|
All --
Recently on this e-list here has been a lot of back-and-forth/justification for a variety of wheel and track types and how to accommodate what on what trackage.? In my view, this is the single most off-putting issue facing the future (or lack thereof) of S.
Look at HO.? Everything you can buy is mutually/physically compatible with each other -- cars, locomotives, track products.? You can purchase A's loco. B's car, and C's track components and everything will work toigether.? No tutorial required.
Now look at S.? Despite recent NASG efforts to separate the various incompatibilities in S into -- get this! -- six different brochures in order to avoid confusion, the very fact that this was done accedes to the fact that S is still haunted by American Flyer.
Of course, we here are long past that issue, comfortable with what we are doing.? But the future of S depends not on us (most of whom are past our expiration dates!) but on future converts and newbies.? For them, STANDARDS MATTER!
Forget rail height for now.? It's wheel flanges and flangeway widths that matter.? There is no need for new products to conform to anything but NMRA standards for S.? (These are identical to NASG's "scale" standards.) The only additional "no-no" is for major-mag ad to dump the AF-compatible lobster-claw coupler visuals.? People new to S should not have to school themselves on S's historical incompatibilities in order to achieve operational success.
I am the last surviving founder of the NASG (Chicago, 1960).? NASG's stated goal was -- and continues to be -- the promotion of S scale.? And I have seen a lot.? I started with Lionel O-27 at age 11 months.? I gave the Lionel away to a Chinese immigrant family on my 10th birthday because my parents replaced it with an A. C. Gilbert S gauge Hudson freight set.? My goal ever since then has been to create realistic models to the best of my personal capabilities, expanding them via experience over time.? I built my first kit, a Chester 85-foot baggage car kit, when I was 11.? It didn't like my 20-inch radius curves, so I shortened it to 11 inches and -- it worked!? Throughout my student years I gradually converted my tinplate stuff as well as my Northeastern, Nimco, and Kinsman kit-built equipment to NMRA-compatible scale standards, building the occasional pattern for Claud Wade's brass castings project, and entering NMRA model contests.? In that era S began blossoming among the model railroading community.? Our pinnacle was achieved with the arrival of the first imported S scale brass locomotives in 1985.
Since then it has been downhill.? Before then, the personal goal of nearly all NASG members was to move from toy trains progressively toward more realism, generally via kits with AF-compatible wheelsets and flextrack components, into hirail and scale.? That is the path that I took.? But now we are faced with no brass importers and inconsistent track products (unless custom-built).? (Yeah, I know that Bill and Dan are working on this latter issue, and I wish them well.? But plug-and-play turnouts are still a gleam in the eye.). Maybe the RMC inside-cover ads in conjunction with the NASG.org website will turn things around.? But for now, those whose interest is piqued by these resources must shop the secondary S market (e.g., eBay and this e-list) to acquire even the most basic S inventory.
I hadn't intended to ramble this much.? My basic message for all of us whenever we face the outside model railroad fraternity is this:? Get rid of the AF/hirail albatross around our necks!!? Just because we here know how to deal with it doesn't mean we should have to foist it on potential newbies. -- Dick Karnes, MMR
|
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Sat, Mar 29, 2025 at 3:28?PM Dick Karnes, MMR via <rnk2202= [email protected]> wrote: All --
Recently on this e-list here has been a lot of back-and-forth/justification for a variety of wheel and track types and how to accommodate what on what trackage.? In my view, this is the single most off-putting issue facing the future (or lack thereof) of S.
Look at HO.? Everything you can buy is mutually/physically compatible with each other -- cars, locomotives, track products.? You can purchase A's loco. B's car, and C's track components and everything will work toigether.? No tutorial required.
Now look at S.? Despite recent NASG efforts to separate the various incompatibilities in S into -- get this! -- six different brochures in order to avoid confusion, the very fact that this was done accedes to the fact that S is still haunted by American Flyer.
Of course, we here are long past that issue, comfortable with what we are doing.? But the future of S depends not on us (most of whom are past our expiration dates!) but on future converts and newbies.? For them, STANDARDS MATTER!
Forget rail height for now.? It's wheel flanges and flangeway widths that matter.? There is no need for new products to conform to anything but NMRA standards for S.? (These are identical to NASG's "scale" standards.) The only additional "no-no" is for major-mag ad to dump the AF-compatible lobster-claw coupler visuals.? People new to S should not have to school themselves on S's historical incompatibilities in order to achieve operational success.
I am the last surviving founder of the NASG (Chicago, 1960).? NASG's stated goal was -- and continues to be -- the promotion of S scale.? And I have seen a lot.? I started with Lionel O-27 at age 11 months.? I gave the Lionel away to a Chinese immigrant family on my 10th birthday because my parents replaced it with an A. C. Gilbert S gauge Hudson freight set.? My goal ever since then has been to create realistic models to the best of my personal capabilities, expanding them via experience over time.? I built my first kit, a Chester 85-foot baggage car kit, when I was 11.? It didn't like my 20-inch radius curves, so I shortened it to 11 inches and -- it worked!? Throughout my student years I gradually converted my tinplate stuff as well as my Northeastern, Nimco, and Kinsman kit-built equipment to NMRA-compatible scale standards, building the occasional pattern for Claud Wade's brass castings project, and entering NMRA model contests.? In that era S began blossoming among the model railroading community.? Our pinnacle was achieved with the arrival of the first imported S scale brass locomotives in 1985.
Since then it has been downhill.? Before then, the personal goal of nearly all NASG members was to move from toy trains progressively toward more realism, generally via kits with AF-compatible wheelsets and flextrack components, into hirail and scale.? That is the path that I took.? But now we are faced with no brass importers and inconsistent track products (unless custom-built).? (Yeah, I know that Bill and Dan are working on this latter issue, and I wish them well.? But plug-and-play turnouts are still a gleam in the eye.). Maybe the RMC inside-cover ads in conjunction with the NASG.org website will turn things around.? But for now, those whose interest is piqued by these resources must shop the secondary S market (e.g., eBay and this e-list) to acquire even the most basic S inventory.
I hadn't intended to ramble this much.? My basic message for all of us whenever we face the outside model railroad fraternity is this:? Get rid of the AF/hirail albatross around our necks!!? Just because we here know how to deal with it doesn't mean we should have to foist it on potential newbies.
--
Dick Karnes, MMR
|
Well thought?and and good suggestions. Thanks for your?many contributions?over the years.?
On Sat, Mar 29, 2025 at 3:28?PM Dick Karnes, MMR via <rnk2202= [email protected]> wrote: All --
Recently on this e-list here has been a lot of back-and-forth/justification for a variety of wheel and track types and how to accommodate what on what trackage.? In my view, this is the single most off-putting issue facing the future (or lack thereof) of S.
Look at HO.? Everything you can buy is mutually/physically compatible with each other -- cars, locomotives, track products.? You can purchase A's loco. B's car, and C's track components and everything will work toigether.? No tutorial required.
Now look at S.? Despite recent NASG efforts to separate the various incompatibilities in S into -- get this! -- six different brochures in order to avoid confusion, the very fact that this was done accedes to the fact that S is still haunted by American Flyer.
Of course, we here are long past that issue, comfortable with what we are doing.? But the future of S depends not on us (most of whom are past our expiration dates!) but on future converts and newbies.? For them, STANDARDS MATTER!
Forget rail height for now.? It's wheel flanges and flangeway widths that matter.? There is no need for new products to conform to anything but NMRA standards for S.? (These are identical to NASG's "scale" standards.) The only additional "no-no" is for major-mag ad to dump the AF-compatible lobster-claw coupler visuals.? People new to S should not have to school themselves on S's historical incompatibilities in order to achieve operational success.
I am the last surviving founder of the NASG (Chicago, 1960).? NASG's stated goal was -- and continues to be -- the promotion of S scale.? And I have seen a lot.? I started with Lionel O-27 at age 11 months.? I gave the Lionel away to a Chinese immigrant family on my 10th birthday because my parents replaced it with an A. C. Gilbert S gauge Hudson freight set.? My goal ever since then has been to create realistic models to the best of my personal capabilities, expanding them via experience over time.? I built my first kit, a Chester 85-foot baggage car kit, when I was 11.? It didn't like my 20-inch radius curves, so I shortened it to 11 inches and -- it worked!? Throughout my student years I gradually converted my tinplate stuff as well as my Northeastern, Nimco, and Kinsman kit-built equipment to NMRA-compatible scale standards, building the occasional pattern for Claud Wade's brass castings project, and entering NMRA model contests.? In that era S began blossoming among the model railroading community.? Our pinnacle was achieved with the arrival of the first imported S scale brass locomotives in 1985.
Since then it has been downhill.? Before then, the personal goal of nearly all NASG members was to move from toy trains progressively toward more realism, generally via kits with AF-compatible wheelsets and flextrack components, into hirail and scale.? That is the path that I took.? But now we are faced with no brass importers and inconsistent track products (unless custom-built).? (Yeah, I know that Bill and Dan are working on this latter issue, and I wish them well.? But plug-and-play turnouts are still a gleam in the eye.). Maybe the RMC inside-cover ads in conjunction with the NASG.org website will turn things around.? But for now, those whose interest is piqued by these resources must shop the secondary S market (e.g., eBay and this e-list) to acquire even the most basic S inventory.
I hadn't intended to ramble this much.? My basic message for all of us whenever we face the outside model railroad fraternity is this:? Get rid of the AF/hirail albatross around our necks!!? Just because we here know how to deal with it doesn't mean we should have to foist it on potential newbies.
--
Dick Karnes, MMR
|
On Sat, Mar 29, 2025 at 01:28 PM, Dick Karnes, MMR wrote:
the very fact that this was done accedes to the fact that S is still haunted by American Flyer.
And it always will be.? There's a 75 year Flyer history that simply isn't going to go away into the night, even with Lionel ceasing manufacturing Flyer.
?
Rich G(ajnak)
|
When I first became aware of "scale model railroading", I must admit I was somewhat put off and puzzled by the seeming obsession with "standards". At the time (late '60s), it seemed that most ads in MR for HO stuff (which by then had really become the most popular scale) had a tagline about "NMRA standards- it insures interchange".
?
Looking back, one can see why HO got so big: as Dick said, "...A's loco, B's car, C's track..." all work together, (for the most part), without any needed alteration(s).
?
Having said that, just look at Mr. Stover's layout: it's only "highrail" because of the track: everything else is as "scale" as any fine layout...in any scale. The same could be said for Norm Charbonneau's fantastic O scale 3 rail masterpiece.
?
Is it not possible that the tradition to label our stuff as "scale" or "highrail" (mainly based on the track and /or code of rail being used) could be causing confusion or even "harm" to potential S scale participants??
?
Just throwing that out there...
?
Mark in Oregon
|
My always-addition to Dick's points, when was the last time someone "converted" from another scale to American Flyer? When was the last time a new model railroader chose American Flyer? I am at the NMRA Pacific Coast Region convention today - do you think there is a single person here interested in trying out American Flyer? Hi-rail?
There is simply no future in it. I put a model in the contest room every year, and always hear the perennial "I think about switching to S, but I just have too much equipment in ..." At least they are thinking about it.
|
On Sun, Mar 30, 2025 at 11:34?AM Michael Eldridge via <meldridge2000= [email protected]> wrote:
There is simply no future in it. I put a model in the contest room every year, and always hear the perennial "I think about switching to S, but I just have too much equipment in ..." At least they are thinking about it.
When I changed from HO to S, I got rid of 300+ freight cars, 125 locomotives, and a plethora?of passenger equipment and track and such. So it's not really a deterrent.?
Ken G.
?
|
I hate to be “that guy”, but…
I’ve been somewhat involved in S since the 1970s, with my Dad at first, building models for him, reading his Heralds and Dispatch…
The dream that we will somehow rival or even compete with HO, O or N scale will not die, despite every “what S needs…” prediction becoming true at some point - ready lay track (Shinohara), sets (S Helper, AM,) etc.?Maybe there was a window in the 1990s with AM, S Helper, SSA and Lionel all making new stuff, which is the driving force of success in other scales. But that window passed, AM is back to being kinda sleepy, with new paint schemes on existing models. S Helper AKA Scale Trains is?basically the same. Even one completely?new car a year is a pipe dream (except with 3D printing, more later there). Not my money, so I can’t really yell?at them about making new stuff, but this is basically treading water and not getting nearer to shore.
I wish Bill and all well with their track production, but to be realistic -?how many people here plan to rip out their existing track and replace it? I think relying on a sudden influx of new S scalers to buy better track without a bunch of other new product of matching quality to all the product in HO, N and O is unlikely, so the success of a new track line relies on a bunch of existing customers buying the product. And buying it only to?dump on eBay in six to twelve?months is like a sugar high, not going to last long enough to make a viable company or bring new blood into the scale.
I nose around other minority scales - HOn30, On30, On18;?and have a lot of friends modeling in HO. Of course most of those narrow gauges?have an advantage in using other scale’s track and mechanisms to an extent. Then there is TT - the Versers left S to make some cars in that scale. They have some product, there are people producing mechanisms to fit Hallmark Christmas ornament trains which happen to be close to TT scale. The point is, they found ways to get more equipment, which is what draws people to model in a scale. Far more than really good looking track (we all have our interest, no offense to the “track is a model too” people, I agree. But…). And they spend their time modeling in their?chosen scale and generally seem unconcerned with appealing to other modelers.
I suspect finding a way to make some decent mechanisms for diesels and steam locomotives that are not now available in S, combined with 3D printed bodies to go on them, would do far more to attract people than “look, track!”. Even just expanding the range of diesels (much easier than steam) from the last 40 years would make the scale look totally different to outsiders!
Someone mentioned?Norm Charbonneau's O 3-rail layout;?I suspect more people would be attracted by layouts like that than care about running on code 100 or smaller rail. If we really want to do track,?make?a track line that can carry Hi-rail and scale (Fox?Valley, S Helper but with #6 and above turnouts, some kind of modifiable turnout to handle at least recent Hi-rail and scale wheels assuming modern hi-rail has better standards than old Flyer) and it might become viable. Or, find a way to convert older equipment (steam engines) so they can at least run on?the new track, even if it is new axles to take the old wheels.?
There’s a thought - a company that re-manufactures older AF and Flyonel equipment to be able to run on “scale” track like S Helper or Fox Valley, with “scale” couplers. Not as custom work, but maintaining a small stock of “scaled” models with refurbished paint and parts! You could even reverse-engineer the scale axles for the recent Flyonel diesels that seem to be unavailable now.?As the collector side of Flyer dies off, there should be lots of relatively inexpensive material. Strictly selling on-line and at shows. Might even work! You would have a 4-8-4, Hudson, K-5, USRA heavy pacific and Atlantic as a starter, maybe an 0-8-0 and 0-6-0?as well, ?we have never had that kind of lineup since AF left (and?never operable on scale-ish track). If the line is successful,?try variations with 3D printed boilers and tenders like the Hiawatha and streamlined Hudson, variations on the Pacific, Norfolk Western?and SP for the?4-8-4, non-Reading variations on the Atlantic… ?detail sets that the modeler can add to improve the 70 year old Flyer detailing…?Like Ed L. used to say,?don’t have the design and manufacturing skills or the money to bring this off, but lots of ideas for others who might.
I’m afraid you?will ALWAYS have to explain the difference between Flyer, Hi-rail and scale unless you find some way to make 85 years worth of AF/Hi-rail?production go away! It will be out there at shows and on eBay even if you convinced the remaining manufacturers to drop it. You might be better off giving up on “scale”, as there is less floating around (no, not a serious suggestion).?New people will need to understand it, or face the frustration of buying things that won’t run. HO grew despite years of conflicting NMRA and European standards because code 100 track, while out of scale and somewhat ugly, could handle both standards. Guess what the majority used? Somehow O scale, with 3 rail, five foot gauge and a minority of?correct gauge, thrives - mostly people ignore the wide gauge and live with it, most even ignore the third rail!
Some semi-random thoughts on a Sunday morning.
On Sunday, March 30, 2025, 10:02 AM, Mark Mugnai <mugnai@...> wrote: When I first became aware of "scale model railroading", I must admit I was somewhat put off and puzzled by the seeming obsession with "standards". At the time (late '60s), it seemed that most ads in MR for HO stuff (which by then had really become the most popular scale) had a tagline about "NMRA standards- it insures interchange".
?
Looking back, one can see why HO got so big: as Dick said, "...A's loco, B's car, C's track..." all work together, (for the most part), without any needed alteration(s).
?
Having said that, just look at Mr. Stover's layout: it's only "highrail" because of the track: everything else is as "scale" as any fine layout...in any scale. The same could be said for Norm Charbonneau's fantastic O scale 3 rail masterpiece.
?
Is it not possible that the tradition to label our stuff as "scale" or "highrail" (mainly based on the track and /or code of rail being used) could be causing confusion or even "harm" to potential S scale participants??
?
Just throwing that out there...
?
Mark in Oregon
|
The modelers to snag are people like me, new or coming back to the hobby.? Also kids...On30 started with Christmas Tree sets using sectional HO track. The secret to kids and new modelers in S Scale would be sectional Code 100 track.
|
Also...one potential turn off to people choosing S Scale is the somewhat pretentious advice we tend to give out that you really need 30" minimum radius curves.? Almost all AM and SHS S-Scale equipment will run on 20" curves, let new modelers start out on their 4x8 sheet of plywood and get hooked on the Scale, they can expand once they get hooked...like I did.
|
After displaying one of those NASG
sponsored banners for a few years, " Loud Ding" I finally thought
just a bit deeper where it states the 4 divisions of S. meanwhile
we had purchased 4 total--each corner! ??? Just recently I was
going through a bunch of old literature --one, an old Dispatch
cover showing our layout with just a large" S Scale" sign I had
made hanging from a tall stand of 3" PVC pipe.?
?No reason for those fancy banners.?
Seems like the Christian world did that hundreds of years
ago--just finding reasons and cracks in faith to divide and argue
about.? Luckily they were stolen with our trailer; but unluckily
the two signs I had made had been cut up!? Sometimes wisdom is
slow--very slow!? I also thought that the Hi-rail guys would have
blended with the scale sizes, our better plastic models, our great
looking brass etc.? So it seems we're destined to segregate what's
left till the end!
Bob Werre
Phototraxx
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
When I first became aware of "scale model railroading", I
must admit I was somewhat put off and puzzled by the seeming
obsession with "standards". At the time (late '60s), it seemed
that most ads in MR for HO stuff (which by then had really
become the most popular scale) had a tagline about "NMRA
standards- it insures interchange".
?
Looking back, one can see why HO got so big: as Dick said,
"...A's loco, B's car, C's track..." all work together, (for the
most part), without any needed alteration(s).
?
Having said that, just look at Mr. Stover's layout: it's only
"highrail" because of the track: everything else is as "scale"
as any fine layout...in any scale. The same
could be said for Norm Charbonneau's fantastic O scale 3 rail
masterpiece.
?
Is it not possible that the tradition to label our stuff as
"scale" or "highrail" (mainly based on the track and /or code of
rail being used) could be causing confusion or even "harm" to
potential S scale participants??
?
Just throwing that out there...
?
Mark in Oregon
|
Mr. Eldridge's point may be applicable if one is at an NMRA event.? In any other location, the opposite is true.? I am in NJ.? I have just attended big train shows at the Allentown fairgrounds, the annual historic society show in Clark, NJ, and the Greenberg show in Edison, NJ.? I did not see a single "scale" S steam loco.
|
Being involved, somewhat, in the NASG Annual Car and NASG Convention
Car projects (I process the online orders we receive via the NASG
web site), I still find it surprising that about 75% of the actual
orders received are for the "hi-rail" versions of the cars. So, I
agree, we will have to "deal" with the realities of "AF", "hi-rail",
and "scale" for quite some time still.
- Peter.
On 03/30/2025 11:53 AM, Pieter Roos via
groups.io wrote:
I’m afraid
you?will ALWAYS have to explain the difference between Flyer,
Hi-rail and scale unless you find some way to make 85 years
worth of AF/Hi-rail?production go away!
Pieter Roos
--
Peter Vanvliet (info@...)
owner, Fourth Ray Software
Houston, Texas
(personal web site)
|
On Sun, Mar 30, 2025 at 09:53 AM, Pieter Roos wrote:
?
Edited with embedded comments...
The dream that we will somehow rival or even compete with HO, O or N scale will not die, despite every “what S needs…” prediction becoming true at some point - ready lay track (Shinohara), sets (S Helper, AM,) etc. Maybe there was a window in the 1990s with AM, S Helper, SSA and Lionel all making new stuff, which is the driving force of success in other scales. But that window passed, AM is back to being kinda sleepy, with new paint schemes on existing models. S Helper AKA Scale Trains is basically the same.
Also "back in the day," we did have a good clearing house with Scenery Unlimited.? Whatever one thought of Don Heimbuger personally, he was a driving force of S.? A phone call or mail order got you all the code 100 turnouts (Shinohora or Old Pullman) or flex track you needed, along with AM, SHS, Lionel and others.
I wish Bill and all well with their track production, but to be realistic -?how many people here plan to rip out their existing track and replace it? I think relying on a sudden influx of new S scalers to buy better track without a bunch of other new product of matching quality to all the product in HO, N and O is unlikely, so the success of a new track line relies on a bunch of existing customers buying the product. And buying it only to?dump on eBay in six to twelve?months is like a sugar high, not going to last long enough to make a viable company or bring new blood into the scale.
I certainly not going to rip up all the Fox Valley track I just put in.? HO had one real advantage in the "old days" to kick it off.? 99% of trainsets came with track from one manufacturer: Atlas.? While somewhere in the mid-70's some other companies came out with their own brand, but it was still compatible with good old Atlas code 100 Snap Track.
?
The somewhat amazing thing was when Lionel came out with their S FasTrack.? It was compatible with SHS S-Trax (with minor modification.)? But now with Lionel ceasing Flyer production, even that source is drying up.
I suspect finding a way to make some decent mechanisms for diesels and steam locomotives that are not now available in S, combined with 3D printed bodies to go on them, would do far more to attract people than “look, track!”. Even just expanding the range of diesels (much easier than steam) from the last 40 years would make the scale look totally different to outsiders!
Assuming folks would be willing to to gather the other components to complete the locomotives that are readily available in their existing scale.? We always seem to assume that other folks are willing to face the challenges of being in S with great enthusiasm.? Some may be attracted to the challenge, but they are a shrinking minority.
Someone mentioned Norm Charbonneau's O 3-rail layout; I suspect more people would be attracted by layouts like that than care about running on code 100 or smaller rail. If we really want to do track, make a track line that can carry Hi-rail and scale (Fox Valley, S Helper but with #6 and above turnouts, some kind of modifiable turnout to handle at least recent Hi-rail and scale wheels assuming modern hi-rail has better standards than old Flyer) and it might become viable.
I have a bunch of modified Fox Valley Hirail turnouts to run Scale and Hirail.? Now that it's installed Scale and Hirail run fine, Flyer not so much.? It was kind of a pain in the butt to modify them, but it's working with what I could get.? I did have higher hopes they would handle Flyer, but 'twas not to be.
There’s a thought - a company that re-manufactures older AF and Flyonel equipment to be able to run on “scale” track like S Helper or Fox Valley, with “scale” couplers. Not as custom work, but maintaining a small stock of “scaled” models with refurbished paint and parts! You could even reverse-engineer the scale axles for the recent Flyonel diesels that seem to be unavailable now. As the collector side of Flyer dies off, there should be lots of relatively inexpensive material. Strictly selling on-line and at shows. Might even work! You would have a 4-8-4, Hudson, K-5, USRA heavy pacific and Atlantic as a starter, maybe an 0-8-0 and 0-6-0 as well, ?we have never had that kind of lineup since AF left (and never operable on scale-ish track). If the line is successful, try variations with 3D printed boilers and tenders like the Hiawatha and streamlined Hudson, variations on the Pacific, Norfolk Western and SP for the 4-8-4, non-Reading variations on the Atlantic… ?detail sets that the modeler can add to improve the 70 year old Flyer detailing…
We used to have a company: Nixon Manufacturing that made scale conversion wheels for Flyer.? I've seen some converted thusly, but I don't know how many did the conversions back then.? I'd wager even the folks that converted the Lionel/Flyer U33C's, SD70 and AC44's to scale wheelsets and Kadees is relatively small.? And an even smaller number got their Flyer Y3's converted (Which as I recall, cost just about equal to the MSRP of the locomotive itself.)
I’m afraid you?will ALWAYS have to explain the difference between Flyer, Hi-rail and scale unless you find some way to make 85 years worth of AF/Hi-rail?production go away!
True enough.
?HO grew despite years of conflicting NMRA and European standards because code 100 track, while out of scale and somewhat ugly, could handle both standards. Guess what the majority used?
Code 100 HO isn't all that ugly and was virtually the standard for decades.? When N Scale was getting established, code 70 rail was the norm (and some relatively deep flanges) and look what happened there...
Somehow O scale, with 3 rail, five foot gauge and a minority of correct gauge, thrives - mostly people ignore the wide gauge and live with it, most even ignore the third rail!
The phenomenal growth of 3-rail O Scale occurred when Lionel butted heads with MTH as both companies released 1/4" scale proportioned products.
?
Rich G(ajnak)
|
I was in the same boat, Ken... I had at least 12K worth of HO, but still managed to sell it all in a reasonable amount of time.? It CAN be done!? I did it.? You just have to want it bad enough.
?
?
John D
Scaler164
?
?
On 03/30/2025 11:41 AM EDT ken garber via groups.io <garber.ken@...> wrote:
?
?
On Sun, Mar 30, 2025 at 11:34?AM Michael Eldridge via <meldridge2000= [email protected]> wrote:
?
There is simply no future in it. I put a model in the contest room every year, and always hear the perennial "I think about switching to S, but I just have too much equipment in ..." At least they are thinking about it.
When I changed from HO to S, I got rid of 300+ freight cars, 125 locomotives, and a plethora?of passenger equipment and track and such.
So it's not really a deterrent.?
?
Ken G.
?
?
?
|
Well... not just newcomers, but also those of us long-timers who don't already have a layout have to be factored in.? And I would venture a guess that MOST S scalers (not including AF guys) do NOT yet have layouts.? So Bill's new track line does have merit with that considered.
?
?
John D
?
?
On 03/30/2025 2:15 PM EDT Kim Hartshorn via groups.io <w.kim.hartshorn@...> wrote:
?
The modelers to snag are people like me, new or coming back to the hobby.? Also kids...On30 started with Christmas Tree sets using sectional HO track. The secret to kids and new modelers in S Scale would be sectional Code 100 track.
|
4X8 tabletop type layouts will likely appeal more to 'toy train' fans instead of scale modelers.? So I don't see a real "PRO" in that point.
?
?
John D
?
?
On 03/30/2025 2:20 PM EDT Kim Hartshorn via groups.io <w.kim.hartshorn@...> wrote:
?
Also...one potential turn off to people choosing S Scale is the somewhat pretentious advice we tend to give out that you really need 30" minimum radius curves.? Almost all AM and SHS S-Scale equipment will run on 20" curves, let new modelers start out on their 4x8 sheet of plywood and get hooked on the Scale, they can expand once they get hooked...like I did.
|
The simple way to explain it:? 87.1÷64=1.36? Fox Valley track is (basically) the S scale equivalent of HO code 100.?
<<I'm certainly not going to rip up all the Fox Valley track I just put in.
Code 100 HO isn't all that ugly and was virtually the standard for decades>> Stan Stokrocki
|
I encourage EVERYONE to NOT go LOOKING for "scale S" at shows... rather, go SHOWING
scale S" at shows!
?
?
John D
?
?
On 03/30/2025 5:11 PM EDT John Hutnick via groups.io <johnhutnick@...> wrote:
?
?
Mr. Eldridge's point may be applicable if one is at an NMRA event.? In any other location, the opposite is true.? I am in NJ.? I have just attended big train shows at the Allentown fairgrounds, the annual historic society show in Clark, NJ, and the Greenberg show in Edison, NJ.? I did not see a single "scale" S steam loco.
|
FWIW, I ran an S Helper scale switcher on a loop of old-school Flyer metal track one Christmas with no problems. No switches, though.
On Sunday, March 30, 2025, 2:20 PM, Kim Hartshorn via groups.io <w.kim.hartshorn@...> wrote: Also...one potential turn off to people choosing S Scale is the somewhat pretentious advice we tend to give out that you really need 30" minimum radius curves.? Almost all AM and SHS S-Scale equipment will run on 20" curves, let new modelers start out on their 4x8 sheet of plywood and get hooked on the Scale, they can expand once they get hooked...like I did.
|
Dick Karnes, MMR
Mark Mugnai
ken garber
Bob Werre
John Degnan