Newbie HO layout question

[dutch245]

Evening everyone! My fiance and I are looking at building our very first model train set. We've decided on HO scale, and we are currently looking at different track plans.

I got a little confused when I was looking at the plans, the one we are looking at right now is plan 3 on this page.

www.modeltrainguide.com/index.php?mode=displayarticle§ion=3&article=3

We noticed that it is comprised of a lot of little sections throughout the entire track. Does the layout have to be made of these individual pieces, or can the longer stretches of flex-track be used instead?

Thanks!

[edwardsutorik]

You CAN use flex-track if you want--all or in part. You'll then have the chance to change the layout trackage around a bit, if you want. but flex-track is a bit harder to put in. Not lots, but a bit.

Ed

[Paul Cutler III]

Welcome to the Hobby, dutch!

I guess it depends on how handy you both are. They make the snap-together track (sort of like slot car track from the old days) from manufacturers like Kato, Atlas, Bachmann, and others. It's pretty easy to put down on plywood and will go together relatively quick. However, you are limited by the system you buy in to as they are not compatible with each other. They are, however, great for beginners.

The more advanced idea is to use nothing but flex track and regular switches (nothing that comes with roadbed attched to it, in other words). Flex track and normal switches can be nailed into plywood, but it's not recommended. Usually, the idea is to add a roadbed of your own choice. Some use cork roadbed, others use foam, while some use soft wood like white pine. The idea of the roadbed is to allow you to spike the rail down (by pushing miniature spikes into the roadbed by hand with pliers) vs. nailing it down (with brads and a hammer). The extra time used allows one to use just about any kind of track design one can think of, and you're not locked into one manufactuerer.

I would not mix the snap-together track with the flex. It's possible, but not usually worth it. It's much easier to go all flex than to try to mix-and-match.

BTW, looking at your plan, the inner loop is 18" radius track. It's the smallest acceptable track for most equipment, but one should stay away from long cars and long engines...at least on the inner loop. The outer loop, at 22" R, is better for that. All of us have generally started with the 4'x8' and it's good to start with. But in 5 or 10 years, who knows? Maybe you'll have the room to do a layout that can run anything. Whatever you do, don't get frustrated right away. The learning curve can be steep at times.

Good luck!

[Donnell Wells]

As already mentioned, sectional track allows you to set up temporary layouts and easily break them down to facilitate an alternate track configuration.

Once you come up with a track plan that you like, such as the one you've chosen in this thread, you can permanently mount the sectional track in that particular configuration, or you can affix it temporarily, trace its outline, take it up, and use the outline to locate your flex track.

In the 90s, I had a small 6' x 6' HO-scale layout. I used a combination of Atlas Code 83 22" radius curve sections, and flex track. One of the places on that layout where the fixed radius sections were advantageous was on a curved ballast deck wood trestle.

Donnell

[alan]

If you have room for a 4'x8' table, you probably have room for an around the walls - shelf layout. You will find an around the walls layout much more rewarding in the long run.

HTH
Alan Bradley

[umtrrauthor]

Welcome aboard! Glad to have you in the World's Greatest Hobby.

The plans in the webpage you cited are great for just getting started, though as you grow into the hobby you'll probably want to modify them. This does give a slight edge to sectional track vs. flex track, since some sectional track (mostly 9 inch straight track in this case) can be swapped out for Atlas turnouts (aka switches).

While I see Paul's point, I respectfully disagree on the mix and match of flex and sectional. I've done it that way, although in N Scale, and it has its advantages and disadvantages.

My own experience is that I'm not very good with keeping curves constant (a source of humor for my N Scale friends, I might add) so sectional track is nice for that. Most of my layout uses 19 inch radius curves, which is relatively broad for N Scale, though just above the realistic minimum for HO Scale.

I've found that short pieces of sectional track, including those I cut to fit, are a bit easier to work with than flex track of the same length.

On the other hand, flex track is great for longer runs, and it's possible to introduce very subtle curves which make for a nice visual effect.

[Donnell Wells]

Sectional track does have its limitations, but if the catalog is filled with many different pieces, those limits are quickly diminished.

Take, for instance, the Atlas Code 55 sectional track line. This track line has curves from 10" up to 21.25", as well as special reverse curves of 30.609" and 71" to be used with #5 and #7 turnouts respectively. They also have a #10 turnouts, and a curved turnout with a 21.25" outside, and 15" inside radius.

The Atlas' Code 83 track line has 15", 18", 22" and 24" radius curves. Turnouts include 18" snap-track turnouts, as well as #4, #6, and #8 NMRA-type turnouts. They also have various lengths of straight sections, and half and third length sections of 15", 18", and 22" radius curves.

In fact, with this track system, building a small layout consisting soley of sectional track, without a symetrical design, is indeed possible. The only issue is that the cost of track rises significantly with the assortment of track you need to do the layout. This is where flextrack has the advantage given its ubiquitous nature.

Donnell

[riogrande]

Sectional Track Pro's:

-You can quickly build a layout to a track plan design with a minimum of fuss.

Sectional Track Con's:

-You are limited to the geometry and shapes available to you from a maker.
-There are more connections where electricity has to be passed through, more change of a dead section.

Flex track pro's:

-You can choose any curvature or geometry you want.
-Less connections to pass power, less chance of a dead spot.

Flex Trak Con's:

-Not as easy to lay, takes a little more skill to cut.

[edwardsutorik]

Should you choose to use some flex-track, the best way to cut it is with rail nippers. Get ones that are strong enough for the task, and remember that the edges are very delicate and easily damaged by mistakes.

In the olden days, we had to cut the rail with a razor saw--much less fun. And even further back, a hack saw--absolutely no fun at all.


Ed

[riogrande]

As a teen, I tried cutting flex with a razor saw and it was hard to not rip the rail out of the plastic ties. It sort of traumatized me into not using flex for some years until later when I vowed to find a better way to cut flex as an adult. Then I tried the Dremel with cutoff disc and it worked great. I now have both dremel/cutoff disc and a Xuron rail nipper at my disposal for future projects.

[umtrrauthor]

+1 for the rail nippers on flex track. I had almost exactly the same experience with the razor saw as you did-- and you can imagine how much more fun it was with N Scale vs. HO Scale track.

-1 for N Scale Code 55. I tried it for a branch line for a little variety and spent too much time wrestling with turnouts. It was pulled and Code 80 replaced it-- my friend who is a track laying master did almost all of it with-- you guessed it-- flex track. No question that the variety of curved sectional track is impressive, but the turnout quality and reliability left me disappointed.

[dutch245]

Wow! We didn't expect so many responses so quick ;D

We're still working on finalizing the layout, choosing an era, themes and what not. But we know for sure that this is a great place for questions. Thanks everyone!

[dutch245]

another quick question, do you all think adding in some elevation would be too much for a first time layout?

[Donnell Wells]

Not at all. However, before you start, continue to read as much as you can, and include material regarding various types of benchwork. If you take your time and make sure everything is done correctly, you should have no problem adding elevation to your layout.

Donnell

[Paul Cutler III]

Define the elevation that you want. Are we talking track or scenery elevation?

[dutch245]

maybe a little bit of track elevation, went to a shop today where the guys set up their layout on a foam board, then just cut the board where they wanted a bridge.

[Deleted]

I see that track plan 3 is the typical NASCAR layout. You will have two grooves for racing.

Couple of things that newbies get derailed on when building a layout.

1. Less is more - You don't need every inch covered with track.

2. The dreaded oval - you go into turn 1 but are free on exit of turn two. You give it the gas and bury it into turn 3, get on the gas out of four for the finish line......Oooooops this isn't a race track.... A gentle curve in the straight, one track instead of two, a siding or two. The oval will get boring in NO time, leaving the builder looking for a little more....

3. The 4x8 sheet of plywood and model railroading should be banned! Buy the Kalmbach book on benchwork and consider an open grid using the plywood on as sub-road bed strips. This allows scenery to go below track level.

4. When buying plywood purchase 3/4" thick. Anything less can be problematic.

5. Why 4x8? Consider even something like 5x9 and the open grid.

6. Learn that with 18" radius curves you CAN NOT operate most six axle diesels without some modifications to draft gear and couplers. Some six axle units will not even negotiate a 22" radius curve.

7. Look at other layout books before making the final decision. Please don't take this wrong, but the plan your looking at is flat out boring. No sidings, little yard, engine facility....NOTHING. Just around and around and around....first one to do 100 laps wins the race?

8. Try picturing yourself and this layout five years from now? If the goal is get started and build up your talents, you can still have a layout that has a least a little pizazz.

[drolsen]

Jun 12, 2012 16:03:30 GMT -8 @australianterrier said:

3. The 4x8 sheet of plywood and model railroading should be banned! Buy the Kalmbach book on benchwork and consider an open grid using the plywood on as sub-road bed strips. This allows scenery to go below track level.

While I agree with most of your points, Jim, I think the oval on the 4x8 sheet of plywood is still a great starting point for someone just getting into the hobby. They can learn how track and wiring goes together, get a feel for the running quality of different manufacturers' models, etc. When the time comes that they're ready to branch out into something more interesting, they can cut up the sheet of plywood and use it to build that nice around-the-walls layout or switching layout that they've designed for themselves or found in a more advanced layout design book.

I definitely agree on the advice for Dutch about the track plan though. I would recommend Plan 5 (which needs some flex track even if you want to go the section track route), or maybe Plan 4 as an alternate. Those two would allow you to make up trains in the small yard, run them around the layout, and then switch cars around in the yard to make up a different train. I think that would add a lot more interest to your first layout so you can experiment with switching cars around. Of course, you can always add additional sidings to any of the plans, but I think those two would provide more interesting operations out of the plans on that site.

Hope that helps - welcome to the hobby, and have fun!

Dave

[Paul Cutler III]

Dutch,
Hmm... That actually sounds more like scenery elevation change. Cutting out the area for a bridge is keeping the track level, but altering the height of the surrounding scenery. That's scenery elevation. In that case, it's not too hard.

There are several options available. If all you want to do is go up with the scenery, then a flat sheet of plywood for the whole layout is all you need...just build on top of it. If you want to go down in just a place or two, then you simply cut out the area around the track with a saber saw. This is called a "cookie cutter" type layout and is useful for ponds, rivers, etc.. This idea can be carried out to the extreme of simply cutting out all the wood that's not holding up track, leaving the framework of the layout exposed. If you put the track plywood up on little risers, then you get what's called an "open grid" layout. An open grid layout gives you the most flexibility, but is also the most challenging to build. A further development of the open grid method is called "L-girder", which is basically a smarter, more effecient way to build an open grid.

One beginner's book I always recommend to all new modelers is Linn Wescott's book, "How to Build Model Railroad Benchwork". It's the best layout construction book out there as it not only gives you the "How To..." but also explains why and what to look for in construction details. It also tells you how to build L-girder layouts since Linn invented it: www.amazon.com/How-Build-Model-Railroad-Benchwork/dp/0890245428

If you can't find that, some of this book has been re-packaged into Kalmbach's new "Basic Model Railroad Benchwork" by Jeff Wilson: www.kalmbachstore.com/12469.html

Jim,
It's their first layout. Let them start at their own pace. Mocking their choices is no way to keep them interested in either the hobby or this forum. Did it occur to you that maybe they don't have more room? That maybe they don't want to run 6-axle units? Give them a break, for pete's sake.

And for the record, I have a large layout that uses nothing by 1/2 plywood, and I don't have any problems at all. 3/4" plywood can be just a tad overkill at times. It just depends on how often you support it.

[edwardsutorik]

I haven't done a proper survey, but I would think most beginners would want an oval of track involved in their layout (Dutch may be an exception). Until you're a certified can't-help-myself train nut, it's awfully nice to watch your trains go without having to DO something all the time. I'm still that way, and I'm certainly certified (ask my former friends). That said, a passing siding, a mini-yard, some industry switches certainly make the oval more attractive scenically and opertationally. I was very impressed with the recent MR Virginian layout in this regard.

As far as minimum radius, back in my 4x8 phase, I put a 22" oval on the edge, with smaller radius track inside, just so I would be able to run some big stuff SOMEWHERE. So, when that GN S-1 4-8-4 came home, it had a place to play. A very limited one, admittedly.


Ed

[dutch245]

Thanks for the advice everyone, im going to look at different layouts when I get home from work tonight .

Now I have a question about powering the track. I had a coupon and was able to get a bachmann starter kit for pretty cheap. It came with a bachmann power pack, 44213. It looks like this pack has a proprietary connector to go with bachmann's e-z snap track. Can this power pack be hooked up to atlas track?

Thanks again everyone!

[Deleted]

Jun 13, 2012 10:35:30 GMT -8 dutch245 said:

Thanks for the advice everyone, im going to look at different layouts when I get home from work tonight .

Now I have a question about powering the track. I had a coupon and was able to get a bachmann starter kit for pretty cheap. It came with a bachmann power pack, 44213. It looks like this pack has a proprietary connector to go with bachmann's e-z snap track. Can this power pack be hooked up to atlas track?

Thanks again everyone!

You know that the Bachmann 44213 power pack is for G scale and not HO?

[dutch245]

Edited Post:

The actual number on the power pack I have is 46605A. I just went downstairs and took some pictures and measurements of the area we will be building in. As soon as I get it all sorted out, I'll post that on here too.

[dutch245]

Here's some better information on where the train will be going:

imgur.com/1FiHp,DtCLR,CYPZC,tUVlV

and a quick video of the area:



The first picture is a drawing showing the size of the area, the dimensions are in inches. The biggest constraint is the hot water heater which is shown by the circle, and the dryer which is the square on the lower right. There will also need to be some room saved for our workbench, but I'm going to go ahead and start playing with some alternative layouts!

[edwardsutorik]

Dutch,

Lots of possibilities there.

Is this your place or are you renting? Are you going to be there for awhile?

I ask these questions because:

If it's your house and you're going to stay awhile, I'd recommend closing up the ceiling if it needs it; closing up the walls, and making sure the floor is smooth and clean--basically prepping the place for a layout. That'll also give you more time to be in the space and figure out where you want this to go. You can decide if you whether you want a layout attached to the walls or not.

On the other hand, if it's a rental or you'll be leaving soon, I can see how the layout would tend to the modular/portable. And not hung on the walls. And cleaning up the room would apply much less.

Also worth thinking about is the idea of "throwing something up quickly". That way you get an introduction to model railroading and also a lot of the mistakes you might not want to make once you decide on what to build "for real". If you take model railroading the least bit seriously, you start developing directions you want to go that were almost completely unpredictable.

But, enjoy the ride!


Ed

[dutch245]

Thanks for the advice Ed!

We're only going to bein the place we're living for another year. This space is in the basement, but we might actually consider setting up the layout in the garage, due to the difficulty of getting the layout in and out of the basement.

[KIM]

Welcome to the world of model railroading. I might offer a couple other sources for layouts that might give you more satisfaction. Atlas makes some excellent firsttimer's books.One of my favorites is HO King-Size Plan Book. I've built several from it. My favorite is the Berkshire Valley Route, but it's 4 X 12. My next favorite was the Plywood Summit Lines, which is 4 X 8. Both of these layouts gave me hours of enjoyment.

Another fine book is Atlas's HO Layouts For Every Space. If you've got wall space for a shelf layout, number 19 Narrow Switching for Tight Spaces, gives another layout with hours of operational enjoyment. It's meant to sit in a corner, and is 11 X 6, but only comes out in the room 15 inches. This would allow book cases and entertainment centers to fit under it. It also contains several other cool layouts, but I haven't built them.

Another alternative you might consider is N scale. It's what I operate in now. HO is traditionally known for more detail, while N scale offers vistas. N scale also allows operation in a smaller area. AN Atlas book that I like for N scale is, Nine N Scale Railroads. A suggestion here would be the Unhinged and Horizontal. This layout is 6'6" X 2'6", features a small yard, and a figure 8 that allows continuous run or out and back switching. The big favorite out of this book is the Scenic & Relaxed. This one is a twisted figure 8, that's just pure enjoyment to run.

I like the Atlas books because they start with giving basic information for layout building, and then give knowledge of wiring, how to cut roadbed, and how to build the foundations. They're very easy to understand, and they walk you through every step of construction, and include many pictures along the way. The only problem is that these are old "tried & true" plans, meaning that they come from the era of Atlas code 100 HO track, and code 80 N scale track. Both of these are excellent for beginners, and I actually still use code 80 on my layout.

I really like Mike Chibbaro's book, Model Railroading In Small Spaces. Like the Atlas books, he gives you basic knowledge, and then follows that with some fun layouts. I've never built any layouts from his book, but it's been very inspirational for me. I think this book consisted of several scales, but don't quote me on that.

Model Railroader's, Six Railroads You Can Build is an HO based book, that not only has some great layouts, but is very inspiring.

My layout is powered by MRC 1300 powerpacks, which work for both HO and N scale, and have been very satisfactory for me.

Iain Rice's Small, Smart & Practical Track Plans offers some very interesting track plans with good background to areas and their reason for existing. It's mostly HO scale with a couple of N scale tossed in.

Add to your collection of books one called, How To Build Model Railroad Benchwork, by Linn H. Westcott. This will give you an understanding of benchwork, both basic and advanced.

I'd like to give a word of advice, if I might. It sounds like you have your scale finalized, and that's great if you do. If not, give consideration to other scales. I really wish I had the room for O scale. It's so incredible for detail, and the size makes you feel part of the action. HO scale is easy to handle, has an excellent assortment of just about everything you could ever need, and is detailing friendly. N scale allows one to have a smaller layout for those with smaller spaces. More material assortment is becoming possible, and detail is improving dramatically. The warning that I would give anybody here, is to do some research, and be sure that when you do finalize your scale, that it's something that you'll want to stay with permanently. Changing scales is comparable to getting a divorce. I've gone through it, and it's an unreal experience. For somebody like me, it was even harder, because I much prefer HO scale, but I barely have room for N scale.

Consider also the idea of building your layout modular. Building a 4 X 8 layout in two 4 X 4 sections will make it much easier to move if needed. Breaking it down into 2 X 4 sections makes it even easier. Even my "permanent" layout is built in modules, in case I ever have to move.

My intention here is not to promote other scales on an HO scale thread, but just to present information that might prove beneficial, not only to this fine person, but to others who are considering this hobby.

[edwardsutorik]

Jun 15, 2012 8:51:03 GMT -8 dutch245 said:

Thanks for the advice Ed!

We're only going to bein the place we're living for another year. This space is in the basement, but we might actually consider setting up the layout in the garage, due to the difficulty of getting the layout in and out of the basement.

Then I think a 4x8 makes a lot of sense.

Two thoughts if you put it in the garage: 1.) You might want some kind of dust cover eventually--garages can get kinda dusty. 2.) It might be nice to rig up some pulleys to lift the layout up so you can park under it.

As has been mentioned, there's lots of sources for 4x8 layout plans. I'd look them over and ponder. Just a little, not a lot, 'cause it's time to build a railroad!



Ed

[dutch245]

The pulley idea sounds awesome, luckily we won't have to mess with it though, my fiance's car doesn't fit in the garage, so right now it's just a storage place.

The next thing we're running into is buying the track. I've heard that atlas is having supply issues because they're moving the factory, so that makes the availability of the track rather low. There's a couple places local to us that sell track, but their prices are a tad bit higher. So now we're havign a debate on supporting local business at a higher price, or saving money online but having to wait. Decisions decisions! ;D

[Donnell Wells]

Well, I'm almost certain that whatever money you save by buying online, you may end up spending on shipping. Three-foot sections of flex track through the mail is very costly.

If you're going to do it though, larger quatities will be more cost effective, and the plan you've selected has about 35' of track total. So, you'll need at least twelve 3' sections, bringing your cost to roughly $60, IF you can find the track at $5 per section.

Personally, on a small layout like this, I would splurge and go for the Micro Engineering Code 83 track and turnouts. It actually costs less than Atlas' flex track, and is much more detailed, operates nicely when installed properly (as really any track should), and if you can master laying this stuff smoothly, you'll have no problem building any other layout!

Donnell