31.5 vs. 32mm gauge

[Simond]

Jim,

 

Is that a trap point I see hiding behind the signal post?

 

I'm a little surprised, I'd have expected it to be between the yard and the diamond, where a derailed wagon would be less problematic, rather than in the six-foot. Is it normal or have I misunderstood something?

 

Best

Simon

[Miss Prism]

As a ps., Cyril Freezer was for some time an EM modeller.

 

Really?  (cough, splutter, spill tea...)

[jim.snowdon]

Really?  (cough, splutter, spill tea...)

I know - everyone assumes that Cyril and 00 were inextricably linked, but then, many years ago I not only modelled in EM but, through being on the EMGS Committee for som eyears, knew people who had been involved in EM for a lot longer than I.

 

Jim

[t-b-g]

I think that Cyril Freezer's long standing friendship with Peter Denny convinced him of what could be done in EM and I believe he did dabble a bit. However, it was more OO with a wider gauge than anything too finescale by way of wheel profiles, flanges etc.

 

Buckingham has tight curves, very short, small radius points and check rails set really wide to allow for a big variety of wheel standards. The running can be a bit bumpy at times but most things stay on most of the time! It is not anything like as "finescale" as many an EM layout that came later.

 

To me, there are two reasons why 31.5mm should give smoother running. One is the gap through crossings, as has already been mentioned. The other is that the tighter gauge will not allow vehicles to "crab" from side to side quite so much and will keep the wheels more in line with the rails, which can make a big difference through crossings and at point blades.

 

I am not one of those who say that 32mm won't work, because I have seen enough proof that it does. I just feel that it is a standard that has been around since for ever and dates back to the days when most wheels were a lot heavier in the flange than they are now. Wheel profiles have improved but the track hasn't adapted with it. If you want to tighten up the track standards but still using commercially available wheels, then you can't really open up check rails without increasing the B2B measurement so the only way to do it is to narrow the gauge slightly. It works and it looks slightly better than conventional 32mm track through points.

 

Many people won't notice the difference. Lots of modellers only see the track as somewhere to run their locos and that is absolutely fine. But for those of that do like to model the track in the same we that we model other things, it is a practical and easy to adopt improvement to our track.

[Miss Prism]

Wheel profiles have improved 

 

That is a key factor.

[Huw Griffiths]

I'd appreciate some thoughts on the merits of 31.5mm gauge vs. the standard 32mm O gauge fine scale please?

Any merits, advantages,disadvantages of both without going into the discussions of S7...

 

Thanks for asking.

 

I suspect that a number of us might be interested in finding out about this - without going into the full-blown "pistols at dawn" style "discussions" that sometimes seem to ensue in some places.

 

Thankfully, things haven't gone down this path here - and I don't want them to.

 

Certainly, I've been wondering about essentially the same question myself - but I've been scared of asking. This is mainly because I've been thinking of building a small railbus model, in O (to give my eyes some chance of seeing what I'm doing) - so I'd like to ensure it's compatible with as much as possible.

 

 

Can of worms do not open.jpg

 

Wheel profiles have improved but the track hasn't adapted with it. If you want to tighten up the track standards but still using commercially available wheels, then you can't really open up check rails without increasing the B2B measurement so the only way to do it is to narrow the gauge slightly. It works and it looks slightly better than conventional 32mm track through points.

 

Many people won't notice the difference. Lots of modellers only see the track as somewhere to run their locos and that is absolutely fine. But for those of that do like to model the track in the same we that we model other things, it is a practical and easy to adopt improvement to our track.

 

This (plus a subsequent post) makes me wonder what gauge a lot of RTR stock and wheelsets are actually designed / produced to fit - and also the compatibility of a lot of track and stock sold for both gauges.

 

At the same time, if I were to go to a show - and buy a Heljan or Dapol loco - or some Peco or Parkside Dundas wagon kits, or Peco or Slaters' wheelsets - without specifying which of these gauges I wanted, I wonder which gauge I'd be more likely to get (and how easily I'd notice the difference).

 

Somehow, I suspect that my version of the question might be rather less helpful than the original version at the start of this thread - I wonder ... .

 

 

Huw.

[robertc]

When I made a decision to change to using British Fine Standards for my O gauge I straight away ran into a problem...wheels dropping into the frog gap. I thought I had done something wrong at first but finally realised the crossing gap and recommended wheel width did not match. The wheels needed to be wider or the gap reduced. So I just closed the gaps on my points to match the wheels I had ( Slaters and Peco) and adjusted the check gauge to suit. As I only make plain points not slips and crossings this worked fine.  It came as a bit of a surprise as previously all my layouts were made to either Australian or US standards and such situations never existed.

When I went outdoors and changed to commercial track and points (Peco C124) I just put a shim in the bottom of the frog gap to lessen the drop. I couldn't close it up as I have to accommodate NMRA profile wheels as well as FS.

However I am making another indoor plank and O-mf looks like a good option for pointwork as I might need a crossing and one slip.

 

I am not fond of wheels dropping into point gaps. Not a good idea, particularly when rakes are being pushed backwards!

cheers

 Bob

[jim.snowdon]

Thanks for asking.

 

I suspect that a number of us might be interested in finding out about this - without going into the full-blown "pistols at dawn" style "discussions" that sometimes seem to ensue in some places.

 

Thankfully, things haven't gone down this path here - and I don't want them to.

 

Certainly, I've been wondering about essentially the same question myself - but I've been scared of asking. This is mainly because I've been thinking of building a small railbus model, in O (to give my eyes some chance of seeing what I'm doing) - so I'd like to ensure it's compatible with as much as possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This (plus a subsequent post) makes me wonder what gauge a lot of RTR stock and wheelsets are actually designed / produced to fit - and also the compatibility of a lot of track and stock sold for both gauges.

 

At the same time, if I were to go to a show - and buy a Heljan or Dapol loco - or some Peco or Parkside Dundas wagon kits, or Peco or Slaters' wheelsets - without specifying which of these gauges I wanted, I wonder which gauge I'd be more likely to get (and how easily I'd notice the difference).

 

Somehow, I suspect that my version of the question might be rather less helpful than the original version at the start of this thread - I wonder ... .

 

 

Huw.

Huw,

 

The key thing about 0-MF (and 0-SF) is that the track was made to fit the standard for 0 fine wheelsets, with which the great majority of available products already comply. You will not have a problem with wheels from Slaters or Peco or any of the other regular sources, and of the RTR products, the only manufacturer that can be tricky is Heljan, some of whose products have compliant wheelsets whilst others don't.

 

The important point is that the check gauge for the wheelsets (back to back plus (one) flange thickness must not exceed 29.95mm.

 

Jim

[Giles]

I too work with 31.5mm on Denton Brook.

The reasoning being very simple - I build my own points anyway - so it makes absolutely no difference what adjustment to gauge I make in the building, but they look so much nicer, and the running is better.

 

Perhaps if I had been staring in 7mm from scratch, i might have gone for S7 - who knows ? But I'm too far down the line. OMF is a very easy and satisfying compromise for me, at any rate.

Edited July 30, 2017 by Giles

[t-b-g]

I had not even considered RTR when making my choice of gauge.

 

I enjoy building things and my chosen prototype is GCR in pre-grouping times. I am not sure that RTR will be playing much part. Of course there may be visiting locos from time to time and it would be a shame if they couldn't run well on the layout.

 

My experience of 7mm isn't great but if the RTR wheel situation is anything like 4mm, then there may be some inconsistencies. Working in EM gauge, there are some wheels that can just be pulled out on the axles and will work with a 1mm check gap. There are a few that have flanges so wide that they either bind over check rails or have to be so far apart that they bind between the rails.

 

If that is the case with 7mm RTR then it is a good argument for somebody sticking with the more tolerant 32mm gauge.

 

Edited for spelling.

Edited July 30, 2017 by t-b-g

[Simond]

I should perhaps have been clearer in my post on WT which I copied over. I mentioned RTR, as it was pertinent to the OP's question, which was to do with a new club layout, and I suggested that members who had stock already would be able to run it on 32 or 31.5 without modification (whereas S7 would not offer that option).

 

Basically anything you buy in "finescale 0 gauge", (RTR, Kits, Slaters of Peco wheels, and most others, with the possible exception of a few Heljan items) will run on 31.5, more smoothly that it would run on 32.

 

If you are happy to move away from Peco point work, 31.5 is no more effort, and, in my opinion, offers better running, than 32mm.

 

I must admit, however, that I have not yet built anything approaching a "main line", so my personal experience is limited to relatively low speeds & short trains. I can't see any reason why the principles shouldn't remain valid when I do build the rest of the layout.

 

Best

Simon

[Izzy]

Could I offer a bit of perspective/history to perhaps help explain how things got here.

 

When I first dabbled in 7mmFS a few decades back I too was surprised/disappointed by the amount of wheel drop I found with shorter stock with smaller wheels, so 9'/10' wheelbase wagons mainly. At the time S7 was just emerging and it was mostly a question of the Coarse scale or Finescale standards then offered as the normal ones by GOG. However, allied to the emergence of S7 was the arrival at around the same time of wheels from both Slaters and Alan Gibson which used a finer profile (for FS) than had been available until then, finer flanges, narrower treads. It was these that showed up/exacerbated the wheel drop with FS which until then had not been seen as a problem/issue. Indeed many O gaugers back then felt that FS was 'too fine' and pushing things, but you have to remember that very tight radius curves ( by todays general standards) were quite normal and getting longer wheelbase stock around them was the challenge.

 

Being a bit thick I didn't think of the clever ruse of just narrowing the gauge a bit, and instead adopted my own standards of the Slaters/Gibson wheel profile along with a wider b-t-b of 29.8mm, so 0.6mm more than the standard 29.2mm, allowing the flangeways to be tightened up a bit to overcome the wheel drop. So basically the same result as using 31.5mm today. This wasn't too much trouble, and of course you can forget compatibility with RTR, because at the time it just didn't exist, except I seem to recall for a couple of Lima offerings at odd times. Today the situation with O gauge has changed completely, large amounts - comparatively speaking - of RTR in all shapes, sizes and standards, most of which is aimed at 7mmFS.

 

Personally speaking I think 31.5mm/ O-MF gauge should now be considered as the defacto standard to use given the compatiblility with RTR stock and using anything on 32mm gauge.

 

Izzy

Edited July 30, 2017 by Izzy

[3 link]

I originally put this video up back in 2012 to show how the different stock cope with Peco turnouts.:

 

 

I will try and do a video later of some wagons going across some 31.5 mm pointwork so you can see the difference.

 

Martyn.

Edited July 30, 2017 by 3 link

[BG John]

I mentioned earlier that it looks as though I will need to rebuild all the old copperclad track I was given, so intend to use 31.5mm, which is what I'd have done if I was building new track anyway. The reason for the total rebuild is that the layout works best in the available space with 48" radius points. The biggest locos I'll be running are Dapol Terriers, all wagons will be short wheelbase, and most coaches will be 4 wheel, although I've also got two bogie coaches from the same free source as the track. I've produced the track plan in Templot to 31.5mm. Am I likely to have any problems with 31.5mm gauge on the curves?

[CF MRC]

Many years ago I made a straight two-track O gauge test piece on which to run my A4. This comprised a couple of 7mm finescale points as a crossing. They were made with the CPL system but I could not accept the awful appearance of the wing and check rails. They were never used in anger. If you want a better appearance and to run proprietary stock then the narrower gauge is a good idea through turnouts: on plain track, the wider gauge would be useful, especially on curves. We used the same dodge on the N gauge turnouts on Chiltern Green forty years ago: much improved the appearance and runnng.

 

Tim

[Happy Hippo]

On my shunting plank I use Peco code 124 bh for the plain track and then used their individulay components for the pointwork.

 

The 32 gauge track is fine and although I started using all the Peco components I ended up throwing away the crossing nose and wing rails kits as they were just not up to it.  Likewise their switch rails:  All were far too short.

 

The first point I made was to 32 mm gauge, but as others have pointed out, there is a lot of wheel drop going through the crossing nose.

 

It was a simple task to  rebuild this one, and the other five have been built with the 31.5mm gauge through the crossing nose which seems to have solved the problem.

 

When I was modelling in EM, I moved the back to back of wheel sets out to 16.7mm rather than 16.5mm and again there was a noticeable difference (for the better) in the running of stock through pointwork.

[Simond]

I mentioned earlier that it looks as though I will need to rebuild all the old copperclad track I was given, so intend to use 31.5mm, which is what I'd have done if I was building new track anyway. The reason for the total rebuild is that the layout works best in the available space with 48" radius points. The biggest locos I'll be running are Dapol Terriers, all wagons will be short wheelbase, and most coaches will be 4 wheel, although I've also got two bogie coaches from the same free source as the track. I've produced the track plan in Templot to 31.5mm. Am I likely to have any problems with 31.5mm gauge on the curves?

John,

 

The real thing widens the gauge on curves. You can do the same of course, and 3-point gauges will help you do that automatically if you use them with the two points on the outer rail. I don't have a 3-point gauge so use 32mm on curves & 31.5 on P&C.

 

Photos in my PD thread, link below.

 

Best

Simon

[3 link]

This first clip is some copper clad pointwork I built just for use in the fiddle yard, basic but sturdy point work.

 

 

Martyn.

[3 link]

In this clip the pointwork is built using C&L parts also to 31.5mm, sorry for the film quality it's awkward filming and controlling the loco but hopefully you get the idea.

 

 

ATB,

 

Martyn.

[Wotan]

In this clip the pointwork is built using C&L parts also to 31.5mm, sorry for the film quality it's awkward filming and controlling the loco but hopefully you get the idea.

 

 

ATB,

 

Martyn.

 

Thanks Martyn, a picture or your video says it all!  Oh my bringing up the subject of track gauge does seem to produce  much comment  does it not !?!?!?

31.5 rightly fits the bill on so many counts....

best wishes

Michael

[Sheffield]

I took to using 31.5 because of the excellent track gauges Debs used to make available, and I have not regreted it at all.

[BG John]

John,

 

The real thing widens the gauge on curves. You can do the same of course, and 3-point gauges will help you do that automatically if you use them with the two points on the outer rail. I don't have a 3-point gauge so use 32mm on curves & 31.5 on P&C.

 

Photos in my PD thread, link below.

 

Best

Simon

I normally use 3 point gauges, but only have them for EM, P4 and P4 broad gauge. I don't have any gauges for 31.5 yet, and just a couple of roller gauges for 32. Something I need to make or buy soon I suppose.

[jim.snowdon]

Jim,

 

Is that a trap point I see hiding behind the signal post?

 

I'm a little surprised, I'd have expected it to be between the yard and the diamond, where a derailed wagon would be less problematic, rather than in the six-foot. Is it normal or have I misunderstood something?

 

Best

Simon

Simon, you have - what 's hiding behind the signal post is the checkrail for the turnout in the foreground.

 

Jim

[jim.snowdon]

I normally use 3 point gauges, but only have them for EM, P4 and P4 broad gauge. I don't have any gauges for 31.5 yet, and just a couple of roller gauges for 32. Something I need to make or buy soon I suppose.

In practice, we found that you don't need gauge widening on curves down to at least 5 foot, and if you do, Roxey do a 31.75mm gauge just for the purpose. They also do 31.5mm gauges and, as far as I am aware, are the only other source of gauges.

 

Jim

[BG John]

In practice, we found that you don't need gauge widening on curves down to at least 5 foot, and if you do, Roxey do a 31.75mm gauge just for the purpose. They also do 31.5mm gauges and, as far as I am aware, are the only other source of gauges.

 

Jim

A search on Roxey's web site only brought up OO roller gauges.

 

Are Deb's gauges not available now?

 

I was actually planning a cheapskate approach and going to try making them myself. My brother made some 28.08mm 3 point gauges for me. He may be an experienced engineer, and I'm not, but O-MF is less precise that P4 broad gauge! I also have another idea, but I'm not telling unless it works .