OO vs EM vs P4 comparison photo

[John Tomlinson]

2 hours ago, RichardT said:

This was the OP’s actual question, specifically saying that s/he wasn’t after a discussion of the merits of each gauge, just a visual comparison. So, of course, what we’ve got is a discussion of the merits of each gauge and a distinct lack of comparison photos!

 

RichardT

 

 

 

Fair comment and I'm guilty as charged in my response above!

 

I wonder in fact if many such photos exist? How many people have layouts in different 4mm gauges, and even if they do it may be difficult to arrange a photo of the kind requested. It's certainly near impossible to do so in the course of visiting an exhibition.

 

Hence perhaps the answers that are not of the question asked, but a best effort to respond constructively.

 

John.

[Buhar]

Probably the best that could be done is assemble a composite picture if contributors could be found.

 

To be fair to OO, one of the alternatives to Peco streamline should be preferred.

 

A wagon or loco with a front bogie would afford the best comparison.

 

Alan 

[philsandy]

2 hours ago, Philou said:

The perception thing, for me, is being so used to seeing the 'narrow' track, EM and P4 just looks too wide!!

 

As others have said it depends what you want from your future layout - something up and running quickly, without resorting to having to do wheel changing, or the challenge of doing the trackwork more correctly (and wheel changing), or going the whole hog and having a pukka true-to-scale layout. I think 'yer pays yer money .........................................'

 

Good luck and happy layout making in whatever scale/gauge you choose to do.

 

Philip

 

I often think that when I see the real thing.

[jcm@gwr]

I've a small diorama that has 3 yards of parallel track P4, EM & 00, it's in the loft at the club,

I'll try and find it tomorrow evening (club night) and take a couple of pictures.

[Enterprisingwestern]

1 hour ago, jcm@gwr said:

I've a small diorama that has 3 yards of parallel track P4, EM & 00, it's in the loft at the club,

I'll try and find it tomorrow evening (club night) and take a couple of pictures.

 

With a wide angle lens hopefully?!!

 

Mike.

[Jeff Smith]

Plain EM and P4 track will look almost identical, it's the points that will look different.  Perhaps though, as suggested above, a wagon or loco standing on each track from the front with the wheels visible.....

[jcm@gwr]

50 minutes ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

With a wide angle lens hopefully?!!

 

Mike.

 

I'll see what options my phone has!

[jcm@gwr]

17 minutes ago, Jeff Smith said:

Plain EM and P4 track will look almost identical, it's the points that will look different.  Perhaps though, as suggested above, a wagon or loco standing on each track from the front with the wheels visible.....

 

I don't have any wagons for P4 or EM, it was built for my F-in-L to take to shows

[kevinlms]

4 hours ago, philsandy said:

 

I often think that when I see the real thing.

Try that in Australia, where they have 5ft 3in gauge, where it DOES look too wide!

 

There are places where Standard gauge & 5ft 3in are together.

 

Here's the run round loop at Southern Cross (which actually isn't used as they use XPT's).

 

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Southern_Cross_Station_viewed_from_platform_1.jpg

[Harlequin]

Apart from the appearance and running qualities, don't forget that the minimum radii of the different track standards affect what kind of layout can be folded into, say, a double garage.

 

[Siberian Snooper]

I decided to go to EM on the grounds that there was very little ready to run rolling stock for a mid '20's  GW layout, so it would need to be kit built. I knew that I could build 00 track, so I decided that I should be able to build EM gauge track OK, so that's where I am. I thought that P/S 4 was a step too far.

 

 

[Barclay]

For me going EM was a personal choice to effectively end my dependency on RTR, which, admittedly, was pretty rubbish back then (late 80's). The real improvement in appearance is hand made track to reasonably respectable radii and with flowing formations and all that goes with it. You can do this in 00 and it makes nearly as much improvement as it does in EM, but if you're going to the trouble, then why not add the missing millimetres? This was my logic back then. P4 seemed harder - suspension, finer tolerances etc. I could do it now (maybe not, have you seen my track!?) However I am happy with the compromise EM represents and have no plans to change. 

 

However to answer the OP - I also have no direct comparison shots, but agree with what others have said. There are lots of pictures on this forum of EM and P4 layouts. Look at them long and hard and if the P4 stands head and shoulders above in your eyes then that's the one for you. For either standard though you really have to enjoy the making of things and not see the construction phase as that annoying bit that gets in the way of you operating your trains.

[Mark Forrest]

Had a bit of a rummage and managed to find three lengths of nickel silver rail code 75 bullhead flexi-track; 00 (SMP), EM (SMP) and P4 (C&L).

Illustrating my earlier point about P4 being more time consuming I don't have a completed P4 steam loco, so some use of imagination may be required.

 

What about wagons though?

Bachmann 00, straight out of the box.

 

Kit built (Slaters, I think) in EM.  Cast white metal brake gear from ABS; Smiths three link couplings.

 

Kit built (Parkside) in P4.  Bill Bedford sprung axle guards, etched brake levers, cast brake shoes and pushrods.

 

Arguably, wagons could be built to any of these specifications in any of these gauges, but I've found the temptation is to add more detail when working to P4 standards.  Not necessary, but more of an indication of the part of the hobby I enjoy the most (and my reasons for switching to P4).

[Mark Forrest]

A couple more.

 

00, EM, P4

Obviously other types of track with different sleeper spacing and thickness are available, but I think this is a reasonable like for like comparison.  Personally tend to only use this sort of track off scene in a fiddle yard and something else on the scenic section.

[davefrk]

Any code 75 track can look good once painted and ballasted, my Layout is EM and having dabbled with P4 and decided on the layout I wanted EM was the best option for me. Yes some will notice the checkrails, some will notice the wider gauge but for me it's the running qualities.

 

Boards split for ballasting.

 

Dave.

[Hal Nail]

2 hours ago, Mark Forrest said:

Had a bit of a rummage and managed to find three lengths of nickel silver rail code 75 bullhead flexi-track; 00 (SMP), EM (SMP) and P4 (C&L).

 

I think the answer is to have your baseboards at eye level!

[Enterprisingwestern]

9 hours ago, davefrk said:

some will notice the wider gauge but for me it's the running qualities.

 

The joys of having a set of standards!

If I can get EM to work then anybody can!

 

 

Mike.

[Mark Forrest]

10 hours ago, Hal Nail said:

I think the answer is to have your baseboards at eye level!

That definitely helps - that is the way we usually view the real railway.

 

However, a comparison of plain track (from any angle) can only tell part of the story.  The way I see it, it's a choice between (near) instant gratification of 00, Vs how much enjoyment the individual takes from time spent at the workbench rather than with controller/DCC throttle in hand.

 

Taking the three locos above as examples; the 1F took something like 30 seconds of my time to extract from its packaging and place on the track.   There are some detail parts in the box, so let's say a total of 30 mins modelling time to have a operational model.

The EM 3F Jinty, a little more involved as in addition to above the keeper plate was removed to swap the wheels and coupling rods swapped over onto the replacement wheels.  Couplings have also been changed.  Ignoring the weathering (as that would be equally applicable to all) let's call that 2 hours of modelling enjoyment before it's operational in the chosen gauge.

The kit built (unfinished) Special Tank has provided me with hours of enjoyment spread over a few years as with kit builds I tend to do a little as and when I feel like it.  I've learnt new skills in the process and learnt a lot about real locos along the way.  At this stage it has been test run and just requires a few details before paint.  The same would apply to building a replacement chassis to go under a RTR body.

 

Personally, it's the enjoyment I get from making stuff that has taken me down the P4 route; visual improvement of track is merely a side benefit.

[Qweqwe]

13 hours ago, Mark Forrest said:

What about wagons though?

Bachmann 00, straight out of the box.

 

Kit built (Slaters, I think) in EM.  Cast white metal brake gear from ABS; Smiths three link couplings.

 

Kit built (Parkside) in P4.  Bill Bedford sprung axle guards, etched brake levers, cast brake shoes and pushrods.

Thank you so much for this! Exactly what I was looking for. If I could ask for just one more favour… You have that photo there with the 3 different wagons on the track, any chance you could take another photo of the 3 wagons on the 3 different gauge tracks from directly in front?

 

Again I can’t thank you enough, I’m considering choosing one of these gauges and spending decent chunk of money on some track and wagons for each gauge just for testing would be a little expensive. Your photos are saving me a lot of money!

[TheQ]

Of course what we are missing here is 00FS verses peco / Hornby / Bachman standard track as well as the others..

Edited May 21 by TheQ

[fulton]

8 minutes ago, Qweqwe said:

 

 

Again I can’t thank you enough, I’m considering choosing one of these gauges and spending decent chunk of money on some track and wagons for each gauge just for testing would be a little expensive. Your photos are saving me a lot of money!

Think hard, on any choice, may be try a wagon or loco, a bit of simple track, to see how you get on, when I moved from 00, I tried P4 but my skill level was not up to building a loco, track, wagons, coaches were fine, I then went for EM which suited my skill level, and the amount of efford I wanted to put in, much better, while today I look at the current 00 RTR and wonder if I would change today.

[jcm@gwr]

I found the diorama, here are 3 pictures taken on my phone, the 00 track has had the sleeper spacing adjusted

 

 

[Harlequin]

Worth pointing out that the Peco Bullhead Code 75 range uses 4mm scale sleepers and sleeper spacing unlike the older HO/OO scale of Streamline Code75 and Code100 flat-bottom.

 

[Captain Kernow]

1 hour ago, TheQ said:

Of course what we are missing here is 00FS verses peco / Hornby / Bachman standard track as well as the others..

Yes, but beware of OO-SF, if you are seeking to run certain RTR locos through the pointwork, some really don't like it.

 

[dj_crisp]

2 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

Yes, but beware of OO-SF, if you are seeking to run certain RTR locos through the pointwork, some really don't like it.

 

 

Sound advice. I've always wondered how RTR has got on with code 75 bullhead track. My only experient using RTR wheels set at EM found them to catch all of the chairs on my bullhead track. So I abandoned that approach