0 vs 027

Basically, as I understand it, the O-27 line was a cost reduced line and the smaller size reduced material costs.

Distilled down:  Lionel's original 0 Gauge track used the same size rail as its older Standard Gauge line; 027 had its origins in the IVES lines that Lionel bought and employed as a low-end market penetration; the track Lionel inherited had smaller (cheaper) rail and tighter curves.

Yeah I know about the curves but wondered why the rail itself was so much unrealistically higher.  The only references about 0 track I ever saw was it was sturdier.

As @palallin stated, the O gauge rails are the same size as the already established Standard Gauge tubular track - minimal retooling required. Remember, these were elegant eye catching novelties of the time, not 100000000% realistic models.

"100000000%"

Wow! That's a lotta percent!

Okay guys, I know it wasn't realism but that still doesn't explain why 0 gauge rail was so high.  Ill survive not knowing the answer, just curious 🤔

The same answer detailed multiple ways has been provided in multiple responses above. Not sure what else one would be looking for or expecting at this point. Not everything Lionel (or any other manufacturer) did is nostalgically romantic or intriguingly ingenious as to create a compelling backstory.

@jps32016 posted:

Okay guys, I know it wasn't realism but that still doesn't explain why 0 gauge rail was so high.  Ill survive not knowing the answer, just curious 🤔

Well,

@bmoran4 posted:

As @palallin stated, the O gauge rails are the same size as the already established Standard Gauge tubular track - minimal retooling required...

@palallin posted:

Distilled down:  Lionel's original 0 Gauge track used the same size rail as its older Standard Gauge line...

My understanding is that the same rail stock rolling equipment used since 1906 for Standard Gauge toy trains was used to roll the "O" rails for their introduction of the 1915 "O" gauge toy trains, without any consideration for scale detail for these novel toys.

Same rail as standard gauge, that's got to be it.  I've got a few pieces but never made the connection.  Hey, if you want wider curves you should buy all new track!

Of course it's about 100 years too late but ideally they should have used 027 rail for everything below standard gauge, with 031 and 072 curves and non platform switches, plus longer ties. With ballast, extra ties and painted rails, which I use, it looks pretty good.

My big transition was to go from O27 tubular to O tubular in the late 1990s. My experience is that O is much sturdier, less likely to warp, the O switches have voltage plugs that enable them to be powered independently from the track, and my trains operate much better on O than 027.

Maybe I will use more modern track like Garfraves, Ross or Atlas in another lifetime.

LOL, Arnold

I think I understand the OPs question. I'm going to word it differently in my own way.

Basically, if they wanted to save money (and why not?) Then why even offer O gauge track? Just make O27 track, but make the curves available in all widths from O27 to O72 with the same O27 height profile. The extra height really doesn't change the functionality of the track. It just raises everything up a little higher. Sure it might be sturdier, but did the extra cost of producing it make it worth it?

But I believe you also answered the question with the above comments. Maybe in a different way than he wanted.

@jps32016 posted:

Of course it's about 100 years too late but ideally they should have used 027 rail for everything below standard gauge, with 031 and 072 curves and non platform switches, plus longer ties. With ballast, extra ties and painted rails, which I use, it looks pretty good.

Congratulations, you've just invented GarGraves, albeit 83 years after Earle Gardner and Eldyn Graves. They just went with 3' flexible sections back then for everyone to make their own curves.

@Arnold D. Cribari posted:

Maybe I will use more modern track like Garfraves...

GarGraves is 83 years old this year. They've been making track longer now than Lionel made O-27.

The great thing about Gargraves and tubular is they can be cut to fit.  I actually have two layouts.  The first started as Gargraves in the mid 80s, and was rebuilt and donated to a museum (pictures at strasburgmuseum.org).  I had run out of room at home and the museum, where I ran MTH programmed shows, is only open 6 months a year.  I did have a cache of old tubular, which I increased, for another home layout on the only space available, the workshop floor!  No scenery but so what?  Can do plenty of stuff 😃!

Other