Two rail pitfall's

Clem,

It is very simple: there are no pitfalls going two rails. It is the natural order of things.

Yves

quote:

Originally posted by Yves:
Clem,

It is very simple: there are no pitfalls going two rails. It is the natural order of things.

Yves

Ok optimism is good, I like that. Don't know if I am up to hand laid rail.
clem

Once you move into the 2 rail realm. The biggest pitfall is the sheer volume of brass you can get. Sure hi-rail has a bunch but 2 rail brass list is quite extensive, except for factory new Key, Kohs, Glacier Park, 3rd Rail and Weaver most are on the secondary market.

If you are happily married to MTH and are a runner, your journey into 2 rail will be almost seamless, definately easy fun.

Very affordable engines with upgradeable control and sound already priced into the package.

I have had a fair amouunt of dealings with MTH products and service and am very favorably impressed. tt

No pitfalls...you'll just wonder why you waited.

Clem the more and more I have gotten into track the less and less I like 3 rail. I acknowledge that it may be fine for some people but for me there is no way to disguise the center rail by making it thinner or blackening it. It is still there staring at you. Even the perennial 3 rail favorite Scaletrax has a glaringly obvious center rail. It's just a thinner but glaringly obvious center rail. I did a pretty nice job of disguising the center rail by making it into stud rail but it does take quite a bit of effort. Outside 3rd rail also looks more real than a center rail and I am a fan of it but it requires hand laying track at worst but at best still some level of labor intensive custom work. I enjoy it but that's not for most people. 2 rail track however you can just buy and nothing looks more real than 2 rail track. That's what most real track is.

The case can be made for and against 2 rail or 3 rail. Everything has tradeoff and we are talking about trains running on electricity. However if you ask what the downsides to 2 rail are, ask yourself this. Why is N scale, HO scale (except for Marklin), G scale, and pretty much any other size all 2 rail if there are so many downsides to it? 3 rail hung on out of tradition and has just been expanded upon from there. Yes it makes certain things easier but in other ways it makes things more difficult. Namely in creating a realistic appearance.

You do have a larger selection in 3 rail as well as cheaper options. Keep in mind you can convert anything to 2 rail. Maybe you want to play with Thomas and semi scale trains but just hate a 3rd rail. You can convert it. Cars are pretty easy to convert. Only engines, especially steam engines, pose any issues. Some diesels can be fairly straight forward. If you don't have the budget for brass engines, don't worry. That doesn't mean you can't still run 2 rail. N and HO have their fair share of over sized rail track and trains with little detail as well.

This what I like about this forum positive feedback
Clem

Now that I've said that I'm going to have a 3 railer read it and think I'm a 3 rail hater. Not true at all. I just want something on my personal layout that 3 rail track can't give me. It's none more complicated than that.

Hand laying not mandatory. ME and Atlas have 0 scale track. Peco and Atlas have 0 scale turnouts.

Plus there are always loads of new used old stock on the trading tables at 0 scale meets.

That is what I like about the newer 3 rail track as the middle rail about goes away. Depending on how much room you have I think 3 rail is just fine. What is nice about 2 rail is the detail expected for it being scale but one can compromise with scale trucks smaller couplers etc I guess. I don't know much about 3 rail outside the lionel looks but think it is managable for a hobby in trains without the rivet counting of scalers. Brass can be had by buying Sunset 3 rail products. And lastly when operating 3 rail don't look so much down at the tracks but at the cars themselves.

Phil

Tom Tee,
Where do you get the Peco switches?
Thanks,
Ed

I'm a person who thinks the exact opposite. I'm willing to run a lesser detailed train but the track has to be perfect. For me the track is the railroad. The trains are just what run on it.

Clem,

If this doesn't push you over the edge, nothing will!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...I7nY&feature=related


Simon

Clem: If some one tells you "there are no pitfalls going two rails. It is the natural order of things," either has dementia and is smoking something illegal. Two rail Track is all over the place. If you use Atlas track there is very little choice in switches and crossovers, Old Pullman is gone, Peco is has european tie spacing, Micro Engineering track offers no switches or crossovers, not counting even the high cost than 3-rail. Do I need to go on?
Two rail Locomotives are more limited in choice than three rail. Atlas charges more for 2-rail and Sunset for the same price as 3-rail you will will not get a command or sound system. Old brass is either worn out, out of date, high votage draw motors, and way over price by those who sell them as vintage antiques (yeh Right!). Example: the older brass Overland models have poor drives. Yes you can repair them, but at what cost and most importantly TIME invovled. So you end up cost on cost. Most O Scalers are "stuck in the mud" so to speak, as they have not kept up with the times on skills and inovative thecniques like the HO and N scalers. The O scaler group connot even correct their out of gauge wheels. The Europeans have blown the American 2-railers out of the water with teir modeling! Fact is: 2-rail is limited and will cost you more $ and Time. The fact is that my opinion is not far off. nw2124

"Progress - either you are for it, or get out the way!"... SLR

Clem,

there are no pitfalls going to 2 rail, best thing I ever did. I have found more great stuff in O Scale than I could ever know what to do with and continue to find more new things all the time.

John

quote:

Originally posted by nw2124:
Clem: If some one tells you "there are no pitfalls going two rails. It is the natural order of things," either has dementia and is smoking something illegal. Two rail Track is all over the place. If you use Atlas track there is very little choice in switches and crossovers, Old Pullman is gone, Peco is has european tie spacing, Micro Engineering track offers no switches or crossovers, not counting even the high cost than 3-rail. Do I need to go on?
Two rail Locomotives are more limited in choice than three rail. Atlas charges more for 2-rail and Sunset for the same price as 3-rail you will will not get a command or sound system. Old brass is either worn out, out of date, high votage draw motors, and way over price by those who sell them as vintage antiques (yeh Right!). Example: the older brass Overland models have poor drives. Yes you can repair them, but at what cost and most importantly TIME invovled. So you end up cost on cost. Most O Scalers are "stuck in the mud" so to speak, as they have not kept up with the times on skills and inovative thecniques like the HO and N scalers. The O scaler group connot even correct their out of gauge wheels. The Europeans have blown the American 2-railers out of the water with teir modeling! Fact is: 2-rail is limited and will cost you more $ and Time. The fact is that my opinion is not far off. nw2124

And, the President of the O scale Optimists Club weighs in with another uplifting sermon from the mount.....


"high votage"? Freud would get a serious giggle.

quote:

Originally posted by nw2124:
The O scaler group connot even correct their out of gauge wheels. The fact is that my opinion is not far off. nw2124

I CAN !!!! and Clem, please note 2 rail has its challenges. You will definitely not find it "piece of cake" so to speak, but if your seriously interesting in realistic model railroading in 1/4" scale, it's the only game in town. That is a fact!

Bob

Clem, everything in the overwhelmingly negative post above is true to some extent but pales in the comparison to the many benefits of 2 rail.

Like skewed political rhetoric, the statement has no effect on any of my decision making factors for staying and growing in 0w5.

Not sure why anyone with that accumulation of negativity would have any interest in being on the 2 rail forum. None of the horrible items mentioned stand much of a chance of changing. Guess 0w5 is not really that bad

Take with a grain of sand anything said by anyone who will not post their true name.

Tom Thorpe
www.curvedbenchwork.net

quote:

Originally posted by Clem:
I should probably go two rail the more I do to my Hi rail the more the third rail shows up. Also then I can loose the traction tires and the claws. Those are three big benefits. Ladies and Gentleman what are the pit falls? I like double headed steam and Mu diesels, also spotting cars. I figure I can keep cost down with purchasing MTH 2 rail and keeping my Z4000 and DCS. All my rolling stock can be converted.
Clem

To me, the biggest pitfalls are the fact that 2 rail equipment takes a larger radius so you will need more space for that. The other big pitfall is the lack of choices of track. Unless you want to lay your own, Atlas O is your only RTR choice and they have a relatively small selection of track pieces. I'll let others speak for the sound and electronics part.

BTW welcome to the world of 2 rail!

quote:

Originally posted by Simon Winter:
Clem,

If this doesn't push you over the edge, nothing will!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...I7nY&feature=related


Simon

Yea I like the hobo ride video,awesome!

Your former 3-rail operating colleagues refer to your transition as "being seduced by the dark side" while your new 2-rail operating colleagues refer to it as "being saved from the dark side."

All kidding aside, the only issue I see is you have to abandon the hi-rail mantra of "Big Power on Sharp Curves." You have to be much more conscious of the equipment you purchase or convert since 36" radius (AKA O-72) is normally not well suited for six-axle diesels and cars over 60 feet long and you have to be very careful about your steam locomotive purchases.

If you've been purchasing MTH diesels with scale-wheels and fixed pilots, you're already ready to go. Just remove the pickup rollers and set your 2-rail switch. Reverse loops and wyes are a little tricky since Proto-2 can only pick up from one rail, but the old school relay polarity switching solutions will fix that.

No one is running live steam or live diesel indoors either so anyone running electric trains aren't running them prototypically either.

Here are a few things to think about in regards to O scale vs the accuracy of the most popular other scales. While gauge may be slightly wide in O scale and wheels a bit wide as well, wheels are also overly wide in HO and N scale too. An N scale coupler is way over sized to be scale and are basically the size of 3 rail couplers in their scale. The people that really want a more accurate look will retrofit a Z scale coupler. Even then it is slightly large for scale. Imagine how large a Z scale coupler must be to a Z scale car! N scale wheel flanges are nearly the 3 rail O wheel equivalent too yet people consider them to be scale. They've gotten better over the years. The old ones were very tall. N scale uses either Atlas code 80 rail or it's equal which would be equal to an astronomically tall code 267 in O scale or the more accurate code 55 rail which would be the equivalent of code 183 in O scale. Still overly large. O scale 2 rail is anywhere from code 100 to code 125 to code 138 to code 148. Extreme cases may be code 172 but it is an older and rare size. The smallest 3 rail track which is MTH Scaletrax uses code 193 rail with Gargraves and Ross setting in around code 205. Atlas 3 rail track is code 215 with Lionel O-27 track at code 250 equivalent. Don't get me started on all the things wrong from a scale perspective with each track type.

HO uses either code 100 which is the O scale equivalent of code 181. Their more realistic track is code 83 which is the O scale equivalent of code 150. Their shorter rail is basically the equivalent of what O scale considers a very heavy rail. So much for scale accuracy! You've got to get into custom hand laid rail with smaller rail codes for true authenticity. The ties on code 80 N scale track and code 100 HO track are also much too wide to be anywhere near a scale sized tie.

Now you may be thinking that I am making a great case to say that 3 rail can be considered scale since equivalent sized rail and ties in other scales are, granted without an extra obvious rail running down the middle. What I am actually suggesting though is that in many ways 2 rail O scale, even being a mere .073" wide on gauge from the true prototype is actually the MORE prototypically accurate scale to be in from a track perspective. It's true that you can't get dozens of different 2 rail O scale switches. Yes you are limited there to 3 sizes from Atlas in only code 148 rail unless you find older no longer made switches from Roco or Atlas or can import Peco. You can get sectional track in code 148 in a decent variety and can get code 100, 125, or 148 pieces of flextrack from Micro Engineering. If you need a switch that you can't find for sale from a manufacturer and don't want to build one yourself, here's a hint. Ask someone here if they'd be willing to build you one. You may be surprised at the answer!

Two rail O scale does have it's pitfalls but then again so does 3 rail. So does N scale, HO scale, or any other selection. Realism, even despite the slight track gauge issue, isn't really one of them. Especially not when compared to other scales where most people pick 1 rail size that is probably still a bit oversized and then just stick with it exclusively. In many ways 2 rail O scale is the easiest segment of model railroading to be in if you want accuracy of track and rail size selection.

the hard part is what do I do with my just finished high rail layout 36x20 feet Donut shape.Be a shame to throw away looks to good.
Clem

I don't see too much of them.

Just takes money, sufficient quantity of it to solve any issue.

I elbowed some bidders aside to get a flawless I-12 while hacking into a Lionel I-12 to force it to two rail. I finally had some illumination with the guide from these forums and some time pondering an issue.

For me perfection is a half coupler too high in two rail =) I can shim it, slap some shorter wheels on it or cut out a die cast 40' floor from a boxcar kit to make it fit.

One other thing. Dremel is your friend. But be careful with it.

Clem: It seems that the truth is negative. Yes I am in 2-rail. Yes 2-rail definitely needs to change. We have a lot of work to do. This is my goal so that we can get the "old school" way of thinking out of the way we will be going in the right direction. What 2-railers hate is telling/hearing the truth about their scale. Your best bet is go to a O scale show and see for yourself the junk that is for sale, and then look at the great new items that are currently comming along. My point is that 2-rail is not like 3-rail with unlimited products of all sorts put in pretty boxes ready to go. If you want to stay on top of new ideas and learn better ways to do them find some friends who are wide open to the CHSANGE and great new up to date, modern, efficient, and more realistic approach to your modeling. This is the new millennium, not the last century. The up side of O scale is that there are brass importers who are catching up with the times. Atlas has entered the game with great products. DCC is starting to take off, and the magazines are pushing to "herd these cats" in the right direction. nw2124

"Progress - either you are for it, or get out the way!"... SLR
"The Fact is, this is my opinion"

Ok Clem my first post was brief but now I will bore you with "The rest of the story". I had been a 3 railer since I was about 7 years old when my father bought me a Lionel DT&I switcher set with a 1033 transformer. I hooked it all up and I am here to tell you that freight moved from point to point on my layout at speeds that would make the space shuttle envious.
That said let us fast forward to my 20's and my first noticing of the 2 rail bug. I went to Hills Hobby Shop when it was still at the Park Ridge location and noticed some magazines and began to look through them and I noticed this funny looking track on this layout....only 2 rails hmmmmmmmmmm I thought to myself what the heck is that about. I swear I grew up under a rock or something because I had never even heard of this let alone seen it. Wow I thought how cool...it's so real and as I read further about the wiring of such a beast and the construction process my knees began to shake and sweat formed on my forehead and I began to feel light headed with it all. I put the magazine back and left and just kept admiring it from safe distance.
Ok now I am in my 30's and I joined this forum and began reading more books/magazines on the subject and reading about everyones experiences both good and bad and began to notice it wasn't quite as bad as first thought back in the day. Then I began looking at the photo's of layouts posted here and all I could say then as now is what a bunch of truely talented modelers there are out there. Not to mention I am still mopping up the puddle of druel that forms under my desk everytime I look at the great layouts I see here.
I finally decided to pull the trigger and tear down my 3 rail layout and make the switch over to the 2 rail world and I have not looked back. I find fore myself that handlaying track is very rewarding because I am truely building my railroad one spike at a time. That said there is nothing wrong at all with sectional track made my the likes of Atlas or whomever...I just prefer to handlay. In the beginning when I began asking questions here I was greated with a ton of helpful advise and years of experience saying don't do that (and here's why) which was exactly what I was looking for and needed. I consider myself blessed by all the help I received here because if it wasn't for them I would not be as far along and would still be scratching my head on what to do. So to all who have helped me I say Thank you all.
Now about pitfalls....Is there more work in 2 rail? Well it depends on what you consider work. You can by RTR track from Atlas or you can handlay. Some prefer to handlay everything which is what I am doing. I first thought handlaying was extremely hard and to handlay a switch?...You had better have an engineering degree. Well turns out I was very, very wrong because while it takes time it is not hard you just need to be patient because there will not be instant gratification as with RTR track, in this...it is more like g-r-a-t-i-f-i-c-a-t-i-o-n. The RTR track is not bad looking at all and does go down much faster, John Sethian and Chrstopher N&W have shown just how good it can look. There are pitfalls in all scales with 2 or 3 rails but it's not quite doomsday. Wheel gauge? well then re-gauge the wheels, can't build a switch or find one to suit you have one made for you...expensive engines or rolling stock...shop around you will be surprised at what you'll find. There are more and more choices becoming available all the time. Don't worry Clem the sky isn't falling the clouds are just parting...

Wow! I did not read every word of all that. My answer is simple: If you like the look of a center rail, yet want scale in every other way, do not convert. If the center rail bothers you, convert.

The smaller flanges will jump the rail quicker, but with good track work, that is not a problem. Some say that 2- rail takes more space, but that is not true - accurate models of long equipment takes bigger radii.

I was unable to decipher the comment about dementia, but it is awfully close to calling folks names, unless meant in jest.

quote:

Originally posted by nw2124:
Your best bet is go to a O scale show and see for yourself...."

Just what I was thinking: Given your location, consider attending the Chicago 0 Scale Meet -- the biggest one -- on March 17 - 18 in Lombard IL [ that's a western suburb of Chicago ]. Their web site is www.marchmeet.net.
And in the meantime there's plenty of 0 scalers and a club or two in the Detroit area; I'd avail yourself of their knowledge, experience and hospitality.

Best regards, SZ

I'm thinking like nw2124 ? That's scary.....

chem check out this layout not sure how close it is to you but it's in the same state http://www.chi-townunionstation.org/

quote:

Gentleman what are the pit falls? I like double headed steam and Mu diesels, also spotting cars.

Clem

The radius requirements of 2 rail steam locomotives are a big drawback to many people given typical space limitations. Look at an MTH catalog. Most MTH 4-8-4s are listed as requiring O-54 for the three rail version and 54 inch radius (O-108) for the 2 rail version. MTH 2 rail steamers have flanges on all axles like most other 2 rail steam locomotives. Typically, that means doubling the radius of the curves. Doubling the radius means four times the square footage is covered by a circle.

All the Protosound 2 locomotives are polarity sensitive. You will have to wire for reverse loops like any other conventional DC two rail layout to operate with DCS. Protosound 3 locomotives automatically switch polarity to follow the command signal.

And so far MTH has yet to even advertise an O scale operating coupler. That might be a big drawback if you use your operating couplers for switching. The O scale operating coupler is supposed to be in the works. Hopefully they will unveil it later this year.

Also, Ross doesn't make 2 rail switches. The variety of ready made switches is much smaller in 2 rail O than in 3 rail. The Ross #4s, 5s, 6s, 8s, 10s, crossovers, double slip, #6 and #8 curved switches and yard sets can make layout design and construction far more efficient than accepting the design limitations of working with manufactured 2 rail switches or taking the time to make your own.

If you model big steam or electrics there are real operational advantages to going with the 3 Rail Scale approach especially if you have mountain grades. Keeping three rail flanges (and blind drivers) along with traction tires allow for O-72 minimum curves while maintaining realistic tonnage ratings for locomotives. You may have the space to incorporate greater than O-72 curves for aesthetics on prominent areas of your three rail layout but it sure comes in handy in concealed spaces and yards. Fifty four inch radius or O-108 is a large minimum curve.

Those may not be deal breakers for you. But they are contributing factors to the limited popularity of 2 rail O and are worth your consideration before you make a decision on how you would like to model railroad in the future.

As others have mentioned, the big difference between 2-R and 3-R is in the minimum radius curve needed for operation.

The recently released 3rd Rail/Sunset GTW 4-8-4 is rated for 054 curves in 3-R, but 56" radius curves in 2-R.

Big difference when you are short on space....


Jeff C

I switched to O scale about 11 years ago. I did this for 2 reasons, one was failing eyesight, the other was O scale is "ponderous."

I have a 12 x 20 space which is small for O scale but I model a Mississippi shortline that uses a SW900 & SW1. I have one fifty foot boxcar and all others are 40 footers. I decided to handlay track which caused me to have many sleepless nights. I will not say that it is easy but I did learn to do it. If I can handlay track any of you can too and probably much better.

I will eventually have one steam loco to mess around with, a All Nation 4-6-0 that is in kit form at present. I love to old technology of O scale. I am a AN/Athearn rolling stock fan. I know they are wood and surplus/scrap metal kits but I love them. I have many scratchbuilt cars, cabooses and locos. I own an occassional new RTR car but they are not my favorites. REMEMBER, this is just me, I don't care what you buy, that is your business.

I have found that there is a lot of O scale stuff out there but it takes some work to find it. The details that are not there can often be made at the workbench. I look at O scale as a little bit of a challenge as we in this scale must improvise at times. When I was in HO I could basically get anything I wanted RTR, that became a little bit boring at times.

I believe the words of Dirty Harry apply to me and O scale, "A man has to know his limitations." I have dealt with mine and still love O scale. Yes, I have thought about how much railroading I could do in a 12 x 20 space with N scale. I also know how frustrating it would be not to be able to see it.

I will now place my soapbox back under the layout, Malcolm

I admit I did not have the time to read everything written above so I may be repeating some stuff here.

I made the switch about 9 years ago. To this day I am very happy about my decision but some of the negative things I have encountered are:

#1)2 Rail requires more room. I knew going in I would need larger radii for the curves but what I didn't know was just how much extra room prototypical numbered turnouts would take up as apposed to 3 rail turnouts in which a curve is equal to O72,etc.

#2)I am still baffled and very fearful of older O scale brass models. Unless I know the person I just won't put my money into them. Although I learned a lot from my former club I still have a long way to go. I've been burned too many times and it is true that it isn't cheap to upgrade the drives.

#3)When I got into 2 rail I expected it to keep growing and that Atlas would grow their track line. Well, (IMHO) 2 rail is growing but very slowly and due (my guess here) to the economy Atlas has not grown their track line which I consider nice but imcomplete.

There are many positives to 2 rail that I have not mentioned here and I feel that for me these positives outweigh the negatives I listed here. In the end you have to do what is best for you. Like Fred says that center rail really bothered me.

The one pitfall I hear mentioned often is the need for large radius for large steam locomotives. I have a mainline minimum radius down to 56" and everything works fine. It may not look as good on that radius but it won't look as bad as a large engine on 36" radius. It depends on your focus.

There is nothing in 3 rail track selection that is acceptable to me so 3 rail track selection works out to be 0 no matter how much of it, or how many numbered switches they put out. Considering that as a starting point, I've found the alternatives in 2 rail to be very manageable.

There is more variety of product that has been made in scale 2 rail for the railroad and era I model, and more product that comes around than I'll ever be able to purchase in a lifetime.

Where O is clearly lacking is with engines that have the ability to turn tightly as has been mentioned. The real question is why? Why can you get an articulated steam engine in 3 rail that can make a really crazy tight curve but you can't in 2 rail? Certain concessions were clearly made to do this but they get made in other scales as well. MTH's 4-12-2 in HO doesn't have a fixed frame over the drivers but instead they decided to slightly articulate it to help it around curve. Yes it's a compromise but people buy them because they can run them. Now I'm sure some of you are saying that you'd never buy an engine like that because it isn't correct. That may be so. However, how many people here run 3 rail precisely because it can make those curves yet wish they didn't have that center rail? I'm sure some don't care but others clearly do. Why then can't 2 rail make a few compromises here and there? We'll always have more accurate stuff for those who don't want to compromise the same as every other scale.

I'm sure someone is going to point out that we'd need large flanges on the drivers to make tighter curves. That may be true to a point lets say if you wanted to run your engine around an O-31 curve at 200 scale mph. It's pretty easy to derail trains in other scales around curves from excessive speed too. Common sense needs to be used. We don't need to have every wheel on a steam engine be flanged. Using a blind flange on middle drivers would help things out quite a bit. I know the purists are probably appalled by that comment but having manufacturers make products where you can swap wheels, even on steam engines, would open so many doors. Allowing the pilot and trailing trucks to swing a bit wide would help things a bit. Sure we may get curves that don't look prototypically accurate because they are too tight. That's fine. People do it all the time in every scale. Some don't care and others do. It's the people that don't care that are missing the option though and that should be fixed.

Let's say you're a person who can live with the large flange wheels like many 3 railers and 3RS people do but you just don't want a center rail. Why not give these people a taller rail code option like code 205 which would allow them to keep their deep flange wheels but then still give them the 2 rail option? An MTH 3/2 engine is a perfect example of this as they can do this. Yes there would need to be insulated 3 rail wheelsets and many issues to overcome but the point I'm trying to make here is that there is a segment of the market that may not like a 3rd rail but who would rather live with it than restrict themselves to certain types of trains in a certain sized area. There is no one right or wrong way to enjoy the hobby and there is room for everyone. The key is in finding how to accommodate everyone. That's something that other scales have done well through unity but O has done through division.

Fred,
I have some MTH and Sunset engines that'll make tight curves. My MTH J will take 40" and even 36" at slow speed but seems like it wants to straighten the rails. My MTH A's will take 36" radius no problem. My 3rd rail Y6 engines will take 40 inches and the Y3s will take 36". They work well in hidden areas but they look horrible taking those curves.

I know you think it probably looks stupid around curves that tight and I may think the same but I also know there are people that don't care who would like to not have a center rail. It is for them that things could be done.

quote:

Originally posted by fredswain:
However, how many people here run 3 rail precisely because it can make those curves yet wish they didn't have that center rail?

Fred, I could be wrong, but I'm guessing not too many because this is the 2 Rail forum!

quote:

Originally posted by fredswain: Why then can't 2 rail make a few compromises here and there?

Well, let's see.....if we made all the compromises you want. we'd have............3 rail!

quote:

Originally posted by fredswain: We don't need to have every wheel on a steam engine be flanged. Using a blind flange on middle drivers would help things out quite a bit. I know the purists are probably appalled by that comment but having manufacturers make products where you can swap wheels, even on steam engines, would open so many doors. Allowing the pilot and trailing trucks to swing a bit wide would help things a bit. Sure we may get curves that don't look prototypically accurate because they are too tight. That's fine.

Sounds like 3 rail to me.

quote:

Originally posted by fredswain: Let's say you're a person who can live with the large flange wheels like many 3 railers and 3RS people do but you just don't want a center rail. Why not give these people a taller rail code option like code 205 which would allow them to keep their deep flange wheels but then still give them the 2 rail option? An MTH 3/2 engine is a perfect example of this as they can do this. Yes there would need to be insulated 3 rail wheelsets and many issues to overcome but the point I'm trying to make here is that there is a segment of the market that may not like a 3rd rail but who would rather live with it than restrict themselves to certain types of trains in a certain sized area. There is no one right or wrong way to enjoy the hobby and there is room for everyone. The key is in finding how to accommodate everyone. That's something that other scales have done well through unity but O has done through division.

Well you could run all this by the people who make/import this stuff, but I doubt you would get too far......but then that's only my opinion, and that and a $1 might get me a coffee if I don't go to Starbucks.

What I read out of all your comments is that you want trains that will perform like 3 rail trains on 2 rail track. Nothing wrong with that!

There is a relatively simple answer (I think). Take one of your 3 rail engines and convert it to RC rechargeable battery power. You can then toss the center rail and keep all the 3 rail attributes you like....or not. Power is right there on board, you don't really need any rails, though that would likely be a bit messy.

Probably NOT the answer you wanted to hear, but I don't think any of what you talk about will be happening soon!

Simon

I know a 4-8-4 looks a little goofy going around a 27" radius curve (054), but when you don't have room you don't have room. I have a space that measures 65"x150" for my layout, and that's all the room there is right now.

The real world intrudes in other ways. I also look at the hobby differently than I used to--I suffered a stroke in August last year, and it took a long time for me to get back to something close to normal--both mentally and physically.

I've decided I don't want to wait for that magic day--sometime in the future--when I have a 60'x60' room to play with...and it's a fact of life for me that the fine modeling skills I would need to model in N or HO scale are gone (and I never was that great a modeler anyway).

Fred is right--there are a lot of people who hate that third rail who would switch to 2-R if they could run the bigger equipment in the space they had. I don't think it is realistic to expect the importers to change their 2-R models (especially brass importers), but I think a commercial stud rail system would be possible in the future for 3-R. I also think wireless control and batteries could change the equation at some point in the near future.

Jeff C