07-28-2010, 12:40 PM
Perhaps a little bit different criteria to evaluate scales by:
- Do you prefer to see the big picture - a larger area at one glance - or do you prefer very detailed mini-scenes?
- Do you usually buy car kits or RTR cars?
- Are the locomotive models you want only available in one scale or the other? Or if you are willing to kit build/bash/scratch, do you see a viable path to the locomotives you want?
-
I evaluated 4 scales in looking at a 1900-era combination standard and 3ft gauge layout - O, S, HO, and N. S lost out due to Sn3 being pretty much limited to Colorado prototype, and almost nothing for the era in standard gauge. N is too small to fit decent 4-4-0 and small geared lokie mechanisms. HO ended up winning over O because of the space needed for structures and other scenic elements - otherwise O would have been the better choice for me.
my thoughts, your choices
Fred W
....modeling foggy coastal Oregon, where it's always 1900....
- Do you prefer to see the big picture - a larger area at one glance - or do you prefer very detailed mini-scenes?
- Do you usually buy car kits or RTR cars?
- Are the locomotive models you want only available in one scale or the other? Or if you are willing to kit build/bash/scratch, do you see a viable path to the locomotives you want?
-
I evaluated 4 scales in looking at a 1900-era combination standard and 3ft gauge layout - O, S, HO, and N. S lost out due to Sn3 being pretty much limited to Colorado prototype, and almost nothing for the era in standard gauge. N is too small to fit decent 4-4-0 and small geared lokie mechanisms. HO ended up winning over O because of the space needed for structures and other scenic elements - otherwise O would have been the better choice for me.
my thoughts, your choices
Fred W
....modeling foggy coastal Oregon, where it's always 1900....