Would you consider going HO to build and operate a longer layout?

No It's nice to look at but not for me. And with that said gee lets think about n scale then you could get about 4 or 5 times the trains in same area. 

I've dabbled in HO recently and find it somewhat rewarding now that most have sound quality that is almost as good as what we're used to in O albeit at a slightly less volume. However, Broadway Ltd has their 'Rolling Thunder' powered subwoofer system that is quite impressive and outperforms our locomotives in the lower frequencies by a wide margin.

The newer locomotives run flawlessly too and are much more economical. The high-end steam locomotives can be bought for well under $400 with DCC, sound, smoke, etc. I picked up (from a dealer) a new MTH UP alco PA set (AB) with both units powered, PS3.0 sound, and smoke for $225. That's for TWO PS3 locomotives. I bought a second pair and you should hear 4 alcos with sound humming along...

Not for me.  HO has come a long way with sound and control but I’ll stay with O for all the same reasons I went to it in the first place. It’s just more fun with all the capabilities that engines,rolling stock and accessories can do.  I have “toy” trains and that’s the way I run them I have no interest to try to run them like a real railroad with way bills and all that.  Not to mention these eyes aren’t getting any younger and my paws aren’t getting any smaller to work with smaller scales. 

No,never,nada! Its O gauge or no gauge!

Can't argue with the fact that HO is cheaper and you can fit more in a given space.

However, I find that, while it photographs very well, I am always underwhelmed when seeing video or a live layout in action. The smaller size seems dinky and the cars are subject to jostling due to any track imperfections, etc. It just doesn't hold my interest despite the fact that I'm geared more towards scale realism.

In the early 1990s, I changed to 3-Rail SCALE, after modeling in HO from the mid-1950s. The HO brass steam locomotives and high-end passenger cars were simply getting WAY TOO expensive, by the late 1970s, plus the HO models back then didn't have sound nor lights. 

I much prefer modeling in 3RS today.

No.

Positively, no.

I am going to build an N scale layout in my basement as well as an around the room shelf style O scale layout

You can see HO?! Too small for me...

C.Sam posted:

However, Broadway Ltd has their 'Rolling Thunder' powered subwoofer system that is quite impressive and
outperforms our locomotives in the lower frequencies by a wide margin.

I dont know what you mean by , "outperforms our locomotives in the lower frequencies by a large margin" when you only hear one locomotive at a time on that subwoofer. Goto Youtube and there is only ONE locomotive that runs and sounds impressive with "rolling Thunder" Lets try multiple locos and Multiple trains running simultaneously that us O gaugers normally run. See if you can differentiate the SD9 with the SD40-2 running together.

Sorry but the answer to the OP is NO for the HO's! Cleaning track before each run is a PITA!

Matt Makens posted:

I am going to build an N scale layout in my basement as well as an around the room shelf style O scale layout

I have a lot of Kato track and others new in packages and even some lightly used switches if your interested

I used to work in HO and N gauge when first getting into model railroading. While I appreciate how much improved everything is in those sizes, I decided years ago to 'move up' to O - I prefer the size of the engines and rolling stock, and (for me) the simplicity of conventional wiring. Haven't looked back...

Went into H0 back in my teens because it was "scale" and supposedly much more "serious" than 3-rail 0 gauge. I finally wised up to all the problems of track, regauging wheel sets, wiring, lack of power in locos, etc. But what really killed it for me was the nearly complete lack of operating cars and accessories. I finally pulled the old Lionels out of the basement one Christmas, cleaned and lubed, turned on the power and off they went. Sold all the H0 a few years later and have been a Happy Lionel Lad ever since. I'm now 65, and have never regretted that decision.

dk122trains posted:

No,never,nada! Its O gauge or no gauge!

Well put Don 

I have both O and HO.

My O is for my postwar-style design, albeit with all the modern tech (Legacy/TMCC/DCS).  It's 6x9.

I have an HO that is also 6x9 where I do all my "modelling" and scenery, etc..

I picked up a box of HO stuff a while back because it was too good to pass up, weighted freight cars, Kadee couplers, nicely weathered, at $2 per car there was no way those remained on that table.  I figure when we move there may not be the space for an O scale layout right away.  Those cars will be put to use with a nice switching layout.  For now they remain safely stored alone with a nice 44 ton and boxcab loco.  Those will be the extent of my HO endeavors.

Chris Lonero posted:

dk122trains posted:

No,never,nada! Its O gauge or no gauge!

Well put Don 

Don't forget Standard

No.

Donald

But of course......I would consider it!

After all, I recently lamented in another thread about the new availability of some HO products that I can only dream about being done...if ever....in O3R.  (sigh.)

However, my age and the reality of mortality would probably shorten the consideration.........'considerably'!

So.............probably not.

Besides.......my better half would undoubtedly have me committed before I started demolition of the O3R 'elephant' in the basement.

KD

I dabbled in HO for some years and still have an assortment of steam and diesel engines and passenger cars (nothing much in the way of freight). Apart from Athearn and MTH among these are some Marklin 3 rail system trains, both US and European prototypes. I've found all of this stuff very well made, almost entirely QC issue-free and the command control systems are fun to use once you get the hang of them.

But frankly I'd never go over to HO in preference to 3 rail O, not even for the advantage of getting more scenery/signals/scale distance in less or the same space. The HO models are simply too, well, dinky - both in size and sound. They are literally an occasional tabletop amusement for me. 

I do wish that 3 rail O had as many sound options as DCC offers and I've never understood why it does not but that would never be enough to push me over the edge. 

No

If you simply enjoy running trains in loops then I would stay with Ogauge. If you want prototypical operation as in true model railroading then I would prefer HO scale. 

Hi

I have HO running alongside my O , looks good and yes the new locos are very good, only problem is I get a lot of derailments because I find that as I am rather advanced in years getting rolling stock properly on the rails is very tricky for me

No. Never. For me, HO is too small and too delicate. And my O-gauge layout has reached the point where it is done = I have no intention of climbing aboard the layout to rip it all out and begin again. Nope. No way.  

FrankM.

Obsidian posted:

...... So does the desire run our ever growing collection on more track cause us to consider going HO? 

Even with us that have small railroads and more limited equipment, the lure of HO is great. You can do so much more in that little space.

Probably even more so with scatter-brained people like me .... who sometimes want to change directions with our modeling. Everything ... is virtually always available ... in HO.

Jeff T posted:

You can see HO?! Too small for me...

And, I swear ..... it's getting smaller. Both, for my eyes, and my fat little fingers. 

dkdkrd posted:

..... However, my age and the reality of mortality would probably shorten the consideration .........'considerably'! .....

You're gonna live to be an old coot!  

Still .... nothing can take the place of O scale. 

I would consider a larger barn before I switch to   "HO"

Clem

I have lots of H O with no place to run it. I'm a 3rail guy, always will be.

Jim

I started out in HO scale and enjoyed it for many years. Never had the room for a big layout. I think the biggest one was 5' x 9'. About 2000 or 2001 I switched to On30 to try something different. I scratched and bashed several pieces of rolling stock and a few locos. Bachman was just getting into that gauge at the time and I had a few of their engines too. Still stuck with a small layout. After awhile all the building with no real layout but a 4' x 4' loop with a switchback to a mine I sort of just burned out.

For a couple of years there was no model train activity and then one Christmas I pulled out my dad's old Lionel trains he had given me years ago. That started me in a new direction and I built a small O-27 postwar inspired layout on a door slab. Now I am into pre and post war tinplate. I have zero interest in HO now. I can get more train running action on my current 39" x 80" than I ever could on even the 5' x 9' I used to have. For me the fun is in the run, and the old O-27 trains get me the best bang for my buck.

I have mused what I could build in 14x39 if I were to go to N or Z. But the 3 rail O gauge track is VERY forgiving when it comes to track work. I enjoy running trains, not dealing with derailments.

I started out in HO when I was about 12.  I also had a layout in N scale as a young married adult for the reason cited, fit more railroading into a small space.  Later N was too small, then HO was too small for me.  I am one of the many here who would not go back to a smaller scale even if I had less space than my 130 square foot room.  In fact, I didn't even have the room when I switched to O, I only built a 4x8 then.  Scales smaller than 1:48 are too small for me now that my eyes aren't a good and my hands have arthritis.  I have nothing against any scale, there are some great models available in all scales, and all scales can be fun.  I just prefer the larger scale now that I am older.

In a word, no.  

-Greg

My desire to have longer runs and break up the monotony of simple loops resulted in tunneling through the walls and under the basement steps, building a lift-out bridge for the utility room, and building cantilevered "shelf" sections along 3 basement walls. I recall contemplating switching to HO, but was too far invested in O. The end result of my expansion project was well worth it ~ I've given my trains a nice journey to run through.

I dabbled in HO a few times.  While the engines look great & you can run longer trains, I found the engines & cars way to fragile for  me.  Forget even having my kids handle the equipment. All my kids, but my son especially, love to be able to get up & close to the trains.  O just works better for that. 

No way. If anything, I'd trade my O gauge for more standard gauge. 

I dabbled in standard ga, s ga, HO & N but always came back to O ga.  All of that is packed away now so it's O ga  to the finish.

Paul Kallus posted:

My desire to have longer runs and break up the monotony of simple loops resulted in tunneling through the walls and under the basement steps, building a lift-out bridge for the utility room, and building cantilevered "shelf" sections along 3 basement walls. I recall contemplating switching to HO, but was too far invested in O. The end result of my expansion project was well worth it ~ I've given my trains a nice journey to run through.

I did the same thing with my layout.   I expanded from the original 11x13' basement room into the adjacent closet and storage room.  My wife was 'thrilled' with the 'holes in the walls' but she soon forgot once we remodeled the kitchen;-)   I too like the idea that my trains head up the Potomac river from Harpers Ferry then reappear coming down along the Shenandoah sub.   The extension added almost 50% more mainline.   Now I can run a comfortably spaced a 20 car freight + a 6 car passenger on my outer loop.   Only thing I may do for more realism is to switch to 2 rail O.   In the meantime I have a lot of scenery improvement projects.  Thanks for all of the great replies, though I know I'm singing to the choir.

Standard progression here: 027 2055 Hudson layout ( an actual layout); packed it away and tried HO in the early 60's (I actually still have my original Lionel HO Pacific) on the same layout table (4X8); packed the HO away and got a driver's license...you know the story. So - HO has been around me.

Anyway, when I see HO layouts and equipment I can like and appreciate them, if they are good. Their sound, running qualities and detail can be exquisite...I'll watch it at train shows going through nice scenicking...but I don't want to take it home. I like it, but I don't want it.

The smaller scales (what I like to call the "junior scales") are the way to go for the layout-oriented model RR'er; for the equipment-oriented RR'er like me, the larger scales present pieces and scratch itches that 1:87 just cannot.  So, no - I would never go to HO under any foreseeable circumstances.

Rule of Thumb, literally: if you can hold a die-cast or brass model of a 4-8-4 between your thumb and one or two fingers, the scale is too small.

As a youngster, I had Lionel O gauge and then switched to HO. I left the hobby at age 13 and rejoined 39 years later. When I restarted, my first purchases were a Rivarossi HO Big Boy and an MTH PS-1 scale New York Central Hudson. No comparison - that Hudson is a beauty - I still have it and will never sell it. Since then, I have bought only O 3-rail scale-sized trains and finished a 12-by-8 layout. Am now working on a 10-by-5 transportable O gauge layout which I had considered making On30 or 2-rail - but I decided to stay with O 3-rail scale since I have lots of nice trains to run, although the third rail does annoy me. I would have made it 2-rail but couldn't fit it into the small space. I have considered working in HO many times but have never been able to convince myself to do it - just not impressed with the small size. When the current O-gauge 10-by-5 layout is complete, I will either build a small expansion or a small On30 switching layout. I am satisfied running trains in an oval as long as the structures and scenery are realistic. For me, nothing is better than working in 1:48 scale.

MELGAR 

nope