How many on here are building in P48?

If you don't notice the difference then don't waste your time or money on it.  It's like paint, many people go bats**t crazy if they think the color is off or too shiny or too flat.  To me if it is in the general realm it's good enough for me.  I know how much variation there was, and is, in the prototype, and with the light illuminating it at any given time, so not a big deal to me.

As stated above it is the difference in the train on the track that I notice.  4'8.5" track trains sit over, 5' gauge track trains sit in.

If you think P48 is a bit much you should check out the P87 stuff.

Let's take P48 to the next level.  All the locomotives should be electrics which is great because I love Box and Steeple cabs and one should be running everything off of catenary or side third rail.  Yep, trolley poles and pantographs.  If you think about it, the trolley/traction folks are the most prototypical. Now for the steam locosI guess those will run off butane.  It will be a challenge trying to control the steam pressure.  Good luck making an actual diesel engine at 1/48 scale.  Just my two cents.

 I love looking at details in books such as "A Century of Southern Pacific Steam Locomotives" and "Ironhorses of the Santa Fe" and trying to replicate those details just as much as the next guy, but taken to the natural end, we should all be running trolleys and heavy electrics.

Rob

Seriously?  No need to implode in an emotional rant.  Everyone enjoys their hobby differently and no way is the wrong way.  It's a hobby after all.  Some people enjoy watching tinplate run around in circles all day and that's just as important as someone who has an interest in doing more serious modeling.  It's all good in this hobby if it makes you happy.

Why do varying opinions always turn into people completely losing their minds and going bat shatner crazy when someone else doesn't agree with doing things the exact same way? It's like watching people debate what is and is not considered 3RS.

fredswain posted:

Why do varying opinions always turn into people completely losing their minds and going bat shatner crazy when someone else doesn't agree with doing things the exact same way? It's like watching people debate what is and is not considered 3RS.

I don't think it is the varying opinions, it is when people get personal and judgemental, like "who would spend that much money on X".  That is not an opinion, that is a personal attack and trolling.

fredswain posted:

Why do varying opinions always turn into people completely losing their minds and going bat shatner crazy when someone else doesn't agree with doing things the exact same way? It's like watching people debate what is and is not considered 3RS.

Sorry.  Couldn't help myself after seeing your post .....

The last time I checked we are ALL modeling for ourselves right?  Why does it matter what someone else is or isn't doing...spending????  Guys doing different things in different scales, different ways is what helps the hobby grow, helps us grow as modelers and most importantly we all get to share our approaches to things...and we ALL should be allowed to do just that without being attacked in one form or another or judged for it.

N&W Class J posted:

 Why does it matter what someone else is or isn't doing...spending???? 

It doesn't matter one iota! Some of us were having a good time needling each other a bit, and some took it seriously. I think the track gauge difference is so negligible as to be irrelevant, and I certainly don't care what anyone else does!

Simon

Yes indeed, some did. 

Did we ever find out how many there are? 

Not very many, but all nice folks.

MaxSouthOz posted:

Did we ever find out how many there are? 

Max,

No...no we didn't, which WAS TJ's original query.

He also asked, "Please share experiences, pictures, or lessons learned." and many of us who are practitioners with first-hand knowledge of P48 have.

Invariably though it "seems" that anytime the topic of how/what/when/why P48 comes to the floor in an open forum, there are always those that either vehemently don't agree with the concept, lament that they already own too much equipment to ever convert it, state that the change in gauge to an accurate one is visually insignificant, is a waste of time and money, reliable operation on narrow treads and/or having a large steam fleet is impossible, etc., etc., etc.

Of course, none of those comments were solicited, or are they even on-topic with this thread. Nor did I see anyone who posted positive things in support of P48, make a statement even close to (mimicking Frankenstein)..."P48 GOOD...Standard O Scale BAD!!" so I really don't know where all this vitriol comes from.

One point of interest, when it comes to the reliable running of O Scale equipment with AAR Finescale (P48) treads and flanges, Key Models actually brings in all their imports with wheels and drivers gauged to Std.O/5' gauge, but with P48 tread profiles. They started doing that years ago, and have had very few complaints from their customers. Gary Schrader, one of Key's frontmen has been reliably running that setup on his sizeable "O" layout for years now, without issue (someone made mention of Gary in an earlier post on this thread). I know that Charlie Morrell from Texas also does something similar, which has been referred to as "Texas Broad Gauge".

Matt Forsyth

F.R.S. Gibson Shops

I might give it a go on my next layout. 

No way I would stay with 5' gauge if I could run Cab Forwards with .115 tread drivers.  

I have reached a compromise through necessity, since I run and collect 1.48 and 1.43.5 scale models neither P48 or S7 standards would suit both since one has a narrower distance and the other larger between running rails but both have super fine point work.

My compromise is to use both respective wheel profiles on standard 0 gauge track of 32mm with 125 profile rail and ultimately build my own pointwork.

Fact.

To those who say P48 or S7 profile wheels will not run or track properly on 32mm track they are wrong, my re-wheeled rolling stock runs perfectly on a club layout with at best indifferent track quality and at worst poor track work - which is now being replaced.  

Steam locomotives look far better with scale wheel and tyre profile as do diesels locomotives. 

Opinion.

Nick

Then my trackwork is worse than poor.  Anything less than .145 gives me problems.  Maybe four spikes per tie would cure some of it, but temperature changes seem to be the major flaw.

Well, I am a P48'er and I have built some rolling stock, working on a USRA 0-8-0 that was converted to P48 by Matt Forsyth.  Ready to start hand laying some rail.

"hup boys wont't ya line 'em, hup boys won't ya line 'em.  That's all I hate 'bout linin' that track, this ole hammer 'bout to beak my back. Say, hup boys won't ya line 'em."

I do have a comment on the William Shatner statement which is incorrect.

"You must like                           trains     the exact                        same way                  

I do!"

Forgot the "dramatic pauses".

Larry

If you are interested in seeing a number of layout built to Proto48 standards click on the link:

http://www.protocraft.com/Layouts.cfm

It is not a complete list by any means.

Gene 

Gene is one of my heroes.  He published the definitive book on SP switchers, and it is a must-have for SP modelers.  Gene - how about a head-on shot, so folks can see how the rails are inboard of the outer dimensions of the model?

Thanks.  

Did you mean a shot like this?

Gene

That will do - I was thinking "head-on".  Did you see the gorgeous cover of the latest OST?  You can really see the wide gauge there - everything else is perfect!

Are we looking at a Beaver Creek Mogul here?  Looks good.

No, stopped buying that mag after Joe died.  Not the same.

Gene 

Maybe something like this?  Robert Leners responsible for scene and photo.  See Ho responsible for C&NWSL R-1.  Oh yeah, Jimmy Booth did the weathering 

Gene 

I really like the idea of P:48, but for the same reason I gave up on S scale I'll likely stay with O5W. That is the amount of ready to run equipment. I don't enjoy building models or modifying steam engines (or having it done). I prefer to be able to buy RTR. If there were more available in P:48 I would consider it.

jonnyspeed posted:

I really like the idea of P:48, but for the same reason I gave up on S scale I'll likely stay with O5W. That is the amount of ready to run equipment. I don't enjoy building models or modifying steam engines (or having it done). I prefer to be able to buy RTR. If there were more available in P:48 I would consider it.

Pretty much describes my point of view to a "T".

Simon

Well, in a way, I agree with that.  A very large percentage of my rolling stock is 1/4" scale, O gauge.  Changing to my slightly more correct gauge was a whole lot of work!

bob2 posted:

Gene is one of my heroes.  He published the definitive book on SP switchers, and it is a must-have for SP modelers.  Gene - how about a head-on shot, so folks can see how the rails are inboard of the outer dimensions of the model?

No doubt about it, Gene is the real deal. What would be more illustrative would be dead straight on shots of standard O and P48 side by side.

Simon

Posting on this site is simply an effort on my part to share pictures of modeling.  I am not on a crusade to convert list members to the Dark Side.

In the past 40 some years I have heard or read nearly every reason why P48 is not for them.   Don't feel  the need to offer reasons.  Life is too short.

Mahalo

Gene

What ever happened to Brett?    http://www.proto48.org/p48_photos_whelan_01.htm

I admire Proto 48, and I see it as an example of "less is more", which is one of my core beliefs where this hobby is concerned. My good friend, the late Ben Brown, was building in P48 and shared his progress with frequent emails and photos. But I am not likely to pursue it all things considered. That said, I still thoroughly enjoy the build level involved in models such as Gene D. occasionally links on this forum.

Bob

Doesn't matter to me whether it is 3 rail, P48 or whatever, I am envious of the modeling skills displayed on the layouts I find on all scales.  

Gene D posted:

Posting on this site is simply an effort on my part to share pictures of modeling.  I am not on a crusade to convert list members to the Dark Side.

In the past 40 some years I have heard or read nearly every reason why P48 is not for them. 

Spot on, Gene!!

Again, this entire thread was established by TJ (one of those 30-someting young lions I mentioned, that wants to "escape"  HO and has moved to P48), who's polling the Forum for P48 Practitioners that can help him flesh out his knowledge-base about the subject. He's already made the move, and was not soliciting input or opinions from those that disagree with his decision. 

You, me, and others that made positive contributions have done our best to help him out. Never once did we attempt to convert, nor did we disparage those that are deeply entrenched in Standard O (hey, your trains your choice), even though a few somehow viewed  what we posted as some kind of a personal affront on their chosen scale and gauge?

I've done a boatload of P48 Conversions (Steam and Diesel) for folks all over the US and in 11 foreign countries. Here are some random pics:

Drivers for a 4-6-6-4, converted to P48...

Same locomotive... 36" P48 lead truck wheels, custom turned to the standard ALCo profile, from 12L14 steel bar stock...

42" P48 diesel wheels for a Baldwin AS-16, mounted on re-machined Overland axles...

Canadian Pacific D10, converted to P48, new rod hardware, DCC/sound, minor re-detailing, and light weathering...

Matt Forsyth

Forsyth Rail Services

I agree with both of you.  I am given to sticking "Opinion" at the bottom of most of my posts, lest I be taken too seriously.  It all started years ago when I was explaining my latest Cab Forward with different gear ratios.  Apparently that bothered a fellow poster, and he attacked with gusto - I mean he came at me with both barrels!  It was a personal attack.

Since then I have learned not to get my feelings hurt when somebody mis-interprets me.

Proto-48 is not for me, but I want it to succeed.  Having a mis-matched gauge and scale is also not for me - but most O Scalers simply do not care.  An end-on photo will usually suffice to convince folks that there is a discernible inaccuracy, and then they can make their own decision.  I think it silly to make decisions while ignoring half the facts.

Opinion!

The above is one of Bob Delbridge's photos - with permission.  Note that the car body is an older, narrower car, probably 9' width.  A modern box car is a minimum ten feet wide.

Bob, that Delbridge car is really nice! 

Dan Weinhold

Penn Division posted:

Gene D posted:

Posting on this site is simply an effort on my part to share pictures of modeling.  I am not on a crusade to convert list members to the Dark Side.

In the past 40 some years I have heard or read nearly every reason why P48 is not for them. 

Spot on, Gene!!

Again, this entire thread was established by TJ (one of those 30-someting young lions I mentioned, that wants to "escape"  HO and has moved to P48), who's polling the Forum for P48 Practitioners that can help him flesh out his knowledge-base about the subject. He's already made the move, and was not soliciting input or opinions from those that disagree with his decision. 

You, me, and others that made positive contributions have done our best to help him out. Never once did we attempt to convert, nor did we disparage those that are deeply entrenched in Standard O (hey, your trains your choice), even though a few somehow viewed  what we posted as some kind of a personal affront on their chosen scale and gauge?

I've done a boatload of P48 Conversions (Steam and Diesel) for folks all over the US and in 11 foreign countries. Here are some random pics:

Drivers for a 4-6-6-4, converted to P48...

Same locomotive... 36" P48 lead truck wheels, custom turned to the standard ALCo profile, from 12L14 steel bar stock...

42" P48 diesel wheels for a Baldwin AS-16, mounted on re-machined Overland axles...

Canadian Pacific D10, converted to P48, new rod hardware, DCC/sound, minor re-detailing, and light weathering...

Matt Forsyth

Forsyth Rail Services

Do you move the steam cylinders inward or put spacers between the drivers and the rods?  Or...

Hah.  Check out, for example, an MTH steamer.  The cylinder bores are off- center.  The problem for rods is the wide gauge.

There was an article in the "Proto 48 Journal" (this was before they went on line) that talked about narrowing the cylinders...I would have to think Matt would do that...?

Mark in Oregon