rogerfarnworth Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 This is a bid to claim that the best scale is 2mm and the best gauge is 'N'!! What is not to like in N gauge? I guess that some may disagree? http://rogerfarnworth.com/2019/05/24/n-gauge-railway-modelling Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkSG Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 All scales and gauges have their advantages and disadvantages. Which is best is a subjective decision based on which particular benefits are more important to you. 2mm/N (which I'm aware are not quite the same thing!) obviously scores well on fitting a lot into a small space. Some of the best "train in a landscape" layouts I've seen at exhibitions have been in N. Scale length main line trains on scale radius curves on a portable layout is really only practical in the smaller gauges. But, no matter how hard you try, you can't really convince anyone that N allows for the intricate detail of O and larger. And the reason why 4mm (or 3.5mm) is so popular is because it's the best compromise between space and detail. You can't have everything. 1 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan. Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 28 minutes ago, MarkSG said: All scales and gauges have their advantages and disadvantages. Which is best is a subjective decision based on which particular benefits are more important to you. 2mm/N (which I'm aware are not quite the same thing!) obviously scores well on fitting a lot into a small space. Some of the best "train in a landscape" layouts I've seen at exhibitions have been in N. Scale length main line trains on scale radius curves on a portable layout is really only practical in the smaller gauges. But, no matter how hard you try, you can't really convince anyone that N allows for the intricate detail of O and larger. And the reason why 4mm (or 3.5mm) is so popular is because it's the best compromise between space and detail. You can't have everything. Hi Mark, I would beg to differ in the nicest way. Picture attached is N. Please also see my thread and flickr link in my signature below for more photographs, a grovelling withdrawal of your previous statement will be acceptable! Cheers Duncan 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CLARENCE Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 My layout in preparation is N, previous one was OO. I'm enjoying building a small N layout but I really,really wish it was possible to have a OO in a larger space! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris M Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 (edited) To a degree it is "horses for courses". Very few people can run trains in the country in 0 due to space and equally an MPD works better in O than N. Personally I think N is great and deserves to have a greater following. I have two N gauge layouts which I love running but my other railway is G. You can get some nice scenes in a small space in N . This layout is 7ft by 3ft 2in Edited June 11, 2019 by Chris M 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium njee20 Posted June 11, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 11, 2019 3 hours ago, MarkSG said: And the reason why 4mm (or 3.5mm) is so popular is because it's the best compromise between space and detail. In your opinion... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris M Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 My other N layout is 44in by 27in and provides plenty of operation as it is a branch line with two passing stations and a terminus. Ok I had to use R1 curves in places but it is really nice to run. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLWP Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 Hey guys - let's have a fight! 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traintresta Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 I might have missed some sarcasm here but surely when we are all model railway enthusiasts, the differences should end there on what can only be a subjective topic. We'll never all agree on everything but we can all agree on a love of the hobby and its subjects. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkSG Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 2 hours ago, njee20 said: In your opinion... This entire topic is about opinion. Although it is kind of undeniable that 16.5mm gauge track is the most popular, and there must be a reason for it! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium njee20 Posted June 11, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 11, 2019 Yes, but my comment was that you, very matter of factly, said that OO is the "best" compromise of detail and space. Which is clearly subjective, as you say, the whole thing is. I don't get the whole post really, I thought it might at least be a blog about why N gauge was good, rather than a 10 photos of very similar looking (and extremely good) N gauge layouts! I'm very open minded and enjoy good modelling regardless of scale. Plenty of people are only interested in 'their' chosen scale. Each to their own. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris M Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 I think the best compromise was the one that failed to make it mainstream - 3mm. Nearly as compact as N but still somehow keeps the same presence as 00. The size of N does mean you can run express trains in a smallish space which is useful. You can also build a viable layout (for running trains rather than just shunting) on just one board that can be moved around the house by one person - this can be important for some. It is good that you don’t need much space to store a lot of stock. I think storage space is likely to be a problem in 0 as your collection of locos grows. One further advantage of N is that it is much easier and cheaper to transport a main line N gauge exhibition layout than an 00 one. The big downside of N is the couplings which are huge and look orrible on the front of a loco. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anglian Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 6 minutes ago, Chris M said: I think the best compromise was the one that failed to make it mainstream - 3mm. Nearly as compact as N but still somehow keeps the same presence as 00. I agree and I will always wish that it had been developed as viable RTR option (UK outline). 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traintresta Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 24 minutes ago, Anglian said: I agree and I will always wish that it had been developed as viable RTR option (UK outline). I explored converting to 3mm from 4mm but the lack of trade support put me off. Same reason why I chose to stick with 16.5mm gauge, especially with grandkids in the fold. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan. Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 6 hours ago, Duncan. said: Hi Mark, I would beg to differ in the nicest way. Picture attached is N. Please also see my thread and flickr link in my signature below for more photographs, a grovelling withdrawal of your previous statement will be acceptable! Cheers Duncan 6 hours ago, MarkSG said: All scales and gauges have their advantages and disadvantages. Which is best is a subjective decision based on which particular benefits are more important to you. 2mm/N (which I'm aware are not quite the same thing!) obviously scores well on fitting a lot into a small space. Some of the best "train in a landscape" layouts I've seen at exhibitions have been in N. Scale length main line trains on scale radius curves on a portable layout is really only practical in the smaller gauges. But, no matter how hard you try, you can't really convince anyone that N allows for the intricate detail of O and larger. And the reason why 4mm (or 3.5mm) is so popular is because it's the best compromise between space and detail. You can't have everything. My first post quoted above was meant as a light-hearted comment, this thread seems to be getting a bit to serious and drifting away from subject 'In Praise of 'N', and perhaps my previous remarks have helped that drift, my apologies! Perhaps this thread is not about a particular scale being best but rather just about the virtues and joy of 'N' Happy modelling to all!! Cheers Duncan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodenhead Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 3 minutes ago, Duncan. said: My first post quoted above was meant as a light-hearted comment, this thread seems to be getting a bit to serious and drifting away from subject 'In Praise of 'N', and perhaps my previous remarks have helped that drift, my apologies! Perhaps this thread is not about a particular scale being best but rather just about the virtues and joy of 'N' Happy modelling to all!! Cheers Duncan I think the OP set the scale and gauge flames alight: 8 hours ago, rogerfarnworth said: This is a bid to claim that the best scale is 2mm and the best gauge is 'N'!! What is not to like in N gauge? I guess that some may disagree? I'm back in OO at the moment but all my N stock is awaiting a momentous event in July when son #1 moves out - deposit on home to be paid tomorrow and I will soon be eyeing up new baseboards. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWR8700 Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 Some of my favourite layouts are 2mm finescale/N gauge. The sheer scope of what can be achieved is its best attribute. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nearholmer Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned either eyesight or manual dexterity yet. You can only have super-detailed anything if (a) you can see it, and (b) your fingers can cope with creating it. In the case of N/2mm, I fail significantly on both points, as I suspect do a fair few others. - the tiny details are genuinely lost on me, unless I take my specs off and get my nose in physical contact with the layout, which might be thought of as bad manners at an exhibition. Doesn't stop me enjoying what I can see of other people's layouts, which is generally the broad sweep, though. And some are breathtakingly good ....... model of Ashburton, not sure who by, but I enjoyed getting eye-ache looking at it at St Alban's exhibition several years ago ....... superb! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zomboid Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 I'm a clumsy oaf when I try to build 1:87 stuff, so I have the highest regard for anyone who can accurately build, paint etc anything in that scale, never mind smaller. Sadly my eyesight is still very good (no glasses yet), so I can see my larger scale deficiencies, but I can also appreciate smaller scale details... N is wonderful and absolutely a great choice if you want to build a model of a landscape with trains in it. But it's a bit fiddly, and as someone who likes switching/ shunting primarily, it's not for me. As I've said before, there's no wrong way to model railways, so long as you're enjoying it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahame Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 4 hours ago, Nearholmer said: I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned either eyesight or manual dexterity yet. You can only have super-detailed anything if (a) you can see it, and (b) your fingers can cope with creating it. In the case of N/2mm, I fail significantly on both points, as I suspect do a fair few others. - the tiny details are genuinely lost on me, unless I take my specs off and get my nose in physical contact with the layout, which might be thought of as bad manners at an exhibition. Ah, the old small details fallacy argument. The smallest details in N are no smaller than those in other larger scales, it's just that in those larger scales there are a heck of a lot more details of similar small size. Eyesight and dexterity doesn't enter into it - all scales are equally effected by your own abilities and failings. G 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zomboid Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 That's true, but the details which are too fiddly to apply are more significant in relation to the whole as you go down the sizes. It might be the air pipes in OO, but in N it could be the steps. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris M Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 I find a magnifying lamp is an essential for N. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahame Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 6 minutes ago, Zomboid said: That's true, but the details which are too fiddly to apply are more significant in relation to the whole as you go down the sizes. It might be the air pipes in OO, but in N it could be the steps. Although, of course, there are always likely to be significant details too fiddly for some individuals to handle and apply regardless of their size in all scales and dependent on the person's dexterity. Fortunately that doesn't make one scale worse or better than any other or necessarily curtail an individuals enjoyment of it. G 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steamport Southport Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 I've dabbled in most of the major British scales over the years. 00, N. O, 009, O16.5. I've even pondered EM or S4/P4. The one I probably wouldn't touch again is N Gauge. Too small for my taste. I'm more interested in locos and rolling stock than scenery or operation. I prefer to be able to see the things! I've seen some fantastic modelling in N and 2mm finescale, some of which is akin to Swiss watchmaking. I appreciate it, but it's just not for me. YMMV. Jason Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nearholmer Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 "Eyesight and dexterity doesn't enter into it - all scales are equally effected by your own abilities and failings." I beg to differ. 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. Ones limitations ("failings" is a dreadfully pejorative word) may be such that manipulating a Code 55 rail joiner is a frustrating trial, while using a Code 200 rail-joiner is a doddle, which means that N/2mm modelling is, in a real, practical, sense affected by those limitations, while 16mm/ft modelling isn't. None of which is to detract from N/2mm, all it does is add caveats to the OP's, tongue in cheek, claim that N is "best", caveats like "for some people" or "for some purposes" (most porpoises having very limited dexterity). 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now