock and eventually built a modular loft layout based on OneTrak principals.

 

The running and general quality of the 1:160 Scale American Models was far ahead of the Minitrix and Gafar stock of the old layout not to mention the narrow gauge proportions of the 1:148 British stock.

 

While my main interest is constructing 4mm Scale stock, someday maybe even build a layout, the N Scale was an excuse to get something running quickly though it eventually took nearly 10 years!

 

After a move to New Zealand and brief flirtation with ON30 I had hoped to construct the Ophir Loop in our garage, I started work on a permanent N Scale layout only to realise that my eyesight was not what it used to be and tracklaying was proving to be something of a struggle.

 

A change of job and move of house resulted in the abandonment of the N Scale layout and a move to G Scale American outline no particular prototype, tracklaying was completed within a year and trains run most weekends while I am working in the garden.

 

In certain respects my main interest is working in 4mm, the N Scale has become a collection and G Scale a toy.

 

I think parental attitude towards the hobby and a childs stuborness is probably a more important factor affecting the number of new entrants to the hobby rather than the availability of train sets. My parents were not exactly supportive of my interest in the hobbie and it took them a long time to realise that it was socially acceptable and a grown up thing for a teenager or an adult to "play with trains".

 

While certainly G Scale and to a lesser extent OO/HO have certain play value that may develop into a serious interest, N is not really suitable as a starter set but rathe for the serious modeller or collector who already has been hooked

 

 

John

[coachmann]

Maybe I'm wrong here but it seems to me the first consideration is, do I want to build a model of a particluar stretch of railway line, and if so, is it to be modern image or steam. And do I want to look at scale detail in the models or is this second in importance to operation and producing an expansive landscape with a railway running through it.

[Edwin_m]

Yes I'd agree with that Coach, with the proviso that the "particular stretch" could be real or fictitious and the time/space/money makes some difference too! What Pete Waterman can build in his barn in O gauge is more than most of us could seriously consider in N (or possibly even in T...).

[Guest jim s-w]

Comfort yourself in that 7mm is the gauge we'd all have if we had the space.

If you have the space, there is nothing to touch 7mm.

 

Are you nuts?

 

For me a lot of O has just one minor flaw, that is a lot of it looks nothing like the prototype. Yes its come a long way but in terms of actually looking like a miniature model of a real loco a lot of it is still dire.

 

For me O has to get a hell of a lot better before is even gets close to surpassing 4mm scale. JLTRT is a step in the right direction but the rest...

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[Guest jim s-w]

The smallest part on any model is the one you can manipulate to put it on (as I build my own stuff) so the level of detail is potentially more on the larger scales.

 

Exactly John

 

take a class 37 for example. The Handbrake chains are tricky but doable in 4mm scale, pretty much impossible in 2mm scale and I would say essential in 7mm scale. There is no reason why a 7mm scale class 37 shouldnt have full springing with all the motion exactly as per the real loco. This is the sort of step up in 7mm scale I would expect as standard. (Although prototypic springing in 4mm scale is doable and has been done!)

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[Steven B]

For me a lot of O has just one minor flaw, that is a lot of it looks nothing like the prototype. Yes its come a long way but in terms of actually looking like a miniature model of a real loco a lot of it is still dire.

 

For me O has to get a hell of a lot better before is even gets close to surpassing 4mm scale. JLTRT is a step in the right direction but the rest...

 

Agreed. Many O gauge have less detail than RTR OO or N Gauge models - certainly compared to new models released over the last few years. I've also seen a lot of 2mmFS models that have more detail than 7mm finescale and EM/P4 models. It's as much down to the tallent of the modeller as to the scale.

 

As a N Gauge modeller, I'd probably go as far as saying that the likes of the Dapol class 67, and Farish 150 are better models than the OO Gauge equivalents by Lima/Hornby and Bachmann.

 

Happy modelling (regardless of scale/gauge).

 

Steven B.

[the fuzzler]

Aye - the improvements to N - and DCC socket provision - have lured me away from oo. I'm having a clearout of stuff following the change of plan, and now i'll have a oo layout based on the ELR, where my collection of BR Standards and the odd diesels (like the Heljan 15, and Kestrel/Falcon (got preserved on my layout)) can have a play.

 

My n guage will be modern image, where I can run long trains (Dapol 86's and fl wagons!). EWS 66 on order from Hattons as we speak, with a 67 and FL 66 when then arrive.

 

I don't like N gauge RTR steam outline, as it still doesn't look right.

 

For the nipper, I've got a load of underground ernie stuff and thomas stuff on the cheap, so he can bash about with that without wrecking the expensive stuff.

[F-UnitMad]

It's as much down to the tallent of the modeller as to the scale.

 

 

Hear, hear!!! That is very, very true...

[Guest jim s-w]

I agree in principle.

 

However I see a lot of O gauge where the kit has been very well built - nothing to fault there at all. The problem as I see it is that many kits have fundimental flaws in their design which in the larger scales shows up far far worse. Of course that can apply to any scale (you may have seen my dismay at the Heljan 86 in 4mm scale) and perhaps its down to more people do 4mm scale so you see more people fixing the faults. I am in no way saying that in O people don't do this as I know some do but it certainly seems to have more of a 'its close enough' attitude than the smaller scales. Generally speaking.

 

It was touched up in an MRJ editorial a while ago. The concept of moving to a larger scale due to age and loss of vision is well mentioned and yet a larger scale should mean you can go further in detail not less.

 

I still maintain that in the majority case O gauges are sold stuff at quite a high price that just isnt good enough.

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[F-UnitMad]

I still maintain that in the majority case O gauges are sold stuff at quite a high price that just isnt good enough.

 

With you all the way on that one, Jim... I am convinced that British O scale is overpriced. "it's O scale so it must be expensive" is an attitude that can be seen all too often, especially on Ebay and suchlike.

 

I still like the size, though...

[Pugsley]

There is no reason why a 7mm scale class 37 shouldnt have full springing with all the motion exactly as per the real loco.

Ahem..

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php/topic/7967-more-like-the-real-thing/page__view__findpost__p__93513

 

I believe that the LH Loveless Deltic has springing that works like the real thing, but then again I would expect that when spending nearly £2,000 on a model! However, the springs look a little undernourished when compared to the real thing - the tricky part is making it look right whilst working in the same way as the prototype. As you say though Jim, it has been done in 4mm scale, so 7mm scale shouldn't present any problems.

 

I think Jordan has it spot on when he says that most 7mm modellers incorporate the same level of detail as 4mm, but working with larger sized parts - I think the same applies to 7mm layouts as well. I'm often slightly disappointed by 7mm layouts as there is so much more potential for realism with additional details and textures afforded by the larger scale. Part of my reasons for dabbling in 7mm scale is to make models that are as detailed as possible yet still reasonably sturdy - my 4mm 59 is as detailed as I could make it, but has to be handled extremely carefully, as it's a bit fragile. Even then there were some pipe runs I had to leave off - I didn't fancy having to grapple with lengths of 0.02mm wire!

 

I guess the downside to this is that adding these minute details all takes a great deal of time. It is possible though - I would highlight Debenham as one of the 7mm layouts that uses the size to add the additional details that adds realism.

 

I personally think that if you were changing scales due to loss of vision etc, N is the way to go - very little fine detail needs to be added as it'll never been seen from normal viewing distances.