Comparing N vs. 00

[GreenDiesel]

From 2004 until 2015, I modelled in 00. Then, for space reasons, I built (and still operate) a 3.5x6' N scale layout.

 

Just recently, I've started dabbling in 00 again, partly because I still have a lot of 00 items in stock. I've just started a small switching layout and plan to keep my N scale layout going. But I immediately noticed two significant differences with 00.  One -- the detail on the 00 locos simply b/c they're larger -- and two -- how well & smoothly the locos ran. The latter was especially noticeable. 

 

BTW, I'm running very new locos on both N and 00 layouts, i.e. ones made within the last 5 years. So now I'm feeling a little conflicted but I will still keep my N scale layout as my main layout for now. Has anyone else noticed this? The N scale locos due run well but it was much more noticeable in 00.

[Robin2]

I spent some time thinking N gauge was the answer to a small space for a layout. I know other people get spectacularly reliable running with N gauge but I never could - laziness, probably. I converted some N gauge locos to battery powered radio control to get around the unreliable running.

 

But now I have changed to 00 Gauge simply because of the larger size of the models. When I look at N gauge trains I feel I am too far away from them. For me the extra size of 4mm scale seems "right".  And I have no particular interest in highly detailed models - all that I require is that a model is easily identifiable for what it is at a distance of 3ft or 4ft. And because of the larger size the radio control equipment is much cheaper for 00 gauge

 

At the other end of the scale 0 gauge seems too large - except perhaps in a garden railway.

 

...R

[GreenDiesel]

I spent some time thinking N gauge was the answer to a small space for a layout. I know other people get spectacularly reliable running with N gauge but I never could - laziness, probably. I converted some N gauge locos to battery powered radio control to get around the unreliable running.

 

But now I have changed to 00 Gauge simply because of the larger size of the models. When I look at N gauge trains I feel I am too far away from them. For me the extra size of 4mm scale seems "right".  And I have no particular interest in highly detailed models - all that I require is that a model is easily identifiable for what it is at a distance of 3ft or 4ft. And because of the larger size the radio control equipment is much cheaper for 00 gauge

 

At the other end of the scale 0 gauge seems too large - except perhaps in a garden railway.

 

...R

 

 

Thanks... Although I was impressed by the extra detail (of, for example, my Bachmann Pannier), I'm also not really into this, as I have several Hornby Dublo for 00 and am also impressed with Union Mills locos for N. Both of these have less detail but are very robust layout locos that will pull a heavy load. For now, I plan to dabble in the two scales until the future (i.e. several years) when I hope to have more space.

[Chris M]

I spent from the 1960s to the 1990s doing OO. I then sold the lot and had a few years sabbatical from model railways. I then built a garden railway starting in 2001. By 2012 I had worked out that it gets cold out in the garden during the winter so I decided to build a very small N gauge layout. See http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/131708-the-ridgacre-branch-a-very-small-n-gauge-layout/?hl=ridgacre. I found that I enjoyed the fact that I could get so much operational interest in a small space. I have since built a larger layout and can now run eight coach trains on a layout no more then 7 foot long.

 

I totally agree that the larger the scale the greater the “presence” the loco has which is why I like the garden railway. The great thing about N is that you can do so much in a small space and it is possible to capture the look of trains running through the landscape in a reasonable space. I have to agree that OO locos are more impressive but don’t expect I will go back to OO now; I’ve got used to the advantages of N.

 

My larger layout is 7ft by 3ft 3ins and fits into the back of my car for exhibitions but would probably need a van to transport it if it was OO because it would have to be so much larger.

[Robin2]

With photos it is usually impossible to identify the scale of the models - indeed it can be hard to tell if the photo is of a real train or a model.

 

But when I view a model train directly at home or at an exhibition the scale is immediately obvious.

 

The photos are nice to look at but I'm not convinced that they do the hobby any good. They encourage too much emphasis on "the best" and the acceptable and the affordable and the do-it-yourself-able all get lost.

 

...R

[GreenDiesel]

I spent from the 1960s to the 1990s doing OO. I then sold the lot and had a few years sabbatical from model railways. I then built a garden railway starting in 2001. By 2012 I had worked out that it gets cold out in the garden during the winter so I decided to build a very small N gauge layout. See http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/131708-the-ridgacre-branch-a-very-small-n-gauge-layout/?hl=ridgacre. I found that I enjoyed the fact that I could get so much operational interest in a small space. I have since built a larger layout and can now run eight coach trains on a layout no more then 7 foot long.

 

I totally agree that the larger the scale the greater the “presence” the loco has which is why I like the garden railway. The great thing about N is that you can do so much in a small space and it is possible to capture the look of trains running through the landscape in a reasonable space. I have to agree that OO locos are more impressive but don’t expect I will go back to OO now; I’ve got used to the advantages of N.

 

My larger layout is 7ft by 3ft 3ins and fits into the back of my car for exhibitions but would probably need a van to transport it if it was OO because it would have to be so much larger.

17B920A6-57DC-4E95-840A-7A49B971382F.jpeg

CA1DEF7B-F551-42C8-BAB8-BF9FCF0501FE.jpeg

 

I basically agree. I'm not criticizing one scale vs. the other but the large amount of detail and smooth/slow running jumped out at me as soon as I started running 00 after 3 years.  Running long scale-length trains is one of the main benefits of N. And -- re my 3.5x6' N scale layout -- I would never have space for the equivalent in 00 in my current house /sizesituation. 

[sammyboy]

I'm going to add my own thoughts on this as I did exactly the same - by changing down in size from OO to N Gauge about 10 years ago, basically I thought that I had very little room for a OO Gauge layout when I changed to a smaller bedroom in my parents house, so that N Gauge was to be the answer for layouts in small spaces. And it worked, because I am still a N gauge modeller enjoying building a nice layout which lies on a door sized baseboard.

 

From now on I believe that I will be modelling very happily in N gauge for the rest of my life!

 

Sam 

[MJI]

I considered N for as long as it took me to realise they are difficult to see.

[GreenDiesel]

Thanks for this feedback. I think all scales have their pro's and con's.  As long as I'm restricted on space, I will probably stick with N as my main layout and tinker with 00 on the side.  One day, when hopefully I will have more room, a full return to 00 might be an option.

[woodenhead]

I tinkered with OO on the side and then my N stuff went into their boxes stacked into even bigger boxes and placed on a high shelf where they have remained for 2 years now only getting them down to sell some of it on Ebay.

[Ravenser]

,,,,,,, But I immediately noticed two significant differences with 00.  One -- the detail on the 00 locos simply b/c they're larger -- and two -- how well & smoothly the locos ran. The latter was especially noticeable. 

 

BTW, I'm running very new locos on both N and 00 layouts, i.e. ones made within the last 5 years. So now I'm feeling a little conflicted but I will still keep my N scale layout as my main layout for now. Has anyone else noticed this? The N scale locos due run well but it was much more noticeable in 00.

 

My impression from my limited experience of N is that N gauge mechanisms are always a generation behind OO in performance. N gauge has now improved to the point where the running is on a par with a good Ringfield mechanism. This is probably an inevitable result of the much smaller size and mass

 

I'm afraid I decided N gauge wasn't really my cup of tea after I had applied the last of 7 separate C-Rail transfers on the door end of an N gauge container. At which point I quietly shook my head and decided I couldn't live with this on an on-going basis...

[w124bob]

For a clumsy modeller HO(in my case)is as small as I dare go, Ideally I should model G scale but I'd probably trip over the stuff!

[The Johnster]

I'm another 00 clumsy, can't apply coach numbers even in this scale any more.  But back in the day I could do some fairly fiddly stuff, and N would have been within my comfort zone. 2mm finescale wouldn't have been, though, and what put me off N was the overscale track, flanges, distance between coupled vehicles, and poor low speed performance (I did have a dabble in 009, which was a lot of fun!).  3 of those objections have not been dealt with, though low speed performance is pretty good these days.

 

Not a criticism of the scale or it's standards; 00 is a pretty dreadful compromise, but an assessment of how much satisfaction I reckoned I would get from it.

[grahame]

what put me off N was the overscale track, flanges, distance between coupled vehicles, and poor low speed performance (I did have a dabble in 009, which was a lot of fun!).  3 of those objections have not been dealt with, though low speed performance is pretty good these days.

 

I'm not sure where you get the idea that N gauge track is overscale. The gauge is certainly closer to scale (certainly more so than OO) but is still at little under scale. The old code 80 Peco track was supplemented by code 55 in 1987 and now code 40 is available (from other manufacturers). The sleeper size and spacing of Peco track is actually a tad underscale (rather than overscale) but British Finescale track has spot on 1:148 sleepers.

 

Flanges are now a lot smaller than they ever were with newer NMRA RP25 standards although they will never be absolute scale (and neither is 2mm finescale) - it's just not possible.

 

And coupling gaps have massively improved with kinematic designs and ones that open out on bends and automatically close up on straights. Plus push in pull out NEM couplers are now available in a choice of shank lengths. And, of course, coupling choice and gap is an easy solution and fix for modellers.

 

G

[GreenDiesel]

I'm another 00 clumsy, can't apply coach numbers even in this scale any more.  But back in the day I could do some fairly fiddly stuff, and N would have been within my comfort zone. 2mm finescale wouldn't have been, though, and what put me off N was the overscale track, flanges, distance between coupled vehicles, and poor low speed performance (I did have a dabble in 009, which was a lot of fun!).  3 of those objections have not been dealt with, though low speed performance is pretty good these days.

 

Not a criticism of the scale or it's standards; 00 is a pretty dreadful compromise, but an assessment of how much satisfaction I reckoned I would get from it.

I'm not a real stickler for detail -- but I am gradually becoming more particular as I continue in the hobby!   I can tolerate fairly basic detail, especially when viewed from a distance. Right now, I don't mind the scale problems of 00 and N, not too mention over-scale or coarse track.  I'll see what I think in 2-3 years?!

[Chris M]

To a large degree it is a case of “horses for courses”. A branch line terminus in OO is likely to be more impressive than one in N. An OO terminus is also likely to be better for shunting, although I do shunt on my N gauge layout very successfully. On an OO Gauge roundy roundy the trains will have more presence than N but it will be possible to include more landscape in N and run longer or more trains in the same space.

 

For me the really big downside of N is the rapido couplings. Much worse than the much maligned tension lock OO couplings. The size of OO makes fitting alternative less intrusive couplings much easier.

 

Our club’s new N gauge layout at over 22ft long should give a great impression of trains in the landscape, something that would be difficult, though not impossible, to achieve in OO. It is still under construction but here are a couple of photos.

 

 

[Robin2]

. It is still under construction but here are a couple of photos.

 

 

 

Cutting the grass with a strimmer always leaves a mess everywhere. I suggest a cylinder mower with a grass-collector for next time.

 

...R

Edited April 15, 2018 by Robin2

[grahame]

For me the really big downside of N is the rapido couplings.

Yes, the Rapido is an obtrusive anathema. But nowadays with pull-out push-in NEN coupler sockets it is easy to change them for alternative working and dummy types available or even replace with a simple unobtrusive homemade hook and eye/bar type.

 

Consequently it's not really a deal breaker (well at least not for me).

 

G

[grahame]

Cutting the grass with a strimmer always leaves a mess everywhere. I suggest a cylinder mower with a grass-collector for next time.

 

...R

I'd be grateful if you could come to my house and demonstrate on my front and rear lawns.

;-)

 

G

[rue_d_etropal]

There has been much discussion over the years on which scale is best. I remember one very powerful argument, and that was that it depends on what you are modelling. It is the overall size of the trains that matter, so N gauge is more effective for long trains running through large expances of town or country, but small industrial/goods orientated layouts are better done in large scales, even OO being a bit small .

With reasonably priced r2r O gauge now being available, we are seeing far more people upping to O gauge. My own preference is to take that further and use gauge 1(1/32 scale). I have found that it is often the bigger the scale the smaller the layout, as height starts to have a positive effect on visual impact of the layout.

[Chris M]

It’s a shame 3mm scale didn’t take off in a big way. 3mm is nearly as compact as N but the locos still seem to have the same stage presence as OO locos.

 

I suppose you could say N is best for long trains in landscape, O (and larger) is best for shunting and concentration on highly detailed locos while OO is an excellent comprise which is good for most layout types.

[GreenDiesel]

Re TT: There have been a few articles recently on railway magazines about a possible resurgence of TT. One was in the 2018 Railway Modeller annual.

 

Re N scale Rapido couplers: I also don't like these, not so much for appearance, but b/c they don't work that well. Often, when the train touches a turnout or slight bump in the track, they uncouple. Very frustrating.

[GreenDiesel]

Good points re N being better for long trains running through countryside and 00 (and even larger scales) being better for shunting layouts.

[Steven Draper]

I think a lot is how you wish to experience your model, especially when you factor in the angle between the baseboard height and your viewing perspective plus distance.

N gives that floaty over the landscape like a bird enjoyment.

OO puts more focus on the railway aspect and gives you a more from an overlooking window, over bridge or road experience.

 

O gets closer to the walking around the loco shed or standing on the station. 


N certainly does put more in per square foot of model, but if modelling area is a constant will almost cost a lot more than an OO gauge layout in the same space.

N certainly does require more care with track laying and keeping things clean / free of dust etc. 

The latest N locos (Castle etc) are fantastic - probably technically better than some of the OO loco's as they nearly all have coreless motors, sophisticated pic ups, and like OO are DCC ready and have sound options. High quality weathering and detailing really improve presence even further.

OO loco's have more visual presence out of the box, and because they are widely collected too (many will never run on a layout) the variety and liveries are much greater and always will be.

O look the best of all !!


 

[Allegheny1600]

I like N scale!

I first modelled in N in 1983, remember all the crude models available back then? Lima with it's 31 that towered over the Mk1 coaches? But it was good fun and I built a fairly intricate layout on an 8'x2' board. Graham Farish mechanisms at that time appeared way better than the equivalent 00 mechs, even though they were hardly reliable*.

The Rapido coupling was a bugbear but like the tension lock, you pretty much had to put up with it.

For me, the best thing was the track to body interface, which like 0 scale, was much closer to prototype appearance than with 00, ugh!

I tried N again a few years ago with an Ixion Manor and a few other items and found them really good but I have subsequently concentrated on H0.

Why? Well, I do have quite a lot of H0 of many different countries including British outline and I went into sound in a fairly big way.

Of course, now you can get really good sound in N scale and I could have gone back but the thought of selling all my H0? No thanks.

Also, I don't know - can you get capacitor fitted N scale locos that ensure trouble free running at slow speed over complex pointwork? You can with the larger scales so shunting becomes more pleasurable.

 

My summary;

N (and Z!) for 'roundy-roundy' or 'scenery' type layouts where trains are 'running' most of the time.

00, H0 (maybe TT) for the above plus shunting.

0 and above for shunting (unless you have lots of space, cash, time etc).

 

* I lost count of how many times I rebuilt Grafar mechs for myself & friends, fitting new motors, bearings and so forth. They used some rubbish materials in those days.