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

I wish I had an answer, Joe. There used to be more people in my town in 2 rail O scale, but I think I am the last one. Thank you for all of your March photos.

I suspect one issue is the size of a 2-rail O-gauge layout.  It would take four times the space for the same layout done in O-scale as in HO. That's a major factor I suspect, especially for home layouts.

The availability of 2-rail products is also a factor.

I have always presumed 2-rail to be DC vs AC for 3 rail.  So in that is the answer.  AC much easier to work with for all ages.

Ron

I think it is the size of a layout more than product availability. HO guys (for the most part) want to run prototypical operations and they need long runs with lots of towns/industries along the way. They often build double decker layouts to gain an even longer run. I have to admit you do need a very large space to do what the HO guys do in O scale.

I am constantly hearing about older 2 rail guys passing on and their collections hitting the secondary market but yet there’s no product out there? With the exception of recent years I think the product availability thing is just another myth like how they used to say it is so much more difficult to wire a 2 rail layout as compared to a 3 rail layout.

True in recent years with the restructure of MTH less 2 rail products were offered but not a significant difference. Even in 3 rail in recent years some items are very hard to find due to the lower quantities and the BTO ordering system. Yes, you are not going to find 2 rail O at your LHS but between converting 3 rail rolling stock and knowing where to look for the 2 rail stuff it is out there. I think the problem with this is no demand due to some many 2 rail guys leaving the hobby for various reasons.

How about the myth that O scale 2R is very hard to keep on track? Your trackwork must be meticulous for 2R to run good. I have heard that one a few times. I am sure there are more myths and any myths will continue to be told as truth unless the person being told does their own research.  

How about the myth that OS2R runs only on DC and DC is much harder to work with than AC?

Maybe the reason HO is so popular (other than requiring less space) is because you can get what you want immediately. So searching for it requires very little effort and the user gets instant gratification.

They used to say when guys got old and their eye sight started failing the6 would switch to a larger scale.  I guess that doesn’t happen anymore.

Over 20 years ago, I decided against O scale and began to work toward having an O gauge layout, because:

1. O scale requires more space.
2. AC is easier to work with than DC for track.
3. O scale brass locomotives and cars are very expensive.

Item 1 was the most influential factor.  It wasn't difficult for me to learn how to ignore the center rail and enjoy running O gauge trains.  I still spent a lot of money, but have enjoyed my trains and the layout, as well as having met many friendly O gauge modelers.  The trade-off was impeccably detailed equipment versus easy, low stress model railroading.

@Hudson J1e posted:

How about the myth that O scale 2R is very hard to keep on track? Your trackwork must be meticulous for 2R to run good. I have heard that one a few times. I am sure there are more myths and any myths will continue to be told as truth unless the person being told does their own research.  

Sorry, but your statement that 2R trackwork doesn't have to be considerably better for reliable running is totally bunk as far as I'm concerned.  Quite frankly, 2-rail operation DOES require better trackwork than you can get away with with 3-rail.

I have seen quite a lot of 2-rail stuff for repair and upgrade over the years, and I even have a loop on my layout with Gargraves track with isolated rails to test it on.  I had one spot that had less than a 1/16" dip, that was enough to cause derailments with a number of 2-rail locomotives.  I truthfully never noticed it until the 2-rail locomotives found it for me, none of the 3-rail stuff ever had any issues there.

BTW, this is my own research.

Easy, shrink it down to about half its size

My 2 cents.  O scale 2 rail requires enormous space id you want reasonable curves.  What 3 rail folks call 072 is an overly tight curve for 2 rail. 

I have (had) a 2 rail switching layout built up with atlas flex and peco tight radius turnouts.  A great way to learn the limitations, track work had to be perfect.  Any imperfection was painfully obvious due to the wheel flanges.

That being said i had the opportunity to visit Ed Rappe's model railroad, it is nothing short of spectacular,  i imagine an operating session would be equally rewarding.  Same goes for the trolley layout built be the owner of micromark.  3r especially high rail affords some of us the opportunity to get close to the level of 2r but the cost and space constraints limit the market penetration. 

And to close, because i had the time this winter i was able to build and populate a HO switching layout for about $150, track, rolling stock, scenery.   The same effort in oscale 2 rail would have presented a challenge.

I THINK there are a lot of myths around O scale.   First the availability of O scale is not a problem.    There is a lot of two rail, both new and used available.    MTH was a very minor player in my opinion in 2 rail.   Atlas O was bigger, Sunset 3rd Rail, is a big one.   There are various small ones - lots and lots of them.    The thing about 2 rail is that most mfg build to NMRA standards, therefore you can mix and match equipment from many mfg.   When you get into 2 rail and look around, you find a lot of availabile models.   They are just not in the same places as the 3 rail stuff usually.

Track work does have to be better, but not so much so as to be difficult.    Remember, track work in HO is even more sensitive and many more guys do it than do O 2R or O 3R,  

While space can be an issue, you can model a lesser size scenario.

Cost is not an issue.    I read an editorial once that Modelers buy enough stuff to fill up the available space.    So if a person buys HO, or N, he buys much more than O so ends up spending as what is available in hobby budget.

Wiring with DC is much simpler that wiring with AC.   Everything is polarity based.   You don't need E-units or any other kind of device for reversing    Simple wire from one rail to one side of the motor, and from the other rail to the other motor pole.    To change direction, simply reverse polarity on the rails.      Reversing loops do require a little more work, such as putting a DPDT switch or a modern electronic device to change polarity in the reversing section.

I think a big issue is that model trains are not as interesting in general.    My operating group is a round robin group with on 3RS layout, my 2 Rail Layout and a bunch of HO layouts.    Generally all the attendees are getting older at all of them, not just the O Scale ones.   WE have a few younger guys, but very few.    So it is not just interest in 2 Rail O scale, it is interest in all model trains that is not as strong.

Lots of mythology already stated but behind that are some truths, too.

Size......well that all depends on what your objective is and you can make that as large or as small as you want it to be - nobody makes you build an empire that you spend a life time building and another lift time maintaining.  My layout is in an 11'x16' room.  Finished as well; never finished on maintaining.

Costs....again that all depends on what your objective is and you choose - nobody makes you go out and run massive steam or even large diesels, or large heavy electrics.  Lots of smaller steam and diesels out there; just what is the basis for the demand for massive steam or even large diesels; compensation for inadequacies........

Track.....there's pre-fab track in 2 rail and/or you lay your own.  I have no idea what sort of tolerances are needed to keep stuff from de-railing in 2-rail, but I must have met them....somehow.....oh wait, there's a track gauge. Dip in the track.....if you lay track that poorly using an uneven roadbed, you deserve derailments....that failure's on the human part of the partnership.

DC......terribly, horribly..........easy to deal with........and despite that I have no idea what I'm doing yet it all works, and everything you might need is readily available.....even for the dreaded horror of reversing loops is simple, basic DC.  Almost 100 years of 2-rail running on DC and strangely enough, folks have figured out things

Availability......again that all depends on what your objective is and you choose - yup, there are gaps in era availability that exist independent of the number of rails.  Yes, there is tons of stuff on secondary market; estates get dumped out for sale all the time and going to the better shows and meets one finds all sorts of fun, interesting stuff.  Primary market is sadly shaky.....

I guess if your eyesight is good and your manual dexterity excellent, you should look at N or HO so you have a massive empire to spend a life time building and another lift time maintaining, while running massive steam or even large diesels, or large heavy electrics with a huge availability factor..........but wait, somehow the modelers of what, 75-80% of model railroading manage to keep their trains on the track running using DC.  Will wonders never cease...

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Sorry, but your statement that 2R trackwork doesn't have to be considerably better for reliable running is totally bunk as far as I'm concerned.  Quite frankly, 2-rail operation DOES require better trackwork than you can get away with with 3-rail.

I have seen quite a lot of 2-rail stuff for repair and upgrade over the years, and I even have a loop on my layout with Gargraves track with isolated rails to test it on.  I had one spot that had less than a 1/16" dip, that was enough to cause derailments with a number of 2-rail locomotives.  I truthfully never noticed it until the 2-rail locomotives found it for me, none of the 3-rail stuff ever had any issues there.

BTW, this is my own research.

Well John, I have had a few temporary layouts with Atlas sectional track over the years and I have zero problems that weren’t caused by me. The track wasn’t even secured down. I do agree with you that 3 rail track is more forgiving but people will make it sound like you have to be super meticulous to get 2 rail to run reliably and it just hasn’t been my experience that this is the case. I wonder if it has to do with the GG track. I have always used Atlas or Micro Engineering. I have no experience with GG 2 rail track. All I am saying is people will make it sound like you have to be a master of precision to get 2 rail to run reliably and my experience is that it is nowhere near that difficult or troublesome.

Well how about, video games? The rising genaration seem addicted. It only requires button pushing, and very little space. Its hard to grow model trains, with that kind of competition. The satisfaction of creating, seems to be replaced with a mind numbing fixation. It has to have an effect on growing the hobby, just thinking! ( I release this doesn't includ every one )     cTr...( Choose the Right )

why would someone find working with AC any harder or easier than DC?   

In two rail, DC polarity determines the direction of the engine, in AC it does not. With simple layouts using DC there is no problem. When one or more reverse loops are part of the track plan DC becomes much harder. The best solution for scale operators with complex track plans is DCC.

Hi Everyone,

This topic seems to come up on the forum in one way or another. Like one post stated, there are many truths in the responses that have already been given. One undeniable, provable, undisputable, and 100% accurate truth is that I did not know 2-rail O Scale existed until about 3 years into my 3-rail build. And get this, it wasn't until about 2 or 3 more years after that I learned about Proto 48. Crazy right? Had I known, things might be different. I'm not sure if that resonates with many but for me that is why. 3-rail was more readily advertised. However I have gotten my "feet wet".

On my relatively small 2-rail non-empire I have done nothing differently from what I have done with my 3-rail as it relates to track laying. I built solid rigid benchwork, I had a cad track design and for the most part I followed it. In laying the track I made sure to avoid any obvious and unappealing kinks in track and used the same roadbed throughout the layout. I mostly run 4-axle diesels and actually can run an SD9(Sunset) and an Atlas SD40 with no problems.

Some argue that space is a factor. Though I don't doubt that plays a role that probably should not be a main concern. Many 3-railers I know wish they had more space. Even those with pretty significantly sized layouts. Many 2-rail converts had nice sized 3-rail layouts and when changing over to 2-rail admittedly the layout wasn't quite as large but not by any significant level. We do what we can with the space we have.

Atlas used to make a Trainman train set complete with transformer and track. You could get it in 2-rail or 3-rail. This was a great idea but you just don't see that anymore. At least as it relates to 2-rail. If you could go to your LHS or online store and they readily had 2-rail equipment would that change things? Also, if a company like Lionel would get into the 2-rail market would that change things? Not that it will happen but what if your LHS only had 2-rail equipment and you had to wait for companies like Sunset, Atlas, and Lionel to come out with BTO 3-rail models? In other words, the other way around. This is the microwave generation and if people are going to get in the hobby it has to be in your face. No one wants to find the key, then the door, then actually open it. Sad but true.

Just my 2 cents...

Dave

@PRRronbh posted:

I have always presumed 2-rail to be DC vs AC for 3 rail.  So in that is the answer.  AC much easier to work with for all ages.

Ron

The first O Scale trains on 2 rail track, or out side 3rd rail had AC motors  Miniature permag. DC motors, became available just before the war  ( AC toy train motors will run on DC, before most households had electricity they ran in wet cell batteries)  AS far as ac , easier to work with, , all the other scales  Z, N ,TT , HO, S , (Existed before AF) O Scale, Gauge 1and F and all the Ng variants, all run on 2 rail track, and all have DC motors .

The problem is the increased chance of short circuits for limited space operations with reverse loops.

People need to have large buildings with a vast amount of room for the track plans to be realistic in 2-rail O scale.

The trend towards tiny houses is the opposite is what is needed for the construction of a home 2-Rail O scale track layout for a model railroad.

People are going to need a large model railroad club building for 2-rail O scale model railroads.

Andrew

Both two rail and three rail look good setting on a shelf.  From the other side of the room, I can't tell the difference.

There are a lot of different opinions, IMO.  O-scale two rail, in most cases, starts at O-144, or 72" diameter, to accommodate the prototypical wheel flanges.  Realistic couplers, and fix pilots, add to limited curve operation.  Again, they all look good setting on a shelf.  IMO.  Mike CT.   

How about the simple fact that Lionel, the progenitor of 3 rail trains, was the marketing giant in the model train world for ?100 years?

With respect to SF Bay Area, the locals do not really have that much disposable cash for the high cost of O scale.  The Bay Area  is an incredibly expensive place to live. I’m surprised that there is any active group left.

The other issue maybe lack of skills to work on the electronics, model building, machining and carpentry.  I challenge you to find a high school, particularly the Bay Area, that offers a shop class.  It really is a sad testament that high schools do not offer such classes any more.  Not sure it bodes well for the future for the US. Lack of building skills is perhaps why a Chinese firm was brought in to replace part of the Bay bridge.

@falconservice posted:

The problem is the increased chance of short circuits for limited space operations with reverse loops.

Folks in G,S,HO,N and Z don't seem to have a problem.

People need to have large buildings with a vast amount of room for the track plans to be realistic in 2-rail O scale.

False.  Tony Koester's Wingate modules disprove that.  You make an assumption that everyone wants to build a massive model railroad and run nothing but large locomotives and long trains.

The trend towards tiny houses is the opposite is what is needed for the construction of a home 2-Rail O scale track layout for a model railroad.

Not everyone buys into the tiny house theory of life.

People are going to need a large model railroad club building for 2-rail O scale model railroads.

False.  Again Tony Koester's Wingate.  It may not be a massive empire, but it is an O Scale model railroad.

Andrew

Rusty

If everything between 3-rail and 2-rail trains was "equal", it seems logical that most of us would've made the switch years ago to 2-rail O-scale. No 3-rail track system looks better than realistic 2-rail track, ballasted of course. But, being able to run large engines on 2-rail track requires even larger curves than 3-rail train equivalent - that's a good thing for realism but challenging for many of us with limited space. I read years ago that large 2-rail engines require something like 120" +- diameter curves - is that accurate? That's not terribly large ~ 10 ft., but it does limit market appeal. Smaller engines can get by on less of course.

I always liked the outside 3rd rail that the "Greats" like Frank Ellison and John Armstrong used on their scale layouts...that track systems looked much better than inside 3rd rail but I can only speculate it had it's challenges as well.

One thing I was wondered about 2-rail: can the curves be super-elevated without affecting conductivity? I imagine if the sub-roadbed is laid perfectly it would function.

I wrote this about 10 years ago and I think it shows you can have an O scale 2 rail layout in 20’ x 20', with certain compromises.

In O scale we tend to "think big" when the subject of curve radii comes up, 60" plus seems about "minimum".  Obviously large 2-10-4 or large articulated locomotive need that or more.  I don't know why we do this as most of us, if we do have a layout at all, can't get that high with the room we have.   For you folks out there with an Oscale layout in an HO scale space you might think 48" is minimum even with smaller locomotives.  When I designed my existing layout, I wanted a peninsula to increase the mainline run and wanted to keep it as narrow as possible to maintain a decent aisle way. 48" radius would make it over 8' wide and 42" 7' etc.  How about 36", making it just over 6'. This area will not be visible so my concern was purely mechanical, not visual.  No way any O scale steamer can do it, right?

Wrong.

I filmed my unmodified Glacier Park 2-8-0 on a torture track made into a 36" radius "S" curve, code 100, fast track jigs.

The videos are not super but prove the point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...ture=em-upload_owner

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...ture=em-upload_owner

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...ture=em-upload_owner

I had decided to do 42" until I tested this locomotive.  I also have a Glacier Park 4-6-0 that will do it with a 1/4 longer drawbar and removal of those "plow like" things (?) by the front truck. Since making the video I tested all my locomotives and they all passed, a 2-8-2T Minaret, a 2-4-4-2 Little River and a 2-6-6-2 Samson all small loggers.

Since writing this I have finished all the track and started on some scenery. Here are a few random pictures and videos.  All the locomotives shown will handle the one 36" radius curve on the peninsula.

Peter

O 2-rail and S are competing for the same modellers.  That's always going to be a limiting factor in both scales.

@Rusty Traque posted:

 

@falconservice posted:

The problem is the increased chance of short circuits for limited space operations with reverse loops.

Folks in G,S,HO,N and Z don't seem to have a problem.

People need to have large buildings with a vast amount of room for the track plans to be realistic in 2-rail O scale.

False.  Tony Koester's Wingate modules disprove that.  You make an assumption that everyone wants to build a massive model railroad and run nothing but large locomotives and long trains.

The trend towards tiny houses is the opposite is what is needed for the construction of a home 2-Rail O scale track layout for a model railroad.

Not everyone buys into the tiny house theory of life.

People are going to need a large model railroad club building for 2-rail O scale model railroads.

False.  Again Tony Koester's Wingate.  It may not be a massive empire, but it is an O Scale model railroad.

Andrew

Rusty

1 hour

Rusty,

We're not looking for a single example of a modest O scale layout.  Providing just one example of how something can be accomplished, and has been, is hardly a groundswell of evidence that Andrew is wrong.  You're too quick to type "False".

In my opinion Andrew is largely, even if not completely, correct.

If you want to stick with Tony's example then this needs to transform into an effort to get large numbers of people to follow Tony's lead and to be satisfied with their results.

Is that going to happen?

Are enough of them going to want to walk away from large engines?  I don't think so.

"False" should be "True".

Mike

BTW -- Andrew's logic about the trend toward tiny houses is equally suspect.  Yes, some people are downsizing, but not in massive numbers.

Please, de-couple AC/DC and 3-rail/2-rail. For instance, American Flyer trains are two rail AC, and DCC is a (modulated power) AC signal. Lionel made a DC-powered three rail set, L.A.S.E.R. The earliest Lionel sets ran off of batteries and some wickedly dangerous connection to the DC power in NYC, a picture of it was in a Hollander book.

All of the new houses on former farm fields in Kalamazoo County are so narrow and tight that someone would have to buy a section of unused farmland or former railroad right-of-way for O scale 2-Rail or G gauge 2-rail track layouts that are truly model railroads, not just a section of a industry or a part of a railyard.

Andrew

@Peter E B Wow! Great layout and modeling! I seeing enjoyed pictures of your layout.

I think we would agree that OS2R is a small niche within a niche of the hobby. Maybe the question we should be asking is why has participation in OS2R decreased in recent years?

Speaking only for myself I have a 32' by 17' space for a layout that also must include thew washer and dryer. I don't think this is a particularly large space for a 2 rail layout. My minimum radius mainline curve will be O99 (in 3 rail speak) or 49.5"R. I will also have 54"R curves (O108). I may also go a little wider in some spots. Not sure yet. All of my steam engines will run on these curves however my compromises are that I will not be able to run any 2-10-4s or 2-12-4s unless they are modified and right now I do not want to do that. I should be able to run Big Boys and Challengers due to the articulation but I haven't tested any because I don't have any yet (and the way things are going I may never have any). Obviously all of my diesels will run on these curves. My point is I willing except these compromises so that I can have a 2 rail layout because I much prefer the look of the track.

I have been wanting a layout for 22 years but unfortunately life threw a lot of unexpected stuff my way. It looks like it may finally happen when I retire in 26 months. I can't wait!! Between my cars and the trains I will never be bored.

I think that three of the main reasons that 3-rail is more popular are;

Huge variety of track styles available/simplicity to install

Larger availability of 3 rail "scale" trains from a number of manufacturers/electronics (control, sounds, etc)

Ease of wiring and running reversing loops, etc

@falconservice posted:

All of the new houses on former farm fields in Kalamazoo County are so narrow and tight that someone would have to buy a section of unused farmland or former railroad right-of-way for O scale 2-Rail or G gauge 2-rail track layouts that are truly model railroads, not just a section of a industry or a part of a railyard.

Andrew

...then they should be looking at Z,N or HO.

One thing (I think) gets overlooked in the "2vs3 rail" debate; the surrounding scenery is the same size; too much of the focus is exclusively on track radius... there's a lot more to model railroading than that.

Mark in Oregon

I would propose a slightly different take on this subject.  Does it matter if OS2R is popular?  What matters most is that we enjoy it.  There is plenty of existing product on the market and still enough demand to see new product come to market.

I generally find scale modelers of all scales to be a hardy bunch of individuals who thrive in any environment.  If anything, the March Meet showed me that there are still young people who have an interest in 2 rail O and have a lot of talent and skill.  In my opinion the rest is hyperbole.

In OS2R, curves and switches take a lot of room. I have built 4, 2R layouts in O scale. The largest space for one of them, was 20'x12'. This layout did allow for a continuous loop run, and quite a few industrial sidings. The smallest I have built was in a 10x11 room, that I also used as a home office. The small layout was a switching layout, with no room for a continuous loop. Space for 2R O scale is definitely a big factor, and if I wanted big trains and big engines, it would not be viable. Luckily, my biggest engine is a GE 70 tonner, and I run mostly 40' cars. As we age, our eyes do not much like HO and N scale modeling. I am going to build another 2R layout, but am also building an O gauge, 3 rail, layout. Now that I have a basement, I can have layouts I can see, and equipment/buildings I can actually see to work on. I do wish more was available in 2ROS.

Jeff

Peter EB,

    I grinned when I read your comment that one could build a 2-Rail layout in just 20' x 20' if they used some compromises.

    I believe that it somewhat reflects the mindset of all 2-Railers.

    But, I think that the overwhelming majority of Americans would say, "What?   Your telling me that I have to sacrifice 400 square feet of my house for the table, and another 200 square feet or more for  walkaround and work space, . . . just to have a toy train?"

   "Forget it!"

    That is why I think it is unpopular.

    A conversation that I will never have:   "Hey honey,  can I take up 600 square feet of our house for more of my stuff, that you have zero interest in?"

    Instead, young people who have this much spare room in their houses are routinely using it for work-out rooms, or  big-screen entertainment rooms, or  dedicated home offices.  More and more, basements are becoming integral parts of the family living space.

   Unlike the 1940s through 1960s, men are no longer allowed to claim sole possession of the entire basement for their man-cave hobbies.

   Remember  back then, when so many men had entire wood working shops in their basements?  Not anymore.  :-(

   Mannyrock

@Lionelski posted:

I think that three of the main reasons that 3-rail is more popular are;

Huge variety of track styles available/simplicity to install

Larger availability of 3 rail "scale" trains from a number of manufacturers/electronics (control, sounds, etc)

Ease of wiring and running reversing loops, etc

...which are of minimal deterrence with future growth and acceptance in 'dead rail'/battery powered O scale.   Industry driven standards, maturity, and competitiveness in DCC and sound for the wider 2-rail realm would also be of huge benefit therewith.

As for track choices, at least three of the most popular O3R track manufacturers are already providing O2R components in their product line.

Just a thought...

The Youngstown (OH) Model Railroad Association has large, permanent HO and 2-rail O scale layouts in a facility that is wholly owned by the club. Here are a few photos of the O scale layout taken in recent years (the club did not hold an open house during the Covid peak period). The photo of the planned roundhouse location was taken in 2018. The partially complete roundhouse is pictured in Nov. 2021. The HO club has a very active membership. The O scale section of the club is ALWAYS in need of new members who are willing to participate. At the present time, they rely on some of the HO members to assist with ongoing construction projects. If you live in the area and are interested in joining, just visit the YMRA's website.

I concur with Falconservice: most housing trends are moving away from people to have the space for a medium to large-sized home layout.

Not that two-rail O couldn’t have a future, but I think that future is more in the direction of station scenes and switching layouts at home and portable, modular layouts at shows, exhibitions, and occasional space rentals, with or without fiddle yards at the ends.  The Brits have been working on these concepts for years, not only in O but in OO.

I’ll be rude and say that model locomotive manufacturers haven’t done that much to promote this idea:  the number of two-rail diesel switchers produced in the last decade or so has been limited. Our three-rail friends still have a fair amount of choice available: we, on the other hand, have very little.

In 2023 look for a feature article on my railroad in a pub catering largely to HO/N scalers.  One objective is to showcase O scale 2 rail to a scale model railroading audience that rarely sees it. (I converted to O scale in 1971 after seeing an article on John Armstrong's Canandaigua Southern).  The railroad is a retirement dream layout built on experiences gained along a 75-year model railroading journey.  I envision it will discuss lessons learned from operation of my prior railroad (March 2000 MR cover article), and most recently implementing Layout Command Control (LCC) digital signaling on a DCC railroad.

@falconservice posted:

All of the new houses on former farm fields in Kalamazoo County are so narrow and tight that someone would have to buy a section of unused farmland or former railroad right-of-way for O scale 2-Rail or G gauge 2-rail track layouts that are truly model railroads, not just a section of a industry or a part of a railyard.

Andrew

What one small city in MI , does not really represent  , a national trend

May I respectfully suggest the difference is not so much space available as mind set.  Three rail scale grew from three rail toys when empty nesters had room for larger layouts, the funds for larger layouts, the time for larger layouts and an inventory of three rail cars and locomotives.  The mind set for three rail scale is the same mind set for two rail (and narrow gauge variations), but the starting point is different.  Read the threads leading to the York meet and read the threads leading to The March Meet and I think you will find many obvious differences.  I had a double table inventory of scale cars at The March Meet, one third of those were sold to modelers who were going to repaint the GGD cars.  To me, that percentage would not be the same at a three rail meet.  How many three rail layouts (regardless of size) have hand laid track, turnouts and crossovers?  I submit very few.  How many pieces of rolling stock on three rail layouts have trucks different than those which came from the factory or are on cars built from kits or on cars which were sold without trucks?  How many three rail modelers have weathered more than 50% of their rolling stock and buildings?  Two rail modeling is not the same as three rail modeling by any means. Dining cars, observation cars and private cars on two rail layouts have a chimney on the roof over the cooking area.  Few such cars on three rail layouts have added chimneys because the factory didn't put them on and the owner is worried about resale value of his/her "investment". Granted, three rail scale is a happy medium.  There is no wrong way to have a model railroad, only different ways to enjoy our hobby.  New in the box in a closet, new on the shelf on display, an 18" x 6' diorama, running an 0-27 oval at Christmas time, a 15 x 45 three rail scale or a 40 x 60 two rail fully detailed model railroad empire.  Basically, it is all the same.  In reality, each reflects the mindset and standards of the modeler.  I'll end with the old saying, "It is your railroad, run it the way you want."

John in Lansing, ILL

@falconservice posted:

All of the new houses on former farm fields in Kalamazoo County are so narrow and tight that someone would have to buy a section of unused farmland or former railroad right-of-way for O scale 2-Rail or G gauge 2-rail track layouts that are truly model railroads, not just a section of a industry or a part of a railyard.

Andrew

Same in Texas. We just moved out of Texas, in fact, out of one of the fastest growing counties in the U.S.A. Thousands of new homes going up, and most are tiny houses on tiny lots., with no basements, and small garages. Not even room for an HO layout it seems.

Jeff

There are a number of things mentioned That I wonder about.    Someone stated that he read that "120 inches is the minimum for 2 rail".     That is simply mis-leading.    the minimum radius depends very very much on the size and type of locos you plan to run.    I started in 2 rail in the 80s and at that time, 48 inches was considered an OK size radius.    I used it on my first 2 layouts.    I have bunch of steamers, almost all PRR models, and almost all with go around 48 inch radius.    My current layout has 52 inch minimums on the mainline and everything can handle that.    The biggest loco I have is a Max Grey 2-10-4 (PRR J1 class).    The MG catalogue says it needs 54 inch radius.    However, it goes around a smoothly laid 52 inch radius with not trouble.   It does have blind drivers on the center 3 axles from the factory.     I have a 2 USH and one Sunset PRR Mikado.   they all go around 48 radius with no problem whatsoever.    I also have an MG and a SUnset 2-10-2 and they both handle the curves fine.   The MG has a blind center driver, but the SS has all flanges.     One key to this is that scale models usually have rods and bearings designed with some slight side play to allow them to "bend" into a curve much as the prototypes.    Although the models have much more play relatively than the prototypes.     I also have smaller locos such small and medium 2-8-0s, a 2-6-0 and a 4-4-0.    Most of these would easily go around 40  inch radius.

As for diesels, I have some Weaver RS3s and FAs.    these will go around 24 inch radius, but the couplers would not mate.    On 36 inch radius which a friend  uses, they have no problem with Kadee couplers in standard boxes staying coupled.     This friend also has at least one Overland Western Maryland "big" 2-8-0 with all flanged drivers and it operates fine on his 35 inch radius curves.     I have a number of the current Sunset diesels and they will go around 48 inch with no problems and the 4 axles ones will go smaller.     I do have an SD9 and a pair of E7s which are quite large in my opinion.    I actually tested and Overland E8 on my 48 inch curves for a friend and it was fine.

If you have models of 40ft freight cars you have not problems going to down to 36 inch radius.   Many 50 ft cars will also as the friend mentioned above has many.    

Models of 80 ft cars require larger radii, or modifications.    My SUnset GGD 80 ft cars will go around 48 inch without mods, but I think they would have trouble staying coupled on smaller radii, but the trucks do swing far enough.

So what defines a big engine?  

In an effort to put a positive "spin" on this, I considered what is the minimum it would require to make a 2-rail O scale (vs 3-rail O scale) decision "early" in the decision process.  The biggest hurdle is the internet interest by young people, and this is a big hurdle, for which I have no response.

I think that the following, as a minimum, are requirements to attract those who might CONSIDER 2-rail (vs 3-rail):  (If space is TRULY an issue, I have no answer except O gauge/scale has a basic inability to compete with HO if limited space is the criteria.)

MAKE THE COST OF ENTRY INTO 2 RAIL AS LOW AS POSSIBLE, PREFERABLY LOWER THAN 3-RAIL AND NO MORE THAN THE COST OF A LIONEL STARTER SET.  (The reality is that this will probably not increase market size significantly, but sustain the existing O market.)

-inexpensive two rail track, certainly no more expensive than 3-rail O gauge track, and preferably, with only two rails, less expensive. The sharpest curvature (48 radius?), pre curved 2-rail track that will permit operation of a small four axle locomotive.  A small circle or a rounded "square" that could include straight track and that would be large enough to surround a Christmas tree would be ideal.  This should be as least expensive as possible, a loss leader, perhaps at a price of $48-$64, that would be 12-16 pieces at $4/piece.

-an inexpensive DC power supply, at a price point of $75?

-a #5 hand thrown, non motorized switch for less than $40, assuming many modelers will want two for a siding.  (Limited low cost or unavailable switch offerings have been a perennial complaint in the 2-rail market.  This would come later.)

-Full O scale rolling stock offerings less trucks, but ALL with coupler pads for installation of Kadees or similar, and priced at no more than $30. (NO 6464 size boxcars or other here.)  USE ALREADY EXISTING TOOLING TO REDUCE ENTRY LEVEL COST!

-A choice of 2-rail or 3-rail trucks for a much lower cost than $25/pair, perhaps $15.  Even more cost effective is a standard truck with the ability to just change wheelsets.  Plastic wheels minimally acceptable but metal (insulated one side) preferred since  metal is common to Lionel, etc. Bulk discounts on 2-rail metal wheelsets vs one car set of four wheel and axle assemblies.  (All rolling stock to enable the installation of EITHER 2-rail or 3-rail trucks, with a screwdriver.)  USE ALREADY EXISTING TOOLING TO REDUCE ENTRY LEVEL COST!

-A short, small, but prototypically sized diesel switcher, EMD SW or Alco S type, with 2 can motors, that will operate on 12 vdc with a plug (like HO) that would permit later addition of DCC.  Metal axles and gearing and with the ability to replace 3-axle wheel sets with 2-rail wheel sets at a nominal cost, say $200. USE ALREADY EXISTING TOOLING TO REDUCE ENTRY LEVEL COST!

The main point with all of the above is to make the initial "buy in price" as low as possible.

If O gauge/O Scale model railroading is to grow, the few importers that exist will be required to deviate from a "harvest pricing" mode.  I am a TCA member and remember that TCA members were quite recently over 30,000.  The TCA magazine no longer publishes membership numbers, but based on the qty of magazines in a print run, TCA memberships have dropped by about 40 percent.  (The 12/2021 issue contains the number of copies printed closest to the filing date.  That number is 18,580.) Based on age demographics, I also believe that Lionel partisans and collectors are declining.  It's up to Lionel and Atlas to deviate from their existing modus operandi and try something different and innovative to sustain and then grow this market.  If they do not, the next step for the investment firm that owns Lionel will be to divest itself from its investment.  One problem I see with this recommendation is that it may already be too late.  An interesting statistic would be how many Lionel modelers are buying new Lionel vs buying in the used/old market.  If the O importers select the most appealing products and price them as above, the decision to buy new vs. paying for used/old/broken as the only option at sporadic train meets would be clear.

Regarding sales channel, the only thing that makes sense in a tight price market is to sell only direct via the internet.  (I am not against and certainly support hobby shops.  The problem is that there will not be sufficient "dollars" to maintain an importer and a hobby shop (ie a reseller)). The internet is the only sales channel that young people consistently use.

My OPINION.

-

-

On the idea of operations being and "HO" thing only, I disagree.     I think there display runners in all scales, and operators in all scales.      I think operations on a model RR makes it much interesting and fun.    Just running trains around no matter how big the layout, does not hold my interest very long.  

Operations does not necessarily mean long trains either.     You could have a shortline that runs from a town on one side of the layout to an interchange on the other side.     You have 3-4 industries in the town, and each one might take 1-2 cars.     So the operation would consist of getting the engine out, picking up 4-6 outbound cars from the industries, tying on a caboose and running around to the other side of the layout to the interchange.   At the interchange you pull out a new set of 4-6 cars, push in the ones you brought over and reassemble a train to go back to the town.   When you get back to the town,  you set out the 4-6 cars at the industries where they are required.     if  you use some sort of system to assign the cars and you have some facing point switches, this bit of operation might take you 30-45 minutes.     And if  you routing system was somewhat random within its rules, each session would be different, ie a different switching puzzle.  

There are others who focus their operations on running trains not doing much switching of individual cars.     That does generally require more space, if not longer trains.

I think 2 rail modelers have more in common with HO and N scalers than with 3-railers.    Many of us use the same control systems and the wiring is basically done the same.     There is the probably the same interest in prototypical models and having operations on our layouts.     The modeling discussions often go in the direction of building or kitbashing an unavailable prototype and the details and painting it, rather discussing what is in the latest catalogue from the big mfgs.   

@Mannyrock

"Instead, young people who have this much spare room in their houses are routinely using it for work-out rooms, or  big-screen entertainment rooms, or  dedicated home offices.  More and more, basements are becoming integral parts of the family living space."

Look at all the pictures of the O Scale March meet and find me 10 people under the age of 60!  OS2R is definitely full of "old ducks", vs say people going to the multi scale meet in Amherst, MA.  It is definitely not an inexpensive hobby which many people cannot afford earlier in life when starting out with homes, families etc. I wonder what pictures of the 2042 March meet will show!

Your above statement could be true of any scale model railroad which has a lot of people worried.  It’s a shame they got rid of metal shop and wood shop in schools because it’s where I learned that building and tinkering with things was fun.  Now fun is had with a new pack of batteries or the latest charger that saves 2 minutes to fully recharge "a device"!

Peter

Saw this and just had to reply.  I won't talk in generality, only my own recent experience.  I agree with many of the comments already made, and fall into them.

I just started in to this hobby in the last year.  I had been a life long HO guy, mainly Athearn Blue Box.  I like the Transition Era because I like watching Steam go around a layout much more than diesel (more to watch).  Plus love Streamlined Passenger cars in more paint schemes than just Amtrak.   I always admired O SCALE.  It had always been out of reach for me.  In the 1990's I could buy a New blue box for $4, a Weaver Boxcar was $25-30.  Fast forward to 2021 I was on eBay I noticed that Weaver O Scale cars could be had for $15 if you were patient.  Current new HO Box cars are $20 plus.  Also new Broadway Limited Brand Steam Locos are $400 and they are plastic!  Found that Williams and Weaver Brass locos, that have been shelf queens, can be bought for that or less.  To me the time to change was NOW!!  Plus I'm not getting any younger, O Scale is easier to work with (poor vision, shaky hands, LOL).  Anyhow going to to 2 Rail of Course.  Wait, 3 Rail stuff is 20 times more available on eBay.  Plus 3 Rail requires only about half the radius for the Steam Locos.  Lastly I fell hard for K-line Passenger Cars, not accurate but who the heck cares, they are gorgeous.  Last time I fell that hard for something it was Female, amazing how in 40 years your perspective can change, LOL.  So 3 Rail it is!

Summary: Pros for 2 Rail it looks a little more accurate. Pros for 3 Rail everything else.  Btw bought a couple of Williams 2 rail locos when I was getting Started, guess what, no smoke units.

Hope some reads, and comments back to me.

I agree with all the space constraint comments about OS2R and modern living; but I continue to wonder why there aren't more clubs offering this option to members.  1/4 inch scale seems designed for a club sized layout.  Because of its size, it is a modeler's scale and easier on the eyes in operation too.  Perhaps the reason we 2-railers find ourselves so far out on the branch of the model railroading tree are long-ago decisions which still haunt us today.  Among these are the unfortunate choice of our ancestors to settle on one and a quarter inch track gauge.  Resulting attempts at "correction", such as 17/64", Q Scale, or today's Proto 48, have only served to divide our ranks.  A similar observation may be made about power- outside third-rail, DC, DCC, DCS, TMCC, dead rail, etc. has not helped to swell the numbers of 2-railers.  I'm unsure if any other gauge of scale railroaders has suffered more in this regard by having adherents go to options which never become universal for the scale. 

About 20 years ago I was in 3 rail and repeated most of the same myths I'm reading in this thread. Then I saw a few 0 scale 2 rail layouts that actually ran in small spaces, and ran well. Then I saw Ed Rappe's (the guy who posted earlier in this thread) layout and that pushed me over the edge pretty quickly to convert to 2 rail 0 scale.

1) I think it helps to see that others have made it work.

After years of believing that 2 rail 0 scale was "too hard to do," I have not found anything I have approached in 2 rail to be particularly difficult. What it has required is patience.

2) How do you make patience popular?

I don't necessarily care that 2 rail 0 becomes popular. As it stands 2 rail 0 is pretty unique. That fact that most modelers are not doing 2 rail 0 makes it that much more special to see people pull it off.

@MainLine Steam posted:

Lastly I fell hard for K-line Passenger Cars, not accurate but who the heck cares, they are gorgeous."

Some modelers care.

True O scale passenger cars are gigantic.  I bought several O scale cars from American car company, old school, All Nations O/S cars and built them.  To my delight they came out beautiful.. However, when placed on my 3-rail system, 31 and 36 radius curves... They could not negotiate the curves...  O scale is completely accurate prototype models.  I love them.. But, they do require extra room and space to have a decent operating layout.  In reality, O Gauge isn't that much smaller, but is easier to manage in a smaller space.  I think all gauges are becoming rather expensive compared to just a few years back.   I guess it all boils down to what personal circumstances allow .  Space, and budget. 

@Hudson5432 posted:

-inexpensive two rail track, certainly no more expensive than 3-rail O gauge track, and preferably, with only two rails, less expensive. The sharpest curvature (48 radius?), pre curved 2-rail track that will permit operation of a small four axle locomotive.  A small circle or a rounded "square" that could include straight track and that would be large enough to surround a Christmas tree would be ideal.  This should be as least expensive as possible, a loss leader, perhaps at a price of $48-$64, that would be 12-16 pieces at $4/piece.

-

-

Waaaayyyy back in the 1970's/1908's Atlas and AHM/Rivarrossi offered 24" radius 2-rail O Scale track and turnouts.  AHM also had 31.5" radius curves in their 2-rail O sets which included their Casey Jones 4-6-0 and IHB 0-8-0.

Rusty

As I said it is my personal journey, and was explaining why I, made the choice I did.  Sorry Christopher, you are correct, grammatically I should have said, I could care less, I did not mean to offend.

I do own Atlas 2R O Scale California Zephyr Cars.  I was at Trainfest in Milwaukee when Atlas was showing the first prototype, believe about 15 years ago.  I had been following it.  When I saw it, I made a comment that I was surprised it was plastic instead of Aluminum.  The Atlas rep stated that to get correct detail plastic molded plastic was the way to go.  I explained I understood, I am a Mechanical Design Engineer.  He asked what I thought and said I was somewhat disappointed.  The cars, when first introduced, were not much difference pricewise than where Sunset/3rd Rail was at that time.

My take is different than many.  I buy what I like the look of.  So I actually have bought both Atlas and K-Line 4600 series cars.

I do understand the premise of rivet counting accuracy, I felt that way for years.  However I made the personal decision to let it go because no matter how accurate it is still just a toy.  Yes, it can be argued by many that an accurate scale model is not a toy, it is a scale archival representation of the real item.  As I said I am a Mechanical Engineer (a very analytical one at that).  However with that being the case where do you draw the line?  It is currently technically impossible to make laminated glass windows that are 1:48 actual thickness, including the center laminate.

All materials are too thick in O Scale, but that does explain why I buy Brass Locos instead of die cast, at least they are closer.

I also agree with Bill's comment about how O R2 has been further fractionalized.  It definitely doesn't help.

Should I start a thread about the pros and cons of achieving Prototypical accuracy?   Would I just be starting a slug-fest?

I am new to the forum, and not sure what kind of topics other would like to discuss.

O scale 2 rail is an acquired taste.

MRR is a great hobby with something for everyone.

@MainLine Steam posted:

Saw this and just had to reply.  I won't talk in generality, only my own recent experience.  I agree with many of the comments already made, and fall into them.

I just started in to this hobby in the last year.  I had been a life long HO guy, mainly Athearn Blue Box.  I like the Transition Era because I like watching Steam go around a layout much more than diesel (more to watch).  Plus love Streamlined Passenger cars in more paint schemes than just Amtrak.   I always admired O SCALE.  It had always been out of reach for me.  In the 1990's I could buy a New blue box for $4, a Weaver Boxcar was $25-30.  Fast forward to 2021 I was on eBay I noticed that Weaver O Scale cars could be had for $15 if you were patient.  Current new HO Box cars are $20 plus.  Also new Broadway Limited Brand Steam Locos are $400 and they are plastic!  Found that Williams and Weaver Brass locos, that have been shelf queens, can be bought for that or less.  To me the time to change was NOW!!  Plus I'm not getting any younger, O Scale is easier to work with (poor vision, shaky hands, LOL).  Anyhow going to to 2 Rail of Course.  Wait, 3 Rail stuff is 20 times more available on eBay.  Plus 3 Rail requires only about half the radius for the Steam Locos.  Lastly I fell hard for K-line Passenger Cars, not accurate but who the heck cares, they are gorgeous.  Last time I fell that hard for something it was Female, amazing how in 40 years your perspective can change, LOL.  So 3 Rail it is!

Summary: Pros for 2 Rail it looks a little more accurate. Pros for 3 Rail everything else.  Btw bought a couple of Williams 2 rail locos when I was getting Started, guess what, no smoke units.

Hope some reads, and comments back to me.

The  lower prices  , at the time .,I fell into  Full sized O  scale, was a factor on bumping up from 0n30. As a modeler (not a collector) working in O scale is just about perfect!  Any thing can be scratch built with ease  with an Architectual scale.  Vintage cars , in kit form or built up are plentiful and affordable,, and with  Battery Power Radio Control ( its been around for 30 years now) and the new light weight batteries > I am no longer limited to running  on 3 rai track.  I can operate Code 148 2 rail track  with either scale or high rail flanges.    My train room is small 10.5 x11.5" enough for a loop  of 72" diameter track Turnouts sidings and a point to point narrow gauge 

@Rusty Traque posted:

Waaaayyyy back in the 1970's/1908's Atlas and AHM/Rivarrossi offered 24" radius 2-rail O Scale track and turnouts.  AHM also had 31.5" radius curves in their 2-rail O sets which included their Casey Jones 4-6-0 and IHB 0-8-0.

Rusty

Yes...and as I've mentioned before, I was able to use body-mounted coupler rolling stock if the screws holding the couplers were not tightened completely, and a little "play" was allowed. This applied to both cars and Weaver diesels...on the Atlas 24"R track.

Not "ideal", but doable and it functioned just fine...

Mark in Oregon

Wow great discussion, I am a boomer with 30 something kids. If you want to reach these "kids" (anyone under 50) you have to do it though media and tell a great story about why they need to get involved. The reality is this generation is having kids later, are buying homes later and for the most part do not have the free time to do an individual hobby like model railroading. Maybe they will be willing participants when they hit their fifties. Granted there are a few younger guys in the forum doing reviews and gathering youtube followers, but still not many. 

Way back in the 60s when I loved HO, I grew frustrated with the need for a 36 radius / 72 diameter track in order to run my HO  SP GS4 Daylight and long passenger cars - it did not do well on a 4x8 plywood sheet. Went to college, the trains got boxed up not to see daylight until my oldest son was "old" enough to play with them. Not wanting my HO models to be destroyed, I quickly went into the traditional Lionel route, buying a few used engines and cars for a Christmas layout - like I remembered as a kid. Those eventually went into storage until the grand kids visited over the holidays and we went to a local train show. They loved it and I then remembered I still had the post-war Lionel.  Hauled those out and the rest is history. They triggered a renewed interest in railroading in me.  And have been re-learning the hobby for the past 3 years or so. And my excuse is "its for the grandkids"  !

Perhaps if we really want to get people involved in the hobby and as the question asks for 2 rail scale, maybe we need to get this into the public more often. Perhaps permanent layouts in shopping centers or other gathering spaces. There is already a ton on content on youtube, so it would be a matter of getting their eyes to view it. But this is a physical hobby not a virtual hobby. Gamers get together for conventions to do battle, perhaps "railroading" competitions would attract attention. They already do exquisite modeling of their players and battle grounds - turn the attention to the battle of the railroads. Best realistic modeling of anything.  Shortest switching time competitions. Fantasy trains not unlike the Snowpiercer movies and spinoffs - of course that's not prototype.

For me as much as I am intrigued by 2 rail scale, when I can't get a scale wheeled engine to turn a 072 diameter curve, that is a problem for me. I am extremely unlikely to ever have the space necessary for 60 or 70 inch radius curves, I cannot imagine the younger generation ever having that option in any numbers. That said I do intend to work in a 2 rail switching layout on my next 3R layout.

This would also seem to imply the hobby needs large spaces where future enthusiasts can get together and play. How about a a railroad themed escape room? While clubs are fine for viewing during the narrow times they are open to the public, how many let people operate the trains? Is there room for a new business model? Might it gather enough interest to be financially successful?

Just some thoughts .... Scoutingdad

David Barrow also built a compact two-rail switching layout.  It was bigger than Tony Koester’s Wingate  modules, and I believe that Barrow used his Domino modular design when he built it.  Drawing from my faulty memory, I believe that it was about two feet wide and about sixteen feet long.  It represented either a very small town with grain elevators or a switching district and was powered by dead-rail.  in true Barrow style, scenery was minimal.

I googled a couple of images using “David Barrow” and “O scale” as keywords.

@falconservice posted:

The problem is the increased chance of short circuits for limited space operations with reverse loops.

People need to have large buildings with a vast amount of room for the track plans to be realistic in 2-rail O scale.

The trend towards tiny houses is the opposite is what is needed for the construction of a home 2-Rail O scale track layout for a model railroad.

People are going to need a large model railroad club building for 2-rail O scale model railroads.

Andrew

Well, if that's the case we might as well come and tear down my 2 rail layout. It 4' x 16' with a 6' arm, "L" shaped. I use smaller 4 axle locos and 40' and 50' cars. It suits me just fine.

1. Wire your layout correctly. If reverse loops were as big a problem as you believe no one would bother with HO or N scale.

2. You do NOT need acres of a viable O scale layout. I have seen a lot of 3 rail layouts that are done on 4' x 8' or 5' x 10' layouts

3.  I don't understand what is meant by tiny houses. I may not have a turntable and round house but I don't want one.

4. I have seen building size 3 rail layouts.

I built what I wanted.

Dick

Look at the bigger picture fellas, ….think about it in these terms, …..3 rail “O Gauge” encompasses a lot of different aspects ….from the the traditional under the Christmas tree set up, to a million converted ping pong table layouts all across the world,…..I bet if you look at the Scale O end of things, you might find that 2 rail and 3 rail probably run tit for tat, ….I’m talking about those that conform to true scale, as most 2 rail guys do, …….trying to compare 2 rail O scale to the giant of 3 rail O gauge is a David and Goliath story, ……now take the 3 rail scale aspect and compare it, then you’ll have a discussion ……

Pat

@Hudson5432 posted:

In an effort to put a positive "spin" on this, I considered what is the minimum it would require to make a 2-rail O scale (vs 3-rail O scale) decision "early" in the decision process.  The biggest hurdle is the internet interest by young people, and this is a big hurdle, for which I have no response.

I think that the following, as a minimum, are requirements to attract those who might CONSIDER 2-rail (vs 3-rail):  (If space is TRULY an issue, I have no answer except O gauge/scale has a basic inability to compete with HO if limited space is the criteria.)

MAKE THE COST OF ENTRY INTO 2 RAIL AS LOW AS POSSIBLE, PREFERABLY LOWER THAN 3-RAIL AND NO MORE THAN THE COST OF A LIONEL STARTER SET.  (The reality is that this will probably not increase market size significantly, but sustain the existing O market.)

-inexpensive two rail track, certainly no more expensive than 3-rail O gauge track, and preferably, with only two rails, less expensive. The sharpest curvature (48 radius?), pre curved 2-rail track that will permit operation of a small four axle locomotive.  A small circle or a rounded "square" that could include straight track and that would be large enough to surround a Christmas tree would be ideal.  This should be as least expensive as possible, a loss leader, perhaps at a price of $48-$64, that would be 12-16 pieces at $4/piece.

-an inexpensive DC power supply, at a price point of $75?

-a #5 hand thrown, non motorized switch for less than $40, assuming many modelers will want two for a siding.  (Limited low cost or unavailable switch offerings have been a perennial complaint in the 2-rail market.  This would come later.)

-Full O scale rolling stock offerings less trucks, but ALL with coupler pads for installation of Kadees or similar, and priced at no more than $30. (NO 6464 size boxcars or other here.)  USE ALREADY EXISTING TOOLING TO REDUCE ENTRY LEVEL COST!

-A choice of 2-rail or 3-rail trucks for a much lower cost than $25/pair, perhaps $15.  Even more cost effective is a standard truck with the ability to just change wheelsets.  Plastic wheels minimally acceptable but metal (insulated one side) preferred since  metal is common to Lionel, etc. Bulk discounts on 2-rail metal wheelsets vs one car set of four wheel and axle assemblies.  (All rolling stock to enable the installation of EITHER 2-rail or 3-rail trucks, with a screwdriver.)  USE ALREADY EXISTING TOOLING TO REDUCE ENTRY LEVEL COST!

-A short, small, but prototypically sized diesel switcher, EMD SW or Alco S type, with 2 can motors, that will operate on 12 vdc with a plug (like HO) that would permit later addition of DCC.  Metal axles and gearing and with the ability to replace 3-axle wheel sets with 2-rail wheel sets at a nominal cost, say $200. USE ALREADY EXISTING TOOLING TO REDUCE ENTRY LEVEL COST!

The main point with all of the above is to make the initial "buy in price" as low as possible.

If O gauge/O Scale model railroading is to grow, the few importers that exist will be required to deviate from a "harvest pricing" mode.  I am a TCA member and remember that TCA members were quite recently over 30,000.  The TCA magazine no longer publishes membership numbers, but based on the qty of magazines in a print run, TCA memberships have dropped by about 40 percent.  (The 12/2021 issue contains the number of copies printed closest to the filing date.  That number is 18,580.) Based on age demographics, I also believe that Lionel partisans and collectors are declining.  It's up to Lionel and Atlas to deviate from their existing modus operandi and try something different and innovative to sustain and then grow this market.  If they do not, the next step for the investment firm that owns Lionel will be to divest itself from its investment.  One problem I see with this recommendation is that it may already be too late.  An interesting statistic would be how many Lionel modelers are buying new Lionel vs buying in the used/old market.  If the O importers select the most appealing products and price them as above, the decision to buy new vs. paying for used/old/broken as the only option at sporadic train meets would be clear.

Regarding sales channel, the only thing that makes sense in a tight price market is to sell only direct via the internet.  (I am not against and certainly support hobby shops.  The problem is that there will not be sufficient "dollars" to maintain an importer and a hobby shop (ie a reseller)). The internet is the only sales channel that young people consistently use.

My OPINION.

-

-

In the 1970s I owned a hobby shop, in fact at one point we had 3 in Sioux City, about 85,000 folks. One would not discount to anyone, it's still in business from 1946. I did some discounting to RC people and an HO club in town. The third was open a year when I sold mine. We all carried craft items as well. There is where I made money. The model train business is different these days. I bought from wholesalers at usually a 40% discount, Atlas was 33%, the craft 50 or 60% was normal as long as I repackaged bulk items.

So let's say I made $1.00 a year. 60 cents bought stuff, I had rent, utilities, insurance should a child go home and drink some paint. I did some "Shopper" ads at Christmas so by the time all was said and done I might have a nickel or if really busy a dime left over for me to reinvest in the business. I owned the business 5 years until a crazy dude walked in and made me an offer, I took it. I never lost money but sure didn't make much. Yes, I was able to say it was my business.

Dick

I just love the prototype railroads, and I think 2 rail is more realistic for me. If you are ok with 3 rail, that is ok.

So many opinions it's challenging to figure out what's what. Can someone say definitively what curve diameters (or use radii) an O-scale 2-rail Big Boy or Challenger requires? If the consensus is that they need >120" diameters (60" radii) then I think we know the answer to the OP's question. However, it's not readily apparent to O-gaugers that by using an "around the room" layout configuration large diameters can be incorporated fairly easily.

Arguably, these are the two most popular models in 3-rail...at least given by how many times Lionel and MTH re-release them, lol.

Paul,

That is difficult to answer because different importers build to different specs. Consider that a 4-8-8-4 in three rail is basically a 2 coupled 4-8-0. For an importer such as MTH or Lionel or 3rd Rail, I'd expect that to make 60' radius easily. The same goes for the Challenger. The problem would come from importers such as Precision Scale, Overland and others who build to tighter specs and include tail beams. The larger wheelbase engines such as a 2-10-4 or a UP 9000 would be more of a problem from the 3 rail importers.

@Paul Kallus posted:

So many opinions it's challenging to figure out what's what. Can someone say definitively what curve diameters (or use radii) an O-scale 2-rail Big Boy or Challenger requires? If the consensus is that they need >120" diameters (60" radii) then I think we know the answer to the OP's question. However, it's not readily apparent to O-gaugers that by using an "around the room" layout configuration large diameters can be incorporated fairly easily.

Arguably, these are the two most popular models in 3-rail...at least given by how many times Lionel and MTH re-release them, lol.

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

Mike Pitogo who used to post here regularly said his MTH Big Boy with scale wheels would go around a 36”R (O72) curve.

Paul,

I was thinking about it and I also think Matt from the club in San Diego said he ran a MTH 2 rail Big Boy on if not 36" radius then something close. He posts here often so hopefully he can answer.

I've test run my MTH class A 2-6-6-4 on 36" radius with no problem. I've run my Sunset 2-8-8-2 Y-3 engines down to 40 inch, The Y6 engines will run on 40" except the handrails stick way out on the backs of the cabs so they would require a longer drawbar. I don't typically run trains on that radius but for storage.

The MTH J class 4-8-4 will get down to 44" pretty comfortably, but on lower radius the engine needs to go very, very slowly and wants to straighten the track.

Rusty

You have a Challenger (in S, I think). What radius are you currently using on your "temporary" layout?

Phil

Wow; that sounds "tight" for a 4-8-8-4. I have a 2-6-6-2 (in 3rail) that will "do" an O63 (31 1/2"R) but it looks (almost) rediculous.  😁

And again (and I keep going back to this): the surrounding scenery is the same size (1/48) regardless of the track being used. So is there REALLY that much difference in the overall approach?

The old "spaghetti bowl" type of layout was, I thought, exposed for what it was back in the Linn Westcott days in "Model Railroader". Sure, you can cram as much track,trains,etc onto a 4x8 (or whatever) as you want, but if you're trying to capture the essence of "real life", then your options are doing a shelf type layout or... moving to a smaller scale. I'm sure you purists will disagree, but HO and N are just as capable as O of offering great, trouble free operation... but that's another thing altogether. 🙂

Mark in Oregon

I generally do not speak for other people  but as a late 1940's baby boomer but I believe the following statement is true, in the 1950's Lionel had the major marketing in model trains, A.C. Gilbert American Flyer was the popular two rail model trains they were not marketed aggressively like Lionel. I know American Flyer is S Scale, the topic addresses 2 Rail O Scale, I prefer 2 Rail, S or O Gauge no center rail. Polarity is not an issue with 3-Rail outside rails are common the center rail is the power rail easier to wire. Also when I returned to the hobby in 1990 I had to make a major decision, the first being whether to build an S Scale model railroad using primarily A.C. Gilbert American Flyer engines ,rolling stock, track and power supply from the 1950's and 1960's I still believe S Scale is the perfect scale for residential model railroading. The second choice was 2-rail O Scale larger than S Gauge  2 rail  the major issue was were to purchase 2 rail track , engines, rolling stock and power supply in Northern Indiana I  would have to drive to Chicago or mail order purchases. The third choice was 3-Rail, Gargraves 3 Rail phantom track and switches were available locally, it was easier to purchase 3-Rail engines and cars even in Chicago or mail order plus my 1955 Lionel open frame Ac engine would run on this track. Therefor my model railroad is 3-Rail for practical reasons, preferences still are S- Scale or 2-Rail Scale, but given my age and investment I will stay with 3-Rail.   

Lots of great OPINIONS here.

And I enjoyed all your OPINIONS.

Happy Easter everyone ☺️

@Hudson J1e posted:

Mike Pitogo who used to post here regularly said his MTH Big Boy with scale wheels would go around a 36”R (O72) curve.

All O gauge Lionel and MTH big steam engines, including Big Boys and UP 4-12-2, are designed to run on 36 inch radius (O-72) curves.  Some will run on a smaller radius.  My own experience with my MTH NH 0-8-0 with scale wheels is that it will easily go around 36 inch radius wheels.  

Like it or not, many model railroaders want to run or at least own big steam.  This is the reason that every(?) major Lionel and MTH catalog during the past two decades has offered at least one big steam engine.  Big steam sells.  NH Joe

My early brass 3-rail Williams 4449 upgraded to TMCC command control on an O-72 (36 inch radius curve).  Does it look bad?  Only you can decide for yourself.  

@Strummer posted:

Rusty

You have a Challenger (in S, I think). What radius are you currently using on your "temporary" layout?

Mark,

Nope.  Not any more.  Sold it a couple of years ago.  The only Challenger I have now is a 45 year old AHM HO one that is in storage somewhere in the basement.

The temporary track is MTH R29.

But, getting back to 2-Rail O Scale:  I found these YouTubes of a small temporary 2-Rail O built for Christmas.  No size was given, but if I were to hazard to guess, it's about 8'x16'.  Again, I'm guessing.

Sure it takes up some space, but it also shows you don't need a basement as big as Montana to have 2-rail O.

Rusty

Takes up too much space.  It is a challenge with 3 rail ...finding space...much less Scale O 2 rail.

My previous post were about my journey into the hobby and how I fell into 3R, which was not what I intended when making the switch from HO.

On a more general side, one thing to keep in mind is the History of 2R vs 3R.  Not assigning a specific year, but the Early era of model/toy trains, through the 1920's was Std Gauge.  When O was introduced in 1930's the 3R was for MAINLY for kids toys (yes I know about the Lionel Hudson) and 2R was for adult modelers.  There was a pretty clear and distinct division between the two, and this was what model railroading at that time.  There was no widespread HO or smaller scales, the technology just wasn't there.  Something called, I believe WW2 happened.  Post war the baby boom fueled 3R toy trains big time.  On the other hand 2R fell victim to the rise of HO.  The technology was there to cost effectively make smaller scale models.  HO became popular because they were relatively prototypical,  could fit in the suburban tract home and were less expensive than their big brother.  So it appealed more to many adults (than 3R) and there kids could play with it.  That is how I originally got into model railroading.  When I complained to my dad that the kid 2 doors down had boxcars that exploded when you fired a missile at them, WOW!  I was taken aside it and it was explained that we had models not toys and why that was better.  At 7 years old believes whatever your Dad tells you is correct.  The take away here is it amazing that 2R still survives at all.  It essentially became the high-end of the hobby, for those that could afford it and had the space required for the layout.  Altas made an attempt to democratize 2R in the early 70's through an agreement with Roco.  The success of which is questionable.  I could argue without it 2R would be gone.  Anyhow the 1980's and up is general knowledge to anyone on this forum.  Models offered in both 2R and 3R sharing as many common components as possible to contain cost.

So to the original question why isn't 2R more popular?  People tend to stick with what they have, unless like me something changes enough to change their course.  Ref my previous posts.  There are a lot more people presently alive that were raised on 3R then 2R.  Once you have a layout set-up for that you stick with it.  Plus with 3R you can run your child-hood attic finds, and the latest Scale model, on the same track if you have migrated that way as you have aged.

What can be done to increase it popularity?  Many of the things previously mention by others in this post.  But to me the fact it is "dying" is just part of the evolution of technology.  Per my prior posts I chose 3R as it is a better fit for me.  When I was young I knew someday I would be rich, and indulge my dream of an amazing O Scale 2R, hasn't happened.  I consider myself fortunate that I have the money, and the Model Train market has taken the turns it has, so I can acquire some AWSOME 3R toys to play with.  Not being wealthy the smaller radius afforded by Flangeless Drivers just works way better for the limited room I have.  So to me unless someone makes Flangeless Driver 2R Steam Locos with Traction Tires I think, it is what it is, for me and possibly others.

@johnshorse posted:

Takes up too much space.  It is a challenge with 3 rail ...finding space...much less Scale O 2 rail.

So... what scale are you using then?

Mark in Oregon

@MainLine Steam posted:

1.  ...On a more general side, one thing to keep in mind is the History of 2R vs 3R.

2.  ...There was a pretty clear and distinct division between the two, and this was what model railroading at that time. 

3.   ... The take away here is it amazing that 2R still survives at all.

4.   Altas made an attempt to democratize 2R in the early 70's through an agreement with Roco.  The success of which is questionable.  I could argue without it 2R would be gone.

5. ...Anyhow the 1980's and up is general knowledge to anyone on this forum. 

6.   ...But to me the fact it is "dying" is just part of the evolution of technology.

7. ...Per my prior posts I chose 3R as it is a better fit for me. 

1. "2R vs 3R." Why the "vs" bit?

2. "...at that time." Sounds like there still is...

3. ??? 🤔 Really? Explain...

4. ??? 🤔 Well...given the fact that the Atlas (and Rivarossi) plastic O scale stuff was generally dismissed at the time, I don't see how that's true.

5. ??? 🤔 Dunno what that means...

6. "...dying..."?  Really? That's a mighty big assumption.

7. "...is a better fit for me." Key here is  "for you". Simply because 3R "is a better fit " for YOU doesn't necessarily mean that 2R is, as you put it, "dying". I would argue that 2R is in better shape now than, say, in the 1960s/70s...

Mark in Oregon

@Strummer posted:

7. "...is a better fit for me." Key here is  "for you". Simply because 3R "is a better fit " for YOU doesn't necessarily mean that 2R is, as you put it, "dying". I would argue that 2R is in better shape now than, say, in the 1960s/70s...

Mark in Oregon

Well stated.

I have no idea how I, as an individual, can change hordes of peoples' taste.  They like what they like.

I am a 2 rail O Scale enthusiast for a simple reason. I want model trains that are as close to the real ones as possible, because I love re-living my childhood experiences with steam locomotives, early diesels and all the attendant cars and buildings. It was a wonderful, all-captivating time.

I used to go to downtown Chicago and the All-Nation Hobby  Shop as a youth, starting in 1960.  All-nation was displaying Max Gray O Scale brass, such as a Nickel Plate 2-8-4, a PRR J1 2-10-4 and a UP Big Boy.  I vowed, in 1960, that I would own O Scale locomotives as soon as I was financially able. And I have, happily.

My two cents... just try to support the importers as much as you can. We have less than an handful left both in 2 and 3 rail. Without them there won’t be much to make a fuzz about.

@mark s posted:

I used to go to downtown Chicago and the All-Nation Hobby  Shop as a youth, starting in 1960.  All-nation was displaying Max Gray O Scale brass, such as a Nickel Plate 2-8-4, a PRR J1 2-10-4 and a UP Big Boy.  I vowed, in 1960, that I would own O Scale locomotives as soon as I was financially able. And I have, happily.

Cool. How about some pictures? 🐰😁

Mark in Oregon

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.  The once active Unaffiliated O scaler modular layout in the Indy area has been dorment for many years, but I am told the layout is still around in storage.  I have reached out thru a member of that group that I know and see at events, to the layout owner to purchase or take over the layout and get it back to shows again.  Getting the scale front and center at shows that more general public and modelers in other scales is very important to getting "new blood" into 2 rail modeling.  Now is a better time than ever as many estates of older 2 rail equipment are coming up for sale.  Using vintage engines, such as All Nation and the same for rolling stock, one can get started in O scale 2 rail cheaper than buying brand new HO stuff.   Yes it takes up more space, but many small switching layouts have been built.  A decent local club or modular layout would give modelers with lack of space a place to run their models.   There really is no one magic answer, its a multi faceted answer that is quite complex and varies from location to location.    Getting the old modular layout going again with some fresh and new folks would be a good first step in my area.  But one that despite some effort before Covid, has remained stalled in the station.   

Strummer - I have posted a few. Will endeavor to post more!  See "Burlington   streamlined Aeolus 4-6-4" and "Colorado & Southern steam wrecking derrick" for previous posts.

I was trying to answer the original question the best I could, did not intend to insult anyone.  BTW when I said dying I believe it is happening to Model RR in general not just 2R.  When I went to the annual loco Train Show there were VERY few under 50 in attendance.

If you read my prior posts on this subject I always have wanted but couldn't afford O Scale 2R.  Scale proportions are Extremely important to me.  Please read them it will give a better understanding where I am coming from.

I am actually stuck in a quandary.  Maybe you more experienced guys can help.  I really prefer 2R but have been acquiring 3R because the only place I can find what I like is eBay and the 3R is way more available for Steam Locos.  Plus as mentioned I really like K-Line 4600 series cars.  Lastly the large radius required for 2R is an issue FOR ME.  So what I have been doing is buying Weaver Boxcars and Hoppers 2R or 3R but intend to run them as 2R.  The height difference of 0.165" for the 3R couplers makes the proportions look wrong.  Plus can couple them closer with the Kadees which also looks way better.  The K-Line Cars am trying to decide what to do to bring them closer together.

I gotta say when looking in from the outside from HO,  I thought there was a divide between 2R and 3R, but wasn't sure until I jumped in.  Maybe I was wrong.  As I said wasn't trying to disparage anyone.

I am familiar with the former Roco 2-rail stuff.  I still have some Roco track here and have it on a display shelf.  The Pandrol rail clips were a negative for me.  I also have two EMD F7's but they are definitely light duty.  I believe that any serious effort in 2-rail must provide Lionel type heft and quality, and the only Co. to have achieved that was MTH.

Finally, I have both 2-rail and 3-rail on common tables, and from a distance of 3-ft or more it is mostly indistinguishable IF you ignore the center rail.  My "scenery and buildings" serve both.  Re "space" as a potential problem, many of us do not want a switching layout.  We want to see big steam and the Baker valve gear go by! On my layout, I can operate, as near as I can determine, almost everything ever built in 2-rail or 3-rail.  I have not checked any ATSF 2-10-4's or UP 4-12-2's on my 2-rail though, as I suspect the long rigid wheelbase and engine tail beam might be a problem.  A steamer with a very long boiler like a UP Big Boy might also be a problem with my two track 3-rail layout in curves due to overhang.  When I built my 3-rail layout, I checked for possible interference on my two track curves using a scale 85-ft passenger car and my 3rd Rail B&O EM1 2-8-8-4.  I have a MTH 3-rail UP Challenger and operate that engine with no adjacent track restrictions.

I enjoyed everyone's comments about their personal experience with 2-rail layouts as well as the advantages of 3-rail (vs 2-rail).  I found it interesting that many made a decision that compared 3-Rail O gauge with HO, which I believe has a much younger demographic AND a wide selection of equipment available from SEVERAL importers.  Those importers hit several price points, depending on degree of detail, DCC, etc. so many can find a way to participate depending on their financial situation.  That is one reason why I believe a harvest pricing strategy is exactly the wrong strategy unless a company has a "going out of business model".

@Hudson5432 posted:

1. I am familiar with the former Roco 2-rail stuff.  I also have two EMD F7's but they are definitely light duty.

2.  I believe that any serious effort in 2-rail must provide Lionel type heft and quality,...

1. Actually, the Roco/Atlas F units were F9s... 😁

2. "...Lionel type heft and quality...". You must be referring to Lionel's older stuff, as the word "quality" as it now applies is used mostly in the phase "lack of quality control"... 😳

Mark in Oregon

This thread certainly took off!!! Are any of the 3-rail guys still following it?

Mention was made of 2-rail track having to be laid absolutely perfectly for anything to run ok.

Sorry, no one told me...

And it is reliable, too, I'll just leave this here - a high speed run down the same track:-

The word "Mindset" was used earlier, and that is very much the issue as I see it from outside the USA. As long as people think a "real" model railroad can be nothing less than an empire of several towns on multiple levels with helix and return loops, then 2-rail O is doomed. As long as people just want to model Transition Era mainline railroads , 2-rail O is probably doomed.

If you open your eyes to the possibilities provided by Short Lines, especially the smaller ones, then a modern era Short Line, even freelanced, can be ideal for 2-rail O. In the UK we have nothing like Short Lines, those of us into US railroads find them fascinating and great sources of inspiration. Coupled with the British way of modelling a 'place' rather than a 'route', we have learned how to enjoy model railroading in spaces many of you guys just would not contemplate, it seems.

My 2-rail O layout is in my loft (attic), is 17ft x 8ft, uses 36" radius curves, but #6 switches, and includes a loop around the room, a small Interchange Yard and a branch line around the outside to several industries on 3 spurs. I accept that my locos are all diesels (from old Atlas/Roco Plymouths, through SW1200, various Geeps, up to Atlas SD40). I run modern freight cars up to MTH 72ft Centerbeam Flats. Just working a train of inbound cars and a train of outbounds can take well over an hour. OK it's not a half-day session with multiple crews, but I bet I operate my layout more times in a month than a basement empire does, that needs a large amount of operators to work it.

Lack of space is just a challenge to the imagination.

I would offer up several things.   There are three basic groups that come to O Scale 2-Rail: New to the hobby, have been out of the hobby, and crossovers from HO or O 3-Rail Etc.  What draws them?  What could draw more?  How do you break the stigma of "not enough room"? Bigger may be better with aging eyesight and great room to put some deep base speakers in.  These are marketing to a large degree, but also played right a huge opportunity.  

The HO RTR market is a great example of more people just want to buy and run trains and not have to re-invent the wheel to get them to run well.  O Scale conversions to 2-Rail outside of some freight cars are not for the faint of heart, let along a complete locomotive teardown, lest they be stuck with a third party scenario where they have to wait a while to get that coveted locomotive converted.  This in itself effects the supply/demand market for things that do run well which often bumps the price up to sometimes gouge levels, which pushes people away.  

First, the goal of making it sell itself.  As already mentioned good quality, and always in supply track should be the norm, including switches.  For grins at Christmas a couple years ago I built a simple double track oval to go around the Christmas tree.  It was simplistic, but it was really cool and got a lot of comments from guests.  The kicker though was it was a bit of work to get it set up i.e. cork, track, woodwork etc.   As we know, with a little bit of work we can build great turnouts, but if we're building for a large or hidden area then that could drive people away in a sense.   So, like the RTR market in 3 Rail and other scales - make it easy to build a temporary set up with molded roadbed.  

Second, grab me at hello!  A new locomotive or car should be ready to go out of the box i.e. have a high quality decoder, deep base speaker, and Kadee Couplers etc.  I've actually avoided a purchase decision where a model had an older inferior sound decoder (not mentioning any manufacturers).   It may sound lazy, but I don't like the thought of having to open up a locomotive and ripping out an inferior decoder, maybe trying to sell it, and installing a new one and a base speaker.  

3rd, as 2-Rail is unique with the conversion aspect the norm instead of trying to build a new model from the ground up, make a retrofit kit that will make converting a locomotive a snap with minimal effort and the 3-Rail parts that are replaced could be sold off etc.  

Last, I'm not complaining, in fact since I've been "officially" on board for the last 5 or so years I've been very happy overall with the new things that have come out.  What's needed also are some new manufacturers that are 2-Rail only and let the 3-Railers convert over if they want instead of vice-versa i.e. a high quality model to start with.  

A few thoughts.    

I am a member of the European Train Enthusiasts club and there I hear a lot of the same debate about the advantages of 3 rail Marklin system (actually stud rail) AC vs 2 rail DC HO scale.  In Europe there are plenty of manufacturers, clubs and modelers in each,  so it’s not like one dominates in the HO market share. In general, the Marklin system 3 rail trains can handle tighter curves and of course there’s the reverse loop issue, but it’s not like there are huge differences between the two. Yet, people will swear by one or the other.  

In general I would say a lot of our people from Europe had Marklin 3 rail as children and just stuck with it. Some of our guys from the US got into Marklin because they were impressed with the advanced digital systems and easy to use track system, which is more like fastrack or other 3 rail roadbed track systems.  I guess my point is that people tend to stick with what they know, or gravitate to what impresses them.

Now, back to O gauge.  I do have both 2 rail and 3 rail trains. In fact, I used to run my 2 rail trains on a carpet central and they did fine.  I got into 2 rail after using 3 rail for years because I wanted more realistic looking trains. I was already used to dcc, so that was also an easy transition. What I haven’t done is invest As heavily in a 2 rail layout as I originally intended.  Why?  It wasn’t for lack of product, but There just isn’t a great selection of readily available track or clubs with with the ability to run DCC. You can buy ready to run digital 2 rail trains if you preorder, which is already a requirement for high end 3 rail.  However, when it comes to clubs with modern layouts and buying off the shelf track the supply is pretty short compared to 3 what 3 rail modelers have.  

I just checked and you are correct, my Atlas F7's are actually F9's.  (They were painted as NYC F7's and I have not looked them over closely for several years.

I do not own any recent Lionel models, but based on what I am reading continuously on the 3RScale forum, I do believe that Lionel's recent quality level is a real problem.  I also do not believe it is Fedex or UPS.

Too much space needed, cost, polarity requirements, potential derailment issues, product availability all good reasons for me.

Plus I don't want it.  I like what I have.

Same thing with fancy electronics on engines, power sources and train software.  Just read this forum for a week and I was convinced to avoid the stuff or I would go insane.

I can't speak for everyone, but for me, the reason I run with 3 rail (with an attempt at the "scale" end of things) is because that's where I started, and I suspect it's similar for a lot of folks. When I got into O, it was because I had an old Lionel set down in the basement and my daughter was old enough to play with it.

From there, I realized how crappy my old Lionel set was (not that there aren't those who delight in its toyish aspect), with its scout engine and O27 cars, and wanted something that looked a bit better, so I gradually picked up a few things that worked with what I had. If instead I'd had some O scale 2 rail trains down the basement, that's probably the way I'd have gone. 2 rail scale will always look more realistic, and most of the other "excuses" are just that. You run what'll fit, or you go with a different gauge. Wiring is wiring, DC isn't inherently more difficult, and if you're running some sort of command system, even less so (95% of what I own in 3 rail is either TMCC or DCS). Price for new stuff is pretty much the same, but there ARE tons more used 3 rail items available for purchase used (also where the bulk of my trains come from).

So the way I see it, the main problem (if there is one, folks who run 2 rail don't seem to have one) to overcome is inertia. A hundred years of 3 rail dominance (market-wise) is a powerful force, and the fact that many entering O may already have experience with 3 rail is self-steering. Not sure if anything can be "done" to increase 2 rail's popularity, but why worry about it? A lot more people own Fords than Ferraris, yet the Ferrari owners don't seem to mind.

@MainLine Steam posted:

I was trying to answer the original question the best I could, did not intend to insult anyone.

The problem with this topic is while the question is neutral, the answers tend to make O 2 railers uncomfortable.  If you don't want to hear the answers then don't ask the question.  It is true that for O 2 railers that for each negative comment that is made there is a response or a work around that is adequate to them.  However they have already bought into the O 2 rail religion.  Not everyone buys into the response, or wants to have to deal with the work around.  If the goal is to grow O 2 rail it is necessary to look at how the unconverted see it. 

@MainLine Steam posted:

I was trying to answer the original question the best I could, did not intend to insult anyone.  BTW when I said dying I believe it is happening to Model RR in general not just 2R.  When I went to the annual loco Train Show there were VERY few under 50 in attendance.

It is not my opinion that 2R is dying but there have been articles in the MR (O Scale Resource) press that participation in it has been going down. However, my point is, a couple of years ago I talked to a hobby shop owner and I asked him his thoughts on the state of the hobby (all scales and gauges) and he said "the hobby is doing great. It is hobby shops that are the endangered species." I (and the LHS owner) could be wrong but I agree with his assessment. It is my opinion that participation in both OS3R and OS2R has declined somewhat but in 2R it seems to a little more noticeable since there were less folks to begin with. I believe the hobby overall will be fine.

@aussteve posted:

Too much space needed, cost, polarity requirements, potential derailment issues, product availability all good reasons for me.

I'll give you product availability. That is a problem, and exacerbated for the likes of me being on the other side of The Pond. But the other "reasons" - no.

I could reel off a whole list of reasons why I don't want ("detest" is actually a better description) 3-rail, and they would all be to do with appearance & realism, or the complete lack of, when it comes to 3-rail. My reasons would not be based on blinkered myths. For one - "derailment issues"? Go up to my previous post above and watch my YouTube video links.

If there are so many 'issues' with 2-rail O regarding the supply of electricity and things falling off the rails, then how come this debate is utterly non-existent in the smaller scales HO & N..???? In fact in the UK O Scale is booming at the moment, not dying, and again the vast majority of it is 2-rail Scale, and there is no 'great debate' about these imaginary problems, because that's just what they are - imaginary!!

Part of it is likely space. That’s why I argue 2 rail with the higher rails and swinging pilots would be a great happy medium for o scale. As a 3railer I’d be very happy with it.

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

@Csxcellent posted:

Part of it is likely space. That’s why I argue 2 rail with the higher rails and swinging pilots would be a great happy medium for o scale. As a 3railer I’d be very happy with it.

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.

"I could reel off a whole list of reasons why I don't want ("detest" is actually a better description) 3-rail,..."

Well, almost a century of 3 rail has dominated 2 rail, there must be deeper reasons, and one is probably the simplicity of making convoluted track layouts without having to worry about crossing voltage polarities.  This started out as a toy for kids with small hands, to be played with hard and run till the brushes wore out.  Adults got into it and everything changed, realism and accuracy, 2 rails with kluge gadgets to make a 3 rail loco a 2 rail and run on an outside pickup rail, unless your were modeling an interurban, subway, or some NE electric line, that is even more unrealistic.  I find it amazing that when  I am running, my 3 rail stuff, the middle rail just seems to disappear and the ease of going through the reversing loop trumps the rail accuracy of my HO stuff with toggle switches being thrown to avoid a short circuit on a similar loop.  Remember, its a hobby, something to relieve tension, fill your free time, make you happy,  and keep you from smoking, drinking and chasing loose women.

@SundayShunter posted:

I could reel off a whole list of reasons why I don't want ("detest" is actually a better description) 3-rail, and they would all be to do with appearance & realism, or the complete lack of, when it comes to 3-rail. My reasons would not be based on blinkered myths. For one - "derailment issues"? Go up to my previous post above and watch my YouTube video links.

I can remember Ed Reutling posting here some of the worse looking track ever laid and running a loco over it just to prove it could be done.

If there are so many 'issues' with 2-rail O regarding the supply of electricity and things falling off the rails, then how come this debate is utterly non-existent in the smaller scales HO & N..????

If you go back a page or 2, I raised that exact point.  It's an argument born of desperation to justify 3 rail.

@Bill N posted:

The problem with this topic is while the question is neutral, the answers tend to make O 2 railers uncomfortable.  If you don't want to hear the answers then don't ask the question.  It is true that for O 2 railers that for each negative comment that is made there is a response or a work around that is adequate to them.  However they have already bought into the O 2 rail religion.  Not everyone buys into the response, or wants to have to deal with the work around.  If the goal is to grow O 2 rail it is necessary to look at how the unconverted see it.

Explaining the "workaround," is a matter of fact means for consideration to reach a potential goal on a layout, not an ultimatum. I think most do understand how the unconverted see it, but some of the unconverted, maybe many, don't seem to even realize the alternatives exist.

@CALNNC posted:

"I could reel off a whole list of reasons why I don't want ("detest" is actually a better description) 3-rail,..."

Well, almost a century of 3 rail has dominated 2 rail, there must be deeper reasons, ....

Remember, its a hobby, something to relieve tension, fill your free time, make you happy,  and keep you from smoking, drinking and chasing loose women.

Indeed it is a hobby and each to their own; 3-rail does have advantages over 2-rail if all that matters is running toy trains in smaller spaces - or more of them in the same space, but accept that that - running toy trains - is exactly what it is, not making as realistic a model of a railroad as the ability of the individual modeller allows.

The domination of 3-rail over 2-rail in the USA in O does not negate the inaccuracy of some of the 'reasons' why 2-rail apparently cannot work. The other part of the OP's question, how to make it more popular, is the more difficult issue to address, and there I go back to the word "mindset", and the overall impression people have of what a "successful" model railroad is supposed to be.

As I said earlier, here in the UK O Scale is currently booming, despite it costing more than OO & N (which actually cost about the same as each other!) and the fact we have much smaller houses than in the USA. It helps that a lot of the prototype - especially in the Steam Era (pre-1968) - was a lot smaller than US equipment, but the will is there to make the most of what's available, be that models produced or space available, and adjusting one's expectations to fit, not the other way around.

I love well done O scale 2R layouts.  The biggest problem I see though is, it's not "scale" either.  It's Ow5.  Not until you get into Proto48 do you get an actual "O" 1:48 scale railroad.  This is probably the biggest turnoff to me.

One thing I've never understood though... In the HO world, where tolerances are much tighter, pretty much anything runs on 18" radius, with a few outliers requiring 22" radius.  The scale equivalent for O would be 33" and 40" radii.  Pretty much any 3R "scale" locomotive can work with those numbers... but 2R locomotives seemingly require 60" or higher radius curves.  Why?  If HO (with it's teeny tiny flanges) can get it done, why can't 2R O scale?

@rplst8 posted:

....but 2R locomotives seemingly require 60" or higher radius curves.  Why?  If HO (with it's teeny tiny flanges) can get it done, why can't 2R O scale?

I give up. Which bit of "36in radius" have people missed, not just in my posts & video, either..??

@rplst8 posted:

I love well done O scale 2R layouts.  The biggest problem I see though is, it's not "scale" either.  It's Ow5.  Not until you get into Proto48 do you get an actual "O" 1:48 scale railroad.  This is probably the biggest turnoff to me.

One thing I've never understood though... In the HO world, where tolerances are much tighter, pretty much anything runs on 18" radius, with a few outliers requiring 22" radius.  The scale equivalent for O would be 33" and 40" radii.  Pretty much any 3R "scale" locomotive can work with those numbers... but 2R locomotives seemingly require 60" or higher radius curves.  Why?  If HO (with it's teeny tiny flanges) can get it done, why can't 2R O scale?

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.

@CALNNC posted:

"I could reel off a whole list of reasons why I don't want ("detest" is actually a better description) 3-rail,..."

the ease of going through the reversing loop trumps the rail accuracy of my HO stuff with toggle switches being thrown to avoid a short circuit on a similar loop.  "

There are relatively inexpensive, simple to wire electronic reversing units that will achieve the same thing in 2 rail. No toggles necessary.

@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.

Great video showing it can be done.  Don't give up.  Keep 'em coming.  Too many folks have blinders on.

Rusty

My feelings reflect those who think 2 rail O scale is more expensive, takes more room plus has a smaller selection of motive power and rolling stock than three rail. Not a new phenomenon either but rather the reality throughout the history of model trains.

I think a better question is why S scale doesn’t have a larger following? Seems like the best compromise between O and HO.

Pete

Why isn't O Scale 2-Rail more popular with model railroaders?

Maybe it has something to do with 2-Rail modelers telling anyone not already a true believer that the majority of what they think is WRONG.

What can be done to increase 2RS's popularity?

I refer you back to the response to the first question.

@rplst8 posted:

I love well done O scale 2R layouts.  The biggest problem I see though is, it's not "scale" either.  It's Ow5.  Not until you get into Proto48 do you get an actual "O" 1:48 scale railroad.  This is probably the biggest turnoff to me.

Honestly, I don't believe commercially producing models to 4'8.5" would draw many folks in nowadays.  OW5 is pretty much cannon now.  Plus there's all the existing OW5 (steam locomotives in particular) equipment out there that nobody's going to make conversion kits for, nor will a vast amount of folks want to bother doing the conversions.

Every scale has compromises in one form or another.

To the folks that model P:48, I raise my glass to you, but any commercially viable expansion of 2-Rail O is going to remain OW5.

Rusty

Sundayshunter,

I think you are absolutely correct about the mindset. To get H0 and N scalers to convert, there would have to be a change of mindset. They'd need to scale up their trains, but scale down the empire idea and get more focused as you do.

I came across a guy who told me he wanted to model all of the class 1 railroads, every region of the US, and the kicker was with every season represented as well. I can laugh about it now but looking back when I was in 3 rail, I had models of steam engines from every class 1 railroad that was available, 50 or more in total and I intended to have them all on the layout. To get into 0 scale I focused on one railroad and one area based around the use of 5 steam models only. To sell all of those other models and get focused was actually more of a relief.

I am new to not only to this forum, but forums in general.  I have heard from friends, to choose words carefully so as to not excite others.

Bill N.  I want to thank you for making me feel better, I REALLY did not want to disparage others, or give negative judgement to their choices.

Also to practice what I am NOW preaching, should use the term "shrinking" not "dying" in regards to Model Railroading.  Too be honest with you, I don't see this as a problem for most in the Hobby.

I definitely agree with what Hudson sited.  If I owned a LHS I would be very concerned.  Along that line there is an EXTREMLY GOOD reason the manufactures no long just bang products out and know they will sell.  Build it and they will come, NOT.  Everything has moved to pre-order for a good reason, the Manufactures want to stay in Business.

When I made the post summarizing the History of Model Railroading as I understand it.  I was trying to explain the domination of 3R vs 2R in numbers of participants.   I was also trying to make the point that as time moves on, Technology and the number of people pursuing interests changes.

The reason I don't see the shrinking of the hobby as BAD for the average modeler is it putting a lot of great used items on the market at reduced prices.  Economics 101 - supply and demand.  As such when I am buying a Used brass Weaver Steam Loco for less than half what it cost new (and in 2022 dollars not 1992 dollars), I am happy.  On the other hand I am NOT at this point in life I am not naive enough to think it is a good "investment".  Hopefully I will live long enough, that by the time my hiers have to unload it, it will only be worth the scrap value of it materials.

Yes it would be nice for future generations to continue in the hobby, if they choose.  I am starting to "work" on my 2 grandsons, but they need to pursue what interests them, not me.

I have other transportation interests.  I am from the "muscle car" generation.  However I am glad to see younger generations interested in cars, even if it is "tuned rice burners".  I do realize the last sentence could be construed as my words not being well chosen.  Hope I didn't offend anyone.

BTW I do agree with CALNNC except....  who says you can't do both.  LOL

The detail on the 2 rail MTH vs 3 rail MTH engines (my only reference) is different with the 2R versions  looking better IMO. And I agree with the fixed pilot argument. Nice video.

However what are those chunks of wire hanging between the couplers? They look awful. I detested them in HO, (but they were better than what passed for couplers) and they look silly in scale. Why go through the bother of prototype realism when those couplers look so out of place? OK its a compromise, but if we compromise there, where else are compromises made?  I dislike them so much I would rather have lobster claws.

The 2 rail scale I own have European style couplers - Fine scale and Lenz - do not know how you could do any switching with these to open these couplers.

@ScoutingDad posted:

The detail on the 2 rail MTH vs 3 rail MTH engines (my only reference) is different with the 2R versions  looking better IMO. And I agree with the fixed pilot argument. Nice video.

However what are those chunks of wire hanging between the couplers? They look awful. I detested them in HO, (but they were better than what passed for couplers) and they look silly in scale. Why go through the bother of prototype realism when those couplers look so out of place? OK its a compromise, but if we compromise there, where else are compromises made?  I dislike them so much I would rather have lobster claws.

The 2 rail scale I own have European style couplers - Fine scale and Lenz - do not know how you could do any switching with these to open these couplers.

Scouting Dad,

That is a thing that can be easily corrected.

Once you lay the 2 rail track the potential is there to correct the other stuff forever.

Once you lay the 3 rail track, you've conceded that you'll have a poor model of track on the layout from square 1.

@GregM posted:

Why isn't O Scale 2-Rail more popular with model railroaders?

Maybe it has something to do with 2-Rail modelers telling anyone not already a true believer that the majority of what they think is WRONG.

What can be done to increase 2RS's popularity?

I refer you back to the response to the first question.

Interesting. I'm curious to how many people under 40 have posted to this thread. Again, a number of great points are being made. This topic always seems to bring the insults. It's crazy!

@rplst8 posted:

One thing I've never understood though... In the HO world, where tolerances are much tighter, pretty much anything runs on 18" radius, with a few outliers requiring 22" radius.  The scale equivalent for O would be 33" and 40" radii.  Pretty much any 3R "scale" locomotive can work with those numbers... but 2R locomotives seemingly require 60" or higher radius curves.  Why?  If HO (with it's teeny tiny flanges) can get it done, why can't 2R O scale?

I'm going to come back to this again. Yes, most HO stuff can take an 18" radius curve, but how pretty does it look?? Common advice for any scale is to make your curves as generous a radius as is possible in your space. So much of 2-Rail O can take a 36" radius curve, but 60" or more will look much better, especially from the outside of the curve. That's all.

@Allan Miller posted:

The Youngstown (OH) Model Railroad Association has large, permanent HO and 2-rail O scale layouts in a facility that is wholly owned by the club. Here are a few photos of the O scale layout taken in recent years (the club did not hold an open house during the Covid peak period). The photo of the planned roundhouse location was taken in 2018. The partially complete roundhouse is pictured in Nov. 2021. The HO club has a very active membership. The O scale section of the club is ALWAYS in need of new members who are willing to participate. At the present time, they rely on some of the HO members to assist with ongoing construction projects. If you live in the area and are interested in joining, just visit the YMRA's website.

Allan,

I looked at the website.  It is a great club and an example of two displays that coexist.  Both displays are impressive.  

I would definitely join if I  lived within a reasonable distance.  I live in the SF Bay Area.  NH Joe

Every scale/gauge has its strong points. Some, like relative availability, or nostalgia, are really accidents of history, but others belong to the nature of things. This is how I would boil it down:

Compared to 3-rail, 2-rail O scale is inherently more accurate.

Compared to smaller scales, 2-rail O scale is, or at least can be, better-detailed.

So, I would think that the person to rope in to grow the 2-rail O scale hobby is the person to whom realism and detail are paramount. I should think that the type of person who belongs to a railroad historical society, or the type who reads Trains or Classic Trains magazine, would prefer to model in 2-rail O, other things being equal. I would imagine that many people who enter the model railroad hobby as adults, unburdened by nostalgia for the trains of their youth, do so because of an interest in real trains, and would be happier in 2-rail O.

Now, I am a committed 3-railer, notwithstanding my admiration for what I see being done in 2-rail. The reasons, if anyone cares to know them, are several: a) nostalgia, b) a complex track plan with continuous running in an extremely limited space, c) a childish delight in trains that are big.

@GregM posted:

Why isn't O Scale 2-Rail more popular with model railroaders?

Maybe it has something to do with 2-Rail modelers telling anyone not already a true believer that the majority of what they think is WRONG.

What can be done to increase 2RS's popularity?

I refer you back to the response to the first question.

As trotted out even in this Topic, the majority of what 'other' people think of 2-rail O scale IS wrong, yet they stick to it, despite being shown evidence to the contrary!!

@ScoutingDad posted:

The detail on the 2 rail MTH vs 3 rail MTH engines (my only reference) is different with the 2R versions  looking better IMO. And I agree with the fixed pilot argument. Nice video.

However what are those chunks of wire hanging between the couplers? They look awful. I detested them in HO, (but they were better than what passed for couplers) and they look silly in scale. Why go through the bother of prototype realism when those couplers look so out of place? OK its a compromise, but if we compromise there, where else are compromises made?  I dislike them so much I would rather have lobster claws.

Wow!! How hard is it to just remove the trip pins from Kadees?

There is another significant reason I would like to identify.  When I first got into 2-rail O Scale, I was very surprised by the price of "brass".  I was told that detail was the most highly prized characteristic of O Scale models, and that perhaps one half of all O scale buyers "did not have layouts and used their models for display only".  So all of the negative characteristics of O Scale, i.e. minimum radius, insufficient room, etc etc are of NO CONCERN to perhaps half of this part of the hobby.  Many O scalers do not even care if their models run.  This most highly prized "correct detail" is perhaps the major reason why we have fractured further, into Proto48, ON3, etc., which has not helped our cause, and is in fact difficult to explain to a potential new entrant who "just wants to buy a great model like dad or grandpa ran".

I agree with almost all of the above comments.  I believe that we O Scalers are close to or have reached a "minimum in number", and we will stay with it until none of us are left.  I also believe that the 3 RS guys and the HO guys will see significant reduction in numbers in the years ahead, especially since these members number in the thousands, real railroaders have declined significantly in numbers, and the six North American transcons are trying to make themselves invisible.  "Modeling" a real RR will not interest anyone...

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 dominence 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.

The first items produced by Joshua Lionel Cohen ran on two rail track.  The switch to 3 rail track came later.

https://www.collectorsweekly.c...trains/lionel-prewar

@SundayShunter posted:

Wow!! How hard is it to just remove the trip pins from Kadees?

I would not think it is that hard, no clue as to how many couplers I would break if I did. But why then does nearly every 2 rail scale photo and vid contain rolling stock appear with the kadee hook still in place? If prototypical realism was all that important wouldn't those be removed regularly?  I wish I understood why this "feature" bugs me so much. It really shouldn't matter.

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