In Praise of 'N'!

[grahame]

4 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

 

 

The sizes of certain essential parts are dictated very firmly by the scale. Wheels, or rail-joiners, for instance, and the components in a locomotive drive-mechanism.

 

 

That is, of course, simply comparing the size of similar items in different scales whereas I was commenting on the relative size of the smallest parts one has to handle. For example, in say a comparable kit of a wagon there are generally many more parts in the larger scale one than in a smaller scale version and the smallest part of the smallest scale is usually no smaller than the smallest one from the larger scale. That means one doesn't need keener eyesight to see or greater dexterity to handle them.

 

Of course one's ability may mean not being able to deal with parts from any scale but that it is not usually dependant on their scale and is more a function of their size. I would have no great difficulty in adding N fishplates or dropping in a wagon wheelset (in N they come complete as a pair on an axle and don't usually need separate bearings) but I would baulk at having to assemble four buffers, each from several parts including fitting springs, in OO. 

 

However, I don't think size differences makes one scale better than the other. It's more about horses for courses.

 

G

[Atso]

I love modelling in N gauge, as there is no way I could model a prototypical section of the ex-GNML in a larger scale in the space I have available. However, the availability of suitable RTR for my chosen time period (1930's) is extremely limited - if I could fit my chosen prototype in 4mm scale then I would and I would also make use of all the wonderful RTR stock available! Therefore, my choice to model in N gauge has required me to learn all kinds of skills and techniques to produce models of the items I want. I have nerve damage in my left hand/wrist (I'm left handed) which results in intermittent trembling and a deformity (and early arthritis) on my right thumb which makes using the thumb of my right hand for prolonged periods painful. Despite this, I've found ways to adapt this and am slowly reaching a standard of modelling that I am happy with.

 

 

 

 

 

While I would agree that it is possible to incorporate more detail into larger scale models, I'm firmly of the belief that the art of working in the smaller scales is working out what details can be left off without it negatively affecting the overall impression.

 

 

Edited June 18, 2019 by Atso

[ianmianmianm]

I'm enjoying playing around in N having arrived here after 30 years in 00. On a purely practical level I'm using boards designed to fit in RUB storage boxes. 4 boards will fit in 4 boxes, and each pair of 2 boxes fits in a checked luggage case. So when it's time to move continents by air, the layout can come with me.  We also have a lot of products such as the Kato trams and Tomix moving bus, and the many 3-d prints that work out very cheap in N and would cost a lot more to procure in 00.

 

[sammyboy]

I've been building layouts in N since I changed from OO in 2008 (12 years ago!) when I got my first proper paid job (My first model I bought was a Virgin Voyager for Christmas of that year). None have been properly completed - basically I've changed the designs and track plans too much over the years lol!

But I have enjoyed modelling in the scale, and like the convienience of having a intresting track plan with large station, goods yard, loco shed, etc... in a small space. For example, my layout at home has all of those features built on a single internal house door measuring 6 ft 6 inches x 2 ft 6 inches.

 

Sam