What Looks Better-Scale or Semi-Scale?

Interesting view points by everyone.   When I got back into the hobby 15 years ago, I was all about semi-scale.  As scale began to dominate my tastes,  About 13 years ago,  I began selling off the semi-scale ( except for my original 027 stuff from childhood ) and reinvested in scale.  I've been buying mostly scale ever since ( with exception of my Aerotrain set and Y6b mallet ) 

My layout is approximately 17 X 6 ft.  All curves are covered by tunnels.... either mountainous or a city above the tracks.  The tunnels hide the ridiculous overhang of my scale GG1s, J class, and long passenger cars on curves ... especially the 042.  Although I run 18 inch passenger cars, I assemble short passenger consists ( 2 - 3 cars ) which makes the trains look ascetically proportional to the layout.   Sometimes I run 18 - 20 car freights .... having tunnels at both ends of the layout give the illusion of an even longer train, due to the train stretching from inside one tunnel to the inside of the other ... especially when running at slow speeds. 

As others have said already its all up to you and how you view your railroad.  There is no definite way of playing trains.  There are as many ways to approach this hobby as there are hobbyists.  That's one of the things I love about it all!

I just run trains!!

Run whatever pleases your eye.  I have a small layout so I don't go for big locos (I do have a Lionel Lionmaster Challenger but who could resist that?).  The regular 15" passenger cars look just right to my eye even pulled with an F3 A-A.  I have some from Lionel, a very early aluminum MTH set and two Williams sets-love them all.  I tried the 18" cars but an engine and two cars take up most of the straight areas.  For some reason on my layout the bigger more scale freight cars look good but I do mix them up-the real railroads did too!

I like the semi-scale stuff for a couple of reasons- my "mainline" track uses 072 and 060 radius curves (in one place I used 048- but it is under a mountain and not visible)- so the semi-scale locomotives and cars (15+ passenger and traditional O/O27 gauge just look better. 

Secondly, as to SCALE structures a full-scale city block varies by city-  in Denver (sort of an average) the city blocks are 266 feet by 400 feet.  At 1/48th, that means a city block would be 5.5 ft. X 8.3 ft. 

Let's use the Yuengling Brewery as an example of (maybe) the biggest factory structure we would use on a layout.  Their Pottsville brewery covers 2.7 acres. That facility alone would cover a city block- and so would be the only "factory" on a 5 X 8 sheet of plywood.  Washington's Union Terminal is 760 ft. long- main terminal alone- would be 16 ft. long.

So, clearly- we have to shrink (selectively compress) everything on our layouts, unless we are happy with what is basically a diorama. 

And, full 1/48th scale, or later than 1930 locomotives??  IF I had any of those they would be collectibles displayed on a shelf even if they will run on my 048 - 072 curves.

In my 15 years or so in the hobby I've gone from O-27 starter sets engines and cars to Railking 60' semi-scale to nearly all Premier 1:48 O scale.   All the while I modified my layout from O-31 min curves to now O-54 (with mostly O-72 on outer loop).   Yes the layout grew from about 14' to 22' but it's been in the same 14'x11' room for the last 12 years.   Like any of us I'm sure, I saw the scale engines running at shows or on the shelves at the hobby shop.   The sticker price of Premier helped convince me that semi-scale was "fine, good enough".   But I always envied the detail and prototypical size of the Premier engines.   Then I discovered I could buy gently used/new PS1 Premier engines for no more than Railking (including cost for me to upgrade to PS2).  So now I was replacing my Railking engines and buying used/old Premiers.   I was happy with passenger trains headed by Scale engines with 60' Railking passengers.   I've posted on this forum that 70' scale passenger cars just didn't look right on my O-42 layout curves.   

Then it happened.  I got a great deal on a Premier N&W #1218 Class A articulated steamer just like the one I had visited in Roanoke, VA.   I knew that it was rated for minimum O-72 curves and that it should not be able to negotiate the O-54 curves on my outer loop..... BUT IT DID!!!!   MTH doesn't make a Railking Class A.   So I redesigned my layout and eliminated the O-42 curves on the inner loop.   The outer loop curves got larger as well.   After the redesign, 70' passengers cars on O-54 looked like 60' on O42.    I found some deals for 5-car Premier passenger sets that cost no more than I had paid for their 6-car Railking counterparts.   Now I've replaced almost all of my Railking 60' passengers sets with Premier 70'.  Interesting fact is that the length of a 5 car 70' consists is the same as a 6 car 60'.   So the spurs in my staging yard still work.  Sometime 8 or so years ago I stopped buying Railking semi-scale freight.   Typically I've gotten 6-car Premier new/used sets on eBay or York for &150-$200 (sometimes less).  At those prices why buy Railking?  Today I'm running all Premier.  I agree my shorter premier engines (Hudsons, Pacifics, Atlantic, Mikado) look better on my smaller curves.   But now that I see that 70' passenger cars are not only longer, they are slightly taller and wider and (to me) look better behind their scale engines than the smaller 60'.   I've made the move to 1:48 O scale and I'm happier now .

See for yourself: 

My layout 10 years ago with almost all semi-scale Railking and O-27: 

 My layout today with all scale Premier:

PS: all of my 4, 5, and 6 car Railking passenger sets are for sale @ $25 a car.   If you see a set in one of my video's send me a message.

Scale if you have the room..........

A little discussion about speed of movement is also a matter of taste.

What I disliked most was that on my O31 loop, even moderate speeds caused a very noticeable “jerk” as the locomotive entered the curve. But slower speeds helped greatly to reduce the magnitude of “jerk”. Obviously wider curves also reduce the magnitude of “jerk”.

I choose speeds low enough to make the “jerk” undetectable to the eye.

TM Terry posted:

A little discussion about speed of movement is also a matter of taste.

What I disliked most was that on my O31 loop, even moderate speeds caused a very noticeable “jerk” as the locomotive entered the curve. But slower speeds helped greatly to reduce the magnitude of “jerk”. Obviously wider curves also reduce the magnitude of “jerk”.

I choose speeds low enough to make the “jerk” undetectable to the eye.

A way to reduce that is to make the curve into what is called a tangent or spiral curve. An example would be to use a piece of 72 inch radius curve between the straight and 31 inch radius curve.

This eases the transition from straight to curve track and in fact is a technique used a lot by the prototype track layers. Another help is super elevation which is nothing more than sloping the track so the outside rail is slightly higher than the inside.

Bogie

necrails posted:

Scale is nice but jeez the size of the curves make it all but impossible to fit a layout into a given space.  21 inch passenger cars, those Atlas auto carriers, not for me.  However, the Atlas 60 foot trainman passenger cars look just fine. .......Also all of my motive power relatively short diesel, except for my 2 FM train masters.  A Big Boy will never see my rails, just don't have the space and probably never will.

That's how it is for me as well. No basement, therefore no big locos or big cars, simple as that. Even if I had room for 0-72 curves, the big stuff is going to look stupid without long straight-aways that can accomodate it. So, big Northerns, Mountains, etc., nope; articulateds, nope; 50' or larger cars, nope; big 6-axle diesels, nope; 18 inch or longer passenger cars, nope. Like others have said, for me it's either shorter scale items or semi-scale, or else it isn't going to work. I suspect similar considerations apply to the vast majority of O gauge operators.

breezinup posted:

That's how it is for me as well. No basement, therefore no big locos or big cars, simple as that. Even if I had room for 0-72 curves, the big stuff is going to look stupid without long straight-aways that can accomodate it. So, big Northerns, Mountains, etc., nope; articulateds, nope; 50' or larger cars, nope; big 6-axle diesels, nope; 18 inch or longer passenger cars, nope. Like others have said, for me it's either shorter scale items or semi-scale, or else it isn't going to work. I suspect similar considerations apply to the vast majority of O gauge operators.

I run scale Mikes and Mountains, some 50' cars, and 18" passenger cars on my 054 loop, and they look fine to me.

There is no "right" or "wrong" answer here.  It's all subjective.  As long as you're having fun, that's all that counts. 

Scale is great.  But the reality is... unless you're building a club-size layout or an entire basement empire, it's gonna be tough to achieve EVERYTHING you may want in "pure" O-Scale -- given the limited real estate.  So whether its downsizing a bit via "selective compression" or running lesser-detailed locomotives and rolling stock, the real trick is providing our brain with just enough detail so our brain connects the dots (so to speak) and fills in the details that aren't really there -- giving us the impression that our miniature worlds are indeed very close to real life.

I would suggest that enthusiasts running 15" semi-scale passenger cars and small 36'-reefers on O-48 or O-54 curves in an otherwise well-scenic'd layout might believe the miniature world they've created is more real than folks running 21" passenger cars and huge 86' scale hicube boxcars on O-72 or even O-120 curves atop a sheet of plain, bare plywood.  So we always should think "big picture".  But at the end of the day, it's all what looks good to YOU.

David

Whether you run prewar, postwar, MPC, modern, any gauge or scale, original or repros, scale or tinplate, 2 or 3 rail, display or layout, bedroom or mansion, circle around the Christmas tree, shelf collect, or ANY other expression of this great hobby, IT IS ALL GOOD! ENJOY,  AND DO NOT STRESS!

Hot Water posted:

Dennis LaGrua posted:

There are scale purists here , semi-scale guys as myself and toy collectors that don't care. While my layout is 1/48 scale;

It one's layout is ALL "1/48 scale", then shouldn't EVERYTHING on the layout be "1/48 scale" also? All rolling stock, buildings, scenery, and vehicles?

from a perspective view semi-scale trains seem to look better to my eyes. With semi-scale I can run longer consists and trains that follow the curves more realistically. The 9 1/2"-10" box cars an 14" passengers cars just look like a better fit.   As the detail is great I run scale 700e's, Tranmasters, F-3's Alco PA's  and R3-3 but for rolling stock semi-scale O gauge does it for me and I doubt that visitors see any difference..  What scale do you like best?

 

The layout is all scale .  All structures and scenery are built by myself to exact 1/48 scale. If the trains aren't all scale you arrive back at my claim of running semi-scale.

Strictly, just my opinion, with a little touch of advice:

If a hobbyist-modeler can manage (and has the preference and comfort) to keep 1/48 vehicles with 1/48 figures (like Artista)

and keep 1/43 vehicles with 1/43 figures (like Preiser),

then various vignettes can appear to be better modeling and less like happenstance. If a whole neighborhood or section of the layout can be kept true to that formula, all the better, when feasible. 1/43 with 1/43; 1/48 with 1/48.

Of course, the proportions of fences, stairways, steps, and buildings, especially doorways, to the scale of the figures, are relevant to the believability of the story being told, too, aren't they.

FrankM

I run mostly scale sized stuff on my 12'x16' layout. The maximum curve is 072, minimum 054. You can run postwar/postwar style F3s GP7/9s, and FM Train Masters with scale equipment as these engines are scale sized (see the scale refrigerator cars behind the LIT F3s).

I did go semi-scale in two areas, for space consideration. One is passenger cars. I run 60' cars so a 6 car train doesn't take up too much room and also doesn't have too much overhang around curves.Secondly I went semi-scale with my RK SP GS2. It looks ok on its own, but when parked next to a Lionel F3 it looks a bit small. The SP GS class northers were pretty big engines. I'm thinking of replacing the RK GS2 with a scale GS2/4, so it will fit in better with the scale sized diesels I run.

I just snagged an RMT Beef Mini F3 ABA set. Are those scale? 😉

Deuce posted:

I just snagged an RMT Beef Mini F3 ABA set. Are those scale? 😉

Only on the planet Mongo.

Simon

Eventually I have acquired lots of semi-scale and full scale rolling stock.  In O gauge it seems to me every manufacturer builds to a different spec.  There is no real consistency.  So when I get a new piece I just compare it to what I have and either run it with the full scale stuff or the semi-scale stuff.  My steam engines are MTH Imperial mostly, some Rail King.  The smaller engines go on the tighter curves, while the bigger engines go on the wide curves.  I pull semi-scale with the steam loco's.  When I want to run the full scale consists I switch over to the diesels.  I have quite a few MTH Premier diesels and behind those goes the full scale rolling stock.  That way I'm not disappointed when a new piece of rolling stock arrives from an auction and it's either smaller or bigger than I expected.  I just put it where it looks best, either in with the semi-scale stuff  or the full scale stuff.  This way I don't have to stress over size differences.  

Dominic Mazoch posted:

The width of the track, 1.25 inches, to quote Donald Duck, is not scale!

good thing we get math instruction from humans and not ducks.
1.25" gauge track representing US standard gauge is 1:45.2 scale.

let's face facts, though...  a 20° curve, the minimum curve a Big Boy could negotiate, translates to an O144 track curve in O gauge.  a true scale mainline curve would more likely be on the order of O300 and lager.  you all may be running scale SIZE trains, metaphorically speaking though, you're running a Formula 1 race in a K-Mart parking lot.

cheers...gary

On my long narrow layout with mostly 031 curves, trains with semi scale train cars look better and more realistic to me than scale train cars. I have some O scale train cars, but rarely run them.  The size of the locomotives is OK as long as the they can handle my 031curves

I like running trains as long as my reverse loops will allow (10 to 12 semi scale cars), and run unit trains (all coal dump cars, all oil tankers, etc.).

Here is an MTH Premier Burlington Northern diesel in action hauling post war coal dump cars:

To each his/her own is still the best advice as long as one knows what they're getting into. Semi-scale to me is still best because of the massive space nearly anyone needs to give "scale" equipment its due. To my eye, even 72-inch curves barely give scale-size big locos and passenger cars their best turns, but that's only my opinion. I run my stuff on 048, Railking 60 footer pass. cars and my forgiving eyes just love watching my trains in action... 

We are the real "snowflakes" in model railroading, That is to say that every layout is unique, unless you copy a classic design. No two are exactly the same. Selection of tracks, rolling stock, accessories, scenery, railroad, etc., all vary and are mixed in different combinations and permutations. Sizes of layouts, budgets, tastes, are all mitigating factors. Hence, like snowflakes, no two layouts are the same. Personally, I like scale over semi or 0-27 as they say. But IF, and there are always IF's to consider, I had less room I would put on my tracks whatever would fit. Given unlimited time, space, and money I would ALWAYS buy scale. One thing I have learned about the folks here and elsewhere I the hobby - they generally do not look down the nose on anyone's layout, even a simple loop, and enjoy trains for what the are. A great bunch! 

Michael Hokkanen posted:

We are the real "snowflakes" in model railroading, That is to say that every layout is unique, unless you copy a classic design. No two are exactly the same. Selection of tracks, rolling stock, accessories, scenery, railroad, etc., all vary and are mixed in different combinations and permutations. Sizes of layouts, budgets, tastes, are all mitigating factors. Hence, like snowflakes, no two layouts are the same. Personally, I like scale over semi or 0-27 as they say. But IF, and there are always IF's to consider, I had less room I would put on my tracks whatever would fit. Given unlimited time, space, and money I would ALWAYS buy scale. One thing I have learned about the folks here and elsewhere I the hobby - they generally do not look down the nose on anyone's layout, even a simple loop, and enjoy trains for what the are. A great bunch! 

I agree, except I prefer O Gauge tubular track and 022 switches over 027 track and switches, semi scale train cars over scale ones, and locomotives of any size provided they run well on my track and switches and can pull 10 to 12 train cars. I think that makes me a little weird. LOL

In my view it depends on the size of the layout. For a  smaller layout say 4 x 8, semi- scale (or non scale) looks really good. For a larger layout, that accommodate 072 or larger radius curves, scale looks great. However one must beware of engine overhang.

I run both, but do match the cars to scale or semi-scale.  I have a number of semi-scale steamers that I have detailed to match the detailing on the scale ones.  I really enjoy this part of the hobby and can buy cheaper stuff and add the details.  There are lots of companies making detailing parts!

Something to consider is that if you build a 1/48 scale layout it takes up quite a bit of space. Mine is 28' x 15' and that looks a bit cramped in spots.  What often results on a 1/48 layout is a compromise where you can use scale size structures but of smaller size. This being the case semi-scale rolling stock looks better to me as it makes the buildings appear larger.

I LOVE looking at other people's lovely, scale layouts. They are really cool, with modeling, etc.

Me, I'm a toy train guy. Can't get enough of it. So I run postwar, Marx tin, modern Railking, LC and LC+ all together. Plasticville, Lomax Carnival, Marx crossing signs, Fasttrak, tubular, MTH track,  I put it all on my cork floor empire. I'm hoping this summer to clear space in my two car garage for the four 8 x 5 tables I have, put some green felt down, and run some loops outside in the garage, with all the toy trappings. 

I like the toy aspect of it, and I like that I can change the layout whenever I want to. I love seeing photos of people's toy layouts, with the green carpet on a beautiful table, with all the accessories down, running Standard gauge, s, o, all together. That's heaven, and if I ever have room--that'll be me.

The only trouble I have with full scale vs semi-scale is that I think my 1/43 vehicles (auto's, pickup trucks, etc.) look fine with full scale but they look a little too big with semi-scale.  Maybe it's just that I'm cheap and usually buy $5 vehicles off ebay, and they are always 1/43.    The 1/50 construction equipment seems to look fine on both.   Not really complaining, I knew going in that O gauge was all over the place size-wise. 

Anyone ever try fitting 1/48 people into a semi-scale passenger car?  TOOOOOOO BIG by half !!!  The ones I use are 1/64 I think. 

Interesting question, given that it was posted in the "HI-RAIL, O27 AND TRADITIONAL 3-RAIL O GAUGE" forum.

I happen to run semi-scale traditional sized rolling stock, simply because it's what I ran growing up, and still prefer to collect now.

It's all a matter of  preference.

-Bruce

Hot Water posted:

Scrambler81 posted:

I have to believe a big, scale locomotive would look pretty silly, stuck in the middle of my 36” curves. 

Why would it have to a "big, scale" locomotive? How about a SCALE 0-4-0 or 0-6-0 or 2-6-0, or an SW1 diesel?

This is what I do.  I pull with smaller scale locomotive power.  40' scale rolling stock doesn't look too big, and looks good behind a smaller scale engine.  Scale F units, GP's, switchers and a variety of steam engines aren't too big, and don't demand a super large radius.

This is not to say that I never run semi-scale.  Just keep the size you use consistent through your consist.

Alan

PRR Bruce posted:

Interesting question, given that it was posted in the "HI-RAIL, O27 AND TRADITIONAL 3-RAIL O GAUGE" forum.

If I understand this comment correctly, it is suggesting that O-scale has no place in the “HI-RAIL, O27 AND...” forum. But isn’t Hi-Rail O-scale trains running on Traditional height wheel flanges and rail, and usually dealing with the lobster couplers? 

I faced the scale, semi-scale issues many many years ago.  Once I had 0-72 curves, but I really didn't have the space to add long straight aways to the curves.  So my current layout uses primarily 0-54 curves, F-3s , 40 foot boxcars, and 60 foot passenger cars. The great leap forward was to run Right of Way "scale" 2-8-8-0 and 2-6-6-2 articulateds which easily handle  0-54 curves, and in my opinion look great. Check out my website at www.myworldoftrains.shutterfly.com. BUT at the same time I run semi-scale Hornby and prewar Lionel trains. After all, I'm a toy train collector, NOT a modeler.

Lew Schneider

lewrail posted:

I faced the scale, semi-scale issues many many years ago.  Once I had 0-72 curves, but I really didn't have the space to add long straight aways to the curves.  So my current layout uses primarily 0-54 curves, F-3s , 40 foot boxcars, and 60 foot passenger cars. The great leap forward was to run Right of Way "scale" 2-8-8-0 and 2-6-6-2 articulateds which easily handle  0-54 curves, and in my opinion look great. Check out my website at www.myworldoftrains.shutterfly.com. BUT at the same time I run semi-scale Hornby and prewar Lionel trains. After all, I'm a toy train collector, NOT a modeler.

 

Lew Schneider

Lew, 

  I just spent some time looking through your amazing collection. It reminds me of what Ward Kimball had collected. Congratulations on your collection and your layout. I especially liked the old lithographed engine sheds. Since you have such an extensive collection, I was wondering if you had any prewar Lionel steam switchers since that was around the only items I did not see? 

Tom  

I think scale looks better. More often than not, semi-scale equipment has very little detail and lacks in features versus scale equipment. There are also more than a few instances where semi-scale equipment simply isn't up to par on quality in order to hit a particular price point. Now it is true that some scale equipment isn't up to par on quality either, but the difference is it usually gets fixed and was never intended to be that way. 

I don't think any rendition ever in semi-scale could ever match Atlas' California Zephyr cars. 

Once you buy a scale engine and some cars it becomes like a drug. Suddenly all your other equipment doesn't look so good anymore. It took me about a year to get "hooked" but there was no going back. Oh I went to the "SSA" (Semi-scale Anonymous) meetings every week but it didn't work. I'm scale for good. Don

scale rail posted:

Once you buy a scale engine and some cars it becomes like a drug. Suddenly all your other equipment doesn't look so good anymore. It took me about a year to get "hooked" but there was no going back. Oh I went to the "SSA" (Semi-scale Anonymous) meetings every week but it didn't work. I'm scale for good. Don

same thing happened to me Don, the SSA is for quitters....