What am I not getting?

[AlkemScaleModels]

The photo snips of Tom's amazing Z Scale work has me puzzled. What is the attraction of Z versus N? The size delta is about 73 percent, so you don't gain much in space saving, yet you compromise on everything else.  What am I not getting?

BTW I used to do 1:285 war gaming, so I am accustomed to working in small scales. But I don't think I'd want to build a RR in that scale.

[Sokramiketes]

New frontiers.  Certain amount of treasure hunting due to the fact that not everything is available.  N Scale is becoming well filled out, there isn't much you can't model, and not much that isn't available.

For me, railfanning in Washington State kicked off an interest in modern day BNSF.  I did start buyng BNSF stuff in N scale, but there was so much out there I could have gone bankrupt quickly.  And it was hard to focus.  The stream in Z scale is much slower, somewhat exciting, and the additional scenery to train ratio while only 73% of N is still helpful for the area I want to model.  N scale and the Modutrak layout still takes most of my time, especially coming up to NMRA 2010 here.  So the Z just needs to take less time away. 

It's probably much the same feelings that led you to O gauge ACW modeling?

[tom mann]

I like the people in the scale.  The small group of z scalers create a family environment, so it is easier for me to relax.

(not the answer you thought, eh?)

[David K. Smith]

New frontiers.  Certain amount of treasure hunting due to the fact that not everything is available.  N Scale is becoming well filled out, there isn't much you can't model, and not much that isn't available.

I like the people in the scale.  The small group of z scalers create a family environment, so it is easier for me to relax.

Both of these, plus: I enjoy pushing the modeling envelope by working as small as I can (that's why I also dabble in T, 1:450). N has been my focus since the 60s, but I started taking Z more seriously in the early 2000s, when I was looking for something of a "new frontier."

[AlkemScaleModels]

Interesting.

There is a huge Z scale layout about 5 blocks from my house, Allbritton's Gotthard pass layout. It is well done but it never excited me.

Tom's work is very impressive (what little he has shown us). I do recall being very impressed with two Z scale dioramas I saw at the Philly NMRA show. One was a prairie grain elevator scene, part of the GC laser display IIRC.  The other was a UP western desert scene with a tunnel. They were very well done, but not far enough from N Scale in my mind to make me want to take a plunge.

I was not totally correct when I said I would never build a RR in 1:285. I had thought about doing a "RR" in that scale or even 1:350 to match up available ships. I am following David's 1:450 scale efforts, as some day I may dabble with that. A WWII NYC harbor scene with Liberty ships, destroyers and a working RR in 1:350 scale would be awesome.

As I work in O Scale I am finding that I really like building in this scale, especially in the early rail period as one can make things operate just like their actual prototypes.  Switch stands, working brakes, stub turnouts, wood ties, 4 spikes per rail,  link and pin couplers, etc. all just like the prototype. I am also finding myself drawn to the P48 crowd. The idea of working knuckle couplers is just too cool for me (I know HO has the Sergeants).  However, designing a layout in this scale to fit a mid sized space is a PITA.  

As to people, modeling the Civil War can be tricky. While  the Yahoo civil war RR group is an interesting, mutually supportive and friendly group of people, you have to watch out for the folks still fighting the civil war.

Once my ACW layout is complete, I plan to try some of these other scales.

[tom mann]

Tom's work is very impressive (what little he has shown us).

Thanks, but what have I shown exactly?  Not much!  Maybe the rest of it sucks!

[AlkemScaleModels]

Tom's work is very impressive (what little he has shown us).

Thanks, but what have I shown exactly?  Not much!  Maybe the rest of it sucks!

I was referring to those two shots you posted earlier this week. Plus were there not Z scale models in your weathering book? Somewhere i recall seeing a weathered Z scale SP switcher.

[bambuko]

...The size delta is about 73 percent

yes, this is linear delta, but if you take into account space on your layout, delta is actually 52.8%
and that is what makes the real difference (at least for me  )
Chris

[Chris333]

I just like Z and it is smaller enough for me. My Z layout is 6' long the same layout in would be 8'3" long.

[GaryHinshaw]

Don't forget the prototypical prices.  Suppose you want to take advantage of the scale to run long trains, say a 15' (actual length) grain train of 3-bay ACFs pulled by 3 SD70s:

N - 3 Kato SD70s @  $70 ea + 36 IM hoppers @ $17 ea = 210+612 = $824
Z - 3 AZL  SD70s @ $200 ea + 50 AZL hoppers @ $25 ea = 600+1250 = $1850

(using MB Klein prices - and even at 36 cars, the Z train is $1500).  Oy, they're both expensive.

P.S. Get back to work on that layout Chris.  Looking good.

[Shipsure]

The real advantage to Z is the ability to model without compression in a reasonable space.  A dream layout of mine is doing Dunsmuir Ca around 1960.  I can do the yard from end to end in 18' and really do a historical piece of modeling without compromise.  Level of detail depends on your skill and your patience and as Skibbie rightly said, there's an aspect to the thrill of the hunt too.

Joe
MTL

[Nato]

   Yes, Expermintation,pioneerning like the early days of N and a smaller community of modelers almost a family like Treble -0 in the pioneer days. Of course T Gauge is where it is really at now there are several Railwire Members who are doing some amazing work in both T and Zed. i'am just alittle too old and heavly into N to switch to Z,but I'am mighty tempted by T. There was a small layout sold about 20 years ago,the trains ran in slots ,were about T size which I considered buying "Tiny Trains".The home made air trains displayed at several of the GATS Shows were also very interesting.                                                     Nate Goodman (Nato). Salt Lake, Utah. "I have always wanted the worlds smallest layout."

[AlkemScaleModels]

The real advantage to Z is the ability to model without compression in a reasonable space.  A dream layout of mine is doing Dunsmuir Ca around 1960.  I can do the yard from end to end in 18' and really do a historical piece of modeling without compromise.  Level of detail depends on your skill and your patience and as Skibbie rightly said, there's an aspect to the thrill of the hunt too.

Joe
MTL

That is what Albritton is trying to do in his layout, though I think he did do a lot of compression.

Dunsmuir in 18 feet in Z. Does that equal 24 feet in N?

I think I'll try some Z scale track plans in my layout room just to see what could have come from it.  Tenn Pass would be a good candidate for a Z scale layout since it is mostly trains running through scenery without too much switching. 

[tom mann]

without too much switching. 

Check the YouTube videos for Z scale switching.  You would be surprised.  The mechanisms (from MT and AZL) are super nice and low speed is great.

[Sokramiketes]

The mechanisms are good enough to switch.  I don't know if the majority of operators in my area are adept enough to handle the uncoupling without getting frustrated.  I hear complaints about Z scale couplers on N scale equipment when we host sessions.

The strength of Z is probably mainline action for a while.