|
?I have a few topics that might help this cause.
?
I have just stripped my layout to bare module tops for a complete rebuild.? Fear not,? this has always been the plan.? ? I will be placing an order for code 100 flex track from Micro Engineering in the near future.? ?I anticipate many turnouts from Empire Track works to follow.? ?I continue to work on several scale modeling projects including rolling stock, structures, and maritime vessels.? ?My collection of expensive scale semi trucks, vehicles of all kinds and construction and farm implements continues at an unhealthy rate.? I am hoping with fading confidence that Shane Lambert will follow through on delivering an AM GP 35 Erie Lackawanna locomotive that I sent him a check for in mid December.
? ? My good friend Bill has just posted photos of his recently completed RS 11.? ?The trade we made was a bare brass RS 11 for a beautifully painted NYC RS 11.? ?The NYC RS 11 is a perfect companion to the RS 11 that a purchased from Ed Loizeau.? I think Bill posted a photo of the two locomotives together that, in my opinion, should be put out into the print world as an example of what our scale looks like.? ? Bill warned me early on that scale was going to be expensive.? ?The RS 11 was that.? ?
? ? ?I have been on a steep learning curve since joining this "sport" during COVIDs shutdown.? ?Sitting in with Bill while he installs decoders in my locomotives is invaluable.
? ? ?So now my goals are to install headlights in my SP SD40-2 and paint and detail my Peobe Snow Midgage passenger train..
I have in my train collection:? ?a 1946 AC Gilbert K Pacific PRR and four New Haven passenger cars.? This runs on Gargraves track.
A high rail diesel transition Lackawanna freight train.? ?A scale transition diesel freight train.? A high rail modern freight train.? And a scale modern freight train.? These all have, until I ripped it all up, run on AF Fast Track.
?
When I hear stories about our love of scale trains on the decline it saddens me.? ?I'm here to stay.
?
Andrew Parker
|
Sounds like a plan Andrew! ?Looking forward to seeing the build pics!
The hi rail stuff won’t run on the code 100 track. What are your plans for those locos and rolling stock? ?Are you going to retire them to the display shelves? Or update where possible? ?Or sell?
Bill Philadelphia
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Mar 24, 2025, at 10:45?PM, Andrew Parker via groups.io <andriaart1@...> wrote:
? ?I have a few topics that might help this cause.
?
I have just stripped my layout to bare module tops for a complete rebuild.? Fear not,? this has always been the plan.? ? I will be placing an order for code 100 flex track from Micro Engineering in the near future.? ?I anticipate many turnouts from Empire Track works to follow.? ?I continue to work on several scale modeling projects including rolling stock, structures, and maritime vessels.? ?My collection of expensive scale semi trucks, vehicles of all kinds and construction and farm implements continues at an unhealthy rate.? I am hoping with fading confidence that Shane Lambert will follow through on delivering an AM GP 35 Erie Lackawanna locomotive that I sent him a check for in mid December.
? ? My good friend Bill has just posted photos of his recently completed RS 11.? ?The trade we made was a bare brass RS 11 for a beautifully painted NYC RS 11.? ?The NYC RS 11 is a perfect companion to the RS 11 that a purchased from Ed Loizeau.? I think Bill posted a photo of the two locomotives together that, in my opinion, should be put out into the print world as an example of what our scale looks like.? ? Bill warned me early on that scale was going to be expensive.? ?The RS 11 was that.? ?
? ? ?I have been on a steep learning curve since joining this "sport" during COVIDs shutdown.? ?Sitting in with Bill while he installs decoders in my locomotives is invaluable.
? ? ?So now my goals are to install headlights in my SP SD40-2 and paint and detail my Peobe Snow Midgage passenger train..
I have in my train collection:? ?a 1946 AC Gilbert K Pacific PRR and four New Haven passenger cars.? This runs on Gargraves track.
A high rail diesel transition Lackawanna freight train.? ?A scale transition diesel freight train.? A high rail modern freight train.? And a scale modern freight train.? These all have, until I ripped it all up, run on AF Fast Track.
?
When I hear stories about our love of scale trains on the decline it saddens me.? ?I'm here to stay.
?
Andrew Parker
|
Andrew,?
?
The biggest advantage to being friends with Bill that I can see is that whenever the lady in your life raises her eyebrows at your growing model railroad empire, you can always point to Bill's collection of 968 locomotives and 12,000 freight cars and say, "Look, what I have is nothing compared to Bill." I have used this tactic repeatedly over the years, and it's always worked. Bill has done us all a favor truth be told. Best to keep a snapshot of his storage shelves on your cell phone if you ever get challenged though.?
?
Brian Jackson
Springfield, IL
|
My solution is code 148 track and movable frog turnouts, which will then run everything.
In this group, since it is primarily scale, I sense a kind of in-built prejudice against hi-rail.? If not code 100(or even 83), then no good.
If there were never AF S gauge, we likely would not be here.? And no one has offerred any viable method that I have seen to convert later Lionel AF hirail scale steam to true scale.? I can't even get anyone to sell me basic conversion chassis kits for Hudsons or K-5's.
|
Not quite so: Cleveland CD products preceded AF's move to 3/16".
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
My solution is code 148 track and movable frog turnouts, which will then run everything.
In this group, since it is primarily scale, I sense a kind of in-built prejudice against hi-rail.? If not code 100(or even 83), then no good.
If there were never AF S gauge, we likely would not be here.? And no one has offerred any viable method that I have seen to convert later Lionel AF hirail scale steam to true scale.? I can't even get anyone to sell me basic conversion chassis kits for
Hudsons or K-5's.
|
John,
There are some very good, published, S modelers that use track
larger than Code 100.? I'm drawing a blank on names but a check in
NASG Dispatch and Model Railroader (especially the S modeling issue
in either 2023 or 2024) should yield the support you're looking
for.? Also, it's your railroad, build it the way you find most
enjoyable.? Everyone else does.?
--Dave McBrayer
Auburn, CA
----------------
On 03/25/2025 1:28 PM, John Hutnick via
groups.io wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
My solution is code 148 track and movable frog turnouts,
which will then run everything.
In this group, since it is primarily scale, I sense a kind of
in-built prejudice against hi-rail.? If not code 100(or even
83), then no good.
If there were never AF S gauge, we likely would not be here.?
And no one has offerred any viable method that I have seen to
convert later Lionel AF hirail scale steam to true scale.? I
can't even get anyone to sell me basic conversion chassis kits
for Hudsons or K-5's.
--
Dave McBrayer
Auburn, CA?
|
Brooks Stover the poster child for that.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
John,
There are some very good, published, S modelers that use track larger than Code 100.? I'm drawing a blank on names but a check in NASG Dispatch and Model Railroader (especially the S modeling issue in either 2023 or 2024) should yield the support you're looking
for.? Also, it's your railroad, build it the way you find most enjoyable.? Everyone else does.?
--Dave McBrayer
Auburn, CA
----------------
On 03/25/2025 1:28 PM, John Hutnick via groups.io wrote:
My solution is code 148 track and movable frog turnouts, which will then run everything.
In this group, since it is primarily scale, I sense a kind of in-built prejudice against hi-rail.? If not code 100(or even 83), then no good.
If there were never AF S gauge, we likely would not be here.? And no one has offerred any viable method that I have seen to convert later Lionel AF hirail scale steam to true scale.? I can't even get anyone to sell me basic conversion chassis kits for
Hudsons or K-5's.
--
Dave McBrayer
Auburn, CA?
|
I'm here to stay as well. I switched to S 17 years ago from N and I have not regretted it for one iota. As a theoretical exercise, I have looked into modeling what I am currently trying to model in S, in N, O, and G. This was just for fun, and just to see how comparatively "little" there is available in S for my personal objective. The several times I have engaged in that theoretical exercise, I came to the same conclusion: for my personal modeling objective, there are no more ready-to-use products available in N, O, or G, than there is in S!!! HO has never been an option for me, because the scale just "looks wrong" to my artistic eye. N, S, and true G (i.e. 1:32) all have a mathematical relationship with each other, which is why they just look right to my eye.
So, given that I have to, mostly, build things myself, I'd rather build it in S than any other scale, with O and G being simply impractical given the amount of space I have available, and N being impossible to convert to battery-powered engines. So, S it is until the end of days for me. ?
- Peter.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 03/24/2025 09:45 PM, Andrew Parker via groups.io wrote: When I hear stories about our love of scale trains on the decline it saddens me.? ?I'm here to stay.
Andrew Parker
--
Peter Vanvliet (info@...)
owner, Fourth Ray Software
Houston, Texas
(personal web site)
|
If not code 100(or even 83), then no good.
John, As a Pennsy guy, I'm willing to go as high as 125!?? Jamie Bothwell Bethlehem, PA
Brooks Stover the poster child for that.
John,
There are some very good, published, S modelers that use track larger than Code 100.? I'm drawing a blank on names but a check in NASG Dispatch and Model Railroader (especially the S modeling issue in either 2023 or 2024) should yield the support you're looking
for.? Also, it's your railroad, build it the way you find most enjoyable.? Everyone else does.?
--Dave McBrayer
Auburn, CA
----------------
On 03/25/2025 1:28 PM, John Hutnick via wrote:
My solution is code 148 track and movable frog turnouts, which will then run everything.
In this group, since it is primarily scale, I sense a kind of in-built prejudice against hi-rail.? If not code 100(or even 83), then no good.
If there were never AF S gauge, we likely would not be here.? And no one has offerred any viable method that I have seen to convert later Lionel AF hirail scale steam to true scale.? I can't even get anyone to sell me basic conversion chassis kits for
Hudsons or K-5's.
--
Dave McBrayer
Auburn, CA?
|
Yes.? C-D seems to be first.? This is from the April 1937 Model Railroader:
Another interesting entrance into S scale was Nord in this March 1945 ad in Model Railroader:
 I don't think you will have much luck if you send them a dime for one.? But you will have excellent luck in this group's files because I scanned the entire "report" and put it in the files section.? You can decide how "impartial" it is.? It is a pretty interesting read.
Here it is:
Charles E. "Chuck" Kinzer
On Tuesday, March 25, 2025 at 02:02:02 PM PDT, Jamie Bothwell via groups.io <jamie.bothwell610@...> wrote:
If not code 100(or even 83), then no good.
John, As a Pennsy guy, I'm willing to go as high as 125!?? Jamie Bothwell Bethlehem, PA
Brooks Stover the poster child for that.
John,
There are some very good, published, S modelers that use track larger than Code 100.? I'm drawing a blank on names but a check in NASG Dispatch and Model Railroader (especially the S modeling issue in either 2023 or 2024) should yield the support you're looking
for.? Also, it's your railroad, build it the way you find most enjoyable.? Everyone else does.?
--Dave McBrayer
Auburn, CA
----------------
On 03/25/2025 1:28 PM, John Hutnick via wrote:
My solution is code 148 track and movable frog turnouts, which will then run everything.
In this group, since it is primarily scale, I sense a kind of in-built prejudice against hi-rail.? If not code 100(or even 83), then no good.
If there were never AF S gauge, we likely would not be here.? And no one has offerred any viable method that I have seen to convert later Lionel AF hirail scale steam to true scale.? I can't even get anyone to sell me basic conversion chassis kits for
Hudsons or K-5's.
--
Dave McBrayer
Auburn, CA?
|
Brian,
You make a good point here.? Thanks Bill.
--
Ken Zieska
1/64th Scale Modeler
|
I like model trains.? ?? I like toy trains.?? I make no differentiation other than that.??I find the rail height to be quite minor vs oversize couplers and way oversize accessories.??
Ted Larson -- Ted Larson trainweb.org/mhrr/??????? --------??????? NASG.org??????? --------??????? GN in 1965
|
Wow. The?ad and the adaganda reads as if S has a super bright future ahead of it.
?
Seriously: What went?awry with S?
?
It IS?a great size, there's no denying that... but WHY didn't it take hold and become a major player among the scales, especially since its inception was before the massive growth and popularization of HO?
?
What does history say went wrong?
?
Andre Ming
?
?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
----- Original Message -----
Subject: Re: [S-Scale] On topic (S scale railroad modeling)
Yes.? C-D seems to be first.? This is from the April 1937 Model Railroader:
<snip>
?
?
|
I think it is mainly the layout limitations due to the scale.? Once HO became known and pretty reliable, there was no contest for those who didn't have much room for a layout.? And that was a lot of people.
On a related note, a friend of mine had the company Flint Model Supply founded in the 1960's to sell "N Gauge" (people usually didn't use the word "scale" for it then) mail order.? I didn't think it had very much future.? "Just too small," says me.? "Just not reliable," says me.? And then the Con-Cor Alco PA diesels came out which were decent.? Things took off from there.
The industrial designer (or perhaps THE industrial designer) Raymond Loewy had a saying called "MAYA."? That stood for "Most Advanced - Yet Acceptable."? In the model railroad world, the size shrink to HO was advanced, yet it was still acceptable.
Charles E. "Chuck" Kinzer
On Tuesday, March 25, 2025 at 03:44:26 PM PDT, Andre Ming via groups.io <laming@...> wrote:
Wow. The?ad and the adaganda reads as if S has a super bright future ahead of it.
?
Seriously: What went?awry with S?
?
It IS?a great size, there's no denying that... but WHY didn't it take hold and become a major player among the scales, especially since its inception was before the massive growth and popularization of HO?
?
What does history say went wrong?
?
Andre Ming
?
?
----- Original Message -----
Subject: Re: [S-Scale] On topic (S scale railroad modeling)
Yes.? C-D seems to be first.? This is from the April 1937 Model Railroader:
<snip>
?
?
|
Andrew,?
?
The biggest advantage to being friends with Bill that I can see is that whenever the lady in your life raises her eyebrows at your growing model railroad empire, you can always point to Bill's collection of 968 locomotives and 12,000 freight cars and say, "Look, what I have is nothing compared to Bill." I have used this tactic repeatedly over the years, and it's always worked. Bill has done us all a favor truth be told. Best to keep a snapshot of his storage shelves on your cell phone if you ever get challenged though.?
?
Brian Jackson
Springfield, IL
|
And why did HO grow and OO fade away?? ?And N blossom and TT die?? ? Stan
Wow. The?ad and the adaganda reads as if S has a super bright future ahead of it.
?
Seriously: What went?awry with S?
?
It IS?a great size, there's no denying that... but WHY didn't it take hold and become a major player among the scales, especially since its inception was before the massive growth and popularization of HO?
?
What does history say went wrong?
?
Andre Ming
?
?
----- Original Message -----
Subject: Re: [S-Scale] On topic (S scale railroad modeling)
Yes.? C-D seems to be first.? This is from the April 1937 Model Railroader:
<snip>
?
?
|
O scale seems to be doing OK so size isn’t much of a factor. Gilbert thrived until AC died and it dumped when quality dropped dramatically under the crooked new owner. AC’s son had no drive, no passion. CD was long gone by then. I suspect, had Gilbert acquired AF a decade or two earlier he could have established S as a dominant scale.
|
I wonder if a factor contributing to the level of acceptance of S by the broader modeling community through the years has been the tendency for S modelers to stay 'close to the fold' rather than mingling and engaging with the larger model railroading community.? Maybe it was necessary since the scale is complicated with compatibility issues and so it's been necessary to hook up with other S modelers to get the answers.? But how many S modelers have been actively engaged with their local NMRA multi-scale clubs and operating groups...where modelers in other scales can be exposed to S?? How many S modelers over the years have been avid readers of, and contributors to, the multi-scale modeling magazines like Model Railroader and Railroad Model Craftsman?? Perhaps we've spent too much of our time talking among ourselves instead of 'mixing it up' with N, HO and O modelers so they can see first hand what S is all about.?
?
And I wonder what the impact of having a national organization specific to S has had on the growth of S.? While a national S organization certainly can coordinate outreach efforts and support wonderful resources like the NASG website,? perhaps being a member of the NASG and/or local S-only clubs has replaced membership in multiscale organizations for many S modelers.? Curiously, opening our conventions to non-S modelers has never been a priority...perhaps a missed opportunity.? Modelers in the other popular scales seem content to be part of multi-scale organizations.? Yes, there's a national O scale organization, and there are N- and O-specific magazines, but to my knowledge there are no N or HO-specific national associations.? An NMRA S Special Interest Group (SIG) was tried with limited success but that certainly seems like a great avenue to both hook up with other S modelers but also to integrate S into the wider modeling community.
?
Being the close-knit group that we are has been both an asset, and I would contend, a liability over the years.
?
Brooks Stover
|
Good points Brooks. I wonder what Ken Zieska would say? He’s been very active in the NMRA for well over a decade and has hosted a yearly modelers meet featuring S and other scales for a decade. Since I left Minnesota almost nine years ago there have been some new to me modelers but whether they are new to the scale I don’t know. It’s a tough nut to get someone to change scales. I know if I were new I’d certainly choke at the price of track. $78 plus freight for 18 feet seems pretty steep. It’s probably more palatable if you want to add a couple spurs, but to start fresh, I’m not sure. Thank goodness I think I have all the .138 I need.
|
Thank you and hello to Brooks.? My personal feeling,? for whatever it is worth, is that I like having our S scale groups and conventions confined to S scale. I am reasonably annoyed when I search for S scale or gauge trains on Ebay to then have to scroll past 100 N or HO offerings? and never come across an S listing.
Andrew Parker
I wonder if a factor contributing to the level of acceptance of S by the broader modeling community through the years has been the tendency for S modelers to stay 'close to the fold' rather than mingling and engaging with the larger model railroading community.? Maybe it was necessary since the scale is complicated with compatibility issues and so it's been necessary to hook up with other S modelers to get the answers.? But how many S modelers have been actively engaged with their local NMRA multi-scale clubs and operating groups...where modelers in other scales can be exposed to S?? How many S modelers over the years have been avid readers of, and contributors to, the multi-scale modeling magazines like Model Railroader and Railroad Model Craftsman?? Perhaps we've spent too much of our time talking among ourselves instead of 'mixing it up' with N, HO and O modelers so they can see first hand what S is all about.?
?
And I wonder what the impact of having a national organization specific to S has had on the growth of S.? While a national S organization certainly can coordinate outreach efforts and support wonderful resources like the NASG website,? perhaps being a member of the NASG and/or local S-only clubs has replaced membership in multiscale organizations for many S modelers.? Curiously, opening our conventions to non-S modelers has never been a priority...perhaps a missed opportunity.? Modelers in the other popular scales seem content to be part of multi-scale organizations.? Yes, there's a national O scale organization, and there are N- and O-specific magazines, but to my knowledge there are no N or HO-specific national associations.? An NMRA S Special Interest Group (SIG) was tried with limited success but that certainly seems like a great avenue to both hook up with other S modelers but also to integrate S into the wider modeling community.
?
Being the close-knit group that we are has been both an asset, and I would contend, a liability over the years.
?
Brooks Stover
|
David McBrayer
Ted Larson