How can I help promote O scale 2 rail

Nice video of a beautiful layout.  How about starting a blog on this forum about the layout with updates?  Do something similar to what the NJ Hi-Railers do on this forum.  I have been on the forum for a long time and this is the first thing I have seen on the Cherry Valley Railroad.

Joe

I think another thing the 2 rail community could do to increase interest is to ask manufacturers to start making all trains able to negotiate a 36 inch radius curve.  Large curves that dictate that you need a large space is the biggest detriment for most people to adopt 2 rail.  I picked a 36 inch radius because all 3 rail equipment is already designed to go around O-72 curves. 

I believe that this could be done with very little impact on scale fidelity.  The 3RS community has already shown that you can take diesels, fix the pilots and add Kadee couplers and run them on O-72 track pulling cars that have Kadee couplers.  I have both a 3 rail and a 2 rail RDC from 3rd Rail.  I can't tell them apart except for the Lionel coupler on the 3 rail model.  I could easily put Kadee couplers on my 3rd Rail FL9s.  There is very little difference between 3rd Rails 2 and 3 rail equipment except for the couplers and the wheels that I can see.    

I think that there would be very little compromise on most freight cars.  Passenger cars could be designed with a coupler that stretches to increase the distance between the cars when the model goes around curves.  The Europeans have had this design in HO for a long time.  

Some steam engines would probably have to have more blind drivers than the prototype.  I have two MTH steam engines with scale wheels.  They both go around my O-72 curves on my 3-rail layout.  One is an O-8-O and the other is a 4-6-4.  (These engines are designed to run in both 2 and 3 rail modes.  I have never tried them on a 2 rail layout.)  

I also run a circus train with scale wheels on my O-72 curves and through the switches. The cars are 85 feet long.   The overhang is bad but they run.  

Joe

There are a lot of posts from there members here. Maybe the reason you say this is because your looking for some type of title? I know that they have shown the layout many times. There were even posts on the building of the catenary system, if I'm remembering correctly?

Just tell them it's 2/3 the fun of 3 rail.

And this is one of the perpetuated myths that detracts from 2 rail - that you have to have large curves to do 2 rail.  It's really not necessary and everybody simply does not need to run Big Boys, Y's, A's, and 12-drivered engines to be an O scale 2-rail modeler.  In some fashion, the infatuation with the larger engines is real problem.  But, no one makes you run big steam or big diesels.

All of my curves are below 36 radius and I limited myself to smaller engines, the largest being a small 2-8-0 along with 40' freight cars and some slightly larger passenger equipment. I also run somewhat smaller diesels, NW-2, RS3, etc. w/o any problems.  I also run boxcabs of similar size.  I also run trolleys on the same track.  I also have at least 1 curve that cannot be passed by anything larger than an 0-4-0 since that's what switchers are for.....  and, I have no shortage of equipment or rolling stock - I have a ridiculous surplus,

Joe,

The compromises necessary for ALL equipment to negotiate 36" R curves would be objectionable to many 2-railers, including me.

We, 2-railers that is, have just convinced Scott of Sunset to have steps body mounted on the diesels.  This can only be done with a wider radius.  This holds true for fixed pilots, also.

I am not being condescending but certain aspects (equipment) of 2-rail will require larger radius and rightly so.

Ed

"We, 2-railers that is, have just convinced Scott of Sunset to have steps body mounted on the diesels.  This can only be done with a wider radius.  This holds true for fixed pilots, also."

  Most diesels should be able to handle 36 inch radius with fixed pilots and steps. Weaver RS3 and GP38-2 and Atlas SW8-9 have no problems doing it. I see 36 inch as a useful minimum radius for O scale modeling as it can allow more folks to join the ranks but I'm not into the promoting aspect of it since I believe folks should not be promoted to do anything but should do what they want to do after studying the options. Given the size of the equipment and spaces available in most houses I'm thinking O scale is not the best choice for most folks. HO or S at largest make more sense in most cases ...DaveB  

And me and many others I believe. For folks who have curves of at least 54 - 60 inch radius and want to run larger locomotives they don't want to blind the middle 3 sets of drivers on a 2-10-4. Plus, you would be faced with the issue of having to have solid side rods on larger locomotives if they were to run on 36 radius with blind drivers on all but the end drivers.

There are a number of 2 rail locomotives that will handle 36 inch radius.  I do not see any importer of O scale being willing to accept a 36 inch radius requirement for their product. Who would impose that requirement? I believe the importer"s answer would be to go to 3 rail or use small motive power.

I have no knowledge regarding the Atlas product but the Weaver RS3 will go quite a bit tighter yet w/o any issues.  You really have to go to 6 wheel truck engines to start to require larger curves, in all probability.

Given the size of the equipment and spaces available in most houses I'm thinking O scale is not the best choice for most folks.

But it could be if they choose wisely and want to stay in O scale.  Having an "empire" is not always the best choice.

I think if MTH offered a starter set with 2 Rail equipment it would make it alot more accessible.

Well, there is an idea!  They could take the smaller PRR steam, which apparently already runs on 2-rail, insulate a few select freight cars and a caboose, and supply some 2-rail sectional track, and off we go.  Matter of fact, since their locomotives can be switched to 2-rail, why not just insulate all freight cars?

As to making all the 2- rail stuff go around 36" radius - not gonna happen.  My large steamers are already compromised with tapered tail beams to go around radii twice that.  And you have no idea how ridiculous an 80' coach looks on 36" radius.  But there is a niche for smaller stuff in 2-rail.  A nice PRR B6 or a Harriman 0-6-0 and some nice 40' freight cars would make a nice scale starter set in 2-rail with almost no compromises at 36" radius.

opinion

Come to think about it, didn't Rivarossi and Atlas do just exactly that in the 1970s?  With Diesels and 0-8-0s in full scale?

I believe that no matter what is done, 2 rail O scale will remain the tiny market segment that it has been and continues to be. I think that it makes a great appearance, is more realistic, but the market was established as three rail a long time ago. As a result the overwhelming majority of model railroaders and equipment on the market are 3 rail. I doubt that 2 rail is even 5% of the total O gauge train market. IMO, it would be an impossible feat to get the market to shift so enjoy 2 rail for what it is, as it is unlikely that promoting it, is going to change anything.

Assuming that a goal is to increase the popularity of 2 rail and increase the number of 2 rail modelers, then building equipment that will get around 36 inch radius would, I believe, be a good idea.  The Lionel VL Big Boy sells well because it will get around O-72.  Two rail diesels could probably be built with detachable steps.

The fact is that most modelers don't have the space for 60 inch radius curves but they want to operate large equipment. 

I have a couple of 3rd Rail 3 rail steam engines including a SP 4-10-2.  It looks like a scale model to me.  I don't care about the blind drivers.  I don't know what the other differences are between my 3-rail version and the 2-rail version except for the blind drivers and a longer draw bar between the engine and tender.  My 3-rail version has an oversize coupler but that can be changed.  I think that from most viewing angles the 2 and 3 rail 3rd Rail SP 4-10-2 cannot be told apart (except for the rear coupler).

No one would impose any requirement on importers.  It may in their best interest, however, if they can enlarge the 2 rail O market and increase their sales by designing their products to get around sharper curves.  This may also be good for all 2 rail modelers because an expanded market would raise all boats so to speak.  

Joe

I searched for Cherry Valley posts on the forum.  There are numerous posts announcing shows.  There are a few posts about the cement plant and a few more with short videos.  

I didn't bother to go back more than about a year.  I didn't find any posts with numerous photos taken at the train shows, etc.  I also didn't find a club website.  I did find links to video done by a local TV station and a Wikipedia article on the club's history.  

This club, as far as I can see, is almost hidden.  How about photos on the weekend photo fun?  How about a forum blog about the club?  How about an OGR article about the club?  

I suppose my point is that if the O 2 rail hobby is going to expand or even hold its own it is going to have to increase its exposure both within and beyond the model railroad community.

Joe

Assuming that a goal is to increase the popularity of 2 rail and increase the number of 2 rail modelers, then building equipment that will get around 36 inch radius would, I believe, be a good idea. 

That is a big assumption.  That is the presumption of this thread - make O Scale 2-rail bigger.  But bigger is not necessarily better, and in so many ways trying to get others to see things our way can be a truly lousy idea.

There may not be a future for 2-rail semi-scale, but if there is, it will probably help your goal.  I applaud you for trying to move things in this direction, but am not sure O Scale 2-rail really needs it to survive.

I don't think making compromises on 2-rail equipment so it can run on small radius curves (aka, trying to appease the 3-rail crowd) is going in the right direction as far as promoting the scale.  Most 2-rail rolling stock can run on fairly small curves anyway, there may be some under body detail that has to be cut away so the wheel flanges clear.  Personally I'd rather see the 3-rail makers cut down on the high-angle wheel taper to a more scale-like appearance.  They could keep them a larger diameter (and keep the flanges the same so they could make it thru switches) so it could run with older 3-rail equipment.

Engines are a different mater, but again, why compromise 2-rail so that 3-railers can use it?  There's already plenty of stuff available for 3-railers.  Blind drivers might not have been used on every prototypical locomotive but they were used.

When I fixed the pilot and installed Kadees on a Williams E7 I also fixed the steps:

It was the only way this engine would negotiate a 072 curve, otherwise I would have had to leave them off.

That would be one solution, make parts like this removable so if the owner wanted to run on smaller curves that's all that would have to be done.  That would appease both 2 and 3-railers I would think and possibly help promote 2-rail.  3-railers are used to compromises anyway ( whether they know it or not) so missing steps (in order to get around a curve) shouldn't be a big concern for them.

I like prototypical looking things anyway so the more "correct" detail the better, whether it's 2 or 3-rail.  Atlas does a pretty good job of offering equipment in both configurations.

'This club, as far as I can see, is almost hidden'

that's pretty funny, considering we sometimes think we put too much material online here. far more than other clubs of any scale.

we are in the middle of compiling a story about the club's 50+ year history and the present-day layout, to be submitted to a popular O scale magazine.

we have mixed feelings about other forms of online presence, such as Facebook or a club website. some members do not want their personas online and constructing and maintaining a club website or blog is time better spent working on the layout.

trust me, I already spend my days & nights publishing a paper and digital media product. so while I have the expertise, I don't relish the additional time requirement.

I agree with Bob Heil and others similar views. I don't have a problem with 2 rail 0 that the others who want to change have. I enjoy the nature of the experience, and the uniqueness of it. There is a totally differnent and higher level of satisfaction in it.

I do promote the hobby in a small way. I've had the local NMRA over and have open houses for the locals 4 or 5 times a year, and have had an article written about the layout in an NMRA regional newsletter. I can understand why some would not want to open their homes up to strangers but I do it without a second thought.

I've written a few articles for OST and should have something ready to go within a year or so. I don't particularly like writing formal articles but it is something I can do to help. Nothing about the experience of writing formal articles or getting published really gets the juices flowing for me and I suspect the same for others.

I've posted videos and photos here and on Youtube from time to time. The person who posted that "0 Scale" should be in the title of Youtube videos is a good idea. 

I think there is a balance between promoting the layout and modeling with photos and videos, and a perception that people are promoting themselves. I think this perception seems to permeate 0 2 rail more than 0 3 rail. I don't know why. Terms like "fishing for compliments" seem to come up every so often in discussions I hear offline. Personally, I agree that we could be posting more videos and photos.

Chris' post about promoting the hobby and how it can be a distraction from working on the layout is really valid.

If you are into promoting 2 rail and enjoy it then I'd say go for it. If it becomes a drag for you, then focus on your trains and just enjoy the hobby in that way and let the other stuff go. If I'm the last 2 railer standing, I'm okay with that. It just means other people are enjoying something else.

With patience, I've certainly been able to obtain everything I've wanted and more than I need in 2 rail, so I don't see the problem there.  

You hear all the time how impossible 2 rail 0 is to make work. I've heard all of the myths and even believed them when I was in 3 rail. Contrary to what many believe, my experince with most 0 scalers is that they have a "can do" attitude when faced with challenges. I've made 2 rail work pretty easily for me and have blown through most of the myths, so maybe some of us are not just mere mortals.

 Edited for spelling errors.

It's probably more related to that traumatization at the hands of an English teacher or even worse, a Creative Writing teacher.

quote:

I do promote the hobby in a small way. I've had the local NMRA over and have open houses for the locals 4 or 5 times a year, and have had an article written about the layout in an NMRA regional newsletter. I can understand why some would not want to open there homes up to strangers but I do it without a second thought.

I think that what you have described is one of the best ways an individual can promote their hobby, regardless of what that hobby might be.

Given the size of the equipment and spaces available in most houses I'm thinking O scale is not the best choice for most folks.

"But it could be if they choose wisely and want to stay in O scale.  Having an "empire" is not always the best choice."

   There's certainly lots of O scale layout concepts that would work well in smaller spaces but it seems most guys get too hung up on larger equipment and big dreams so end up with too much and too large stuff to fit on the layout so it ends up looking like a 2 rail version of a 3 rail department store Christmas train display. The size of O makes it necessary to make some severe compromises on reach in distances versus scenic compression and it's hard to pull off without lots of layout design experience along with the acceptance of what is possible in the space ......DaveB

I always have referred to my layout as a 2 rail Christmas garden that I keep up year around. Just like to watch the trains go around in a circle, or, more specifically, in an oval.

Probably just compensating for other shortcomings,

I agree that would be the best way if MTH or Atlas wanted to try to make 2-rail O-scale more accessible.  A starter set would be the best bet in doing that.  In general though I think O-scale manufactures should invest in working on small scale locomotives like switcher locomotives and boxcabs, etc.  They can run on smaller radius curves and price wise they would be much more affordable then $1000+ larger locomotives that require large layouts to operate. 

See, all this stuff is available off the shelf.  If there was any real interest, one could buy a Williams B6sb in 2-rail, some Atlas box cars and a caboose, an oval of snap-track ( I think Atlas still makes the stuff), and a used HO transformer, and presto -2-rail on a serious budget.  I believe this could be done for under $500, and once the locomotive is captured, the rest is probably at the local hobby store.

EBay shows a bunch of B6- type models for between $200 and $300, but this week they are all 3-rail.  Joe could 2-rail one of those things faster than you can think.

I did check the MTH catalog - I did not see any Proto 3-2 switch locomotives in current offerings.  I suspect the market is fairly thin.