Hi-Rail Scale vs 3-Rail Scale

They would both be the same: hi-rail is scale 3 rail. 

Do some research. Wikipedia has an article on hi-rail that is pretty good.  

Until you get into FINE SCALE O things stay the same.....then wheel size, tread width, flanges and gauge all change.....but a 40' box is a 40' box.

I'll have to disagree with Lee.  The 3RS guys require Kadee couplers, fixed pilots on diesels, etc.  On a 40' boxcar the couplers would be O scale Kadees.  They also would not tolerate cast on grab irons or fantasy paint schemes.  Hi-rail allows Lionel couplers and so forth.  Not as uptight.  I remember an early postwar Walthers catalog which defined the term Hi-rail.  Walthers was in the middle of it back then, with kits and parts that made 3 rail trains more realistic.  They also produced fantasy items, such as a beer can tanker kit that used a real beer can.

The major distinguishing feature is the coupler.  Three rail scale modelers typically convert to Kadee couplers while still using three rail track.  Just a few examples.

Some 3RS/OS3r operators also run scale-wheeled cars, depending on track type used.

Seems to me Hi-Rail proceeded 3 rail scale starting in the 1970's or 80's and was more about realistic scenery.

3-rail scale seems to me an extension of Hi-rail to include prototype locomotives and rolling stock. Some of the requirements were already mentioned ,like Kadee couplers, fix pilots and scale wheels. added detail, weathering and prototytpical operation may be other important features of a 3-Rail scale layout.

As Charlie said, originally hi-rail referred to the level of detail in the scenery on a layout - not about the trains themselves.

The term was first used before the war, but was most commonly used to describe well-scenicked layouts in the post war era. 

It had nothing to do with whether or not the trains themselves were scale. In those days most were not.

Lately, many hi-rail layouts also use scale equipment which was not available in the early days of hi-rail.This makes sense because most people who would detail a layout with realistic scenery would also want scale equipment.

3-rail scale is a recent term that has more to do with the trains themselves rather than the layout. See the 3-rail scale forum threads at the top of the page for definitions. As has also been said, most 3-rail scale operators use Kadee couplers.

Jim

3 rail scale seems like an oxymoron...

I get called an Oxy-moron a lot. Well, they usually say 'silly cow', but that means the same doesn't it? 

To be honest, I think the best that can be gleaned from this is three rail semi-scale.

It cannot be totally scale because there is a middle rail and the rail heights (at least with Atlas track) are not scale, so how do you describe partially scale ?

If you have some trains that are true O scale running on track that is not true O scale, calling it three rail scale is a misnomer. The rail size itself is not scale.

My layout is as scale as I care to make it. Most of the trains have pizza cutter flanges running on Atlas O track. It looks scale in some ways and not in others. Adding Kadee couplers would improve the "scale" look but it cannot be true scale. It just ain't.

I thought oxymoron was one of those folks from the Oxy-Clean commercials!  lol

To me 3-rail scale as defined above is just not possible - as Scher said there is a third rail to deal with and the issue of rail height, too.  

To me, big fat couplers mean trains stay together through hours of operation and behave themselves when running, and pizza-cutter flanges mean good tracking around tight curves for hours on end.  That dependability trumps any desire I could possibly have for more prototypical accuracy.  

I want to run on three rails but only with scale-size locos that have great detail (Legacy Mohawk, MTH Premier ATSF Hudson) and those big fat couplers and deep "pizza cutter" flanges so they don't hassle me with operating problems.  I view such super-sized features as manly attributes of robust toy locomotive that have worked out at the gym until they are tough and heavy and dependable workers, and completely eschew the delicate couplers and tiny flanges on "girlie trains" - pretty boys made of lightweight brass who haven't worked out at the gym like the big tough guys and who will never run on my layout!!! 

Pretty sure that there's an entire forum section on 3 rail scale that even comes with a definition right there....

In my opinion, that statement is completely uncalled for. I'll match my metal Kadee O Scale couplers against your "lobster claw" couplers any day of the week. I no longer have to bash my cars together in order to get those darned claws to close & latch. I can operate 50 to 100 car trains, without the claws coming apart or uncoupling for no reason at all. And that "lightweight brass" comment is just too funny!

I'm with you guys.

I've seen pictures of some mighty fine layouts with super detailed scenery where nothing but Postwar Lionel is run. And we all know most postwar is anything but 1/48 scale. This to me is Hi-Rail.

I agree completely.  I have to zip tie nearly all my "lobster claw" couplers when running trains in excess of 50 freight cars or 12 or more scale passenger cars.  I've pulled 50+ Kadee couplered cars and they simply don't come apart on properly laid track.

In deference to the OP, he was merely asking what the difference was between the two.  That is clearly defined on the 3 Rail Scale page. 

The constant putting down of the 3 Rail Scale people is honestly old and tired.   We like what we like whether it be Marx 3/16 on O scale track or SN3.  Someday, maybe we'll all understand that is just trains and we can enjoy them in any way we want.  I doubt it, but it possible.

Of course I just moved to 2 rail within the last few years.  Way more interesting to me than anything else. 

Had always assumed that 'High Rail' referred to just that - the rails themselves were WAY too high to be compared to scale rails as found in HO, 2 rail O, and others. Lionel tubular and Gargraves are perfect examples of 'High Rails'.  The inclusion of realistic scenery and structures makes sense too although I've seen many a highrail layout replete with LIonel Gatemen, Crossing Signals, and other PW accessories towering over the trains!

This is what motivated me to use ScaleTrax on our layout due to it being the lowest height 3 rail track commercially available. A couple of Forum members have been having success with using 2 rail O track an adding a center rail made from HO or N gauge track.

As far as couplers, I haven't had a lot of experience with Kadees but did install one on the front of our Atlas GM&O diesels. Am planning to replace the front couplers on most of my other diesels as well someday too.

This photo shows ScaleTrax

Compared to Gargraves

I agree with the fact that the track is not scale height, but a third rail in the center is actually prototypical in some cases as have been shown on other threads on this forum. so please leave the poor third rail out of this discussion

Someday, maybe we'll all understand that is just trains and we can enjoy them in any way we want.  I doubt it, but it possible. I just moved to 2 rail within the last few years.  Way more interesting to me than anything else. 

 

 

Jonathan Peiffer,

Well said and so very true. The one thing I've noticed more than anything though is this. The two and three rail "scale" folk act more like school yard bullies when given the chance. The one truth that not one person is willing to face up to. No matter what you do. These things that you're ready to come to blows over will always be, "Toy Trains".  

Pappy,

As a former TCA Division President I got my share of strange looks when I announced at my first Division meeting that "you all just elected a scale modeler as your president!". 

Having said that, I don't get the concept of my trains are better than yours.  I know that the things I enjoy are horribly tedious to others.  Models, toys, whatever!  It is all good.  Just because someone doesn't have an interest in owning or operating it, doesn't mean one can't appreciate it.  

My greatest interest in this hobby is learning all the things about items I don't collect or operate.  If we all had the same interests, this would be boring place!  One of my most interesting afternoons in the nearly 40 continuous years I've been playing with trains was sitting down with an unfortunately now deceased postwar Lionel collector who had nearly if not every piece of postwar Lionel on the wall in his train room.  We talked about the variations in the cars, the boxes, the state of the hobby, when his collection peaked in value, how to get kids involved and how modern toys/models had come such a long way.  It was a wonderful dialog between two equally crazy train fanatics who just approached the hobby from a different perspective.  

To that end, all of the forums on this site are interesting and worth spending time in. 

Before this thread I thought Hi-Rail and 3-Rail Scale were the same thing.

Now I know I'm a Hi-Railer. I gotta have electro-couplers.

That goes both ways Pappy.  I've been jumped on more than once from traditional and other operators who are either not into scale or not concerned with rivet counting just because I pointed out that the quilling feature on the scale Lionel cab forward was incorrect to the prototype.  Mike Regan from Lionel asked what he thought our opinons were on the model, I gave mine (regarding the incorrect quilling whistle sounds) and almost everyone had a field day with me on that, treating it like I was insulting their mothers or something. 

I happen to agree with Jonathan (GG1 4877) and Jack (Hot Water) regarding the aforementioned criticizms on this post regarding 3 rail scale and highrail and Kadee coupelrs.  I suspect that some of those people have had no experience at all with Kadees, let alone in O gauge/scale.  I can also relate to the unreliability of 3-rail couplers to where they're more prone to popping open under load and the fact that if you want to do switching operations you have to virtually ram your engine up against cars to get the 3-rail couplers to close, whereas with Kadees when they close they stay closed until you want to open them, and you can be as light as a feather coupling cars that are equipped with them.

Actually it started shortly after WW2 with the introduction of Gargraves track, Walthers offering the option of tinplate trucks (that was the term for all 3 rail compatible trucks/wheels back then)for use on scale car kits, and companies like General Models offering 3 rail versions of their locomotives.  Search the magazines back then and you will see 3 rail layouts using wide curves and scale sized equipment  (and I'm not talking about outside 3 rail!).  So Hi-rail back then wasn't always just scenicked layouts using traditional sized equipment.  There was a variety of approaches back then, and it was all considered Hi-rail.  

I agree that 3RS is a subset of Hi-rail.  However I've seen totally traditional layouts on tubular track doing prototypical operations with waybills & timetables, and I've seen beautiful 2 rail layouts where the very detailed brass trains just ran around and around.  So, as mentioned above, there are many, many ways to approach this hobby.

Now I know I'm a Hi-Railer. I gotta have electro-couplers.

Surprisingly enough, Atlas had an O scale very near, scale sized electro coupler.  It needed to be refined a bit with regard to coupling.  It worked fine for uncoupling.  I found some areas where it could be modified enhance coupling and I still plan to get back to it someday.  If someone would have continued to work with it, I think it could have been successful.  As is, I find it useful but not all purpose.

Kadee has a remote coupler for G.  If the O scale demand was sufficient they would make one for O scale. 

Sam those GM&O F3's are great looking, and I don't have to look at swinging pilot!

Actually it started shortly after WW2

John is correct.  The term Hi Rail has been corrupted and misused over the years.

I have a Hardback first edition of Warren Morgan's book that I've had for over 50 years.

Here's a link to a post by Scale Rail that explains the original story.

I was reading a old paperback book called "The Model Railroad Book" last night. I bought it in the 50's sometime as a second hand book. It was written by Warren Morgan in 1951. He tells the story of wanting to build a basement layout with his two sons sometime in the late 30's. They wanted a scale layout but only had tinplate Lionel trains. They couldn't afford to start over with scale trains so they decided to try tinplate trains and a scale looking layout. When they were finished one of the sons, Jack suggested they should have a club layout with a secret password. Now Jack's dad was in World War One in the 13th Engineers (railway). They were nicknamed "rails". Other Army guys would always greet the guys in the unit by saying "Hi, Rails". Jack's Dad suggested they use Hi-Rails as their secret password. After awhile Lionel, Polk Hobbies and Model Craftsman Magazine all were interested in this new kind of layout. Tin plate and scale. No one knew what to call this new kind of layout. Of course the boys suggested "Hi-Rail" and it stuck to this day. Bet you didn't know that. Don 

 

By the way, we have traveled this same path in previous threads. Here is one of the latest:

Hi-rail thread

Seems to be a lack of agreement on when the term was coined.

And, as far as the meaning of the term is concerned, as usual, many people around here would rather post what they think definitions should be, rather than what has traditionally been accepted in the hobby.

Jim

And that is not really true.  I have seen on the 3RS forum when a newbie asked some basic questions and both him and some others who tried to help him were jumped on by self-appointed "forum purity monitors".  There are some there that are very elitist.

Regarding pointing out shortcomings in manufacturer's products, it is useful for some to learn more, but others may look at such as critizing their choice of locos.  If such is posted on this forum rather than the 3RS forum, you should expect that might happen.

That's funny Jim I was working on that as you were posting.

Jonathan,

Yours is another example of, saying so much with so few words.

There are those who are easily upset when it comes to this subject matter. So much so that it is comical how fast the same folk become defensive .

Martin,

It is truly amazing how fast some want to add something that was not said or implied . This is fine as well.

While we're at it, the term Tinplate is highly misused, including it's use on this forum.

That said, I think the way most people think of the term tinplate today, is a better use.

You have a point, if the product criticism was also projected towards anyone who buys the product; in other words if comments are made along the lines of, "What were people thinking buying such a stupid train" or similar.

But it is clearly apparent some people fail to see that distinction and take any type of product criticism personally anyway.

marker,

Shame, shame...Trying to hyjack this thread with a true statement...(nice try). Why not post it in the Tinplate Forum?

I have always heard the term Hi-Rail as referring to model trains using the overly high rails and wheels with deep flanges as typically seen in American Flyer, Lionel, and more recently MTH. It was usually applied without reference to the couplers, just the rails and wheels. I had always thought the term came from the "high-rail" being taller than scale sized rail.

Being an "S" scale modeler since the early 1980's, I had always thought of my own layout as being "hi-rail" since it used hand-laid code 148 rail, with wood ties and closed-frog turnouts so that I could run trains with both the fine scale NASG profile wheels or the deep flanged American Flyer wheels. My trains are mostly equipped with fine flanges and Kadee S-Scale couplers but I wanted the flexibility of being able to run AF trains if the occasion arose. At some point, I calculated that using code 148 rail in 1/64 scale wasn't a whole lot worse than using code 100 in HO, and was closer to scale than using code 80 rail for N scale, so I went with the hand-laid "high rail" track and wood ties for my otherwise scale "S" Gauge layout.

Bill in FtL

I can really relate to the unreliability of 3-rail couplers.  A 3-rail coupler on a conventional Lionel engine popped open during our train show this weekend.  The engine ran around the layout and crashed into the rear of its own train.  This caused the cars to derail onto the adjoining track.  A train on the next track plowed into the derailed cars and caused a mess.  A short circuit caused the entire layout to shut down.  It took a half hour to get everything running again.  

I would prefer having Kadees on all O gauge equipment.  They stay closed until they are opened.

I still can't get the coupler on that Lionel engine to stay closed.  I had to use a plastic tie to hold it closed so I could run a train for the show.

Joe 

marker,

I know what you mean!

But, sometimes it's so hard not to wade in!

...and I know what you were hinting about with the term "tinplate", and I agree. But, I couldn't begin to think of how we could explain that not all tinplate is tinplate! I'll leave that to braver souls!

Jim

I am making a concerted effort to call things (and people) the name they most prefer.  Sometimes the name does not match the reality, but that makes no difference to me.

Sometimes I have to ask - but then I make the effort.  

I do find the Hi Rail/ 3-rail scale differences difficult to keep in mind, but I shall make the effort if I have to address them.

As to truly scale train models, we 2-railers are off the mark as well.  I build my own, and my rivets are triple the size of even the biggest.  My models fit the track gauge, but my track is anything but scale - you will not catch me laying tie plates, and I have no patience for spikes on every tie.  And I insist on .172 width wheels, which seems to drive the fine scale folks nuts.  Even my class lamps and markers are oversize - on purpose.

I'm enjoying this thread and have decided to wade in as Jim P said, "sometimes it is hard not to." 

OK, confession time, I am becoming more and more attracted to "scale model railroading." In the beginning, with few skills, if any, I was happy to get trains running on any three rail track. I popped my buildings, as well as trains, out of the box and was joyful when they ran. Now, learning much from the true experts here on the Forum, I am never satisfied. I love the three rail scale layouts even though the terminology and philosophy are a bit puzzling. Now, my layout is more "scale" than ever, I am simply no longer satisfied with large couplers that must be banged together and I want to run two rail, true scale trains. I don't think I have the requisite skills right now, but I am not as afraid of it as I once was. BTW, my Kadee couplers never come apart. My lobster claws do.

I think I may have one more layout left in me . . . . Yikes !

The truth is, I would like it to look as much like real trains as I can possibly make it. I truly hope I have offended no one with my remarks concerning "labels" and readily admit that with the Forum and experts like those who have posted to this thread,

I may have a chance to do something special with my last effort.