PECO N Gauge code differences

[Bigmet]

flexi is way cheaper in N

there is a slight issue though, for example say if someone were to start a cellar layout build with a plan, and then find that the actual track that goes down is only very roughly the same...

actually getting flexi where you want it, especially with tighter curves, gets a pain

Thanks for that. Having helped a friend with N gauge over a period of fifteen years, with prior experience of the whole gamut of 4mm, RTR set track OO, finescale OO, EM, P4; I am firmly of the opinion that all around RTR N is nearly as tough as EM to make work with real reliability, definitely more difficult than present RTR OO which at the better end of the product array is now pretty much the old finescale standard in commercial production, for which - as an operator above all else - I am very grateful. Out of the box, place on the rails, it works, minor tweakings to optimise sometimes required.

I look with admiration bordering on awe at Prof Watson's doings in 2mm for the MRC's 'Copenhagen Fields' masterwork.

[Mountain]

In my late teens to early 20's I tried out N and found it required more effort to keep trains running. I had a similar experience in H0e despite them having very expensive quality drive mechanisms. (009 would have been my first choice but RTR wasn't available in 009 in those days).

I did very much notice how running qualities improve as one goes up in scales. Never forgot watching an outdoor G scale garden railway and it had not been run in months! The rail surface was thick with brown tarnish and the elderly lady who owned the line said she wanted to show us one of her trains. I looked at the track and said "You won't get far!" But while its running was a bit hit and miss, it actually made it! I was really surprized! The loco was plastic so for its size wasn't actually that heavy... But it made it! How? It wasn't even one of those more budget ones that had skates by the wheels. This one only had wheel to rail pick up. How it found current anywhere on the line puzzled me!

I had a new respect for the larger scales even though I model in 0-16.5. I actually like SM32 when it comes to garden lines, but I am enjoying 0-16.5. I wonder if 0-16.5 will do well in the garden? (heavy weighty locos should be ok).

Where N gauge really comes into its own is where one can create scenery! Trains that are surrounded by their scenery! 2mm scale set in a backdrop of scenery really looks good.

[aleopardstail]

never really found N to be a problem, other than losing it among clutter.

track takes slightly more care as the wheel flanges are smaller so uneven track causes more trouble, also stuff it lighter so rolling friction matters more. its all a bit more fiddly but it works.

it can be far more expensive, just because a loco + 4 coaches in OO is the same length as a loco + 9 coaches in N and its easier to fit in extra tracks so the temptation is to do "more", also some of the stuff is harder to maintain due to smaller mechanisms

the main reason my newer layout isn't in N is because there is a lack of space for stuff like RFID and similar in smaller scales. Otherwise have run N and run OO for decades on and off and never really had an issue with either. in theory N looks better as its got track in scale, but thats not strictly true either as the track is largely aimed at 1:160.

comes down to space, though have to say the N gauge couplers really suck for remote uncoupling, spring ramps tend to lift the whole wagon

[Mountain]

never really found N to be a problem, other than losing it among clutter.

track takes slightly more care as the wheel flanges are smaller so uneven track causes more trouble, also stuff it lighter so rolling friction matters more. its all a bit more fiddly but it works.

it can be far more expensive, just because a loco + 4 coaches in OO is the same length as a loco + 9 coaches in N and its easier to fit in extra tracks so the temptation is to do "more", also some of the stuff is harder to maintain due to smaller mechanisms

the main reason my newer layout isn't in N is because there is a lack of space for stuff like RFID and similar in smaller scales. Otherwise have run N and run OO for decades on and off and never really had an issue with either. in theory N looks better as its got track in scale, but thats not strictly true either as the track is largely aimed at 1:160.

comes down to space, though have to say the N gauge couplers really suck for remote uncoupling, spring ramps tend to lift the whole wagon

Is hard to find an easy solution to the coupling issue due to the work needed to alter them. The ideal solution would be a better coupling that works with conventional coupling and yet works better and allows a shorter gap between vehicles.

Larger diesels and larger steam locos always have better ability to apply extra pickups in their design which really make a difference.

00 couplings are also somewhat problematic and bulky. Yet, realistic couplings common in 0 scale tend to be frustrating to use. (I would be tempted to glue 3 link couplings so they form a single bar hinged at the bufferbeamend, so they will be easier to swing up to the hook of another vehicle. Is just a thought.

I spent ages thinking about couplings. Cheap to make designs that are reliable. Auto coupling is a advantage but not a real need in the larger scales. Smaller scales it is a preferred feature, as one has less space to couple and uncouple.

[rreckless]

I've ordered track for a small inglenook challenge shelf. Given I'm basically entirely new to building a model railway I figure start with an inglenook now, which will fit on an ikea Lack shelf and will allow me to learn a bit about DCC, scenery, working in N gauge and all the electronics that go with a model railway.

[aleopardstail]

I've ordered track for a small inglenook challenge shelf. Given I'm basically entirely new to building a model railway I figure start with an inglenook now, which will fit on an ikea Lack shelf and will allow me to learn a bit about DCC, scenery, working in N gauge and all the electronics that go with a model railway.

this sounds a good idea, I went with some set track and a second hand Lima loco from the mid 1980's to start with, suggestion. drill holes under the point tie bars, even if you have no plans to add motors have the holes in case you change your mind.

its also quite easy to seriously over complicate an inglenook specifically to learn treating it as if it was larger

[rreckless]

I've ordered track for a small inglenook challenge shelf. Given I'm basically entirely new to building a model railway I figure start with an inglenook now, which will fit on an ikea Lack shelf and will allow me to learn a bit about DCC, scenery, working in N gauge and all the electronics that go with a model railway.

this sounds a good idea, I went with some set track and a second hand Lima loco from the mid 1980's to start with, suggestion. drill holes under the point tie bars, even if you have no plans to add motors have the holes in case you change your mind.

its also quite easy to seriously over complicate an inglenook specifically to learn treating it as if it was larger

I'll definitely be motorising points at some point, so will definitely drill the holes. I've not ordered any locos or wagons yet, but I'm off up to The Loco Shed in Whitefield tomorrow, so may see if they have any pre-loved stuff that fits the bill.

At least with it fitting on a floating shelf (I'll be blocking the ends to ensure nothing falls) I can have it in my home office on the wall once it's done, so I'll always have a reminder of where I started

[aleopardstail]

keep in mind the depth below the board needed, however do it right and you can have the ply deck, some framing and a ply base that unscrews for access but contains all the electrickery stuff.

and good hunting with the second hand stuff

[Dad-1]

A thought, IF you put points on the shelf layout have you thought about
manual rod operation ?
I use it most successfully on HS-2 where the actual point changers are
two parked vehicles.

For something bigger automation is essential.

Geoff T.

[aleopardstail]

A thought, IF you put points on the shelf layout have you thought about
manual rod operation ?
I use it most successfully on HS-2 where the actual point changers are
two parked vehicles.

For something bigger automation is essential.

Geoff T.

manual operation has something else going for it, if you can operate via a rod or wire in tube etc if you do want to automate firstly you can add that later and secondly you now have the ability to put the motors away from the points

[Dad-1]

Here you can see a small black car & a BR van.
Moving slightly back & forth not only changes the point, but
also works the mechanical polarity switching.

https://i.ibb.co/HTdHmbb/IMG-4689.jpg

Ideal for small narrow shunting shelf layouts. I've use at least 3 times.

Geoff T.