If you had to start over...

I feel very fortunate for what I have and enjoy it but if I were to do a rebuild I would have more levels for a totally uninstructed view of all the trains.

20 years ago I bought a lot of stuff mainly because it was a good deal and I know I wont run it much if any at all. A unpopular thing to say here but I keep thinking if I could sell all for a fair price I would go HO only. I can afford O alright but I had to work very hard for my money and HO is cheaper. Although it would seem like poor value as DCC and sound cost quite a bit and there not as impressive as O. Being realistic I like my layout OK but HO alows more room for buildings and scenery. And I have accumulated more than I can display or get at easily. HO is smaller to store.

First off...great thread. I have read with interest eveyone's thoughts and ideas. Very valuable stuff.

 

I am closing in on finishing a “dream” layout. Actually, it is more the result of a vision...but it has always been a dream of mine to build such a layout. While not exactly starting over I did construct a layout with my father years ago (early 80s) in our family’s basement. It was on the larger side of layout sizes: six 4x8 boards with two mainlines in concentric loops. It has since been torn down under orders from mom .  Fast-forward to last summer (years later from the layout described above) and I decided to build my own layout in the house I occupy now as an adult in his early 40s.

 

After years of looking at picture after picture of other (very well done) O gauge layouts I knew I always wanted to build my own. When deciding where to do it I settled on a room of the house that I did not use that much: my dining room - as I do my cooking and eating in my kitchen which ultimately meets all my needs. I am single (with a couple of teenage boys in the house) so the decision to invade a whole room on the main floor of my house with toy trains was rather non-confrontational. (As a side note I do have a very special lady in my life and while we do not live together (yet) she thinks my trains are actually pretty cool; and tells me she sees no reason for the trains to ever leave the dining room. Maybe a story for a different thread someday.) So, in the end I ended up turning my dining room into essentially a "train room". I realize for most on this forum the "Mrs" has a lot to do in the decision making with regards to toy trains...and the freedom to turn a whole room in one's house into a train room is simply not an option.

 

Here in south Texas basements are a luxury (my house does not have one) but the idea of having an outside building has always appealed to me. At the current point in my life I decided to go with putting my funds toward a better layout and not toward a new (small) building in my backyard. So far I have been happy with this decision. If I move from the house someday I will definitely buy my next one with toy trains in mind...and specifically where they are going to go.

 

My working space was 15' x 11' and I decided early in the planning process I wanted an around the room design with no duck-unders or lift-bridges. This meant, however, that I had to compromise on the diameters of the curves. My childhood layout had 72" but on this layout I settled with 54". Not what I desired but in the end I am happy with the results.

 

I too agree with the notion that as one gets older bigger is not necessarily better. I consider my layout a medium size and while planning/building I had dreams of a much larger empire. But, now that I have it to the 95% completion stage I must admit I am very satisfied with the finished size. Any improvements in the future will be in adding detail, not acreage. One of the best things I like about working in miniature is the level of detail that can be achieved. The more detail to capture the eye, the better.

 

Probably the best piece of advice I can give is not specific to model railroading but applies to many endeavors in life. It is to have a vision. Have a vision of what you want and work towards it. Lots of decision points will present themselves along way; but if you make a decision with your vision in mind (while it may seem you are deviating from a set plan) I think you will be very satisfied when you are done. I had a vision of what I wanted and while the end result is not exactly what I desired at first the vision kept me on track (get it?) and on target.

 

I've included a picture below of the (near) finished product. As I have mentioned on this forum a few months ago (and posted a pic of the layout at an earlier stage) I plan on doing a blog or webpage of sorts where I will detail the building of this layout with all the techniques that I chose along with close-up shots of the results. While I did learn much from this forum (thank you all!) and other online resources I want to give back to others who might wish to travel down the same road. I have many more points of view and opinions that I plan on detailing there - and available for those who are interested. When I get that done (in a month or so) I will post the link here on the forum.  -Len

 

I have 2 layouts O gauge 24 by 16 and STG 20 by 8. Happy with both layouts.

 

What I would do different is sell stuff that is not used instead of accumulating under the layouts.

Since you asked!  Like others I would not have bought traditional, Williams, or anything less than scale with plenty of detail.  I have a garden railroad, but it is a lot of work (annual winter thaw ground settlement havoc) and haven't run anything the past few years, but truely miss my r/c Ruby live steamer.  I think it would be great to have 2-rail scale, but I have a sizeable collection of engines that would be very expensive to convert.  S-gauge is just too small for my tastes, but I do like the looks of it's 2 rail track.  I only have a 7'x9' layout because we (my wife) have been thinking about moving for the past 10 years!  I don't mind the small layout due to the fact the outside loop is 072 and I can run my large steamers.  Most of my engines are electronic, so I don't use turnouts to better safegaurd the boards.  I really went overboard on buying, but everything is paid for.  I bought tons of stuff for my retirement years, but must admit my interest after 10 years has been waning, although I still love trains in general.  Less is best, but some of us are true railroad nuts, which, in my opinion, can be way different than irresponsible.  Live the dream!

 

Stack   

Redo with FT.  I wish Lionel would make FT with DARK ballast!

I think the future of "S" will depend a lot on what MTH does with it. Having a small AF postwar layout, I see the biggest void in "S" being correct size buildings and a very limited selection of figures.

You might also want to consider a magazine article, Len.  Looks like just the type and size of layout that our readers would enjoy.  You could also make a few bucks in the process.  Just send an e-mail to me if you're interested and I'll make sure you get a copy of our Author Guidelines.  Shouldn't take much work on your part since you have a very good start with what you expressed in your post.

Good thread--interesting and productive "do over" comments! 

Considering Marx had 8 wheel/deluxe cars which were close to S, I am surprised they did not go to S track post war.  Then again, M was into getting trains into people's hands at a reasonable cost.

 

K-Line did have S cars based on M molds.  I think Arsita O has them now.

 

S might be a consideration if there was more product out there if I wanted a scale redo. 

 

I'm thinking that when it gets to the point that running power/command signals through the rails no longer makes sense that we will see a switch to 2 rail.  Batteries have come a long way and I think the technology is getting pretty close to being feasible in trains.  I can already work a long time switching between battery packs on my rechargeable tools.

@Len:

Beautiful!  I would love to see more pictures and hope you will consider Allan's suggestion of an OGR article.

 

Did you post your track plan or other pictures?

 

Eric, thanks for the kind words. Very much appreciated . I have not posted a track plan yet to the forum. I have posted pics of some new engines I recently purchased back in May (that were taken on this layout). While I do not wish to hi-jack this thread with more pics of my stuff - too many other great ideas out there - I do plan on posting a link in the near future to a web-site/blog that will detail all my efforts. And, yes, I will be in touch with Allan regarding potential publication in the future. An e-mail is on the way to you with more pics (including the track plan). -Len

Analogkid's layout looks fabulous! Hope you submit an article to OGR on it.

 

As for starting over, I would recommend:

* Choose one or two railroads to model and stick with them

*Use the steam-to-diesel transition period in the 1950s as your era

*Leave as much open space on a small to medium sized layout to properly see the trains as they run around it

*Develop a train budget and stick to it -- try to avoid impulse purchases (really tough!)

*Get your wife/S.O. on-board with your hobby if at all possible. Or don't get married

*Limit track size to 036 and you won't be able to run larger (i.e. more expensive) engines and thus you will save money

If I did noI collect so much O I would do S gauge in a minute!  Perfect size!!!

If I could start over I'd do 2 Rail O Scale

@Len:

Thanks!  I'll look for the e-mail and respond that way.

 

@Dave W.:

I had never thought of using small curves to force you to run less expensive engines. What an excellent idea.  In my case though, one engine was a prize in a raffle and my PM1225 was a gift.  I probably won't buy any other engines like that mainly because of my budget.  But I really like how you think.

 I'm confused (again). Is this the what if I had unlimited funds post?? Well, thinking of what I have spent, I would research more. I would pick one scale only. I would try and limit myself......

 Na, these trains are like puppies. I want them all! If I started over.... I would grab every last one and I'd run them until they wore out! Oh? That's what I'm doing now....except I'd throw away all receipts! I don't care where I was. Just having fun where I am. Now if the little woman would just let me do this to our house...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kv9CCo5k2g4&feature=my_liked_videos&list=LLibxZM9pcZwOpkZrcdHggpg

 Now these are some big trains:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIAUTt-Q7h4&feature=my_liked_videos&list=LLibxZM9pcZwOpkZrcdHggpg

Gotta stop somewhere. Good thing she has some sense. I'd buy a dozen of these sized and some land.

 This guy has GOT to be single... It would take 2 home depot's to supply enough lumber

  just to build the bench work for this layout.

 

  I wonder if the cleaning staff cleans the track for him..

The first word that came to my mind was "certifiable." 

I started my latest "do over" two years ago when I decided to go to scale sized equipment with a focus on only two railroads, Reading and B&O.  With the planned expansion to the current layout, I'll be pulling out all the O-54 and O-63 curves to replace them with O-72 and O-81 so that I can run scale size passenger cars.

 

Jim

KD....sounds like you would enjoy being a member of our group...The Mid America 3-Railers.  www.midamerica3railers.webs.com  

 

Alan

I cut my teeth on my first layout doing an 8x4 Polar Express layout for my son. Doing that I learned what I liked most about the hobby which are the trains. Scenery is not what I want to focus on. So, I built a 4x4 layout next to my sons and am filling it with whatever I like. Most likely I'll probably put a carnival or a baseball game with a station. We will see I also learned that less is more. I just enjoy the train going around in circles and my interests change with the wind so I don't want to create a theme that boxes me in I posted a pict of my 4x4 layout over in the layout section. The hardest part is taking it slow and not rushing to fill up the space.

OK...I have certainly enjoyed reading through everyone's response.  There is a lot of VERY GOOD advice in this thread. 

 

If I were to start over, I would most likely go to 2-rail.  As I get older, I am realizing that the track is one of the most important visual elements on a layout....but....I went with 3-rail because when I got into the hobby, I simply could not afford the thousands of dollars it took at that time to purchase just one locomotive.

 

Another thing I would do differently would be to build a smaller layout....yep, SMALLER!!  I am finding that because I am still in the work force, I don't progress as fast as I would like.  I am a little over 3 years into the project and have almost an overwhelming amount yet to do as far as details, etc.  Much of that is my fault since I decided to do the entire layout in an urban theme.... There are nearly 200 structures!  I would like to live long enough to see it finished or at least appear to be finished!!

 

Wish I would have painted the track before I put it down....OH BOY!!

 

No curved turnouts...another OH BOY!!

 

Things I am happy that I have done....I kept the track plan fairly simple and by doing that I was able to have large yards and several spurs / sidings.  Because of this, if I want I can actually have operating sessions with places for the cars to be delivered. 

 

The track plan has crossovers and reverse loops so that I can run a train over the entire system creating a trip that takes about 15 minutes at 20 smph....or I can have 6 separate independently controlled "loops" if I want to just watch the trains operate.

 

A minimum of 072 curves....boy has that been a good decision!  In fact, I wish I went with a larger minimum.  Because of the scale length equipment, I have tried to put scenes that block nearly all of the tightest part of the curves since the overhang looks  awful.

 

No grades......I think this mentality came from the days before cruise control so perhaps I would not be quite as concerned if I were to start over. 

 

The height of the layout has worked out great at 44" being the lowest.  I can get under it fairly easily and view it at eye level when I want by sitting in a chair.

 

I am extremely happy with the wiring "idea" I accidentily discovered.  First, my wiring is just plain sloppy.  It is something I don't get into BUT I did figure out a way to get DCS to work properly for larger or odd shaped layouts that can't use the "star wiring" plan.  It effectively creates an equal distance to the power source no matter where you put your TIUs or transformers....works like a charm...no light bulbs needed!!

 

I will probably think of more dos and don't s.....probably in my case, more don't s.

 

Great thread...

Alan

I think I would have bit the bullet and bought Atlas track instead of Gargraves. Also buy more Ross switches.
Also I would have stuck with items that I really wanted, and fewer items that were a good deal

Alan, would you care to expand on your wiring method? I'm finding this thread very interesting. Thanks to all posters. I don't think you guys fully realize the value of the information to some of us newer folks. 

 

Andy

KD.....we have members from Maine to Texas and everywhere in between.  It all depends on whether you want to travel and make friends in other parts of the country.  We have several "get togethers" per year and are planning one in Illinois sometime this summer.  We even have a couple of members in Michigan!  You may want to consider contacting the Detroit 3 Railers if you are more interested in doing something with a group within your state....

 

Andy, contact me via my e-mail posted in my profile and I will give you a complete low down on the wiring method...

 

Thanks,

Alan

I really enjoy my current railroad, but there is room for improvement. If I had the gumption to start anew, I would lengthen my layout from 24' to 36' so I could get a 3' section where all of the tracks were straight and parallel. This would allow a hinged section of bench that would eliminate the duck-under I currently struggle with.

 

My railroad also needs a second passenger train storage yard below the bench top so I can easily swap trains when showing-off to visitors.

 

Bobby,

Nice looking layout plan

 

Sometimes I wish I had more passenger cars and a longer mainline so I could let them take a more scenic route.

I will be making many changes. This is my first layout and as fun as it has been,(never ends) I will include more 72" radius, fewer switches, (currently 52 on my 13x25 with 2 elevation changes) and more room to place all the action items I have accumulated and have no place for. I proposed moving with the idea of a very High priority on a larger space for the new train room. My wife surprised me. Not anxious to move she has suggested that I purchase a 24/48 mobile classroom, one of many to be auctioned off at a local school. She pointed out it was equipped with AC and heat and a clear floor space, and could be purchased and moved for penny's on the dollar for the cost of new construction.. She regrets the remark, as it was partially in jest, the time for bids was closed. I have now started to search for a suitable used prefab. Electricity and water have been run.

Lets, see if I had to start over...

 

-Go with the most obscure Railroad to model and stick with that RR only. With limited selection there would be no impulse purchases thus saving $.

 

-Go with a smaller scale, just think how many N gauge boxes would fit in the same space

as one O gauge freight car box.  Then again, idea number one would limit the number of boxes.

If I were to start over it would be SLOT CARS!!

 

...keep the rails polished...

Like most I don't have a ton of space. I thought of going to a  smaller scale, my eyes and hands can't do it and I am younger, I used to dabble in the smaller scales.  I like S scale and with MTH entering the market, that Is great.  I think to myself wow an 072 curve would be huge in the Liliputian scales. I often read  about the N & HO layouts in magazines and wonder, but easier said then done, DCC, buying new locos ad nasuem.

 

That said I like what I have in O 3 rail and don't see myself deviating.