Atlas Trucks

Michael,

Good choice.  The Atlas trucks that you are replacing do they have metal wheels ? I am interested if they are.

Skipping S

I certainly respect your decision and don't want to disparrage it. I just feel that too many folks jump from the smaller scales to a larger scale due to diminished eyesight (been there!) and fail to consider S scale. S gives you a larger scale to work with in a footprint only 136% that of HO.

Skipping S

Roy,

You have a very valid point ! But I believe most people do that because when it comes to scale we are always thinking of the one that are most in demand, N, HO then they jump to O scale or even G . Never even think about S. It happen to me. But in my case I went to On30. Although I have a lot of equipment in O scale. But for some reason S scale is somewhere out there and it is a very nice size to model.

I went to a larger scale back in 2000, but now for some odd reason I am back in  HO although I still run my On30 and O scale.

The "S"ecret "S"cale

I guess it depends on what you want for equipment. S has lots of stuff available, but getting the word out about it is tough. There are still a lot of perceptions to fight like "It's all American Flyer", "You have the scratchbuild everything", and "There's not much available". I've had no trouble filling a basement up with it.

I may start up a blog and offer to share information on S with anyone considering a new scale.

BTW, thanks for your comment on my layout,

My thoughts on S Scale

I'm firmly entrenched in N scale because I like the long trains and more railroad in a smaller space.  And I have (some more) HO equipment still and love the availability of HO stuff. 

However, in 15-25 years, I expect the N scale stuff will be passed on to my children (hopefully they are interested) and I'd move to a larger scale.  HO is the obvious choice, given the stuff I already have and the availability of it, but S has been something I've thought to be intriguing.  First, at 1:64, its very easy to calculate in my head measurements and what the scale footage and things are (I know, it doesn't seem any easier than O at 1:48, but I think it is), but beyond that, there are a tonne of scale models (not designed necessarily for trains) that are in 1:64 scale that you could utilize in your layout.  Cars, planes, ships, you name it.  Even in HO, you are still fairly limited in the number of vehicles you can get in 1:87.  And it still gives you more layout in a given space than O or G.  But still, its about the trains, and if the time comes when I look at S scale there isn't the type of trains I want, I'll probably stick to HO. 

O Scale conversion

Nick,

All of the O scale Atlas cars I have bought in the last 7 months have had the die-cast metal trucks and metal wheelsets.  At this time I only have a pair of Atlas 2 rail roller bearing trucks on hand.  I have a 60 ft box car in shipping right now, hopefully it shows up today, but it has 3 rail trucks.  I figured why spend an extra $5 for a car with 2 rail trucks if I am completely replacing the trucks.  But then again, I don't know how easy it is going to be to sell the 3 rail trucks. 

Michael  

Different Scales

Dave,

I've been a model railroader for a very long time and you said something very important and something I've been noticing more and more and that is; "I'm firmly entrenched in N scale because I like the long trains and more railroad in a smaller space." I see that more and more in our hobby. In my opinion, I think the time will come that N Scale will be the most popular scale for that particular reason. When I was brainstorming my layout in my bedroom I was really thinking doing N scale and I could've accomplished exactly what I wanted to do in N scale. The reason I did not do it was because it has been 20 years that I've been using DCC with sound and I was not pleased with the sound in N scale, otherwise my present layout would've been in N. My neighbor across the street he is 84 years old and he has a serious N Scale layout.

I know that in Japan the most popular scale is N and what is catching on is Z, but that is a different animal. But the Hobbyist is looking more and more to have the most railroad in the least amount of space.

O Scale conversion

Roy,

I have to say that S scale never occurred to me until after I bought into a bunch of O equipment.  I agree on the comment about S Scale's perception as I felt there was not enough manufacturers making enough equipment to satisfy my modeling needs.  It is a moot point now but I should have done some research on S scale before switching.....  

In the end, I am going to guess that I would have gone O scale anyways as I like the bulk/heft/size feeling when I hold a car or engine.  

Michael

like the bulk/heft/size feeling

like the bulk/heft/size feeling ... that's the weakness of O scale. You picked that massive engine or that bulky rolling stock and you go...UUUUURGH...UUUUURGH. It is manly thing that's for sure. I get a kick everytimeI pick my engine and just feel the masiveness of the scale. For some reason it is call "The King of Scale"

O scale 2 rail shelf layout

Hello - A great beginning.  I am a fan of shelf layouts because of what you demonstrate - fun, operation, and modeling experience in a limited space - in any scale.

I host a website devoted to shelf and similar (around the walls) layouts.  The purpose is to encourage communication between those with similar modeling aspirations and encourage others to start a layout regardless of limited space. There are only three layouts so far but I would like to add material on your layout - diagrams, pictures, whatever.

Check it out at http://webpages.charter.net/aarmstro/index.htm

Art Armstrong

O Scale 2 rail shelf layout

Art,

I would be honored.   Let me know what I need to do.   I finished the framework for the last section, laid the plywood, and padding down.  Tomorrow I hope to put up the fascia.    

thanks

Michael 

O scale two rail

Hi Michael -

The goal is to demonstrate the use of shelf layouts so the first need is a track diagram - with comments if desired.

Then some pics of in-progress or finished layouts, special features such as wall-mounting, lift-ups,  framing,use as module,  etc.

Not needed are train pictures or how-to-do general items.  This is  an attempt to avoid duplicating what is available other places - such as this enterprise.

Send it all to me via email (below)

If  you would welcome comments includeyour email address in a format like this 

just email everything to aarmstro(at)charter(dot)net

to try to avoid robot spamming

Art

Bellingham Bay and British Columbia

Now that I have given you some idea of my modeling mindset here is some more detail.   

I am looking at taking an artistic license in my O Scale 2 Rail layout.  I am going to model the Milwaukee Road Bellingham, WA branch line that goes from Bellingham up to Sumas, WA with a branch off to Lynden, WA.  My thought at this time is to change history a bit and say that the local shippers formed their own railroad to take over the line after the Milwaukee Road retrenchment.  The new railroad will have the same name as the railroad the Milwaukee Road took over in the early 1900's, the Bellingham Bay and British Columbia Railroad.  The new railroad was able to purchase several of the Milwaukee Road GP35's and a SW1200.

The first part of the layout, as shown in the earlier pictures I posted, will be the Citizen's Dock and Whatcom Creek Waterway area.  I don't plan on modeling the waterway itself but I may try to get some of the dock on the layout.  There were at one time at least 4 spurs at this location although I still don't have all the details on the companies located here.  I have seen some pictures of a SW1200 pulling several 50' modern boxcars onto the dock but that is about it on what information I have.  Some research has taken place but...........

More later

Michael Osweiler

Picking a scale from "leftovers"

Ah, the age old argument!! I have been in and out of the hobby for about 50 years. Lionel first, then HO for a long time with two operating, partly sceniced layouts, then a move to G scale back in the early 80's after a couple of articles on indoor G layouts and a trip to the eye doctor to find out why I couldn't see Kadee coupler springs anymore!!! I sold off all the HO rolling stock and bundled up miles of code 70 track and switches. (More on that later) I bought a bunch of G scale stuff from LGB, Delton, USA Trains and MDC. (I still have it if anyone is looking!) My layout room was a whopping 12 feet by 22 feet. I cut my own ties and laid code 132 aluminum rail. It didn't take me long to realize that this was just not enough room for G scale. A personal tragedy (my wife died at age 40 in 1989) as well as a new career path at work stopped my modeling for a while. As time went on I wanted to get back into the hobby. I have always been fascinated by narrow gauge (NG) equipment both locomotives and rolling stock especially logging. I decided if I were to start again it would be some kind of NG. HOn3 was way too small and after looking at On3 locomotive prices at $1500 or more plus the cost of track and switches I looked at Sn3 and PBL and that was even more expensive. Oh what to do? I went into the layout room and started to take apart the G scale track and started designing something in my head. I came across this giant box full of HO track and switches I had forgotten all about. I had a dim recollection of hearing about this new relatively inexpensive scale which was some sort of hybrid narrow gauge. I bought a couple of magazines and found out it was O scale (good on the eyes) that ran on HO track (good on my wallet). They called it On30 or On2 ½!! Hmm. I found a Bachmann passenger set with a locomotive and 3 coaches at Boscovs of all places on a super after Christmas sale. I brought it home and OMG did that steam locomotive run well. Smooth, quiet, and no wobble, no lope, no anything that I remembered about steam engines when I was in HO!! I looked at all the track I had but it didn’t look quite right. Neither did the Peco track that was all that was available back then. I started doing some research as I was going to model a narrow gauge RR located in the Adirondacks north of my home. What I found was the eastern RR executives must have been more miserly than their western counterparts as their ties were nowhere near as long as the ones used in Colorado Narrow Gauge! True, one of the most charming aspects of NG is the slim rail with the long ties, but hey, I had a ton of code 70 flex track and more turnouts than I felt I would ever need. It still didn’t look right, though. As I was sorting it out I found a piece that had the tie spacing about 2X normal and THAT looked about right. Back to the old books and pictures and yes, it looked just like the track on the Grasse River RR!! So, for two weeks I sat in front of the boob tube with a chisel X-acto knife cutting the tie web on the underside to remove every other tie. I destroyed a couple of junked up switches before I got the hang of it. Currently, the layout is half built and half converted to DCC, needing the Shinohara turnouts modified for DCC. Scratchbuilt an engine house and Armstrong turntable (modeled after the one in Laws, CA), built a forest of evergreen trees, got sound installed in 2 locomotives, etc. I do tend to bounce around. Well, that’s my story on picking a scale, and “I’m sticking to it!!” It’s funny how these things work out. I have no idea where I would have ended up if I didn’t have all that HO track. Probably with a simple On3 layout and an expensive K-28!!

Atlas Trucks -- What to do with the surplus 3-rail trucks?

I have to agree that it isn't worth it to pay the extra if you're going with another truck anyway. If you have a collection of Atlas 3-rail trucks, you can put them up on the OGR Forum Buy/Sell section.  Just a thought.

Matt Jackson.