Why isn't O Scale 2-Rail more popular with model railroaders? What can be done to increase 2RS's popularity?

This has been "the big question" for years. One theory, which has some weight, is that until Atlas released one in the early 2000's there hadn't been any "starter" sets since the 1970's. The following is an opinion and should be taken with a tiny grain of salt.

In H.O., starter set equipment can be operated on larger conventional DC layouts without modification. This exists in N Scale as well as 3-rail O Gauge.

In 2-rail O scale, operational requirements dictate a 36" radius (6-foot circle) for a loop, which is substantially larger than the 18" radius (3-foot circle) for H.O. Expansion of a train layout becomes more complicated when you require four times the square footage for the same layout functionality.

The 3-rail/2-rail symbiosis actually complicates things because you can effectively build out an O-Scale-Like situation in H.O.-like space with O Gauge, or build out to a large H.O.-like space using "3 Rail Scale" O-72 (36" Radius) curves (broad-curve H.O. layouts often operate on 36" radius).

MTH stepped into an interesting area by offering switchable 2-rail/3-rail locomotives that would operate under DC, AC, DCS (and later DCC). Doing that is not really complicated and one forum member modified a 2-rail Atlas C40-8W to operate on 3-rail.

And while hybrid locomotives may represent a viable solution to 2-rail vs. 3-rail long term (I've opted for the scale-wheel engines and have operated in both environments), the space requirement is still going to be a problem. Swinging pilots that can be fixed easily might solve some of it, larger locomotives will still require larger radius curves and more space for a layout, especially if you don't have blind wheels in play.

What would be an ideal locomotive design?

• Floating, but fixable pilot with Kadee Couplers. This would accommodate sharp curves, but could be "scaled up" for a scale layout. Rolling stock would be similar to the old Atlas-Roco where the couplers could be easily removed from the trucks and placed on the body. For steam locomotives, body mounts for the coupler on the tender would be included; six and eight-coupled driver sets would have blind drivers on the inner driver axles and would be restricted to smaller steam. Of course, the higher-end locomotives would require larger curves, have more detailing, etc.
• Scale-format wheel sets with Code 172 treads and 3/32" flanges. This would support standard Code 125 2-rail turnouts and crossings.
• Starter sets could be built out using 27" radius curves and sectional track similar to that offered in H.O. starter sets. This takes the old 4x8 to a 5x9 ping pong table.
• No comment as to whether DC or AC should be used. AC was used back in the day because DC variable power supplies were expensive back then. Three rails were strictly a layout wiring consideration because the hot rail is always in the center even on a reverse loop. Modernly, all of this is moot due to reversing circuits and better power supplies.

I'm conflicted in my 30' x 11' home layout design between 42" radius, which allows for a more complicated layout and 54" radius which supports a nicer environment for my scale-wheel equipment (and a simpler design). Either way, it will support 2-rail and 3-rail equipment through the use of fully-insulated track, relay-operated polarity switching, and a strategically wired control center. Stay tuned.

@ScoutingDad posted:

I would not think it is that hard, no clue as to how many couplers I would break if I did.

A Pair of flush cutting wire cutters is all that's needed.  The pins are relatively soft ferrous metal, not titanium.

But why then does nearly every 2 rail scale photo and vid contain rolling stock appear with the kadee hook still in place?

There are folks in other scales that cut the pins off.  99% of folks aren't bothered by the uncoupling pins, plus, they're function come into play if the the person is using under the tie uncoupling magnets or magnetic wands for uncoupling.  Also folk view the uncoupling pins a surrogate air hoses.

Magnetic Kadees (or compatibles) have been in use in various scales for over half a century.  The Kadee delayed action Magna-matic coupler was invented in 1956. They're available, simple and dependable.

If prototypical realism was all that important wouldn't those be removed regularly?

There's also that big spring on the side of the coupler to close the knuckle.  Reliability is preferred over realism in this case.

Rusty

I wish I understood why this "feature" bugs me so much. It really shouldn't matter.

As the original poster, I want to thank everyone of who has contributed to this thread.  I asked the questions because I wanted to understand why OS2R isn't more appealing to model railroaders.  I define model railroaders as people who are in the hobby in any scale and those who are re-entering the hobby, who plan to build or participate in a club layout.  Model railroaders intend to run trains.  

I don't define people who buy and display or store trains in their basement as model railroaders.  These people are collectors.  They are an important part of the hobby.  They support dealers and manufacturers and purchase much of the product.  I am a TCA member and many collectors are my friends.  

I went through every post as of today (Monday afternoon, April 18, 2022) to see what people have said about this topic.  There have been 113 replies to my original post as this time.  I was not overly meticulous because I don't have the time.  This is what I found:

1.  Space:  Mentioned or debated 39 times.   Many posters said that OS2R requires more space than most people have available to build a layout.  This included discussions about the minimum required radius.  Of course, minimum radius directly correlates to the space to operate on a circle of track to run a given engine or car.   Big steam and scale length passenger cars require OS2R curves.  Some people argued that modelers don't need to run big power.  If you are modeling the UP, however, you most likely want big engines.  

2.  Control:  Mentioned or debated 20 times:  I was surprised by the AC, DC, DCC debate/discussion.  Unlike 3-rail and the smaller scales, the OS2R community has not embraced a standard control or operating system.  This is true.  Every HO and N scale person that I know and every club uses DCC.  Many or most OS2R layouts are still using DC or a combination of DC and DCC.  The combination of DC and DCC was tried on my HO club's layout and didn't work well.  The club is now DCC only.  I don't think DC/DCC works well on any operating layout with reverse loops and complex track arrangements.    

3-rail, in my opinion, has too many command control options.  I am primarily a 3-rail operator.  I have 5 incompatible operating systems.  Incompatible to me means that I can't use the same controller across the board on each system.  This is a considerable expense with controllers costing about $200 plus or more.

3.  Product Availability:  Mentioned or debated 14 times.  I believe that it is true that OS2R community has enough product to satisfy everyone but it is not readily available.  You generally can't purchase it from major internet dealers (Charles RO, Train World, Mr. Muffin, etc.).  Yes, you can get it at O scale shows, but how many people outside the OS2R community attend O scale only shows?  Product is usually not available at general interest train shows such as NMRA conventions.  I have attended a lot of NMRA conventions.  

4.  Expense:  Mentioned or debated 11 times.  Some people said that the expense of brass and other 2ROS equipment is too expensive for the average model railroader.  Others said you can find reasonably priced product but you really need to search for it on eBay, internet auctions, etc.  One person mentioned that there are no reasonably priced 2ROS starter sets for the beginner.  

5.  Track Work:  Mentioned or debated 7 times.  There was debate that OS2R track needs to be perfect for reliable operation.  This was countered by a video showing a train running on some awful track.  I think the basic problem is that OS2R does not have a reliable, easy to lay, track system like Lionel's Fastrak or Kato's N scale sectional track.

6.  Proto 48:  Mentioned or debated 4 times.  People argued that if O2SR was Proto 48 it would be a more attractive scale for model railroaders because the models would be more accurate.  I think that this train has left the station and that OW5 will remain the standard for manufacturers and modelers. Too much stuff has already been made to OW5 standards.  

7.  Visibility:  Mentioned or debated 4 times.  One person mentioned that he did not know OS2R even existed when he started in O gauge model railroading.  I believe that OS2R is invisible to the majority of model railroaders and that this is a factor in why it is not more popular.  I have never seen an OS2R modular layout at a NMRA convention.  I have seen great layouts in all other scales from Z to G and Lego.  OS2R has almost no visibility on the internet compared to other scales.  

8.  Hobby Shops:  Mentioned or debated 4 times.  People said that hobby shops don't carry OS2R product.  I would say that model railroad hobby shops are few and far between for any scale.  People will need to search the internet and buy from internet retailers.  

9.  Inertia:  Mentioned or debated 5 times.  Modelers generally begin in one scale and won't change scales because of their existing investment.  This is partially true in my view.  There are many circumstances when modelers have changed scales.  Some have gone from N to O gauge.  Many have a couple of gauges that they work on.  My brother, for example, models in HO and On30.  

10.  Work Around:  Mentioned or debated 3 times.  People felt that OS2R was too difficult for beginners and experienced modelers alike because people had to do work arounds to get operating models.  This included converting 3-rail equipment to 2-rail.  I believe that this generally true.  Most of my model railroad friends want to buy a model, put it on the track, and run it.  Yes, there is a work around for everything but .......

11.  Operations:  Mentioned by 1 person.  I was surprised that only one person mentioned operations.  Maybe this is one of the basic reasons that OS2R is not more appealing.  OS2R layouts that I have seen are generally loop running.  Many of them still use a central control panel and DC block control.  

My experience in 3-rail O, HO, N, and G gauges is that DCC and other control systems have revolutionized the hobby.  Contemporary modelers want to control their trains, switch, see smoke from steam engines, realistic lights, etc.  They want to walk around the display and control their trains.  Everyone in my HO club who is under 30 uses their cell phone to run trains.  I use my cell phone when I forget and leave my NCE controller at home.  One of the most popular activities in all the other scales are operations.  

Too many OS2R layouts are stuck in the DC block era.  I believe that the attraction of OS2R will remain stagnant until this changes.

12.  Modeling:  Mentioned or debated by 7 people.  A few people argued that OS2R is a modelers hobby because of its size and detail.  As I said, however, DCC has changed everything.  Modeling is less important today than it was in the past in my opinion.  This is the reason Woodland Scenic and Menards buildings are very popular.  The majority  of modelers want to run trains instead of building models.  I have only built one model in the last 10 years and most of the members of my model railroad club haven't built a single model of anything, from a building to a tree.  

Modeling is an enjoyable activity and is good for those who want to do it.  However, if you want to attract people to the hobby, they need to see operating trains, not beautiful models.  A modular layout with Menards buildings is better than no railroad because a modeler is taking forever to craft a spectacular building.  

That is a summary of the comments.  I welcome your comments about this.  I plan to post my thoughts on what to do to make OS2R more appealing in a few days.  

NH Joe

@AGHRMatt posted:

What would be an ideal locomotive design?

• Floating, but fixable pilot with Kadee Couplers. This would accommodate sharp curves, but could be "scaled up" for a scale layout. Rolling stock would be similar to the old Atlas-Roco where the couplers could be easily removed from the trucks and placed on the body. For steam locomotives, body mounts for the coupler on the tender would be included; six and eight-coupled driver sets would have blind drivers on the inner driver axles and would be restricted to smaller steam. Of course, the higher-end locomotives would require larger curves, have more detailing, etc.
• Scale-format wheel sets with Code 172 treads and 3/32" flanges. This would support standard Code 125 2-rail turnouts and crossings.
• Starter sets could be built out using 27" radius curves and sectional track similar to that offered in H.O. starter sets. This takes the old 4x8 to a 5x9 ping pong table.
• No comment as to whether DC or AC should be used. AC was used back in the day because DC variable power supplies were expensive back then. Three rails were strictly a layout wiring consideration because the hot rail is always in the center even on a reverse loop. Modernly, all of this is moot due to reversing circuits and better power supplies.

I'm conflicted in my 30' x 11' home layout design between 42" radius, which allows for a more complicated layout and 54" radius which supports a nicer environment for my scale-wheel equipment (and a simpler design). Either way, it will support 2-rail and 3-rail equipment through the use of fully-insulated track, relay-operated polarity switching, and a strategically wired control center. Stay tuned.

Matt,

You are right on about locomotive design.  Manufacturers in the HO world have come out with "Rivet Counter and Runner" models.  Maybe OS2R manufacturers could do the same.  I look forward to learning how you handle 2-rail equipment on 3-rail track, especially at the switches.  My 2-rail equipment derails on my 3-rail Atlas switches.  It doesn't help that all of my O-72 switches may be too sharp.

NH Joe

@SANTIAGOP23 posted:

Teeny tiny flanges???  You’re putting HO in a pedestal. Keep in mind that HO is not Proto87. HO is closer to 3 rail than to 2 rail in that respect.

Santiago,

I really enjoy your posts, but this seems like a stretch.  How is HO closer to 3 rail?

This is great stuff everyone, all excellent and valid opinions and I enjoy reading all your opinions.

The fact this thread is so popular tells me that both 3 rail and 2 rail have a great future. Long live the O scales and gauges my friends!

Popping some more corn.

@New Haven Joe posted:

Matt,

You are right on about locomotive design.  Manufacturers in the HO world have come out with "Rivet Counter and Runner" models.

NH Joe

And OH do I ❤️ LOVE ❤ my HO and N  Scaletrains!  FABULOUS MODELS! 👍

@New Haven Joe posted:

Matt,

You are right on about locomotive design.  Manufacturers in the HO world have come out with "Rivet Counter and Runner" models.  Maybe OS2R manufacturers could do the same.  I look forward to learning how you handle 2-rail equipment on 3-rail track, especially at the switches.  My 2-rail equipment derails on my 3-rail Atlas switches.  It doesn't help that all of my O-72 switches may be too sharp.

NH Joe

I like the idea about intro models and the "Precision" models. LifeLike has Proto2000 and they also have entry level sets you could pick up at toy stores, along with limited accessories.

Interestingly enough, if you took a good look at H.O. and N scale wheelsets (P:87 and N Finescale aside) you'd be surprised at the tread width and flange size when sized up to 1:48.

I'm using ScaleTrax flex and #6 turnouts because they're insulated. Atlas #5's can handle scale wheels (Code 172) pretty well, but you get a bounce in the frog. Atlas 3-rail turnouts are not insulated, but Ross turnouts (regular as opposed to "Ready") are and could be used. 11-degree are fine with scale-wheel equipment (I was running scale wheels are AGHR from 2009 on). O-72 turnouts curve through the frog and have issues with scale wheels.

@rplst8 posted:

Santiago,

I really enjoy your posts, but this seems like a stretch.  How is HO closer to 3 rail?

A quick search for HO scale wheels will get you the following... wheel threads, flanges and axels are so far out of scale they can only be compared with 3 rail. Also, note how all set have pointed axels. Us 2 railers have become accustomed to ball bearings not only in engines but in every piece of rolling stock. I believe that the only importer to do that for 3 rail is 3rd Rail, and that was by the way of two railers. All of the examples below are standard HO... crazy huh?

Proto 87 is a different game...

We have the same subdivisions in S scale. First is high rail, then scale. Commonly supplied scale wheels are known as Code 110 in S. My S gauge layout will allow flawless operation with either high rail or Code 110 scale wheels. I have rolling stock and engines with both types of wheels. Next there is a Code 88 fine scale wheel, it requires a slightly different frog design and wing rail spacing on turnouts for reliable operation. Correct car weight per NASG standards is also important to use these wheels. Finally we have Code 87/Proto: 64. In my experience those wheels are best for closeup photography but some operators use them.

The takeaway here is in both HO and S, high rail and scale can be intermixed to a large degree. It is much harder to achieve that in O between 3 rail and 2 rail.

Corn popping sound effects,🍿dimming lights🎭... 😊

@AmFlyer posted:

We have the same subdivisions in S scale. First is high rail, then scale.

The takeaway here is in both HO and S, high rail and scale can be intermixed to a large degree. It is much harder to achieve that in O between 3 rail and 2 rail.

Well sure...G, HO (excluding Marklin)  S (and even N and Z scale) are 2 rail; only in O is the 3 rail such a huge presence. For most part, almost all scales are typically kinda "high rail"...whether you like it or not...🙂

Mark in Oregon

PS: and yes, the biggest mystery is why S isn't the predominant scale, given its "perfect" size... 🤔

@Rusty Traque posted:

Why is it folks seem to think that everyone wants to run Big Boy's or Challengers?  Model railroading in general is much more than that.

I've never owned a Big Boy in any scale in my life and I don't feel I'm missing out on anything.

Rusty

Not 100% - but pretty sure 2-8-0 and 2-8-2 were the most common configurations found on American roads.  I don't get Big Boy fever either.

@SANTIAGOP23 posted:

Proto 87 is a different game...

This is the first time I have ever heard of Proto 87.  I am not surprised that it exists just that in all the years I have been the hobby (over 70) this is the first mention of it that I can recall.  NH Joe

In summary, not everyone likes the same thing.

@New Haven Joe posted:

12.  Modeling:  Mentioned or debated by 7 people.  A few people argued that OS2R is a modelers hobby because of its size and detail.  As I said, however, DCC has changed everything.  Modeling is less important today than it was in the past in my opinion.  This is the reason Woodland Scenic and Menards buildings are very popular.  The majority  of modelers want to run trains instead of building models.  I have only built one model in the last 10 years and most of the members of my model railroad club haven't built a single model of anything, from a building to a tree.  

Modeling is an enjoyable activity and is good for those who want to do it.  However, if you want to attract people to the hobby, they need to see operating trains, not beautiful models.  A modular layout with Menards buildings is better than no railroad because a modeler is taking forever to craft a spectacular building.  

That is a summary of the comments.  I welcome your comments about this.  I plan to post my thoughts on what to do to make OS2R more appealing in a few days.  

NH Joe

NH Joe,

You made some wonderful points in your last entry but this one here really stands out to me. As I stated in my first post, this is the microwave generation. Who wants to spend time building models or making anything unique? Like writing, it seems to be a lost art form or so it appears. From what I see, most young people entering the hobby are more concerned with running trains and scenery/building is secondary, at least as it pertains to 3-rail O scale. I think WS and Menard's know this and are doing quite well because of it. I must add, I'm very aware that 3-railers aren't the only ones using prefabricated buildings, etc. but many of us do and I will not apologize for it.

If you watch YouTube, you see N and HO scalers doing just as much scenery work/building as they do reviewing and showcasing locomotives and rolling stock. In some cases the modeling aspect takes the lead. Narrow gauge modelers are almost exclusively about scenery and modeling.  In watching, it's clear that running trains is more important with many of the 3-rail modelers online, which in itself is not a negative thing. It's simply how they enjoy the hobby. I would actually be interested to know what percentage of Luke Towans over 1 million subscribers are 3-rail O scalers. Anyways I digress...

I think that 3-rail is the "gateway" to O scale. Some stay with it and find joy in it, myself included. Others move on as their interest changes. One is not better than the other. The 2-railers have something to say about the 3-railers, the Proto 48 modelers have something to say about the 2-railers, and the prototype is sitting back laughing at us all because they are all toys that we spend a lot of money on. So what do you do? Keep having fun with what brings you joy and not bash someone else because they don't enjoy something the way you do. Hey here's another thought, how about throw a compliment here and there to someone who enjoys the hobby the way they want to even if it's not the way you do. I know that may be pushing it for some but try it. We ALL have one thing in common so let's use that to help promote the hobby not introduce someone to the hobby with division. Remember we are all ambassadors for this hobby. If you are ever in a position to teach someone about the hobby and all you can do is tell them what makes your chosen scale the best or better you're continuing the division. Is that really a good look guys and gals?

A few years ago I joined a 2-rail club with no intentions on abandoning my 3-rail. The group was made up of 2-railers, 3-railers who converted to 2-rail, 3-railers that only run 2-rail equipment at the club, and everyone in between. They welcomed me and not once did I ever hear someone tell me I should leave 3-rail O scale and a few even spoke positively about 3-rail O scale. Had they have talked down on my choice in O scale do you think I would have continued going around them and would this have helped encourage my curiosity of 2-rail?  We certainly have the ability to promote the hobby the way we love it without talking down on people that enjoy it differently.

Dave

@luvindemtrains  Re Luke Towans - wow he makes some great dioramas and I learn something every time I watch his videos. Marklinofsweden is also another great resource. And there are a number of gamers doing great modeling work.

There are an awful lot of videos of HO layouts. I often cannot tell the difference between HO/OO and 2Rail scale. At least I can tell anything 3 Rail is O !   Pilentum has made some wonderful cab ride videos showcasing layout detail and running trains - to me they go hand in hand.

I think many of us could take you last last paragraph as an example of how to promote your passion and the hobby. 

While I mostly prefer HO (due to the nearly unlimted number of locomotive and freight car kits) for O scale stuff I exclusively prefer 2 rail as you can still find plenty of All Nation, Lobaugh, and Locomotive Workshop stuff. While substantially more expensive than HO, the upside of 2 Rail O kits are: interesting kits (mechanically), extremely fun to build, and yield BIG beautiful models!

Dave,

For the most part 2 railers and also the guys into 3 rail scale DO discuss the accuracy of models but some 3 railers seem to take the criticism of the trains and transfer that criticism to themselves for some reason. Then 2 railers get called "rivet counters," and get the "Looking down their noses at us," comments. You know the drill. You are correct that the trains and track are not insulted. I don't have anything against any group or anyone personally.

All,

This thread topic is not one about specific models but more of a cerebral exercise. In a discussion about model railroading, I'd think 2 rail modeling would be assumed. The groups I have been involved in have numerous, really superb modelers, including some right down to scratchbuilding their own engines. Some come around the forum but most are doing their thing and not showing their stuff on forums. To some degree, maybe that is part of the "problem."

I have read this thread with great interest.  Like many of my generation (1970s kid), I started in HO...loved it.  Got out as a young adult when DCC was coming in, so I never had any HO DCC equipment.  I got divorced, got back into trains this time O scale 3 rail...couldn't get over the middle rail...sold 3 rail, got into OS2R and learned DCC and how to install the boards.  Right now, I am "collecting" OS2R for a future layout and run them when I can and am getting back into HO for a while...the readily available equipment that comes out of the box DCC or DCC ready is amazing.  I think if OS2R had a standardized operating system as you mentioned, it would be much nicer and "easier", especially if manufacturers made DCC equipment.  A quick ebay search for "O scale 2 rail DCC" netted 5 locomotive results all by MTH and only 1 was truly made for OS2R.

So in a long winded way, I don't understand why OS2R isn't standardized in regards to operations...DCC vs DC.  If you run OS2R do you use DCC or DC on your system?  I use NCE DCC.

Andy,

NCE DCC.

@roll_the_dice posted:

So in a long winded way, I don't understand why OS2R isn't standardized in regards to operations...DCC vs DC.  If you run OS2R do you use DCC or DC on your system?  I use NCE DCC.

My layout is simple DC. In short, for what it is (small and rarely more than 1 engine active) and my purposes (more of a test bed and not for ops, etc.), DCC is not needed.   Where it double in size and scope, I would be running DCC.

@HudsonORailRoader posted:

There have been a lot of technical reasons shared here on why 2R has slowed...DC vs. AC, size requirements, wiring, etc. I maintain that the marketing behind 3R has made a difference in its popularity. For whatever reasons, 3R got an early start in modeling and companies like Lionel spent fortunes on advertising. Lionel has huge brand awareness. Even folks who are not model train enthusiasts recognize the Lionel brand. Had Lionel started 100 some years ago with 2R, I suspect that 2R would be the prominent choice today. Reversing the 3R dominance in the marketplace in a declining market space would take years and $$$ to occur.

Yes, there may be technical reasons but there are market forces that are also at play.

Re O3R...Lionel...marketing...advertising...100 year history...

Your last sentence is nearly spot-on.  With some modifications...

'Yes, there may be technical reasons but there are market forces that once were targeted at play-value.'

Marklin established the then-nacent 3-rail toy train genre.  But Lionel established the connection between a rail-dominated transportation world and admiring kids' play-value attraction, further strengthened by the post-war ideal of a supportive conjugal family unit...including happy, yappy four-legged pets!.

O2R marketing was born of pipe/cigar smoking men in business suits or rolled-up white shirts, ties, wearing Fedora hats (even indoors!), in cloistered dark unfinished home basement work spaces or grouped in large cavernous basements of commercial buildings, exercising admirable, necessary skills of wood/metal/electrical working to create most everything while hardly ever seeing an actively participating child in any photo op.  (Don't believe it?...Look through the pre-war hobby magazines!)

A lot of marketing 'inertia' still out there.  Nowadays the whole hobby is working against the not-so-glamourous backdrop of 1:1 rail transportation being little more than an annual piñata in the Congressional budget "process".   

Here in mid-Michigan we have a town whose history was very much centered around its hub-activity of 1:1  railroading.  They still have their annual "Railroad Days" carnival (?)...which is now more noted as an aggravation rather than celebration by the local citizenry, most of whom have nothing to do with today's 1:1 celebrants...little more than PITAs when dead-stopped blocking every grade-level crossing in town for who-knows-what-or-why reason.  When the kids hear the resulting parental blue banter, why would they aspire to having a miniature version?  (Unless, of course, they acquired a Gomez Addams' interest therefrom, oy vey!)

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...

@SundayShunter posted:

Ah, fantastic - I've just worked out how to embed YouTube videos here!!*

What difference do higher rails and swinging pilots make, apart from looking awful..??! In my video above, my Atlas SD40 takes my 36" radius curves on Code 125 2-rail, hand-spiked track, with no issues at all.

*Edit - have now gone back to my post further up and embeded the two videos I really want Unbelievers to see.

36 radius in 2R is O72 diameter in 3R. Thus, we still work with much tighter curves. For example, I ran my Lionel Sd70ace around my Christmas tree using o36 (18 diameter). It had a lot of overhang on curves, but it was a ton of fun. It would look a little better on 3R o48 or o60, but in a pinch it works. With that said, using regular couplers instead of the 3R lobster claws and fixed pilots, running a 6 axle diesel on my equivalent of o72 is still impressive.

@artfull dodger posted:

Space at home is one reason, this is something I am struggling with and why I turned to traction where I can run tighter radius curves.   And lack of any clubs in the area.

Need for space.  'Small' basements.  Clubs.

These are some of the scotomas of O2R, methinks.

So, you need lots of space?

A "club" (read: lotsa space version) might be an answer, for sure.

But where to find that lotsa-space space?  Maybe empty buildings, unused (today) basements of large buildings...maybe currently owned/rented by a co-enthusiastic O2R modeler.  But what about the expenses of that sort of space? You know, things like rent, utilities, insurance, improvements, local codes re public showings/access, etc., etc., blah, blah?  What about the longevity of the site, much less that of the folks supporting it?  What about the emotional/structural upheaval when an 'exit plan' is suddenly foisted upon the group if they don't hold legal title to the...space?

But, perhaps there is ONE member who has the space.  HIS space...for the club.  But even if it's not a 'home' space.   A "club" has its own well-discussed issues of compatibility, organization, leadership, cohesiveness, etc., etc., blah, blah.  'Clubiness' is not always "the answer".   I was a member for one year in a local 'club' that had no club layout of its own.  Its membership modeled in HO.  Most had their own layout, of their own construction, in their own basement (I had just moved to town, lived in an apartment, no layout but lots of hobby enthusiasm).  Club meetings rotated therein.  Food fest.  Short, feisty meetings.  No joint working on the sponsor's layout.  Watch the trains.  Take pictures. Go home.  For me...and others..."One and done".   So this is what being a 'club' is all about??

I've often wondered how well the NJ Hi-railers would do as an all-O2R club?  I live too far away to ever be a member of their ultra-cohesive O3R group, but I have nothing but admiration of their success and enthusiasm...and outreach!  But, to what extent is that 3rd rail an essential element of the club?

I'm not sure 'space', 'tiny houses/basements', 'club' are defining necessities of O2R.

Risking the 'here-we-go-agains', in about 1 more technological break-through supporting dead-rail, battery-power for O scale, I can safely say I will have spent my last O3R dollar.

Interesting discussion/perspectives methinks.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...

@HudsonORailRoader posted:

Had Lionel started 100 some years ago with 2R, I suspect that 2R would be the prominent choice today. Reversing the 3R dominence in the marketplace in a declining market space would take years and $$$ to occur.

I have had the same thought many times. If Lionel had never adopted the 3 rail setup what would things look like today? I suspect O scale would look very similar to S scale. There would be different types of track systems for different trains. On the toy side you would probably have higher rails and deeper flanges and the scale side smaller rail and smaller flanges. Similar to how it is now but there would be more operational compatibility since all axles would be insulated.

I agree with much of what has been posted. It's very frustrating to me because there is no technical need for the 3rd rail. Hasn't been for a long time.

MTH came SO close with Proto 3/2, but as usual they almost got it right and then went off the rails. If the Hi-Rail wheels would have been sized and gauged to work on Atlas code 148 track I think they would have sold a whole lot more. That way you actually could have had the option to run them on either 3R or 2R.

Lionel refuses to do any 2R locomotives. Even though they do offer American Flyer S scale 2 rail Legacy locos.

The biggest problems I imagine are the sheer space requirements for 2R, Lack of consensus for what should be made and what electronics should or should not be included, loss of builders, inflation, severely declining number of modelers that know of/have interest in 2R O.

One final thought on the space issue... Many people of the Millennial generation believe that they will never own a home, let alone a home with a 2R O sized space. The modelers younger than me (48) , that I've spoken to, seem to gravitate to the smaller scales. I don't blame them.. I've been acquiring quite a lot of N scale over the past year. Truly amazing how much more product is available.

This comes up all the time, and I think if I had to come up with why people choose one thing over another it is in what compromises they are willing to make to gain something else. So with 2 rail O, the compromise is if you want to run bigger equipment, you need a lot more space (3 rail O, even scale stuff, makes compromises on scale fidelity to allow running on relatively narrow curves) or you can have a smaller layout and run small equipment (kind of like in O three rail if you use O31 curves, limits what you can run). The other compromise is accepting there is less in terms of engines available and that while 3 rail is not cheap, O 2 is almost all more expensive relatively (yeah, scale engines are now pushing 2k or more in 3 rail, but you can also get lower level equipment for a fraction of that, long as you don't want the full scale authenticity and the engineer burping and other body sounds, in the Mel Brooks version. In general, with rolling stock there just is a lot less produced for 2 rail O. Obviously you can convert an O scale 3 rail freight car to 2 rail by putting on scale trucks and going to body mounted kadees, and prob with pasenger cars as well, but it still takes some work.

Obviously the pros are you are dealing with scale equipment and can make a lot more realistic layout. Track is less plentiful than in 3 rail, but there is enough that it isn't a limitation I think).

Running three rail O, you have that for a given space, you can do more. There is a relative ton of equipment out there, new and used, that you can buy, even 3 rail scale, and for those less concerned about scale fidelity lot of options. 3 rail high end stuff offers a lot of features, too, with sound and other things, that may not be available in 2 rail. Three rail also has the nostalgia I think tied to 120 years of these trains, even running scale the third rail has a tie to that (obviously this doesn't affect everyone running 3 rail).  Obvious compromises, lot of the equipment isn't scale, the third rail, the track is mostly non scale, the rolling stock has compromises like truck mounted couplers (and the non scale couplers common in three rail) and loses detail to allow for tighter curves. And of course dealing with those who roll their eyes at 'playing with trains'.

In the end you add up the pros and cons, and what you end up with is people find the pluses of 3 rail outweigh the compromises in a lot more numbers then those who find it with 2 rail.

The other thing is 2 rail O's biggest competitor is likely not 3 rail O, it is HO and N. HO especially, while it is smaller, is still big enough to work with, and for the scale inclined modeler means in the space that you could build a really nice three rail O layout in, a decent 2 rail O layout in, you can build a really, really good layout in HO, and in N pretty much an empire. Yes, the size is an issue, and the bigger equipment just looks cool going around the layout, but it is again a compromise many are willing to make, HO is kind of that golden mean of compromises IMO.

And with HO, you have a lot of manufacturers making a wide breadth of equipment and track, it has command control that isn't proprietary and a lot of equipment that goes back over the decades, too (N to a lesser extent, but still), structures, you name it, and HO has a huge edge vs 2 rail O. Price wise despite the inflation of even HO stuff, it is still a lot cheaper than 2 rail O.

Again, comes down to which compromises you are willing to make to gain something. O 2 rail quite frankly has always been a minority presence, I seem to recall an old Lynn Westcott book from like the late 60's I had around, that said O was never more than 5% of the market (and he was talking 2 rail O, not 3 rail, that I specifically remember).  Sure, you can tell someone who has only a small space, to build an O switching layout (like the one Tony Koester built), or tell someone 'well, if you run small equipment, like small diesel switchers, small steam, you can have a 2 rail layout the same as your current 3 rail in size", but if they don't want to make that compromise, if running larger equipment or variety is more important or they simply like the three rail look for whatever reason, then that argument won't work. I think 3 rail is kind of its own world and between that and HO/N scale, it kind of beats out 2 rail scale O.

@christopher N&W posted:

Dave,

For the most part 2 railers and also the guys into 3 rail scale DO discuss the accuracy of models but some 3 railers seem to take the criticism of the trains and transfer that criticism to themselves for some reason. Then 2 railers get called "rivet counters," and get the "Looking down their noses at us," comments. You know the drill. You are correct that the trains and track are not insulted. I don't have anything against any group or anyone personally.

It has been my experience that 2-rail modelers in all scales are disdainful of 3-rail modelers.  To that I will quote a forum member who says:  "Three rails are better than none."  NH Joe

All,

Some come around the forum but most are doing their thing and not showing their stuff on forums. To some degree, maybe that is part of the "problem."  

There are many spectacular layouts in all scales built by lone wolf modelers.  The fact that they aren't seen, especially if they are OS2R, is the visibility problem.  NH Joe

It all boils down to money.  With sufficient application of money all the other things disappear.  I am now one of the train collector types because I have accepted I will never have the space to build a layout I will be satisfied with.  That means a space where I can run 100 car+ P48 trains where they can be far enough apart that they do not see each other i.e., equidistant signal blocks, when going in the same direction  and has about 15' minimum radius.  There is a bowling alley nearby that has been shut down for more that a decade but they still want way too much to lease the space.  But that is a good amount of space.

I got out of HO when it became too small to see or work on.  Not going back there.

@SANTIAGOP23 posted:

A quick search for HO scale wheels will get you the following... wheel threads, flanges and axels are so far out of scale they can only be compared with 3 rail. Also, note how all set have pointed axels. Us 2 railers have become accustomed to ball bearings not only in engines but in every piece of rolling stock. I believe that the only importer to do that for 3 rail is 3rd Rail, and that was by the way of two railers. All of the examples below are standard HO... crazy huh?

Fair enough, I didn't realize that HO wheels were so off from the prototype.  That said, I did the math on them based on the NMRA standards...

Values are scaled up 1:48 and 1:87.1 respectively.

Looking at gauge error... though, 2R and 3R O have an error of 6% while HO has an error of close to nothing.

By this account, I'd say that HO is worse than, but closer to O 2R for flange depth and wheel width.  If you substitute in fine scale wheels for HO, that improves considerably past O 2R.

@dkdkrd posted:

I've often wondered how well the NJ Hi-railers would do as an all-O2R club?  I live too far away to ever be a member of their ultra-cohesive O3R group, but I have nothing but admiration of their success and enthusiasm...and outreach!  But, to what extent is that 3rd rail an essential element of the club?

I have also wondered what the status of the 2ROS hobby segment would be if the NJ Hi-Railers or any other large well known 3-rail layout had been built as a 2ROS display.  Obviously, this club has all the essentials to build an awesome 2ROS display.  They have the space (10,000 sq. ft. I have been told), the money, and the talented people to do it.  The NJ Hi-Railers have built one of the best 3-rail scale layouts in the world.  I would say that it is one of the best layouts anywhere.  

It is well known and advertised.  To my knowledge, there isn't a single 2ROS layout in the nation that has achieved the visibility and acclaim that the NJ Hi-Railers have.  I hope to visit this layout someday.  

Of course, this raises the question: Could the NJ Hi-Railers founders have gotten the same talented people to build a 2ROS layout?  This assumes that space and money was not an issue at the beginning.  

I don't have the answer to this question.  Since the NJ Hi-Railers started as a modular 3-rail club, they may have never considered the 2ROS option.  What they have is a scale model railroad that happens to be 3-rail.  NH Joe

The NJ Hi-Railers have visibility and acclaim in 3-rail communities like the one on this forum.  Their visibility and acclaim among model railroaders in general (most of whom are in HO) is about zilch.  There is a huge 2ROS layout built in an old 10,000 sq. ft. grocery store in the Detroit area called Chi-Town Union Station.  I'll bet there are very few 3-railers here that have heard of it, but lots of the 2-railers have.   Google it.

Seems to me this is all about messaging. Prior to my renewed interest in model railroading, I knew about HO (1960s-70s understanding) and Lionel post war - I did not know it was "post war" and thought they were the only game in town.  After that it was the occasional excursion pass-by by a steam engine (N&W 611 and the Big Boy) advertised locally and visiting a couple of the RR museums in Wisconsin and Illinois. Lets throw in riding the Durango Silverton and a local engine here in Mahomet and some railfanning and a couple of trips to the Great Train Show in Wheaton IL. My understanding of railroading would fill a thimble.  Most of the knowledge I have gained since is directly tied to this forum.  Its almost impossible to do a model railroading search and not get a hit on OGR.   Found it totally by accident. That is not the most efficient way to gain modelers.

And with regard to NJ Hi-railers, the display in Detroit, or any other club, the only large layout I was aware of much less seen is the one at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago. 

NH Joe,

I'm not too involved with H0 but my my experience in 0 scale is very few, not most, would care about how the 3 railers are running their trains. And disdain is certainly true from some 3 railers about 2 railers. I've been close with many, probably 40-50 0 scalers in the area over time and I very rarely hear anyone knocking 3 railers. We've had a number of 3 railers in our local group also, and even put on an 0 scale convention which included a large 3 rail modular setup as well. Some of my friends in 3 rail have died and some have switched to 2 rail is the only reason why I say we've "had" a number of 3 railers. I think most 0 scalers understand the symbiosis

@Bob posted:

The NJ Hi-Railers have visibility and acclaim in 3-rail communities like the one on this forum.  Their visibility and acclaim among model railroaders in general (most of whom are in HO) is about zilch.  There is a huge 2ROS layout built in an old 10,000 sq. ft. grocery store in the Detroit area called Chi-Town Union Station.  I'll bet there are very few 3-railers here that have heard of it, but lots of the 2-railers have.   Google it.

Bob,

I think that more model railroaders than you are aware of know about the Hi-Railers.  I don't have any data to back that up so you may be right that very few in the smaller scales know about it either.  I am also surprised at how many model railroaders in all scales don't know about Bruce Chubb's Sunset Valley, Tony Koester's Nickel Plate, John Allen's G&D, Allen McCelland's V&O, or your own P&W.  

I have seen the videos of the Chi-Town railroad.  It is awesome.  I would like to see it in person someday.  I hope that there will be a model railroad convention in the Detroit area.  Otherwise, I won't have an excuse to visit.

My real goal, however, is attend an event in the Cincinnati area and hopefully operate on your P&W.  That would be a truly amazing experience for me.  I have all the OGR videos of your layout and I love the way you have setup realistic operations on a beautiful model railroad.    NH Joe

There have been a couple of mentions NJ Hi-Railers and what if they were 2R.  Well despite currently having personally chosen 3R, as mentioned previously, when coming from HO, was planning on going 2R.  So before diving in, had visited NYSME layout a few times.  They are located about 10 miles from NJ Hi-Railers (which I have never visited).  So maybe the real world comparison is all ready in place.  Take a look and you decide.  

@MainLine Steam posted:

There have been a couple of mentions NJ Hi-Railers and what if they were 2R.  Well despite currently having personally chosen 3R, as mentioned previously, when coming from HO, was planning on going 2R.  So before diving in, had visited NYSME layout a few times.  They are located about 10 miles from NJ Hi-Railers (which I have never visited).  So maybe the real world comparison is all ready in place.  Take a look and you decide. 

I don't understand what you mean.  Why did you choose 3R instead of 2R after visiting the NYSME?  Did something about the NYSME layout influence your decision to choose 3R instead of 2ROS?  

I have only seen both layouts by video.  Both are awesome in their own way.  NH Joe

@Csxcellent posted:

36 radius in 2R is O72 diameter in 3R. Thus, we still work with much tighter curves. For example, I ran my Lionel Sd70ace around my Christmas tree using o36 (18 diameter). It had a lot of overhang on curves, but it was a ton of fun. It would look a little better on 3R o48 or o60, but in a pinch it works. With that said, using regular couplers instead of the 3R lobster claws and fixed pilots, running a 6 axle diesel on my equivalent of o72 is still impressive.

That's great. I bet it was fun, and providing trains to go around the tree is, I understand, something Lionel excel at and many American kids' first introduction to model trains.

To put 36" radius curves into perspective though, here's two of my British 6-axle diesels sat on it, and one of them with a typical 1960s/70s short 4-wheel box van.

Because they have scale hook & shackle couplings & buffers like the real thing, there is no way they can couple up or pull stock on this curve - in fact the minimum radius for big diesels like these is 72" - 6ft RADIUS.!!  I do not have space for a 12ft diameter circle of track - very very few Brits will at home, at least indoors, but these models (Heljan in this case) sell out rapidly - as I said earlier, 2-rail O scale is booming in the UK at present.  There is no clamour for 3-rail versions. No one wants them fitted with lobster claw couplers. No one moans they don't have room for a balloon track (a very rare thing on British layouts anyway) and no one runs them around the tree at Xmas.

What people DO do is accept what they can achieve in the space they have, make the best of it, and try and model things as realistic as possible.

Mindset. That's what it boils down to in the end.