Country Joe posted:

I am happy with 3 rail O gauge track. I can run just about any O gauge trains made in over 100 years on my track. 2 rail high rail track won't do that. 

If anyone really wants 2 rail track they can go to 2 rail scale. I don't think 2 rail non scale would appeal to very many model railroaders.

Just my 2 cents, and that's about all it's worth.

That is a popular misconception about 2 rail O. The existing 2 rail community is not the same as 3 rail O with one less rail. They aren't even the same as HO. They are unique to themselves. Most don't want smoke. Many don't care for sound. Many don't want any control system at all and favor DC. The majority prefer scale brass models over plastic or diecast because accurate appearance is the #1 priority. Good running characteristics aren't as important as they are in HO. They are willing to buy equipment that requires 100"r to operate well.  

The point being made is that a 2 rail Hi-rail track system and trains to run on it is something that would actually appeal more to the 3R crowd than 2R. It's hard to understand, but having spent years in both communities I am convinced that it's true.

Why do people always assume we have to have either 3R OR 2RHR? Why can't the new system be introduced and see if it gains support over time by those of us that don't want the 3rd rail? I'll bet you aren't using the same computer you were using 15 years ago are you? Modern trains are more electronics than anything. Other electronic products get better and cheaper with each generation. They don't stick to legacy technology for nostalgic reason. If you want to run 3 rail trains then you have over a hundred years of product to do just that. So my question is WHY would you care if they make a new track system for those of us that want it?

brianel_k-lineguy posted:

MTH has tried and offered some locomotives for 2-rail and they didn't sell enough to warrant further attempts. If there was REALLY a market for 2-rail O gauge, it would have probably happened by now.

As of 2016 V2, MTH is still offering locomotives, particularly diesels in the Premier line in 2-rail, with scale flanges.  Granted not every locomotive in the line is availble as 2-rail, but they're still there.

Rusty

Re: "lionel track of the future"

Below is a photo of "lionel track of the future" ... i.e., my future.

Have fun,

Steven J. Serenska

Jim R. posted:

Two-rail O gauge already exists. If that's what you want, there is no need to wait for the future.

The reason it isn't more commonplace? The marketplace for it is extremely small. Few buyers. A small minority against three-rail enthusiasts.

I am amazed that some of these two-rail hobbyists act like two-rail O gauge is a new trend just waiting to flourish. It has been around since the 1930s. Over the years, various manufacturers have tried to make a go of it in two-rail O, including Atlas and Rivarossi in the 1970s. It never amounted to enough of a market to sustain itself as a prime O gauge product independent of three rail.

Now, to those who think that when the three-rail hobbyists die off that there will suddenly be a huge market for two-rail O, guess again. Instead, the reality is that there will be a group of so few O hobbyists that the costs will be at least double the current list prices, in order to amortize the tooling costs in a smaller market, or no marketplace at all. Two-rail O is hanging on only by grace of the market generated by three-rail enthusiasts, who make production practical for O gauge products.

Two-rail O might be more popular, except for that little fact that those so intensely interested in two-rail modeling have this alternative called HO. That scale and gauge is the largest in the country in terms of marketplace.

Yeah, a small minority against another small minority. If you take out the toy train enthusiasts I would say O scale is a 60/40 split between 3 rail and 2 rail in favor of 3 rail.

Yeah, it's true that Atlas and Rivarossi failed in the 1970s but Atlas has been successful in their 2 rail products for almost the last 20 years. So while the time wasn't right in the '70s, Atlas certainly been making a profit on 2 rail in its most recent try. MTH may not make huge numbers of 2 rail locomotives but I haven't heard anything to say that they are discontinuing the line. Even Lionel is finally starting to put Kadee pads on some of their scale cars and even offering 2 rail wheels sets.

Actually over the last 10-15 years 2 Rail O has been steadily increasing in popularity. I was told this by an Atlas rep. Sure it hasn't grown by leaps and bounds but a slow steady increase. The main reasons the increase isn't that large is #1) a lot of guys have a large investment in 3 rail and #2) space requirements. Pretty much everyone interested in O gauge knows that 2 rail exists. That's not the point here. The point here is if there was an option for someone just getting interested in O Gauge and this is someone who doesn't have a Lionel postwar collection, or perhaps someone with a very small O gauge collection that they could have either a O Gauge 2 rail track layout or a 3 rail track layout with the exact same space requirements I have to wonder just how people would choose the 3 rail track?

Sure there are some 3 rail enthusiasts who love the center rail and say, "You will have to pry the 3 rail track from my cold dead hands." Which is fine. It works for them but obviously since this subject comes up often about disguising or minimizing the center rail there are a bunch of 3 rail enthusiasts who even though they may not publicly admit it, deep down they do not like the look of the center rail and would prefer that their track looked more realistic.

I agree that when a lot of O gauge folks die off (guess what: most 2 railers are not spring chickens--they are dying off too) prices will go up but prices will go up for both 3 rail and 2 rail. This is happening right now. I seriously doubt that 3 rail will ever go away. There will always be a good number of folks who like the traditional Lionel trains.

60/40 split three-rail/two-rail? Based on what? What you wish it was? Try less than 10 percent of the market. 

Re-read my post. I said "if you take out the toy train enthusiasts". I was talking 3R scale enthusiasts vs. 2R scale enthusiasts. 

Ask Atlas what their production numbers are if you don't believe me. I have actually talked to people about this. I don't make stuff up. 

I see your point in that regard. Very possible. But it still doesn't extend a future market to two-rail O. The numbers aren't there to support an independent segment of the market.

Remove the three-rail sales, and neither MTH nor Atlas would produce O scale models. Too much risk against too limited returns. Third Rail could continue brass sales under a new name.

Even a majority of three-rail scale enthusiasts wouldn't give up that third rail.

All of this is clearly evident in the products offered by current manufacturers and the comments you see posted above. 

"But it still doesn't extend a future market to two-rail O. The numbers aren't there to support an independent segment of the market."

Yeah, you might be right about that but this thread isn't about if 2 rail will exist 20 years from now when all the 3 rail guys die off. Even in the unlikely case that happens there is so much 2 rail available in the secondary market right now (plus another 20 years of trains produced) it won't affect me at all. If large numbers of folks die off as you say and no new folks enter the scale and trains and no produces 2 rail trains and the little bit of 3 rail trains left becomes very expensive I guess I will just have to make do with what I have. That's a pretty dark picture. I certainly hope that you are wrong and that is not where the O gauge hobby is headed.

"Remove the three-rail sales, and neither MTH nor Atlas would produce O scale models."

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Do you mean removing sales of semi-scale traditional O gauge trains or sales of scale 3 rail trains? I can't deny that sales of scale 3 rail trains have allowed manufacturers to produce 2 rail versions of the same model. However, in certain circumstances, and I agree not very often, it was 2 rail sales that allowed a 3 rail model to be built. Ask Sunset. It has happened once or twice. 

"Even a majority of three-rail scale enthusiasts wouldn't give up that third rail."

I never said they would. I said if new people entering the scale had a choice of 3 or 2 rail with the same space requirements what do you think they would choose?

There are lots of different ways to go about the O gauge hobby. I like what I like and it isn't any better or any worse than what someone else likes. I agree with Johnnyspeed that if there was a way that people could have 2 rail without the space requirements a percentage of O gauge folks would go that route. Sure, not a large percentage but a small percentage none the less and if new people looked into O scale I think it would be good for them to have that option. However, at this time the option does not exist.

Hudson J1e posted:

"But it still doesn't extend a future market to two-rail O. The numbers aren't there to support an independent segment of the market."

"Remove the three-rail sales, and neither MTH nor Atlas would produce O scale models."

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Do you mean removing sales of semi-scale traditional O gauge trains or sales of scale 3 rail trains? I can't deny that sales of scale 3 rail trains have allowed manufacturers to produce 2 rail versions of the same model. However, in certain circumstances, and I agree not very often, it was 2 rail sales that allowed a 3 rail model to be built. Ask Sunset. It has happened once or twice.

 

 

Phil, Regarding Sunset and Golden Gate Depot, 2 rail sales have made many 3 rail projects viable.  Actually, virtually every Sunset/GGD project would not have happened at the price points they have had it not been for 2 and 3 rail sales combined.

Particularly at York I receive the comment "if it wasn't for us 3 railers you 2 railers wouldn't have all the stuff that 3rd Rail/GGD produces". I agree. But, when I point out the converse I frequently get in response "huh, I never thought about that." In numerous cases 2 rail sales outnumber 3 rail sales and sometimes by a wide margin.

Sunset/3rd Rail/GGD attempts to cater to both 2 and 3 rail markets.

I know many will disagree, and it has already been done before with cheap toys, and perhaps g gauge?....but the idea of rechargeable battery powered o gauge locos that look good riding on descent looking plastic track sounds cool to me. Imagine how much plastic track one could buy cheap. Carpet layouts could go all over your house on a tight budget. Sounds great for my kids. Yeah, plastic track might not look the best but just a thought. Kids could easily snap all plastic track together and make the layout that they want. They wouldn't have the frustration of crimping rails, etc. Then later on if kids want more realism, they could move on to metal rails. Maybe their battery powered locos and rolling stock would still run on o gauge metal rails too.

Serenska posted:

Re: "lionel track of the future"

Below is a photo of "lionel track of the future" ... i.e., my future.

Have fun,

Steven J. Serenska

 

That looks like some of my current track, along with some Gargraves track with Ross switches.

Lee Fritz

coltm16a2556 posted:

I know many will disagree, and it has already been done before with cheap toys, and perhaps g gauge?....but the idea of rechargeable battery powered o gauge locos that look good riding on descent looking plastic track sounds cool to me. Imagine how much plastic track one could buy cheap. Carpet layouts could go all over your house on a tight budget. Sounds great for my kids. Yeah, plastic track might not look the best but just a thought. Kids could easily snap all plastic track together and make the layout that they want. They wouldn't have the frustration of crimping rails, etc. Then later on if kids want more realism, they could move on to metal rails. Maybe their battery powered locos and rolling stock would still run on o gauge metal rails too.

I think that's a idea with excellent potential: budget-priced O-gauge two rail plastic track for starter sets with battery-power locos. If it matches O-gauge standards the rolling stock can interchange. The ability to inexpensively build track configurations beyond a basic oval would be a big plus for starter sets. There would be no issues with wiring or dirty track affecting conductivity. The track could have a more realistic appearance than traditional three-rail.

Ace posted:

coltm16a2556 posted:

I know many will disagree, and it has already been done before with cheap toys, and perhaps g gauge?....but the idea of rechargeable battery powered o gauge locos that look good riding on descent looking plastic track sounds cool to me. Imagine how much plastic track one could buy cheap. Carpet layouts could go all over your house on a tight budget. Sounds great for my kids. Yeah, plastic track might not look the best but just a thought. Kids could easily snap all plastic track together and make the layout that they want. They wouldn't have the frustration of crimping rails, etc. Then later on if kids want more realism, they could move on to metal rails. Maybe their battery powered locos and rolling stock would still run on o gauge metal rails too.

I think that's a idea with excellent potential: budget-priced O-gauge two rail plastic track for starter sets with battery-power locos. If it matches O-gauge standards the rolling stock can interchange. The ability to inexpensively build track configurations beyond a basic oval would be a big plus for starter sets. There would be no issues with wiring or dirty track affecting conductivity. The track could have a more realistic appearance than traditional three-rail.

I really wonder how much cheaper plastic track would be compared to Fastrak... enough to make a difference? Not likely.

Alfred E Neuman posted:

Model railroading within your lifetime will be a matter of 3D holographic technology projected by an app on your personal device (future term for smartphone) and will include a third rail only if you are inclined toward nostalgia.  The product design and software engineers presently are determining which olfactory receptor neurons to target for each of the virtual smoke fluid scents.

What, me worry?

this idea sounds cooler and alot cheaper

Why did Lionel and the other importers give up on O 27?  Not scale, but one can get a lot of railroading into a small space.

If your system worked, you'd get a shock every time you walked past your toaster oven.

Serenska, Can't see your photo, try re-posting.

pghtrainguy posted:

Serenska, Can't see your photo, try re-posting.

It seems like the link for that photo is now dead.  The below is the same as what was shown:

"Track of the Future".

SJS

People in the New York to Washington corridor whose homes are close enough to Elon Musk's Hyperloop underground tube train will have the invisible middle rail problem solved for them.  They can just have their model trains tap into the electromagnetic energy of the secondary induction waves emanating from the Hyperloop system.

Without know a whole bunch about electronic theory, I would think radio controlled power would come first when it came to eliminating the third rail. Those radio controlled planes and cars are exceptional!

RC of model RR has been around for decades.  Go take a look at the Dead Rail Society website.

Wireless power transfer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_power_transfer

THE TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY WITHOUT WIRES

by Nikola Tesla

http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1904-03-05.htm

Jerry

Nice to see this thread resurrected.  You guys remember Fred - the guy who perfected stud rail?  He went 2-rail - said it was easier.

Thing is, a large subset of 3-railers really do want to hide that center rail.  They are just not sure how to do it.  Ask Fred.