O-27 vs. O?

IMO, I would use the largest curves possible on my layout. O27 curves make any 10" loco or car look very awkward. 

It is obviously your decision. 

i prefer the lower O-27 profile over O gauge.

Helmut, I would go with the O27 option, but that is just me. I like the lower profile of the ties. Let us know which way you decide. 

Tom

I have gone 027 profile in our layout but with mostly 034 marx curves and turnouts and lionel 042 curves/turnouts. So far it has worked well for us. Just like the look better and used stuff is fairly inexpensive.

Agree with all the above.

My layout is a public display with all 027 with 42" curves and turnouts. You can buy the stuff by the boatload (trainload?) for next to nothing. The only question I have is whether some of the early prewar stuff will run well - looks like the wheels have larger flanges.

If you need switches or any O-27 track cheap let me know I have bunches of it just sitting. 

TM TERRY,

there is no need to use 27" curves everywhere.  I understand there are at least 2 other diameter curves (42 and 54 I think?) available in O-27 "style" plus the Marx stuff mentioned above?

All,

I forgot to mention (some of you know from my other thread) that I will be doing an outdoor layout.  I understand the higher code O gauge might give me more tolerance for "stuff" in the track area, but O-27 is already code 148?  Or lower?

Also, is the newer flex track from Gargraves compatible with O gauge or O-27?  Are there other flex tracks compatible with O-27?

I do agree I like the way the O-27 looks better than the O gauge.

Is there any rolling stock that will NOT work with O-27?  If there is and I decide I have to have it, I am guessing they could be re-wheeled?

Thx!

Well, I hate to disagree but I strongly prefer the strength and durability of the "O" track.  It is much more forgiving if you lean on it with some serious weight.  I walk on mine all the time with no problems.  The four inches difference between 031 and 027 would be worth it for me.  However you should have no trouble finding good deals on used 027 track and switches.

AUSSTEVE,

That is definitely a consideration.  I did not think the O would hold up to stepping on?  Does O-27 crumple?

I THINK just as good deals are available on O gauge as O-27?

I prefer O gauge for the same reasons AUSSTEVE listed.

Both types of track will hold up to occasionally being "stepped on". The plot complication comes from this thing you said:

hlfritz posted:

I forgot to mention (some of you know from my other thread) that I will be doing an outdoor layout.  I understand the higher code O gauge might give me more tolerance for "stuff" in the track area, but O-27 is already code 148?  Or lower?

 None of the sectional O-Gauge track on the market will hold up in the face of outdoor moisture (and none of the trains are designed with any sort of weather resistance--not even to dew) , and even when restricted to dry weather there are no enclosed drivetrains like on 'G', so your right-of-way will have to be inspected for debris prior to any operations.

 Your best bets for outdoor trackage are GarGraves stainless, or AtlasO nickel-silver. Of the two, the latter has the cross-section closest to 'O-27', but both are much larger than Code 148, more like 172.

---PCJ

My first layout was 027. I switched to "O" because the curves are just a bit wider, and the switches are more robust.

Mine is all "O".  Durability and switches.

I used all 027 as you know. 0-54 curves.

Johnsgg1 posted:

Mine is all "O".  Durability and switches.

serendipitously,  Ross switches match up fairly well with O27 track.

Railride,

Yeah I have been through all that over the last 3-4 months and understand the pitfalls of outdoor with other than G/1 equipment.  I have a thread in these ogr forums for help selecting scale as well as over at S Sig and freerails.  No reason exists preventing outdoor layouts as long as the issues are understood and addressed, including moisture (if interested look at the Can tubular old school track look "better" thread in this same forum) and debris (battery operated blower to blow the track clean before sessions - at least that is my current plan).

I am looking at traditional style track due to cost.  If I had an unlimited budget I would be using Atlas O.

All - good reasona on both sides!  You are not making it easy on me. 

If I was to get a starter batch of track in one style or the other that might just be the way to go rather than look for a particular style (O vs. O-27).

Would there be models that I could NOT run if I chose O-27?

hlfritz posted:

Railride,

Yeah I have been through all that over the last 3-4 months and understand the pitfalls of outdoor with other than G/1 equipment.  I have a thread in these ogr forums for help selecting scale as well as over at S Sig and freerails.  No reason exists preventing outdoor layouts as long as the issues are understood and addressed, including moisture (if interested look at the Can tubular old school track look "better" thread in this same forum) and debris (battery operated blower to blow the track clean before sessions - at least that is my current plan).

I am looking at traditional style track due to cost.  If I had an unlimited budget I would be using Atlas O.

All - good reasona on both sides!  You are not making it easy on me. 

If I was to get a starter batch of track in one style or the other that might just be the way to go rather than look for a particular style (O vs. O-27).

Would there be models that I could NOT run if I chose O-27?

Large steam.

You get pretty much the largest at a 4-8-4, or Lionmaster/Railking other stuff.

I thought some company made 72" circle diameter O-27 cros section track. K-Line???

http://www.legacykline.com/app...amp;p_oem_sku=K-0226

Good luck finding that.

Agree with others, O takes stepping on better than O-27.

Thx guys.  I understand about the large locos and turn radius, sorry I should have been more clear.

Is there an issue with the lower rail height of O-27 vs. O with any models?

overlandflyer posted:

Johnsgg1 posted:

Mine is all "O".  Durability and switches.

serendipitously,  Ross switches match up fairly well with O27 track.

Ross switches just need the Gargraves to 027 adapter pins to mate up to 027, nothing else to do, no shimming needed. I am using 4 brand new Ross switches on my layout. 

I run both O & 027 track, 027 has a lower height profile then O gauge track.

FYI; I have got away from Lionel switches because the 027 switches limit what fits through it, use either Gargraves or Ross switches as the switch housing is on the side of the switch away from the track area. Other reasons for getting away from Lionel switches; in O gauge the switches made since 1995 are very bad in quality or should I say "what quality?"

Lee Fritz

phillyreading posted:

Ross switches just need the Gargraves to 027 adapter pins to mate up to 027, nothing else to do, no shimming needed. I am using 4 brand new Ross switches on my layout. 

I run both O & 027 track, 027 has a lower height profile then O gauge track.

FYI; I have got away from Lionel switches because the 027 switches limit what fits through it, use either Gargraves or Ross switches as the switch housing is on the side of the switch away from the track area. Other reasons for getting away from Lionel switches; in O gauge the switches made since 1995 are very bad in quality or should I say "what quality?"

Lee Fritz

Good to know! In the future I may have to look into them

I've been finding very good deals on the more modern Marx 027 and 034 switches both manual and remote. I've been very happy with them and they work very well for me. 

I have seen the old Marx track and switches at a friend's house, they look good but he said they need work every now and then, like an oiling. While I am at it Marx had some 34 inch curves in 027 profile if I am correct.

Lee Fritz

All depends in the person's opinion. I'm using O-27 for my postwar/prewar military railroad. Either one isn't better or worse. It's how the modeler uses them for their own needs. For instance if I want to run my postwar GG1 or Santa Fe F3 I'm going to go with standard O instead of O-27. But for a shortline military railroad I'm going to go with O-27 with it's tight curves. So either one could work in your case. But again it's what you want. What's the look that you want to achieve?  But what would I use for a layout? The answer is both track.  

phillyreading posted:

I have seen the old Marx track and switches at a friend's house, they look good but he said they need work every now and then, like an oiling. While I am at it Marx had some 34 inch curves in 027 profile if I am correct.

Lee Fritz

Correct, you can tell they are 034 real easily by the 5 black ties.  Here is a picture of it on the layout. Outside loop is 034. I'm usually looking for more of it if anyone has some under the layout collecting dust!

Over the years Lionel has produced 027 track with black or brown ties depending on the year it was made.

I use 027 track for elevated track as it has less weight then O gauge track.

Lee Fritz

Over the years Lionel has produced 027 track with black or brown ties depending on the year it was made.

Lionel also made 027 track with natural (greyish-silver) colored ties.
Postwar 027 track ties were just a simple rectangle, Modern era (1970 and on) 027 track has the long edge rolled upward.

Thx guys.  I think I am going to go with O-27 as I have a line on some at a pretty low cost to get me started.

If you expect to back heavy trains through switches, go O or wider.

Thx - I am going with O27 type track, not necessarily 27" diameter curves although they will be useful in the mining/logging area of my layout.  At least those are my current intentions!

Seems like I am reading the desire of low profile and wider curves.  Have you looked at MTH Scale Track?   Flex and sectional with looks and capacity for any flanges.

I have used it on several layouts and really like it.

If Scale Track was available back in the fifties I might still be a three railer.  I just could not go back to the past.

Budget is the issue, hence the reason for looking at old, traditional 3 rail track.  I know I cna make it look better, plenty good enough for me to use and keep the cost down.

overlandflyer posted:

Johnsgg1 posted:

Mine is all "O".  Durability and switches.

serendipitously,  Ross switches match up fairly well with O27 track.

I run too many sliding shoes and have no desire to alter them.

Budget is the issue, hence the reason for looking at old, traditional 3 rail track.  I know I cna make it look better, plenty good enough for me to use and keep the cost down.

In my area you can purchase used 022 switches, without lanterns or controllers for about $5 each. Generally, they will need servicing, but are repairable. I'd suggest steering clear of any that are rusty.

If budget is the lead issue than 027 wide radius is a suitable goal. The trick then is turnouts in excellent used condition.  Going to York next week?

Ross may be the best turnout but if budget is king then original equipment in great condition is the answer.

If you search around, there was a guy in Northern VA who used 027 rail to make some real nice turnouts.  I woulds guess about 7+ years ago on .

He used a Beagle dog as his Avatar and built his RR outdoors w/ 027 rail.

C.W. - thx for the advice.

Tom,

If I understand the name correctly, York is in the NE of the country (PA?) - I am in the SW - so no I will not be going.

I am considering making my own switches.  Since I am going for an older era and/or small privateer railroad I am considering making stub switches to start with and maybe expand to the more modern points type after I get some experience (and I may have the distinction between the two wrong).  I may buy some production switches so I have an idea when making my own.

Here's an odd monkey I'll throw into the wrench.  I have a prewar 259 that wobbles a bit.  It will run on solid T profile rail but derails constantly on the tubular it was designed to run on.  It's something I never thought of before, but if the axle bearings start wearing out on older equipment (as on mine) they have a harder time holding the rail.  So I'd go with solid rail.

Pennytrains,

Understood, but the price keeps me from going there.  If budget was not constrained I would be using Atlas O.  I will just have to maintain the stuff I have and hopefully parts will be available.

0-27 is good for a few oops steps at under 200lbs. O can take 300 just about all day long. There is a substantial difference.

0-27 looks better and is found often and cheap used. O not so much. I figure it's because so much more 027 was made later in time.

0-27 turnout housings can cause long engines and stock to bump tool boxes, etc. in the turns. O turnouts are better built can receive dedicated power, and the switch motor can be swapped to either side of the same piece (most)

Marx fat wheel drivers can't go into most lionel turnouts turns or the gearing hits and deRails them, but they can go straight if the fat wheel side passes along the switches outside edge (to the long rail) which means one direction looping. Early (only), all metal Marx turnouts are the friendliest of all turnouts. Some Lionel magnetics uncoupling tracks share fat wheel issues too. The "eye" shape leaves no room for it to pass. Slide shoe pickups of all types can have issues on those, including Marx small gear wheels and some Lionels.

Crossings (+ & x) I seldom used but I think they have a "don't list too". I know Sakai (50s Japanese, nice, or Marx-like both) and K lines tiny rollers don't mix. The rollers drop into a gap then pole vault the engine or cars spectacularly. An O ring on the centers circular boss stops it, but must be removed for fat wheel Marx.

Some Lionel engines seem to have deeper flanges and ride later Marx plastic 0-27 turnout bases, derailing 50% of the time in turns, but straight do ok.

Other issues are loco specific and have to do with rollers finding power vs ending up with all rollers sitting on plastic. Fixable with mods to the engines.

Early Mark or tin era Lionel are the most versatile, manual or electric.

In fact, you can and should look at track for Marx wind-up trains and it will be 2 rail as is. Talk about cheap!

Later Lionel O is next. But later 0-27 is dirt cheap in price and easiest to find.

there are also locos that can't swing a coupler enough or have too much overhang off the center rail (coupler angles) for 0-27. 0 31 to 0-36 is likely smallest to cover the most trains overall. A gg1 or FM trainmaster needs that 0-31 for instance. ( Some GGs can be modded to 0-27 but need a modded , dedicated lead car headend too)