# Got my first G-scale engine and thank-you...



## Dieselguy (Apr 29, 2010)

Just a quick note of thanks to the people here who share so much information, experience and photos of these products. I really thrashed back and forth over going with 1:32 vs 1:29 and finally decided upon 1:29. I've ordered the Aristocraft ATSF Warbonnet Dash-9 from RLD Hobbies as my start. I plan to spread out the cost of getting into G over time since it can be significant. So, for now I will have a really nice engine to ogle while waiting to engage track, power, control, etc.

The websites that some of you guys maintain (Greg Elmassian, Rayman4449, etc) have been a tremendous help to me. I have enjoyed mining them for lots of information, photos and advice. This website, MyLargeScale has been a great a resource and I have read many past threads for advice and information...it really helped a lot.

The photo-spread from Rayman's website of the Aristo ATSF Dash-9 was terrific and the best collection of photos that I found on the net for that engine.


Rayman's Dash-9 Santa Fe photos 

Needless to say, a lot of the manufacturer photos are small or non-existent, can be grainy and leave a lot to visually question for someone buying sight unseen. So, for you guys that take the time to do such great photographs I just wanted to let you know how very helpful it is to people like myself who are considering purchasing the product.

Looking forward to the day when my engine is running and gracing the backyard landscape,


Rick


----------



## Jerry Barnes (Jan 2, 2008)

Welcome Rick, 
You are starting just how I and many did, get an engine, then save up for the other stuff. I made trestles/bridges/buildings while I waited to save up for track. Once I had those made, when I got the track it all went down pretty fast. I'd urge you to look at code 250 track. Get a sample piece of it and the bigger Aristo/LGB/USA track and see how you like your engine sitting on each. Once you see that, choosing code 250 is a easy choice. SVRR sells the track I use.


----------



## Dieselguy (Apr 29, 2010)

Jerry,

I have been to the SVRR site looking at their products and really like what I see there. Is the height the main difference between the Code 250 rail and the standard Aristo rail? Seems I recall reading about that somewhere around here.


I've located a place in my backyard for my first track that will be a simple loop that is roughly 40 feet long with at least 10' curves. Based on the slight slope of the land, I could either add a little dirt or (my preference) build a long trestle. I've been a modeler since I was allowed to hold Testors glue and still love to scratch-build things. I also plan to add some detailing to the Dash-9, but have to bear in mind that it still needs to "run" on my layout.


Is there a place on the net where someone provided a photo that shows the difference in looks for the Code 250 track? I'd love to see that if anyone has such a link.


Thanks,

Rick


----------



## Jerry Barnes (Jan 2, 2008)

Good comparison on a previous posting on MLS. Has good pix/comments.
http://www.mylargescale.com/Communi...fault.aspx


----------



## Jerry Barnes (Jan 2, 2008)

Rick, 
Send me an email, address below in my signature block.


----------



## Dieselguy (Apr 29, 2010)

Jerry,

That link with the end-on-end compare was just what I was hoping to see, so thanks a bunch for sharing that one.

I'll send you an email in just a few.

Rick


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Congratulations Rick, 
Welcome Aboard. 
I started with a simple oval myself and coming from 50 year succession; from Lionel to HO through On3 and a dabble in Nn3. 10' _ diameter_ sounded so big...but it isn't really; at 5'r =60" it's 30"r in O and a tight 15"r in HO! 
I run smaller old tyme steam on the 10'd and they look ok, your loco choice is a lot bigger and the cars you run will be longer. Though the couplers will be ok, the center over hang will be noticable. I urge you to consider a larger curve. Those of us on tight budgets need to purchase wisely... 
The rail is porportionally smaller. but has a good track record.... neat pun eh? Properly supprted it should withstand most train abuse, deer, large dogs and other critters can be a concern! 
There are several camps in G regarding Scale from Fine Scale to whimsical. I came from scratchbuilding in On3 and thought Oh Boy I can go wild on this stuff! Then a store clerk informed me of the 10' rule; 'If you can't see it from 10' then don't bother.' There are practible merits to this approach. I run on the ground and stand nearly 6' tall and am usually a tad farther back to watch the whole train. Also since you chose 1:29, you rail gauge is out of whack! Yup, 1:32 is the correct Standard Gauge scale for our track.... so we learn to over look some things, like my 1:24 scale on 42" ga track! I wanted robust plastic cars for my great nephews and shorter cars for better looks, thus pocket book decisions led to Aristo's Classic line. The line is limited so there will be plenty to build. For MY train! hee hee 
On your lower level I suggest neither a long fill nor a long trestle and instead break it up with some hills say; trestle, hill, bridge, fill, maybe even a short tunnel. It helps to break the line of sight to a train, adds the sense of distance. A well as keeping it visually interesting, I get bored watching a train go around a loop. But to see it go behind a rock or building or just seeing the tops as it runs through a cut opens my imagnation. After all our trains are props to a world we 'see'... (and in G $cale what we don't... those convenient overlooks). 
Our trains are an evolution from European Garden toytrains for adults. Similar to scale, with compression and compromises. 
One final note, Aristocraft track is labeled in inches but measured in mm, it is not true to stated dimensions. I hate sectional track, but that's what my local store had, so I'm using it. Not having space in my work shop to layout a 10 diameter curve, I lucked out and built my bridges to fit sections of track, only later did I learn that 10'd is less than... Consider flex track and trying to borrow a rail bender (sometimes clubs have benders for their members use), transistion curves really help the trains to track better and look so much better that I semi-designed a cam to roll transitions from straight...but got lazy! Yep stepped back another 10 ha ha. 
You'll soon hear of many 'this is the way I do it's and take what works for you. 

John


----------



## Dieselguy (Apr 29, 2010)

Very good advice John and well taken. After I mentioned the long trestle, I thought, wait a minute why not use both added dirt and a trestle or bridge. I definitely want a tunnel and your point about breaking things up is one that I will take to heart. I already know that eventually my simple loop will graduate to more things that are interesting. I don't have any problems with deer in the fenced backyard, but they have been known to frequent all the other sides of our home. My 3 grandsons will be the most likely to step on the track, and I fully expect there will be some form of damage from time to time.

The whole idea of an outdoor railroad has often been attractive to me (usually every time I hear about or see one), so this is something that I now will be fun for my grandsons and me too.









Rick


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

I often mention things only to realise a better alternative, usually when I'm not thinking about it,I'll get an inspiration.... 

Back when I was making and repairing jewelry, my boss would present a problem and ask my solution, I'd think quickly and give a plausible solution, later at my bench I'd think it through and could foresee problems (if any), take a break and go back with the better solution.... 

Only soft alumunum rail might be prone to damage from the kids. I get wild Javalinas, up to 300# on cloven hooves, 75# on a square inch, unless spooked and then a lot more! The only damage so far is ties popped of the rail, relatively easy to fix in place. SS 332 

If you are having fun, you're doing it right! 

John


----------



## Torby (Jan 2, 2008)

Ooh! Cool purchase. Congradulations. 

You have a loco, get some way to power it, a few cars, but spend most of your money on track.


----------



## White Deer RR (May 15, 2009)

Three years into this and still a beginner, I would tend to agree with Torby about putting money into track. As all know, track is EXPENSIVE. I got about half my little layout before metals prices spiked. Due to the shape of my property, my most likely future expansion would cost about $700 in new track. It's possible but it's a figure that makes one think about things like how many college textbooks that might purchase in a few years for the kids. I'm progressing to the point of wanting a backup loco just in case at this point, however.

Also, the thanks to posters on this forum, and their related web sites, is seconded. It's a rather specialized knowledge base, but it's also taught me to try a few things and figure out how I can or wish to do them. Many folks have had some previous model train experience, but I came into this with none at all, having only built model rockets and a few static airplanes as a kid. So to sample the multitude of techniques, technical know-how and design ideas has been highly informative, I really appreciate it.

Even the arguments can be informative. ;-)

Hope you all are having good running and better weather than up here in the Pacific Northwest, it's just been wet, wet, wet. But the plants are growing well! Best to all.


----------



## John J (Dec 29, 2007)

You are off to a great start. Don't forget switches and sidings.. You need some where to park your cars.


----------



## Dieselguy (Apr 29, 2010)

I tell ya. if I could have ordered everything I wanted to in one order, it would have easily been over $2K (and from what I can tell, that is a modest investment in G). The dialogue here has been very helpful to me regarding DCC control, track type, battery vs track power and more. Switches and siding...absolutely want some of that in my layout. I got a message from Rob over at RLD that the engine has shipped, so I'm looking forward to seeing it. 

I gave my grandsons an O-gauge layout last Christmas, but they have lived so far away (about 13hrs) that I haven't been able to work with them on the layout. However, they are moving to within 3hrs from me in a couple months and I'll be able to visit a lot more often. I really look forward to including them in what I do with the G-scale layout and helping them learn how to model the O-gauge too. Seeing them with hands-on enjoyment is really a big part of why I'm getting back into trains. I want them to discover a hobby as I did when I was a kid and it is great watching them with trains. If they say "Papa can we have that G train in our backyard"...well I'll be starting over again with my layout.









Rick


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

He was happy to sit for hours and just watch the train go round........ and as you can see made me very happy too!

The lader to the left was for an On3 outdoor layout, but between building the ladder and laying track I got to experience my first monsoon's damage to the ladder Yikes! No way was my prized MM K-27 going there!
I went to the hobby shop and purchased the Aristo starter set and enough SS track to make a tri oval w/ 10'd curves. The interior branch line has 8'd curves.(track w/o train).
Since then the 0-4-0 has been parked as too modern, an HLW Jupiter 4-4-0 hauls the passenger train and a freight train has joined the roster.

This corner has changed slightly...










Warning! This hobby will grow on you and The' Gotta Haves 'just get more expensive......

John


----------



## Dieselguy (Apr 29, 2010)

You're making some good memories there John and there is no better investment than that of your time IMO. Nice close-up pic too of the Train. 

Rick


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Rick, if you have young kids around, code 250 may not be durable enough if your track is on the ground. I think 250 looks great and more realistic, but when the track is on the ground and you are usually standing up, the difference vs. code 332 is not as noticeable in my opinion. 

I don't have kids, but even getting adults to not step on the track can be tough! 

Regards, Greg


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Rick, if you have young kids around, code 250 may not be durable enough if your track is on the ground. 
My code 250 is routinely trounced by myself (a few years past the "young kid" stage), as well as my 7-year-old neice, my 4-year old daughter, and now my 1-year-old son. I try not to make a habit of it--and tell the kids not to, either--but invariably feet and rail will meet. The notion that code 250 isn't as durable as code 332 is pure myth. The durability of the track has little to do with the rails, and much to do with the foundation it sits on. If the foundation is solid, you can walk on HO scale track without damaging it. If the foundation is weak, even the hardest large scale rails will kink. 

As for photos showing a comparison... 

Code 332 


















Code 250 


















I personally don't think you're going to go wrong with code 250. I've used it for 15 years, and have yet to have any issues with it. You'll be pretty much mandating that you use flex track to build your railroad, but that's not a bad thing. I find sectional track to be entirely too limiting in terms of the ability to design the railroad that you want. 

Later, 

K


----------



## Dieselguy (Apr 29, 2010)

Thanks fellas for the advice...I read and appreciate all of it even if people have a difference of perspective. The way I view damage is that I expect some of it with my grandsons and don't mind doing a little fix-up here and there while they are growing and learning. When I setup their Lionel O-gauge set last Christmas in the living room (that took up about half the room), I was repairing something every couple of days. But to hear them cackle and see the joy on their faces was worth any repairs I had to make. They are 18mos, 4 and 6yrs old. Several people told me that was too young for an electric train, but by being there with them, and doing a little coaching it was OK. Watching my 18mos grandson try to catch something as it went by was priceless (he loved to sit right next to the track). 

From the photos I've seen, it would appear that code 250 has the most visual impact when viewed at or around "eye level". I'll do my best to have a rigid base under the track to help avoid damage, but don't plan to do anything more permanent (like concrete) in case I need to move the track later. I know that I'm just getting started and the likelihood for change is pretty good. 

Excellent photos there K, that layout is a beauty. 

Rick


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

"The notion that code 250 isn't as durable as code 332 is pure myth." 

OK, let me put it more concisely: code 250 will bend MUCH MORE EASILY than code 332 when stepped on. 

My reference to young kids is in reference to stepping on it. 

I submit that this is not only no pure myth, but proven over and over... 

That is my point, I was not talking about the ties. 

Yes, if you have a concrete base, you can walk on code 40... but that's not our case here. 

Kevin, I will make you a deal, you come walk on my code 332 stainless and I'll come walk on your code 250... 

What I am saying is the 250 will be more easily bent and not as "durable" in this respect. 

I did not say "don't use code 250" so your rebuttal of "pure myth" is unwarranted as well as untrue. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Greg, come on over and take all the steps you want on my track. You're not going to hurt it. That goes for my current code 250 brass in addition to my old line that was code 250 aluminum which I frequently had to trod on as well. (The deer did...) That's why I always emphasize a proper foundation. It needn't be concrete; well tamped crusher fines, sturdy lumber, steel, cinder blocks, whatever properly supports the track so it can't flex when stepped on. The bottom line is you don't want any "give" under your rails. If you have any give, that's when the size and hardness of the rail material come into play. But there, a blanket statement based solely on rail size is equally flawed. Code 250 rail in a harder material such as stainless may very well be more resistant to damage than a softer, larger rail such as code 332 aluminum. 'Tis always better to emphasize the importance of a proper foundation, so that choice of rail becomes irrelevant to the strength equation. To quote the old saying, "the wise man builds his house upon the rock." 

No, you didn't say "don't use code 250," you said "if you have young kids around, code 250 may not be durable enough if your track is on the ground." I offered personal testimony to illustrate that durability of code 250 with relative to kids is not anything to be concerned about, as well illustrated by the thundering hordes which populate my back yard. I certainly don't encourage them to walk the rails, but I know that the rails will withstand the punishment_ because I built it on a solid foundation. _ 

As for the "myth," it is very commonly stated--not just by you--that code 250 is not durable. It is one of many myths surrounding code 250 that have time and time again been proven untrue. I will offer my experiences to counter those myths just the same as you would offer your experiences to counter any DCC myths that abound. Fair enough? 

Later, 

K


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Yes KEVIN, I said "more durable".... as a comparison. I said "may not be durable enough". 

You said this was a myth. I did not say it was NOT durable. 

You misquote and twist again: 

"As for the "myth," it is very commonly stated--not just by you--that code 250 is not durable." 

Maybe SOMEONE ELSE said that... I DID NOT.... please reserve your retorts for them.... 

This sensitivity by you has shown up before on this same subject. 

Pick on the people who make an unfair statement. 

My statements were not unfair or inaccurate, but you still jumped on me... 

That was and is my objection. 

Greg


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

I said "may not be durable enough". 
Yes you did, and I offered an example to demonstrate that it indeed would be durable enough to handle the onslaught of kids and adults alike. 

That was and is my objection. 
I quoted you as an example drawing from the overarching myth, and proceeded to debunk the overarching myth. Any perception that I was "jumping on you" is an in inference on your part. 'Tis not my intention. I'd do the same regardless of who made that argument. 

Yes I'm passionate about debunking code 250 myths. I remind you that you are equally passionate about debunking DCC myths wherever and however they pop up. It is only through those of us who are passionate about our particular interests that the myths surrounding them eventually get beaten down. It's largely through _your_ insistent defense of DCC that I've come to really appreciate it for what it has to offer, and--dare I say--I'm even beginning to understand programming it! I know you couldn't imagine me saying that two years ago... 

Later, 

K


----------

