trying to decide on If I should switch to On30

[Bushel86]

Hello. So I am debating on what my new layout will be. What I enjoy most in the hobby is scratch building structures out of wood. and wood kits. I Have a modern switching layout that i use for my modern desiels and rolling stock. While it scratches the itch of things modern. It doesn't really give me the satisfaction of the type of structures I like to model. So I am thinking of starting new.

I am debating on if I should go to On30. Or stay in Ho standard. I was thinking of doing something similar as to the Thunder mesa Layout but more logging inspired. Sticking with the 15" radius as the thunder mesa, (Yes I know broader is always better, But I have a small room 9.5x13, and I don't plan on running anything longer than 40' ) I Really like the On30 whimsical side but yet still keep that believable look and feel.

I also don't plan on big trains. I find when you have a Small space its better to have Small trains through Big scenes; then to have Big trains through small scenes. (in my opinion)

If I am being Honest I am kinda Burned out with trying to Be as prototpyical as I can. I'm finding it to restrictive as time goes on. esp in small spaces. While I do enjoy prototype modeling. I think I need a change.

I think I want the theme to be a Logging, mining, backwoods 1880-1940s layout. haven't pin pointed a specific time frame yet. but that will give you an idea.

So i am kinda throwing this out on the forum. If I go On30 I be starting from scratch. I have nothing in that scale. and all Of my scratch building supplies would also need to be adjusted. But that is not an issue.

I Guess for me I am looking at what advantages and disadvantages would On30 have over Ho scale in the not so obvious ways with this type of themed layout. (i understand about RTR isn't as common and the size differences.) If you do On30, What Drew you to On30? What Keeps you in On30?

I'm just really looking for aspects on what I should do, because both have their Pros and cons, and thats making it hard to decide. So thats why I turn to you guys.

I'm sorry if this is vague, I be glad to answer any questions that you have.

 

[Rico]

What drew me to On30 was the larger size of the trains in the same or smaller space, plus the possibility of scratch building neat old somewhat whimsical structures. Back woods railroading is more, oh I dunno, romantic in a way.
However my love of big stinky diesels and stuff I grew up seeing won over and I’ve sold off much of my On30 stuff.
I still have a small Plymouth switcher and a couple ore cars I might model a simple industry one day.

 

[santafewillie]

There are some obvious advantages, the larger size of On30 equipment is easier on the eyes to detail and handle. It also uses HO track so you may be able to reuse some of what you have. Scratchbuilding backwoods structures also has a certain allure. The only disadvantage that I can see is the availability/diversity of equipment. But I never tried to source any, so I may be wrong.

 

[Old 97]

 

[Bushel86]

There are some obvious advantages, the larger size of On30 equipment is easier on the eyes to detail and handle. It also uses HO track so you may be able to reuse some of what you have. Scratchbuilding backwoods structures also has a certain allure. The only disadvantage that I can see is the availability/diversity of equipment. But I never tried to source any, so I may be wrong.

Yeah I Do alot of scratch building the same type of structures in Ho scale, so the size and detail issues are certianly a plus I find, as far as it being easy on the eyes I don't know if that is a good thing or a bad thing when it comes to imperfections lol.. I can be a perfectionist at times. I do plan on using track I have. but I may buy some as well. I am thinking of just doing a 3x6 layout to start with. and then decide from there if I want to go bigger. I may do the same in Ho scale, with the same theme and decide which I like more. I bought some On30 rolling stock last night on ebay. so that will help me get a good comparison, and also. I already own a 0-6-0 saddle tank in Ho I plan to convert to On30. at some point.

Old 97, I have watched that video and a lot of his others as well. It is actually what inspired me to debate on doing a On30 or an Ho standard logging. But I do appreciate the link.

 

[DanRaitz]

One thing to consider about On30 when compared to HO scale, is that the scenery elements (structures, figures & vehicles) will be 8 times the area (height/width/length) of HO scale. For example, if you take a object that is 1 square foot in HO scale and enlarge it to O scale then it becomes 8 square feet. Because you're doubling the length, height and width.

Dan

 

[Old 97]

Yeah I Do alot of scratch building the same type of structures in Ho scale, so the size and detail issues are certianly a plus I find, as far as it being easy on the eyes I don't know if that is a good thing or a bad thing when it comes to imperfections lol.. I can be a perfectionist at times. I do plan on using track I have. but I may buy some as well. I am thinking of just doing a 3x6 layout to start with. and then decide from there if I want to go bigger. I may do the same in Ho scale, with the same theme and decide which I like more. I bought some On30 rolling stock last night on ebay. so that will help me get a good comparison, and also. I already own a 0-6-0 saddle tank in Ho I plan to convert to On30. at some point.

Old 97, I have watched that video and a lot of his others as well. It is actually what inspired me to debate on doing a On30 or an Ho standard logging. But I do appreciate the link.

You're welcome man!
Thunder Mesa Studios is where I spend some time.
The Puerto Borracho Railway is another railroad that has captured my heart.

Puerto Borracho Railway

Puerto Borracho Railway. 3,008 likes · 422 talking about this. The Puerto Borracho Railway is a On30 scale model layout born from my love of model trains, Baja and

www.facebook.com

 

[Marlin39]

I've modeled in On30 and HOn30....briefly. The RTR engine offerings in On30 are very limited.. The plastic RTR freight cars have a lot to be desired also. The larger the scale, the more the detail or lack there of gets noticed.

1/4" scale structures take up a lot of space. Peco On30 track & switches are EXPENSIVE. It is easier to work with big stuff, but it does limit you.

I actually just finished an On30 critter (see photo) project that had been sitting around for 7-8 years and is just sitting on a display diorama. It still needs couplers, but since I plan on staying in standard gauge HO I will leave it as is.

Any of the n30 modeling can turn into a serious and frustrating rabbit hole.

Down the HOn30 rabbit hole...again

I guess this is the definition of insanity. 😁 Just finished a box car, but for waiting on the brake wheels to arrive. Engine and box car in front of a Standard gauge 40' box car.

modelrailroadforums.com

 

[Bushel86]

One thing to consider about On30 when compared to HO scale, is that the scenery elements (structures, figures & vehicles) will be 8 times the area (height/width/length) of HO scale. For example, if you take a object that is 1 square foot in HO scale and enlarge it to O scale then it becomes 8 square feet. Because you're doubling the length, height and width.

Dan

Hey Dan Yeah I already know all about the size differences. In fact its what draws me to 0n30. Bigger details in a same space as Ho scale. But What I am not sold on is this. (hopefully I can expalin it properly)

Why Doesn't anyone do in Ho standard gauge what On30 does. for example. Take the Thunder Mesa layout for a minute. while it is a Wonderful layout, it has both a whimiscale and believable aspect to it. It borders fantasy with reality. Why not do the same thing in Ho scale? Why is it almost Taboo to even suggest it, When it comes to standard gauge regardless of scale It's a given that it has to be protoypical, or it has to mimic reality. (when in reality our models do not come close to prototype standards.) But when it comes to narrow gauge, they become less protypical and more or less fantasy railroads. Or a mixture of both. Why is it ok for say a On30 layout to have 12 inch radius but not so in Ho scale? (again I know some locos don't do tight curves thats not the point I am making) if half the time you are using Ho scale chassies to modify in to On30 to begine with, why is one taboo but not the other?

For instance if I want to model the thunder mesa But instead of it being the dessert plains. What if I want to make it logging on the east or west coast, with that same fantasy whimsicle theme that all on30 have. But do it in Ho scale?

Sorry not meant to be a rant. But I just wonder why certian aspects in different scales are frown apon in another scale. it is why I am not sold on On30 because I would love to do a layout in Standard Ho with tight radius like On30 with the same type of equipment. But what I know is its easier in On30 for those things to be believable i guess. Or I Assume as much.

Now I understand the conscept of if your running big diesel and steamers, and you are matching prototype theme. I have been modeling the prototypes for years. and always was a ribot counter. But I am honestly tired of being in "that it has to be done that way mentality". and maybe thats why I am having a hard time with breaking free of that concept.

And I know at the end of they day it is my layout and I can do what I want. I have been in the hobby for 30 years off and on. So I am not stranger to it. But hopefully I made sense. I don't know.

I mean who to say that their wasn't standard gauge logging mining railroads that didn't have that back woods cheap look and feel to, esp in the 1880-1920s. So anyway

thats just what I am hung up on.

 

[Bushel86]

I've modeled in On30 and HOn30....briefly. The RTR engine offerings in On30 are very limited.. The plastic RTR freight cars have a lot to be desired also. The larger the scale, the more the detail or lack there of gets noticed.

1/4" scale structures take up a lot of space. Peco On30 track & switches are EXPENSIVE. It is easier to work with big stuff, but it does limit you.

I actually just finished an On30 critter (see photo) project that had been sitting around for 7-8 years and is just sitting on a display diorama. It still needs couplers, but since I plan on staying in standard gauge HO I will leave it as is.

Any of the n30 modeling can turn into a serious and frustrating rabbit hole.

Down the HOn30 rabbit hole...again

I guess this is the definition of insanity. 😁 Just finished a box car, but for waiting on the brake wheels to arrive. Engine and box car in front of a Standard gauge 40' box car.

modelrailroadforums.com

Nice looking critter. good work.

 

[santafewillie]

When it comes to standard gauge regardless of scale It's a given that it has to be protoypical, or it has to mimic reality. (when in reality our models do not come close to prototype standards.)

I respectfully disagree. Just as a well known example is all of the Thomas the Tank equipment available in all scales. Some Lionel stuff also falls into the mythical category.
Folks who want to be prototypical choose HO or N scale because that's where most prototypical equipment is available.

 

[Marlin39]

I mean who to say that their wasn't standard gauge logging mining railroads that didn't have that back woods cheap look and feel to, esp in the 1880-1920s. So anyway thats just what I am hung up on.

I was thinking of doing something like this with small, 1st generation, diesels. (44 tonner, HH660, SW1, etc).. Logs would be brought in by truck and the finished lumber, chips, plywood, etc would be brought out to an interchange by the company engine. Tight curves would be easier if it was ore/coal cars being brought to the interchange.

 

[PNKFLOYD]

Our club has built an On30 logging layout over the last 5years.
2019 layout. Scratch built or craftsman kit structures

Lots of open space.

2020 progress very little greenery.

2021

2023 many more structures and we have moved somethings around togive a different look. The 3 house to the right were built by 3 different people from the same plan,

 

[DanRaitz]

You can build a "Thunder Mesa" type layout in HO standard gauge. A perfect example is John Olson's "Jerome & Southwestern".

Dan

 

[dave1905]

One thing to consider about On30 when compared to HO scale, is that the scenery elements (structures, figures & vehicles) will be 8 times the area (height/width/length) of HO scale. For example, if you take a object that is 1 square foot in HO scale and enlarge it to O scale then it becomes 8 square feet. Because you're doubling the length, height and width.

That's 8 times the VOLUME, it's 4 times the AREA.

 

[dave1905]

One thing to consider is that going with On30 and 15" radius, that tight in HO, it would be REALLY tight in O (roughly equivalent to 7-8" radius in HO). Back to the previous post and Dan's point. On30 cars are wider than HO (even narrow gauge) so going around tight curves can create clearance problems if you don't watch how close the cars are coupled and how long they are. Not saying it can't be done, just saying that it is something that you will have to take into consideration when building cars. A scale size On3 boxcar or passenger car on On30 trucks might have issues with overhang, while a shorty car will make it. You will also have to watch interference with underbody details to allow enough truck swivel. You are basically building a narrow gauge "trolley" layout.

 

[Bushel86]

I respectfully disagree. Just as a well known example is all of the Thomas the Tank equipment available in all scales. Some Lionel stuff also falls into the mythical category.
Folks who want to be prototypical choose HO or N scale because that's where most prototypical equipment is available.

That is true, but at same time even in O scale and G scale, you have those who try to create a believeable prototype. You mention Thomas the tank engine. well Again there is a Prototype for it. even though it is a fantasy toy engine. it became a proto, so maybe thats the first time the proto mimics the models. lol but Regardless, Yes N scale and Ho scale are the Ones that get the most prototypical favor. But if I am not mistaken, I could be, they are the majority of the Hobby. and so the majortiy can dominate the dictation of what others do and create. the point I was trying to make is that when it comes to model railroading regardless of scale or type. we all model something to make look prototypical. when even the best models are still no where near being Prototypical. But some scale are easer to have fantasy railroads that venture into anything. anyway it was just a rant. But you do have those that will always say.. "well thats not prototypical" or the real railroad didn't do it that way" regardless of scale they are in. (i use to be one myself, and now I am trying to break that box i put myself in.)

One thing to consider is that going with On30 and 15" radius, that tight in HO, it would be REALLY tight in O (roughly equivalent to 7-8" radius in HO). Back to the previous post and Dan's point. On30 cars are wider than HO (even narrow gauge) so going around tight curves can create clearance problems if you don't watch how close the cars are coupled and how long they are. Not saying it can't be done, just saying that it is something that you will have to take into consideration when building cars. A scale size On3 boxcar or passenger car on On30 trucks might have issues with overhang, while a shorty car will make it. You will also have to watch interference with underbody details to allow enough truck swivel. You are basically building a narrow gauge "trolley" layout.

I hate the term trolly layout lol, unless its actually for trollies. But I understand what you mean. And I know that the tighter the curve the shorter the car/loco. And While You bring up the point I was trying to make in my first post. Yes 15 inch radius is considered almost nonexistant in Ho anymore. because of being proto accurate and because of the big diesels and steamers and all. so Yes 15 inch is frown on in Ho scale regardless of what you model. and the same is true in O scale standard. But for On30 you can have a beautiful layout with a backwoods feel logging/mining layout with curves down to 9 inches. The spruce coal layout comes to mind. and yet in On30 that is consider acceptable because it is done well. But You do that same layout in Ho scale standard. and then it becomes taboo. you will get a ton of comments that. its not proto accurate or other comments. I understand the width and legth of a car. I'm a truck driver I understand over hang all to well. But again it always seems to come down to, Narrow gauge layouts are fine with tight curves short cars and that fantasy is yet believeable. but standard gauge regardless of scale (mostly Ho and N) have the problem of it being taboo if it isn't narrow gauge. Also I love a finely detail model. But I take a finely detailed frieght car with out any underside details anyday. Why because I never see those details under the car unless I pick it up and look or it is derailed and layed over on its side. to me If I cant see it, Why bother? Sure it looks nice. and certianly adds to the cost of the car. But When do you actaully ever see those details, You may see some small glimpses of things close to the outer edge but all that detail is really just waste to me. If I can't enjoy it in view while being used why bother. But I do love them details. But even if I have to sacrifice those details to make a car work around a curve I am fine with that.

I do appreciate all of your comments. Trying to decide if I should go On30 or stick with Ho is tough In the regard that What I like about On30, You don't actually see in Ho standard to much. so it is hard to accuratly know if What I want to model will be better in one scale over the other. And please Don't take my comments as aruguing against you, My whole Life it has been drummed in my head to be protoypical, from the clubs I use to be in to different hobbyist I know over the years. And its that Box of Why is it ok for the narrow gauge guys, but not the standard gauge guys that I am trying to break free of.

thinking out loud here. So What if I was to take a On30 track plan and build it in Ho standard? esp if the track plan calls for 15" radius? On30 seems to capture the mind and make things as mentioned romantised and believable, but that same layout in Ho scale would not be because its somehow standard gauge? because now it has to be more protoypical. And I think that is where I am having a hard time sepereating. I am fine with sharp curves In On30 even making a 2x4 On30 layout. But to do that same layout in Ho standard is in my mind not as romatic or believable? Hopefully I am making sense.

 

[Marlin39]

That is true, but at same time even in O scale and G scale, you have those who try to create a believeable prototype. You mention Thomas the tank engine. well Again there is a Prototype for it. even though it is a fantasy toy engine. it became a proto, so maybe thats the first time the proto mimics the models. lol but Regardless, Yes N scale and Ho scale are the Ones that get the most prototypical favor. But if I am not mistaken, I could be, they are the majority of the Hobby. and so the majortiy can dominate the dictation of what others do and create. the point I was trying to make is that when it comes to model railroading regardless of scale or type. we all model something to make look prototypical. when even the best models are still no where near being Prototypical. But some scale are easer to have fantasy railroads that venture into anything. anyway it was just a rant. But you do have those that will always say.. "well thats not prototypical" or the real railroad didn't do it that way" regardless of scale they are in. (i use to be one myself, and now I am trying to break that box i put myself in.)


I hate the term trolly layout lol, unless its actually for trollies. But I understand what you mean. And I know that the tighter the curve the shorter the car/loco. And While You bring up the point I was trying to make in my first post. Yes 15 inch radius is considered almost nonexistant in Ho anymore. because of being proto accurate and because of the big diesels and steamers and all. so Yes 15 inch is frown on in Ho scale regardless of what you model. and the same is true in O scale standard. But for On30 you can have a beautiful layout with a backwoods feel logging/mining layout with curves down to 9 inches. The spruce coal layout comes to mind. and yet in On30 that is consider acceptable because it is done well. But You do that same layout in Ho scale standard. and then it becomes taboo. you will get a ton of comments that. its not proto accurate or other comments. I understand the width and legth of a car. I'm a truck driver I understand over hang all to well. But again it always seems to come down to, Narrow gauge layouts are fine with tight curves short cars and that fantasy is yet believeable. but standard gauge regardless of scale (mostly Ho and N) have the problem of it being taboo if it isn't narrow gauge. Also I love a finely detail model. But I take a finely detailed frieght car with out any underside details anyday. Why because I never see those details under the car unless I pick it up and look or it is derailed and layed over on its side. to me If I cant see it, Why bother? Sure it looks nice. and certianly adds to the cost of the car. But When do you actaully ever see those details, You may see some small glimpses of things close to the outer edge but all that detail is really just waste to me. If I can't enjoy it in view while being used why bother. But I do love them details. But even if I have to sacrifice those details to make a car work around a curve I am fine with that.

I do appreciate all of your comments. Trying to decide if I should go On30 or stick with Ho is tough In the regard that What I like about On30, You don't actually see in Ho standard to much. so it is hard to accuratly know if What I want to model will be better in one scale over the other. And please Don't take my comments as aruguing against you, My whole Life it has been drummed in my head to be protoypical, from the clubs I use to be in to different hobbyist I know over the years. And its that Box of Why is it ok for the narrow gauge guys, but not the standard gauge guys that I am trying to break free of.

thinking out loud here. So What if I was to take a On30 track plan and build it in Ho standard? esp if the track plan calls for 15" radius? On30 seems to capture the mind and make things as mentioned romantised and believable, but that same layout in Ho scale would not be because its somehow standard gauge? because now it has to be more protoypical. And I think that is where I am having a hard time sepereating. I am fine with sharp curves In On30 even making a 2x4 On30 layout. But to do that same layout in Ho standard is in my mind not as romatic or believable? Hopefully I am making sense.

Do what YOU want. There are many facets of enjoyment, with this hobby. It's your money, do what makes you happy. I don't care if people think I am not Prototype Correct.

I went with a 9" radius on my above linked 2x3 HOn30 layout. If I had truck mounted couplers I could easily have done tighter curves.

 

[jhn_plsn]

Could you lower the HO layout and build the narrow gauge project above it? You could operate the HO in a chair and stand or sit on a stool for the 0n30. Trash in trash out. Just me spitballing here.

 

[Bushel86]

Do what YOU want. There are many facets of enjoyment, with this hobby. It's your money, do what makes you happy. I don't care if people think I am not Prototype Correct.

I went with a 9" radius on my above linked 2x3 HOn30 layout. If I had truck mounted couplers I could easily have done tighter curves.

I am a perfectionist. And it is hard for me to break free of doing it one way for another. I know that no one can tell me which to do Ho or On30. its my choice. But it hard to because I think for me Ho has always been need ing to be as prototypical as possible or it wont be believable. and anything but is well toy like. and I like my layouts to look like a real life image of art. so its breaking that barrier i struggle with. Its why On30 for me is easy to break that barrier because it has those aspects already broken. So I think its figuring out which will make me happy, and how to over come the Box I have been in.

Could you lower the HO layout and build the narrow gauge project above it? You could operate the HO in a chair and stand or sit on a stool for the 0n30. Trash in trash out. Just me spitballing here.

I sadly can not. My layout has to be up high enough for my hobby desks. And Also for other shelves and stuff for my structures and models that don't go on the layout. So as far as the Ho switching layout, its broken down in to a 1x8 inglenook layout just to run my modern stuff. and It will be moved to another location. sadly I just don't know if I want to do Ho or On30 for the next layout. the track plan is An On30 track plan. So Converting it is simple. but like I mentioned above. Will the same theme in On30 be as believable in Ho scale. While I have no problems with my scenery techniques, and making things look realistic. its more so that stigmatism I am dealing with. which I know no one can help with.. just makes it frustrating. lol