OO vs EM vs P4 comparison photo

[Qweqwe]

Hi, I'm not here to discuss the merits of each gauge, I am simply looking for a visual comparison. I'm hoping to find a photo(s) that shows the following:
- Any loco on a straight piece of track

- One example of each gauge

- View from head on so the difference in track gauge/wheel spacing is easy to see.

- Preferably with locomotive wheels visible

 

I don't mind if it's a photo for each gauge or a side by side of all three in one photo.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

 

 

I've attached an example image of what I'm looking for but I believe this one shows OO and EM, but I'd like to see P4 in comparison too. Also the wheels are a little hard to see, I'd prefer if wheels are visible.

Edited May 16 by Qweqwe
Typo

[Jol Wilkinson]

i can't help with the comparison photo you want but suggest that one major difference between the three 4mm gauges is the visual difference in the pointwork.  The "ratio" between gauge and the check and wing rail gaps is usually very evident, although this is minimised with well built OO pointwork (see Norman Solomon's handbuilt OO trackwork on Little Bytham in Wrightwrites as a good example).

 

P4 wheels also have narrower tyres as well as smaller flanges. EM and OO wheels from Alan Gibson wheels are also "finer" than RTR wheels, although Markits wheels are also generally better too.

 

The attached photo by Tony Wright will give some idea of P4 track and wheels.

 

Edited May 17 by Jol Wilkinson
Spelling

[Mark Forrest]

12 hours ago, Qweqwe said:

 

From that angle, particularly with diesel locos, you'll be hard pushed to detect the extra 0.63mm of track gauge on plain track. In that example P4, would look very much like EM.

However, where P4 really stands out is the narrower (more prototypical) flangeway clearances and finer wheel standards; as Jol's photo above shows.  Ideally you'd want a side by side comparison of pointwork, which is less straightforward to do as there are other variables.

[Qweqwe]

Thanks for the responses. As someone who doesn’t have access to EM or P4 it’s a bit hard to assess the differences. There are no model shops near me so I didn’t fancy paying shipping and everything just to compare two bits of track haha. But yeah to anyone who has a side by side comparison of EM and P4 I’d be very grateful.

[Jol Wilkinson]

You don't say where you are but a visit to one of the S4 or EM Society shows would give you some idea. An exhibition such as Railwells, Railex at Aylesbury or the York MRS will also usually have layouts of all three gauges to compare.

[Jeff Smith]

I've been a P4 modeller ever since I abandoned OO in the eighties....  I had got very used to the excellent running through pointwork with no wheel drop; but a venture into O-16.5/On30 last year with OO wheel and track standards (Peco O-16.5 track) reminded me just how crude OO is.  Whilst the kit-built locos and rolling stock, using mainly Gibson OO wheels, does run through there are frequently clunky wheel drops.  I have not tried EM but although the gauge looks better the pointwork gaps and overscale wheels spoil the image, especially with steam locomotives.

 

The above picture posted by Jol shows P4 very well, it just looks right!

 

Diesel conversions are relatively easy with drop-in wheelsets from Ultrascale and generally don't need compensation.  I actually used drop-in wheels for a Bachmann 57xx which runs perfectly well but generally it is better to compensate - the P4 flanges are so small that the wheels need to be fully in contact with the rails - this is also good for electrical continuity.  Gibson supplies a wide variety of P4 wheels for locos, wagons and coaches.

 

Track has been problem, mine was all hand built using separate plastic chairs and ply sleepers but RTL plain track has been available for many years together with point kits from C & L and more recently from Finetrax (via the Scalefour Society).

 

Personally, if considering a move from OO I would move to P4, join the Scalefour Society, buy some plain track and a point kit, and a drop-in BoBo wheel set and experiment.....my first was for the Lima GWR diesel railcar which still runs well.....good luck!

[Qweqwe]

6 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

You don't say where you are but a visit to one of the S4 or EM Society shows would give you some idea. An exhibition such as Railwells, Railex at Aylesbury or the York MRS will also usually have layouts of all three gauges to compare.

I live about 16000km away from York so not really a feasible trip for me haha. I live in an area where model trains are mostly unheard of, let alone P4 and UK steam era. But yeah photos definitely help to get a little idea. Anyway not a big deal just curious if anyone had some nice EM and P4 pictures they could share.

[Mark Forrest]

Having modelled in both EM and P4 I'd say that the other factor to consider when deciding is what right for you are how much time do you want to spend making stuff.  There's no denying that EM gives a more realistic model than 00, but the final push to work to P4 tolerances does require some extra time and effort.  I guess why you are asking the question is to try to determine whether that extra time and effort is worth it.

 

I'd also consider what aspects of the hobby you enjoy most, how quickly you want to complete a project and how much stock you are going to need to build/convert for it.

 

Personally, my introduction to P4 was modelling diesels, and I soon found that in many cases the time and effort required to convert a RTR loco to P4 was much the same as to EM.  I've now started to build a few kit built steam locos though, primarily because I wanted the challenge.

 

Not sure if this really helps, but the loco at the front is P4 (Gibson wheels, High Level chassis), while the one behind it is EM (Ultrascale wheels, Bachmann chassis).  Both use the Bachmann body and are standing on P4 track.

 

[ikcdab]

I think a lot is down to visual appearance.  I model in 16.5mm, but I use finescale track and handbuilt pointwork.  My track is level and true and each section is wired.

I get near perfect running and i think my track looks as good as EM or P4. Without the comparison pic you have asked for, you would not notice the gauge. The big advantage is that I can buy stock and plonk it straight on the track without fiddling with the wheels.  I can visit friends and they can bring their stuff to mine for running. I can sell surplus stock into the OO second hand market easily.

I am very happy with my finescale OO.  For me it has all the advantages of EM without the changing wheels hassle.

[Enterprisingwestern]

 

For me, the EM gauge 80/20 rule applies, 80% of the effect for 20% of the effort.

 

Mike.

[Hibelroad]

It’s really a matter of what gives you most personal satisfaction. Some want to operate large layouts and are happy to see models on the move, for them OO is fine. I prefer to build kits and like the work involved in solving the problems thrown up. Years ago I considered EM but decided to go the whole hog and give P4 a try. As others have noted both these options are a bit easier these days but they do require hands on work. If that doesn’t appeal or if don’t know why you should bother then stick to OO. In the end it’s just a hobby and you only do it for personal enjoyment. 

[jcm@gwr]

27 minutes ago, Hibelroad said:

It’s really a matter of what gives you most personal satisfaction. Some want to operate large layouts and are happy to see models on the move, for them OO is fine. I prefer to build kits and like the work involved in solving the problems thrown up. Years ago I considered EM but decided to go the whole hog and give P4 a try. As others have noted both these options are a bit easier these days but they do require hands on work. If that doesn’t appeal or if don’t know why you should bother then stick to OO. In the end it’s just a hobby and you only do it for personal enjoyment. 

 

And I agree with that, it's a hobby, that we should all enjoy, at whatever level you want.

But in the past, I've come across certain people in the P4/S4 circles, that tell you that only their way is correct,

and 00 is just toy trains/waste of time/etc.

That sort of attitude/approach doesn't help anyone, or further the hobby.

[woodenhead]

It doesn’t help no, but this thread should steer clear of that discussion else it will go the way of every other 00/EM/P4 thread

[jjnewitt]

1 hour ago, jcm@gwr said:

And I agree with that, it's a hobby, that we should all enjoy, at whatever level you want.

But in the past, I've come across certain people in the P4/S4 circles, that tell you that only their way is correct,

and 00 is just toy trains/waste of time/etc.

That sort of attitude/approach doesn't help anyone, or further the hobby.

 

I've come across people in EM circles who think much the same thing and some who model in OO who will look disparagingly at those who model in the finer gauges and tell you it's a pointless waste of time. There are always people who, for whatever reason, want to think of themselves as somehow better than others and they certainly don't all model in P4.  They are best left well alone.

 

Justin 

[Neil]

The appearance thing. We should remember that that wheels and points, the two areas where P4 scores most over EM and OO are only a small part of the overall appearance of a layout. Back when P4 was starting out there were photos in the railway magazines of layouts running rewheeled Triang Jinties and Hymeks (without any other mods) through towns of Superquick buildings and dyed sawdust fields. Finer wheels and track don't automatically confer greatness to ones creation.

[kevinlms]

1 hour ago, Neil said:

The appearance thing. We should remember that that wheels and points, the two areas where P4 scores most over EM and OO are only a small part of the overall appearance of a layout. Back when P4 was starting out there were photos in the railway magazines of layouts running rewheeled Triang Jinties and Hymeks (without any other mods) through towns of Superquick buildings and dyed sawdust fields. Finer wheels and track don't automatically confer greatness to ones creation.

On the other hand, there were articles by people who modelled items such as underframe detail, but said it couldn't be seen whilst the vehicle was sitting on the track - but they were happy, because they knew it was there!

 

So whatever keeps modellers happy.

[Captain Kernow]

I model in both OO and P4. I have never modelled in EM, but the fact that I opted for P4 over EM is purely historical accident (right place, right time etc.).

 

As @Neil rightly says, there's more to it than just track and wheel standards, depending perhaps on the angle that you are looking at the layout.

 

This is a scene on my OO cameo layout 'Bethesda Sidings':

 

 

If the photo is taken at more of a 'head on' angle, then I can tell that it's OO.

 

By comparison, here are a couple of scenes from my P4 layout 'Callow Lane':

 

 

If it were just plain track in view, I would probably struggle sometimes to tell whether it was P4 or EM, but the check rail clearances and wheel profile, if visible, are perhaps more of a give-away.

 

[Hibelroad]

In my experience genuine EM and P4 modellers are friendly individuals who model to those standards because they want to, it’s all a matter of what matters to you. The only time when you are modelling in the wrong way is if you are not enjoying what you do. 

[woodenhead]

1 hour ago, Captain Kernow said:

I model in both OO and P4. I have never modelled in EM, but the fact that I opted for P4 over EM is purely historical accident (right place, right time etc.).

 

As @Neil rightly says, there's more to it than just track and wheel standards, depending perhaps on the angle that you are looking at the layout.

 

This is a scene on my OO cameo layout 'Bethesda Sidings':

 

 

If the photo is taken at more of a 'head on' angle, then I can tell that it's OO.

 

By comparison, here are a couple of scenes from my P4 layout 'Callow Lane':

 

 

If it were just plain track in view, I would probably struggle sometimes to tell whether it was P4 or EM, but the check rail clearances and wheel profile, if visible, are perhaps more of a give-away.

 

But what this tells me is that is it more about the care the modeller pays to the scene than strictly the track gauge.  To my eyes your OO Bethesda is every bit as good as the P4 Callow Lane, obviously there is more detail in Callow Lane but really it shows that a beautiful model can be had in OO as long as you learn and apply the right modelling approach.

[H2O]

On 17/05/2024 at 00:22, Qweqwe said:

snip...

I've attached an example image of what I'm looking for but I believe this one shows OO and EM, but I'd like to see P4 in comparison too. Also the wheels are a little hard to see, I'd prefer if wheels are visible.

It looks like the track on the left is HO, this typically has 'continental' sleeper length and spacing (at 3.5mm/ft). A visual improvement can be made with OO track that has closer to scale British sleeper dimensions at 4mm/ft.  This is fraught as true to scale 4mm sleepers don't always sit well with the OO 16.5mm gauge.

 

Don't want to get into which is best (as that is entirely up to the individual) but a photo with OO track, in addition to HO, EM and P4, may help the OP.

 

The availability of British style OO track has improved in recent years.  PECO bullhead range is 'more to scale' for British OO. Much of the rest of PECOs offerings in 16.5mm is HO, either north American or European inspired.

Edited May 18 by H2O

[dj_crisp]

I sort if fell into EM for a few reasons. Firstly at the time I started RTR OO had wide ranging wheel standards and most of them were rubbish. So stuff just derailed on my layout (which was really a trainset... fun to operate when things stayed on the track but no scenics etc). I therefore decided on standardising wheels was key for me. P4 is probably easier than EM... So I've gone for an RP25-88 wheel and built my track to work with that. (RTR spread out to EM doesn't work well on mine). I'd do the same in OO but then I'd end up trying OO Finescale and would find that as hard to build as EM .

 

Next reason was going to exhibitions and watching stuff derail all over the place on P4... really nice layouts so I thought if they can't get it right I won't! The EM layouts I watched worked well! P4 done right does look the best especially the lack of wheel drop.

 

It also depends whether you want to convert RTR or build kits and what you plan on modelling. I find converting RTR challenging enough in EM due to clearances so no idea how the P4 crew cope. However I do use compensation on certain stock so I do use lots of P4 techniques which does help. 

 

Worth mentioning bullhead track is well catered for in all scales... flat bottom isn't. If bullhead is what you're after then the RTR EM gauge society points are very nice and gives you a head start.

 

Enjoy whatever you go for!

 

Cheers

Will

 

[John Tomlinson]

When I returned to the hobby 25 years ago I plumped for "OO", on the grounds that I planned a multilevel layout in a 16' x 8' space with lots of track, as I was looking for "action"! I certainly didn't fancy making lots of track, nor re-wheeling locos and stock, particularly as RTR to the standard we enjoy today had just started to appear.

 

I also went to exhibitions to have a look see, and concluded that painted and well ballasted track in "OO" could look pretty convincing. Indeed only when a "OO" layout was side by side with one in the finer scales would the difference be apparent - to me anyway. Whilst admiring the skill in P4, the fact that many of the layouts I saw didn't seem to work very well confirmed to me that wouldn't be my chosen route - I realise this is a bit unfair as exhibition conditions are stacked against P4 with its much finer tolerances.

 

If I were starting now it would be a different story, and I'd almost certainly go "EM", with a lot more RTL track available, as well as a wide range of drop in wheelsets. There's also a lot of hard evidence, take "Hornsey Broadway" as one example, that EM can be made to work very well indeed, as well as look good.

 

John.

Edited May 19 by John Tomlinson
typo

[RichardT]

On 17/05/2024 at 00:22, Qweqwe said:

Hi, I'm not here to discuss the merits of each gauge, I am simply looking for a visual comparison. I'm hoping to find a photo(s) that shows the following:
- Any loco on a straight piece of track

- One example of each gauge

- View from head on so the difference in track gauge/wheel spacing is easy to see.

- Preferably with locomotive wheels visible

This was the OP’s actual question, specifically saying that s/he wasn’t after a discussion of the merits of each gauge, just a visual comparison. So, of course, what we’ve got is a discussion of the merits of each gauge and a distinct lack of comparison photos!

 

RichardT

 

 

[Ravenser]

This is OO - a bespoke Marcway item as it happens. It's fully matched/compatible with RP25/110 wheelsets and I've had no trouble with drop in or derailments. 

[Philou]

Sorry, no photos for comparison.

 

Is it a perception thing? I'm firmly in the OO camp simply due to having too much stock - some even as far back as the mid-60s - and being where I am HO is the norm anyway, but at least my stock will run on their track.

 

The perception thing, for me, is being so used to seeing the 'narrow' track, EM and P4 just looks too wide!!

 

As others have said it depends what you want from your future layout - something up and running quickly, without resorting to having to do wheel changing, or the challenge of doing the trackwork more correctly (and wheel changing), or going the whole hog and having a pukka true-to-scale layout. I think 'yer pays yer money .........................................'

 

Good luck and happy layout making in whatever scale/gauge you choose to do.

 

Philip